Fallout 3: Proving the haters are right?

[Wrestlevania]

Having originally been very hopeful for Fallout coming to consoles, I've just watched Bethesda's E3 '08 demo of Fallout 3 [2:33+] and am immensely disappointed at this stage.

Whilst the environment realisation and detail looks promising, the colour palette seems to alternate wildly between overly drab and completely washed out, obscuring numerous facets in the landscape as well as many objects populating it.

I'm also really underwhelmed by how stiff and robotic the characters and their animations looks to be. For example, the player viewpoint features no bob or sway whatsoever whilst travelling over rough ground; it feels like you're driving a slow hovercraft, not running rough-shod over piles of rubble.

The gun-play, too, looks equally soulless and uninteresting. VATS appears to have some potential, but seems to be more about automating what already appears to be a fun-free process than about strategy.

There's just no real evidence here of anything new or revolutionary in the world of console shooters. Which has me wondering: what are Bethesda trying to achieve here, creatively?

I really don't want this to be a cashing-in exercise. Has anyone seen anything a bit more encouraging at this point?

[Scrobbs]

I felt exactly the same when I saw an E3 vid - the enemy was stupid, coming towards the player, and the player shot and missed the torso and hit him in the arm. Instead of jumping away, the AI stopped, stepped back a step, and waited a split second before moving towards the player again without any evasion apaprent, giving him ample time to reload the shottie and tag him properly. Highly unimpressed.

[Wrestlevania]

Did you notice there was almost no effort in the gun animations either? No apparent recoil on the combat shotgun for example, despite the mega-blast sound effect when you fired it.

(I was also quite angry that the guy demo'ing the game picked one of the shittiest perks - Bloody Mess - in order to show off the game. Really stupid and completely the wrong message to be sending about Fallout as a game. And, in a sick way, I can see this being the summing up of reviews of the finished game: "a bloody mess.")

However, speaking of sound effects, it seems apparent that Bethesda are currently using a lot of audio samples as place-holders for now, ripped straight from the first two games. This might be an indication of how much we've yet to see and, perhaps, how much earlier the code demonstrated was than where they might be now.

The game launches in a matter of weeks now and I can't believe this is what we'll be getting. But it's so far from what I was expecting that it makes me really nervous as to just what we'll be given.

[vimes]

I had no real preconception but now that I saw the game I don't like it : the game mechanisms for the realtime FPS looks rubbish (and the AI my God) and the not-real-time stuff is not even turn based, so it's also fucking useless.

[DanJW]

It did look reminiscent of a reskinned Oblivion to me. The VATS looked completely rubbish to me - no strategy involved, it's like they just chucked it in to placate fans that didn't want pure FPS.

We haven't seen any of the RPG stuff yet though - the dialogue and missions, storyline etc. This could all be good stuff.

[Nappi]

I have never played Fallout games and had neither a good or a bad hunch about Fallout 3 until I saw this video some time ago. It really does seem rubbish. The environmental graphics look decent if you don't look too close, but there is little else that captures my attention, in a good way.

I wonder how much less crap the combat would have looked like if they had done it 100% fps in the first place. Now it's just stupid.

Also, how can a big budget game in 2008 feature a sentry bot that only slides a couple of meters downhill when you hit it with a rocket launcher? How can a developer walkthrough of a big budget game in 2008 feature a sentry bot that only slides a couple of meters downhill when you hit it with a rocket launcher?

[Scrobbs]

Did you notice there was almost no effort in the gun animations either? No apparent recoil on the combat shotgun for example, despite the mega-blast sound effect when you fired it.

I must admit I did not. I was so outraged that the guy doing the walk through was enthusing about this grenade throwing mechanic (highlight your target, oo wow), and that the AI looked so very very poor, given the quality of other games, that I possibly missed other things.

It looks boring, formulaic, and lacklustre. I might be proved wrong, but even if I am, I don't think I will be buying it. Especially with Left 4 Dead, Little Big Planet, Wipeout:HD (eventually), TF2, Company of Heroes, Call of Duty 4... learning guitar, socialising, kite flying... there's just no time

[Dr.Gash]

This CVG hands on casts a happy light on the whole thing, suggesting that the game gives players a real sense of loneliness, yet the video clip linked above just makes the landscape look sparse and a bit boring. The colour palette, as mentioned, also looks dull and I wonder if that will be consistent across the whole wasteland or is just specific to that section/area.

