You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 08, 2016, 02:13:05 PM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Hark!  The Herald!
Holiday Issue 2016

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: E3 2015  (Read 4924 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline SinXAzgard21

Re: E3 2015
« Reply #75 on: June 23, 2015, 01:12:00 PM »
Tetsuya Nomura has expressed interest in recreating V and VI.  I think that they will decided on that based on how VII is received.  Just putting this out there, I don't think the stand still combat is coming back.  They have already expressed that they are moving forward.  Nomura himself said they are updating game play.

Online Lustful Bride

  • "Logic is for Squares."
  • Lady
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2014
  • Gender: Female
  • This is some personal text. There are many like it, but this one is mine!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: E3 2015
« Reply #76 on: June 23, 2015, 01:56:47 PM »
Tetsuya Nomura has expressed interest in recreating V and VI.  I think that they will decided on that based on how VII is received.  Just putting this out there, I don't think the stand still combat is coming back.  They have already expressed that they are moving forward.  Nomura himself said they are updating game play.

If they are doing that I hope they at least go with the combat style of FFXV, that's been the best non turn based combat yet.

Unlike 13 which was just garbage @_@

Offline CuriousEyes

Re: E3 2015
« Reply #77 on: June 23, 2015, 02:03:44 PM »
Tetsuya Nomura has expressed interest in recreating V and VI.  I think that they will decided on that based on how VII is received.  Just putting this out there, I don't think the stand still combat is coming back.  They have already expressed that they are moving forward.  Nomura himself said they are updating game play.

I thought what he said was that the systems are dated, but at the same time they're kind of intrinsic to the experience people remember from FF7, and there's some fear that changing them too heavily alters the character of the game. Basically suggesting there are a lot of hard design decisions to be made, and that even the developers are struggling on some of them. Gameplay encompasses a lot of things - the minigames could be completely reworked and it would constitute changed "gameplay" for example.

I don't know that they could do this, but given enough resources maybe they can put in options on how combat works. You can keep a turn-based battle system with updated graphics, or you can select a more modernized system that still makes use of FF7 aspects like the Materia trees and the limit breaks. /shrug

Offline Inkidu

  • E's Resident Girlomancer, Dedicated Philogynist, The Compartive of a Superlative, SLG's Sammich Life-Giver
  • Lord
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Jul 2008
  • Location: In a staring contest with the Void.
  • Gender: Male
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: E3 2015
« Reply #78 on: June 23, 2015, 09:25:43 PM »
I don't know about that. I always felt the combat systems of most JRPGs were actually less intrinsic to the game than the story. In fact, the combat always feels like a gate to unlock more of the story.

Offline CuriousEyes

Re: E3 2015
« Reply #79 on: June 24, 2015, 08:19:47 AM »
I imagine we could debate it right up to the release of the game (is there a ETA on that, by the way? I think I saw guesstimates that were pegging it in early-2017 but they might be completely unfounded) if we were so inclined.

Fortunately for all of us, it falls on Square to actually make the decisions and deal with the backlash that happens either way they go. So I guess we'll wait and see.

Offline Sasquatch421Topic starter

Re: E3 2015
« Reply #80 on: June 24, 2015, 02:16:52 PM »
I thought I saw a headline somewhere dealing with the release date, but never clicked on it. I can always go and check again...

I don't know about that. I always felt the combat systems of most JRPGs were actually less intrinsic to the game than the story. In fact, the combat always feels like a gate to unlock more of the story.

I think it really depends on the person behind the controller... Some people prefer story others combat. I'm a story person myself for most of the games I play. If one really doesn't have a story like say Doom? Then I'll make one up as I go along (that usually changes every play through!)

Edit: Well I took a glance, and while the Square Enix website had a release date of October 16, 2015 it was apparently wrong. All I read is they are saying Winter of 2015 at the moment.... Oop's that date is for the PS4 port of the original! Dang selective reading!
« Last Edit: June 24, 2015, 02:24:33 PM by Sasquatch421 »

Offline SinXAzgard21

Re: E3 2015
« Reply #81 on: June 24, 2015, 02:51:01 PM »
I thought what he said was that the systems are dated, but at the same time they're kind of intrinsic to the experience people remember from FF7, and there's some fear that changing them too heavily alters the character of the game. Basically suggesting there are a lot of hard design decisions to be made, and that even the developers are struggling on some of them. Gameplay encompasses a lot of things - the minigames could be completely reworked and it would constitute changed "gameplay" for example.

I don't know that they could do this, but given enough resources maybe they can put in options on how combat works. You can keep a turn-based battle system with updated graphics, or you can select a more modernized system that still makes use of FF7 aspects like the Materia trees and the limit breaks. /shrug

He did say the game was dated and it is being complete updated as, lets be honest it did not age well in the slightest.

Offline CaptainNexus616

Re: E3 2015
« Reply #82 on: June 24, 2015, 03:47:14 PM »
FFVII was a major RPG Milestone for the time but yes its dated. Should be since its a twenty year old game. Personally I would love if we could explore all of Midgar this time around. From the church in the slums all the way to the upper plate section.

However if we get a pilotable Highwind...I will be content lol

Offline CuriousEyes

Re: E3 2015
« Reply #83 on: June 24, 2015, 04:44:25 PM »
However if we get a pilotable Highwind...I will be content lol

That's one of the things I think is most in jeopardy, actually. I have actually played very little FF since X, but if I understand correctly, IX is the last one that used a comparable "Open World" travel system. The others have gone with traveling through dungeon-esque zones and then load-screens to handle transport from one town to another, correct?

I mean, FFXV apparently looks to feature an "open" world, but from what little I've seen it looks more like a GTA game (confined to a continent-ish area?) than a world the size of VII's scope. Not that they can't squeeze down some of the wasted space of the world, but it might not feel quite as... epic. I dunno.

Looooots of hard choices.

Offline CaptainNexus616

Re: E3 2015
« Reply #84 on: June 24, 2015, 05:15:31 PM »
I'm sure the team working on the project feel a LOT of pressure as well. FFVII was a big game during the first PlayStation era and introduced many including myself to FF in general.  Gaming has changed greatly since then and even FF has as well. The challenging part will be incorporating modern game mechanics into a 18 year old game without it losing the charm VII had specifically.

More so because they know they can't rush it. If this flops it will be a crippling blow to Final Fantasy.

Online Mathim

Re: E3 2015
« Reply #85 on: June 24, 2015, 09:29:08 PM »
Since this line of FFVII discussion is depressing me morbidly, I think I'll kindly invite the discussion to return to the jolly news of Fallout 4. Beware, there be spoilers ahead. Mostly what you can find on youtube if you're curious. You've been warned.



I watched one of the representatives for Bethesda doing a nearly half-hour presentation on youtube and it looks like it gave away a lot more than he may have realized was possible without being a major spoiler despite claiming he didn't intend to be giving away any spoilers. Suffice it to say, here's the gist:

The day/week that the bombs drop is when the game actually starts, as the trailer suggests. You're a family man/woman with a spouse and a baby that, according to the choices you make as to the appearance of your own character and the spouse you can also customize (which looks way more streamlined in terms of process than in FO3 or FONV) will be an amalgamation of your marriage partners' appearance (since in FO3, for example, you just had to assume your mother was as dark-skinned as would be plausible to explain one's skin tone if you wanted to be an African-American character since your Liam Neeson-voiced dad was always white, and you never actually get to see any pictures or anything of your mother in that one; though I am aware that in rare cases two parents of the same skin shade can have a child that looks completely different, if they have enough genetic ancestry to roll the dice in that direction). I just think the algorithms to program that sort of thing sound awesome.

I thought that was cool since I have wanted the character to be able to get married and have kids since Fallout 3 (okay, okay, I admit it was an interest in it being more of the harem-style bonding, but still) and that never happened in NV but then in this case, you don't get to 'meet' your character and choose who you get with, it's just a create-out-of-thin-air situation and the kid is already born by the time it starts so there's no deciding when or where that all happens. Still, that's progress. This is where stuff gets really spoilerish and downright weird as hell so you might want to skip it if you're adamant about not learning anything about the plot.