[vimes]

We haven't seen any of the RPG stuff yet though - the dialogue and missions, storyline etc. This could all be good stuff.

Even if it's all good stuff, I wouldn't be happy... I'm having trouble articulating this and I know this is too early to throw conclusion around but I hope it will make sense.

Bethesda is a high profile developer with enough resource and leverage that they can pretty much do whatever they want inside an 'acceptable canvas'. Them tackling Fallout and deciding to make it a First Person RPG with heavy FPS element, they knowingly picked the risks and challenges of the title : story and RPG, they've been doing them for 2 decades now, so they clearly needed to spend resource first and foremost on the FPS and not-so-realtime areas.

In the FPS department they've got a huge number of game to grab good mechanisms from, so if they fail at hugely improving the only elements they are taking risks on, I'll personally have issues finding them excuses ... even more if they only manage to pull off stuff they've been good at for years.

[Erkki]

Based on what I've seen and your comments, looks like I will have to wait for reviews before I decide whether to buy it or not.

[Cigol]

I don't suppose it's much consolation for those who had to endure all the criticism and ridicule for not following suit. And besides, thanks to its (undeserved) circus of hype they are bound to garner enough critical acclaim and attention to gloss over any deficiencies the game (and they as a company) might have.

From what I've seen it's looking a lot like a 'piece of shit' - and I say that sincerely as someone who thoroughly enjoyed both Oblivion and STALKER. Admittedly there's still a chance they've been keeping the meat of the game locked behind doors and plan on unleashing it as a big surprise hurrah come September, I'm not so sure personally, but here's hoping.

[toblix]

I'm just going to try to consider this a "new" game in a wholly separate setting, not related to FO and FO2. I have absolutely no expectations of this being anything other than a shooter. Maybe a bit talky and RPG-y shooter, but a shooter nonetheless. On its own it may be good, even great, but seen as a FO game, I fear even Fallout Tactics comes out ahead.

[lobotomy42]

Keep in mind that the preview in question was part of the general Xbox 360 conference...meaning that they were trying to sell the game to the Halo/Gears crowd, not the Mass Effect / Classic Fallout crowd. I have far more faith (and interest) in the RPG portions of the game than the FPS bits. (Fallout was a relatively action-lite series anyway.) All the previews I've read have focused far more on the dialogue / decision tree side of things than the action bits, so I'm not so worried.

[miffy495]

Honestly, since I just had my first chance to check out that footage, I expected something far worse from what you were saying. The AI doesn't really look amazing, no, but we saw what? Something like 5 enemies? And while the VATS system seems a bit over-simplifying, the amount of footage there is not anywhere near enough to give me a solid impression, good or bad, of the game. It was just a pretty little sequence of a guy walking around for 5 minutes and showing off a couple of weapons. I don't get the fuss here. Still looks like it could be pretty good to me. I'm a little disappointed at how harshly the game is being judged based on barely any demo...

[Wrestlevania]

This CVG hands on casts a happy light on the whole thing, suggesting that the game gives players a real sense of loneliness, yet the video clip linked above just makes the landscape look sparse and a bit boring. The colour palette, as mentioned, also looks dull and I wonder if that will be consistent across the whole wasteland or is just specific to that section/area.

I've just read through the whole thing, as salesy as it was, and to be honest I'm not really any more aware of what the game holds for the player.

There's no revelation in there, it's all stuff you could basically make an educated guess at. If anything, the constant - and seemingly unavoidable? - comparisons to Oblivion (in terms of gameplay mechanics, environment and characters) leaves me a bit cold. I didn't like Oblivion, as much as I tried to.

Wandering around "exploring" sounds like it might be quite distracting, potentially. But the way PC Zone have pitched it, it sounds like an excuse for Bethesda to push you out into the world and leave you there.

[Even] in the wilderness, violence is never all that far away. Cleverly, your UI's compass marks out areas of interest but never gives a clue as to what they are, nor how far away they lie.

For me, one of the worst things about Oblivion was that the game fundamentally consisted of "go in this direction, but we won't really tell you how far it is or how long it will take you to get there; and we'll throw in a metric fuck-tonne of niggling distractions and sub-plots along the way."

This sort of experience in a game leaves me bewildered, confused and aggravated. It just isn't fun to my mind and strikes me as tackling the problem of poor story-telling by hiding it under a mountain of story. I don't want to spend hours and hours just wandering around; entertain me!