Spoiler: Click to Show/Hide
So, apparently, your town is about to be hit by the next wave of nukes after a radio announcement says the major state capitols have already taken fire. You've just been selected to be a family allowed into the local Vault and you make tracks for it. In the confusion you somehow lose the family and end up the only one in your family to make it into the Vault. 200 years later, for reasons unknown, your character is still alive, not having aged significantly and not having been either transformed into a ghoul or put on that weird machine Mr. House was in. Don't ask me how the fuck that happened but there better be an in-game explanation. But just at first glance, I am NOT liking that. Presumably, however, if this ageless phenomenon happened to you, maybe your family also not only survived the blast and ensuing wasteland debacle for 20 decades but also managed this Dorian Grey sort of miracle and are waiting for you somewhere.

That's all the plot details I gleaned so I want to ask: What do y'alls think of that bizarro-ass pitch? I'm not into it personally, I'd rather have part of the game take place in the past and part in the post-apocalyptic future. I mean, think of the possibility of going Ocarina of Time on it; you get to certain points and 'Memory Lane' mode kicks in. While it's an open world, it's smaller-scale although you have the ability to alter things in the past per your discretion and that affects things in the future to a certain extent. Of course places you've already mucked about in during the future can't be messed with in the past since that would create a paradox, but you'd just have to be careful. That's just my idea though that would probably make it twice as hard to program. Anyway, let's discuss.

Offline Inkidu

  • E's Resident Girlomancer, Dedicated Philogynist, The Compartive of a Superlative, SLG's Sammich Life-Giver
  • Lord
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Jul 2008
  • Location: In a staring contest with the Void.
  • Gender: Male
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: E3 2015
« Reply #86 on: June 24, 2015, 09:45:44 PM »
Honestly Not that Bizarre
The Vault Program was a program to research how human beings would handle deep-space travel. Vault 112, and the vault of Fallout 4 were two of the last (and therefor most advanced) vaults. Obviously the vault of Fallout 4 has some kind of cryogenics or suspended sleep program.

To add some tangential support to this, Vault 13 (the vault of the first game was a rather unlucky vault and was a primitive one but took a long time to complete. Barring that total oddball time-travel BS of Fallout 2, which I promptly ignore. In fact, I ignore most of the wackiness of Fallout 2. :|

Online Mathim

Re: E3 2015
« Reply #87 on: June 24, 2015, 11:46:55 PM »
Honestly Not that Bizarre
The Vault Program was a program to research how human beings would handle deep-space travel. Vault 112, and the vault of Fallout 4 were two of the last (and therefor most advanced) vaults. Obviously the vault of Fallout 4 has some kind of cryogenics or suspended sleep program.

To add some tangential support to this, Vault 13 (the vault of the first game was a rather unlucky vault and was a primitive one but took a long time to complete. Barring that total oddball time-travel BS of Fallout 2, which I promptly ignore. In fact, I ignore most of the wackiness of Fallout 2. :|

Vault 13 was where the Courier from New Vegas came from, wasn't it? Or did they get the Vault 13 Canteen from someone/somewhere else? I always wondered why that wasn't one of the visit-able vaults in NV.

Spoiler: Click to Show/Hide
That explanation about the Vault from Fallout 4 doesn't account for why someone outside of it might...you know...so that still bugs me a bit. If the survivor's goal is to find spouse and baby/child/grown-up-by-then, that makes less sense (unless I misheard/misinterpreted what their motivation is). Also the Vault probably was one of those 'defective' ones since the player character is the ONLY survivor by the time they are released from the Vault, from what I heard.

Nevertheless, I expect to see some awesome new Vaults to explore in the Wasteland, the ones that went terribly, terribly wrong either by design or by the inhabitants' unworthiness (like the ones from that Vault in New Vegas where they had to sacrifice someone to avoid being killed by the Vault, except it wanted them to refuse to sacrifice and would have rewarded them for doing so.) I'd love to see what other totally fucked-up experiments Vault-Tec was hatching in the hundreds of Vaults they constructed, what the Bethesda team can come up with.

And new monsters, too. Don't get me wrong, I love me some Deathclaws and Super Mutants (could have used a few more in NV, Fallout 3 had way more plentiful of the latter) but I don't want just more Lake/Mirelurks which are kind of the only other thing that really poses any threat outside of DLC missions. Oh, and I want Behemoths back. Hell, I want different species of Behemoths. Forget Legendary versions, I want a Deathclaw so enormous it eats its own smaller brethren and resorts to smashing rather than clawing despite having claws. The games always lacked boss battles, so these would make for some interesting pseudo-boss battles.
« Last Edit: June 24, 2015, 11:52:36 PM by Mathim »

Offline Mikem

  • *Cancer Survivor*
  • Permabanned
  • Seducer
  • *
  • Join Date: Nov 2012
  • Location: In the damp and dreary Pacific Northwest
  • Gender: Male
  • No labels. I'm a Man and that's all that I am.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: E3 2015
« Reply #88 on: June 25, 2015, 01:24:28 AM »
Microsoft bringing Mass Effect (and hopefully the other two) to the new console is a great thing, but really after going through all three with well over 100 hours total, I quickly got, impatient with the games. I would try to restart with a new character in the first and just get so upset and want to just skip to three where the cool armor and weapons were. Mass Effect one and two proved to be extremely tedious in their own ways.

Not to mention, I downloaded some of the DLC for three which included that N7 machine gun with the guard plate. That thing's spool up rate of fire is atrocious and made me distance myself from it. Then when they returned the original inifinite ammo assault rifle with the Citadel DLC, I fell in love with the lack of need for clips and that amazing sound.

I wonder if the DLC will carry over as well.

Offline consortium11

Re: E3 2015
« Reply #89 on: June 25, 2015, 06:23:56 AM »
Barring that total oddball time-travel BS of Fallout 2, which I promptly ignore. In fact, I ignore most of the wackiness of Fallout 2. :|

The time portal in Fallout 2 is a pretty clear easter egg (and one of the many references to Star Trek); I think pretty much everyone treats them as non-canon.

Vault 13 was where the Courier from New Vegas came from, wasn't it? Or did they get the Vault 13 Canteen from someone/somewhere else? I always wondered why that wasn't one of the visit-able vaults in NV.

The Courier's background beyond being a courier and thus having traveled a lot is never really revealed and there's no hint that he's from a Vault at all, let alone Vault 13. As for the canteen/jumpsuit they were a pre-order bonus/DLC weren't they? As such I take them as largely non-canon. Beyond that one can easily think of reasons why they'd have made their way into the hands of someone who travelled widely; Vault 13 was abandoned 40 years prior to New Vegas starting and it's not unreasonable to think that the inhabitants traded away some of their goods in the intervening period.

As for why you don't visit it, Vault 13 is located at Mount Whitney in California while New Vegas is set in Nevada. The closest location in New Vegas to it is Jacobstown (set in the equivalent of Mount Charleston). The distance between the two locations is about 230 miles in real world terms; to include it as a location you'd have to massively expand the map in New Vegas.

And new monsters, too. Don't get me wrong, I love me some Deathclaws and Super Mutants (could have used a few more in NV, Fallout 3 had way more plentiful of the latter) but I don't want just more Lake/Mirelurks which are kind of the only other thing that really poses any threat outside of DLC missions. Oh, and I want Behemoths back. Hell, I want different species of Behemoths. Forget Legendary versions, I want a Deathclaw so enormous it eats its own smaller brethren and resorts to smashing rather than clawing despite having claws. The games always lacked boss battles, so these would make for some interesting pseudo-boss battles.

Bethesda haven't exactly been that original when it comes to creating things for Fallout; the Enclave were rehashed as the major enemy (and a major power) in Fallout 3 despite it being pretty bizarre for them to be there, they did much the same with Super Mutants and the Brotherhood of Steel and almost all the mutated creatures in three were things that already existed in previous games. I think much the same will probably happen in 4, although changing to Massachusetts does give access to more creatures to mutate.