[elmuerte]

the game's world doesn't really look interesting to explore

[Wrestlevania]

Eurogamer's recent Fallout 3 preview makes for considerably more grim reading than the PC Zone sales pitch:

]Perhaps it's just bad timing. Perhaps it's unfortunate juxtaposition. Fallout 3 made its E3 debut in a demonstration at Microsoft's Xbox 360 briefing in close proximity to Gears of War 2 and Resident Evil 5. All of a sudden, in that context, this very special follow-up to some of the most revered properties in role-playing gaming - venerable Interplay classic Fallout, and developer Bethesda's recent smash hit Oblivion - didn't look so special any more.

Having read Eurogamer's piece, I simply can't believe PC Zone actually spent 5 hours playing the same code. There's arguably more meat from Eurogamer's 30 minute hands-on than anywhere in PC Zone's article.

I know you hate the pre-emptive shoeing, Miff, but it's really not looking good at this point...

[Dr.Gash]

As much as I've got this sense of foreboding about the quality of FO3, I still remain resolutely hopeful that it will be loads of fun to play.

I'm gagging for a slice of Fallout pie.

[BigJKO]

I didn't want to start a new thread for this, since it's got lots of good pro/con points. But here's a, possibly, pro one. In the form of 5 new videos.

I'm more impressed so far, than I am disappointed. The dull colour scheme scares me, the gibs are excessive and unimpressive and the voice acting is horrible most of the time. However, I don't recall Fallout 1/2 having a much more colourful or interesting backdrops and the gibs are likely caused by the walkthrough being on a mixture of some sort of cheat-mode and a Bloody Mess perk. I think the biggest problem with the voice acting is the stiffness of the animation. The bad Megaton-blowing guy is clearly over-acting, but then so should the character model.

Tenpenny towers was also a pretty interesting place.

[DanJW]

The misgiving I have about the new videos is that looks so obviously based on the Oblivion engine. A lot of people were scared that it would be too much like Oblivion, and right now it looks like they were right.

Maybe it's just the Bethesda art and animation guys. I mean the faces look better than the Oblivion freaks, but their facial expressions are still all wrong. And the whole body animations still suck too - even the ragdolls. How can you make ragdolls look wrong? But they do.

It's a pet peeve of mine maybe. If you look at Rockstar games, they make low-poly models look great by having very good animation. bethesda make high-poly models look shit the instant they move.

Ahem. Rant over. I'm still hoping the game itself will be fun.

[Cigol]

The important point is in what respect will it be 'fun'. Chess is fun. Bowling is fun. Golf is fun. Cricket is supposedly fun. Fun is subjective. You don't gobble up a license such as Fallouts and redefine what made the game fun... But we'll see, I agree.

[Wrestlevania]

RPS's point about disparate technology is well made and worth noting:

The stealth/pickpocketing is clearly employing Oblivion systems, and seems a bit of an awkward fit. A functioning invisibility generator seems a whole other level for tech from steam’n'piston guns and cola machines.

I can't see any need to shoe-horn this in, other than "me too" futurist design; "it's the future--everyone has personal cloaking devices!" It sours the whole reductionist ethic they're apparently (and necessarily) striving for; the part where you emerge from the vault and see the devastation for the first time is spectacular and well executed. The weapons, character design and scenery all communicate the devastation well, but throwing this sort of hocus-pocus technology into the mix is the equivalent of witchcraft in this setting. It breaks the immersion and sense of disbelief that seems carefully maintained elsewhere.

Otherwise, it's clear these videos are from a later version of the game than the one I originally linked to last month. And it is an improvement, but I agree that the sense of fun isn't particularly apparent here. It still feels like an (admittedly) ambitious and well produced Oblivion mod, with the VATS system bolted on top to make it more Fallout-like.

I think I might just mentally write off the the Fallout connection and see if I can enjoy this more than I did Oblivion. I find the setting a lot more engaging at least.

[toblix]

What's up with guys in games saying things like "I represent certain... interests"? Guys in movies never say that.

[eljay]

It's a pet peeve of mine maybe. If you look at Rockstar games, they make low-poly models look great by having very good animation. bethesda make high-poly models look shit the instant they move.

I'd have to disagree massively with you on Rockstar, the animations in GTAIV are terrible except when they are procedurally generated by the Euphoria engine. They are all completely stiff and lifeless and really bother me, I found it to be a really poor showing for such a high budget / profile game.

[BigJKO]

RPS's point about disparate technology is well made and worth noting:

I don't get the argument with the Stealth Boy. You could already get one in the first Fallout.