I'm also not sure I'd agree that the games lack bosses. Fallout had Garl, Gizmo, Decker, the Deathclaw at the Hub, Lou and the Master. Fallout 2 had the Rat God, Metzger, Frog Morton, the "Mother" Wanamingo, the various family heads in New Reno, Melchoir and Frank Horrigan. Fallout 3 had the aforementioned Behemoths and a host of characters who fit into the "boss" mould. New Vegas had Lanius/General Oliver, the Fiends, the legendary deathclaw/night stalker/cazadore and the Overseer in Vault 34. They may not all be the "OMG it's a huge monster" style bosses that the Behemoths are but I think they still count as boss fights.

Microsoft bringing Mass Effect (and hopefully the other two) to the new console is a great thing, but really after going through all three with well over 100 hours total, I quickly got, impatient with the games. I would try to restart with a new character in the first and just get so upset and want to just skip to three where the cool armor and weapons were. Mass Effect one and two proved to be extremely tedious in their own ways.

It'll be great if they can get them to a playable state; Mass Effect 1 was never a particularly stable performer on Microsoft's console but in the demo they did they were hitting 10 frames a second in places; that's a woeful frame rate for a game played on the original X-Box, let alone an X-Box One.

I quite like going back to the original Mass Effect just due to the differences in combat. Two and Three play far closer to Gears of War with magic powers but the unlimited ammo in the original gave it a different pace and tone; slightly quicker and more fluid with more emphasis on aggressive bursts of action.

Online Mathim

Re: E3 2015
« Reply #90 on: June 25, 2015, 09:45:43 AM »
The time portal in Fallout 2 is a pretty clear easter egg (and one of the many references to Star Trek); I think pretty much everyone treats them as non-canon.

The Courier's background beyond being a courier and thus having traveled a lot is never really revealed and there's no hint that he's from a Vault at all, let alone Vault 13. As for the canteen/jumpsuit they were a pre-order bonus/DLC weren't they? As such I take them as largely non-canon. Beyond that one can easily think of reasons why they'd have made their way into the hands of someone who travelled widely; Vault 13 was abandoned 40 years prior to New Vegas starting and it's not unreasonable to think that the inhabitants traded away some of their goods in the intervening period.

As for why you don't visit it, Vault 13 is located at Mount Whitney in California while New Vegas is set in Nevada. The closest location in New Vegas to it is Jacobstown (set in the equivalent of Mount Charleston). The distance between the two locations is about 230 miles in real world terms; to include it as a location you'd have to massively expand the map in New Vegas.

Bethesda haven't exactly been that original when it comes to creating things for Fallout; the Enclave were rehashed as the major enemy (and a major power) in Fallout 3 despite it being pretty bizarre for them to be there, they did much the same with Super Mutants and the Brotherhood of Steel and almost all the mutated creatures in three were things that already existed in previous games. I think much the same will probably happen in 4, although changing to Massachusetts does give access to more creatures to mutate.

I'm also not sure I'd agree that the games lack bosses. Fallout had Garl, Gizmo, Decker, the Deathclaw at the Hub, Lou and the Master. Fallout 2 had the Rat God, Metzger, Frog Morton, the "Mother" Wanamingo, the various family heads in New Reno, Melchoir and Frank Horrigan. Fallout 3 had the aforementioned Behemoths and a host of characters who fit into the "boss" mould. New Vegas had Lanius/General Oliver, the Fiends, the legendary deathclaw/night stalker/cazadore and the Overseer in Vault 34. They may not all be the "OMG it's a huge monster" style bosses that the Behemoths are but I think they still count as boss fights.

It'll be great if they can get them to a playable state; Mass Effect 1 was never a particularly stable performer on Microsoft's console but in the demo they did they were hitting 10 frames a second in places; that's a woeful frame rate for a game played on the original X-Box, let alone an X-Box One.

I quite like going back to the original Mass Effect just due to the differences in combat. Two and Three play far closer to Gears of War with magic powers but the unlimited ammo in the original gave it a different pace and tone; slightly quicker and more fluid with more emphasis on aggressive bursts of action.

I never knew there was that much info about the Courier/Vault 13 but that's interesting. I guess with how unpredictable all the Vaults were, it makes sense. I would like there to be a Fallout set in California eventually, maybe Los Angeles or something, or somewhere along the coast so you could get a glimpse of the post-apocalyptic ocean and not just the Potomac or Mead.

I wouldn't agree about the boss battles in anything post Fallout 2 since 4 times out of 5, the Behemoths are in extremely bad places as far as having any strategic advantage over the player. Most of the time they're fenced in or in areas where there are easy hiding places where their size will prevent them from hurting you but from which you can take cheap potshots at them and take them down with enough patience and not break a sweat. Or you'll have so much backup to help deal with them that by the time you get to them, they'll have no more health than a normal Super Mutant or Brute and can be taken down with no real trouble. The Legendary versions of things like Cazadors and Night Stalkers are hardly any more challenging than their ordinary counterparts, and the Legendary Deathclaw is no more difficult than one of the Alpha Males or Mothers when you get down to it. I rarely feel the same tension as when I go up against one of the bosses from any of the pre-Resident Evil 4 games.

One thing I thought would have been better is, since you get a camera from someone for a mission during your visit to New Vegas, there could have been more stuff to do with it, like taking actual visual evidence of such Legendary creatures or other oddities and whatnot. I hope something similar occurs in Fallout 4. There seems to be a lot of healthy skepticism amongst certain individuals and groups, it would be neat to circulate proof positive about the existence of places or monsters that most believe don't exist. Having to survive long enough to get a good photo of something deadly would make it feel more challenging and boss-battle-ish. But the guy from Bethesda did say they wanted to make player freedom a top priority so there's little chance they'll fence you in for a traditional style boss battle.

Fire ants, scorpions and mantises are good bugs to have (although the Mantises didn't have a Queen version like the others as far as I know) but I want more. What other giant creepy-crawlies would make a good threat for the new game? Centipedes/millipedes come to mind after seeing King Kong (or playing Parasite Eve). Any other good ideas?

Offline wander

Re: E3 2015
« Reply #91 on: June 25, 2015, 09:52:39 AM »
Kinda dismayed noone is talking about this;



Or this;



Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain is pretty much the only game I know I'm going to be buying, no matter what and on the day of release for those sweet bonuses too. :)

Offline consortium11

Re: E3 2015
« Reply #92 on: June 25, 2015, 10:58:50 AM »
I never knew there was that much info about the Courier/Vault 13 but that's interesting. I guess with how unpredictable all the Vaults were, it makes sense.

There's not a huge amount of background on the Courier outside of him being a courier... and most of the stuff on that is brief asides as opposed to detailed information. Vault 13 was a major part of two games; it's understandable that there'd be a lot of information on it out there.

I would like there to be a Fallout set in California eventually, maybe Los Angeles or something, or somewhere along the coast so you could get a glimpse of the post-apocalyptic ocean and not just the Potomac or Mead.

I don't want to come across as sarcastic or dismissive here, but there have already been games set in California; Fallout 1 and 2 (although 2 also includes southern Oregon). Likewise Los Angeles has also been covered; it's the Boneyard. You also get to visit the coast and see the sea, notably when you go to San Francisco in Fallout 2 and then on to the Enclave's oil rig.

Offline Inkidu

  • E's Resident Girlomancer, Dedicated Philogynist, The Compartive of a Superlative, SLG's Sammich Life-Giver
  • Lord
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Jul 2008
  • Location: In a staring contest with the Void.
  • Gender: Male
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: E3 2015
« Reply #93 on: June 25, 2015, 11:10:50 AM »
It'd be nice to go back, but not now with the NCR basically making life as good as new.

I liked playing Fallout 1 but I doubt it'll ever get a remake. It's just... not there... it's sort of perfect in its own time. You know with Wasteland 2 there was room to go and grow, but Fallout has so much of an aura around it.

The Master remains one of the most disturbing things I've ever seen.

Places I'd like to see Fallout games in:

St. Louis, Chicago, New Orleans, New York, Seattle, Dallas, Alaska, Michigan, Montana, and the Dakotas.


Online Mathim

Re: E3 2015
« Reply #94 on: June 25, 2015, 11:36:44 AM »
There's not a huge amount of background on the Courier outside of him being a courier... and most of the stuff on that is brief asides as opposed to detailed information. Vault 13 was a major part of two games; it's understandable that there'd be a lot of information on it out there.

I don't want to come across as sarcastic or dismissive here, but there have already been games set in California; Fallout 1 and 2 (although 2 also includes southern Oregon). Likewise Los Angeles has also been covered; it's the Boneyard. You also get to visit the coast and see the sea, notably when you go to San Francisco in Fallout 2 and then on to the Enclave's oil rig.

I also don't want to come across as dismissive (don't exactly have much of a choice now) but I've seen how those games look and what the gameplay is like so honestly, the fact that Fallout 3/New Vegas/4 are named after the first two is pretty much nothing more than a joke to me. Kind of like how every generation of Super Mario games has no bearing whatsoever on any others, which makes it easy to ignore the fact that there's no story to pay attention to or that certain elements are shared and others omitted. I like to just pretend the first two Fallout games don't exist since they're nothing like these newer versions and I never would have gotten into the series in the first place if they hadn't diverged so drastically (and honestly, if they ever did remake them in the style of the current games, do you think everything will remain the 'same'?) Unlike Super Mario, where all the games are awesome in every generation. I mean, you can't go from 'static RPG' to 'RPG plugged into FPS engine' and expect there to be any similarity left between the two generations. But as I keep beating the dead Yoshi, Mario's always a platformer at heart, whether 2D or 3D. Even the RPGs of it are pretty similar to that style. But I digest, end of rant.


I've never played too far into the MGS series, the first one was very irritating in that on what I assume was the second level where you're in that snowy base at night and you sneak into the vents, it's so damn dark I can't see where the hell I'm going and can't figure out where I'm supposed to go or how to get there. Kind of a tragic way to turn me off of the series but I'm not skipping any games where the story is that complex. Or does it matter, those of you who are MGS fans?
« Last Edit: June 25, 2015, 11:49:02 AM by Mathim »

Offline Mikem

  • *Cancer Survivor*
  • Permabanned
  • Seducer
  • *
  • Join Date: Nov 2012
  • Location: In the damp and dreary Pacific Northwest
  • Gender: Male
  • No labels. I'm a Man and that's all that I am.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: E3 2015
« Reply #95 on: June 25, 2015, 11:44:30 AM »
It'll be great if they can get them to a playable state; Mass Effect 1 was never a particularly stable performer on Microsoft's console but in the demo they did they were hitting 10 frames a second in places; that's a woeful frame rate for a game played on the original X-Box, let alone an X-Box One.

I quite like going back to the original Mass Effect just due to the differences in combat. Two and Three play far closer to Gears of War with magic powers but the unlimited ammo in the original gave it a different pace and tone; slightly quicker and more fluid with more emphasis on aggressive bursts of action.

I do agree, Mass Effect one did always seem suggish, but never enough so to seem unplayable to me anyway, I just adapted to how it moved. I never knew exactly how many frames I was getting. But the combat system getting a major overhaul (which they wont do) would be very nice. My weapon of choice through the entire game was either the Assault Rifle or the Shotgun. Sniper Rifle? Bounced all over the screen and I rarely if ever used powers if my class had them. Basically I played as a Tank in the first.

Then Two came around and my playstyle switched up. I started experimenting with class powers, and even made a Vanguard character once. Biotics. <3 I still spammed the AR and Shotgun though, the Geth Shotgun proving amazing which I always equipped my squadmates with. One thing that bugged the living Hell out of me was, they never modeled the characters to hold the SMGs with BOTH hands. And I'm not talking both hands on the trigger, I mean one trigger and one on the barrel grip, like a normal person would do. Holding an SMG like a Pistol? Are you asking for bullet spray?

Quote
Places I'd like to see Fallout games in:

St. Louis, Chicago, New Orleans, New York, Seattle, Dallas, Alaska, Michigan, Montana, and the Dakotas.

Heehee, I live near Seattle. Yeah, we'd totally get nuked at least once but I'm well outside the blast radius of a downtown hit. Alaska would be an interesting landscape, considering there's nothing up there of strategic importance. I wouldn't waste a bomb on Anchorage.

Offline CuriousEyes

Re: E3 2015
« Reply #96 on: June 25, 2015, 11:47:14 AM »
I'd be curious to see other parts of the world entirely - maybe how some of the European powers have fared since the Great War, or China, etc.

Online Mathim

Re: E3 2015
« Reply #97 on: June 25, 2015, 11:53:02 AM »
I do agree, Mass Effect one did always seem suggish, but never enough so to seem unplayable to me anyway, I just adapted to how it moved. I never knew exactly how many frames I was getting. But the combat system getting a major overhaul (which they wont do) would be very nice. My weapon of choice through the entire game was either the Assault Rifle or the Shotgun. Sniper Rifle? Bounced all over the screen and I rarely if ever used powers if my class had them. Basically I played as a Tank in the first.

Then Two came around and my playstyle switched up. I started experimenting with class powers, and even made a Vanguard character once. Biotics. <3 I still spammed the AR and Shotgun though, the Geth Shotgun proving amazing which I always equipped my squadmates with. One thing that bugged the living Hell out of me was, they never modeled the characters to hold the SMGs with BOTH hands. And I'm not talking both hands on the trigger, I mean one trigger and one on the barrel grip, like a normal person would do. Holding an SMG like a Pistol? Are you asking for bullet spray?

Heehee, I live near Seattle. Yeah, we'd totally get nuked at least once but I'm well outside the blast radius of a downtown hit. Alaska would be an interesting landscape, considering there's nothing up there of strategic importance. I wouldn't waste a bomb on Anchorage.

You forget, Fallout's in an alternate timeline and Alaska was invaded by the Chinese, so the U.S. itself probably wouldn't be shy about an 'if we can't have it, no one can' assault on its own 51st state. Still, more snow than just what was on the way to Jacobstown in New Vegas would be fun. I'd love to see some ice-borne mutations as new threats in the wasteland, wherever they happen to be geographically.

Also, I forgot to ask but does the post-apocalyptic wasteland never get rain anymore? I would assume it's all radioactive like all the water in the D.C. area but did the nuclear explosions make it so that the clouds don't form together to make rain anymore or does the game just not have rain programmed in? Or is there rain in the games and I just somehow missed/forgot seeing it?

Offline Mikem

  • *Cancer Survivor*
  • Permabanned
  • Seducer
  • *
  • Join Date: Nov 2012
  • Location: In the damp and dreary Pacific Northwest
  • Gender: Male
  • No labels. I'm a Man and that's all that I am.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: E3 2015
« Reply #98 on: June 25, 2015, 12:16:37 PM »
Also, I forgot to ask but does the post-apocalyptic wasteland never get rain anymore? I would assume it's all radioactive like all the water in the D.C. area but did the nuclear explosions make it so that the clouds don't form together to make rain anymore or does the game just not have rain programmed in? Or is there rain in the games and I just somehow missed/forgot seeing it?

A lot of games just don't program incelement weather patterns in. Either to not have it too taxing on the performance or just an after thought. I know the Devs of Planetside 2 could give two shits about weather. But then again that game can hardly run as is. When I saw rain and snow fall in Skyrim I nearly shit my pants it was so pretty.

Offline consortium11

Re: E3 2015
« Reply #99 on: June 25, 2015, 12:37:18 PM »
In Fallout 1, 2 and 3 the engine and devs basically couldn't handle rainfall without tanking performance. They handwave it somewhat by saying that immediately after the war there was 90 days of heavy nuclear rainfall which killed everything and ever since it's been a nuclear summer. As far as I can remember the only time rain is seen in the Fallout universe is in Honest Hearts where there is actually some rain.