datter
2841
I think someone has a crush on me, how cute. I now officially declare you, ineffective.
I’m a fan of the games too, but was very disappointed with what Bethesda showed at E3. If it weren’t for following the other previews and interviews, I wouldn’t know this was a Fallout sequel based solely on the E3 stuff. I’m not suggesting Bethsoft should’ve geared the E3 presentations toward the hardcore fanatics (some of whom will hate the game if only because Bethesda touched it), but they could’ve, I don’t know, actually shown a bit more of why it’s an RPG rather than some utterly generic shooter.
Of course, but I think he definitely has a point in that Fallout 3, demonstrated as an action game, doesn’t appear to rise above other action games. So if they’re not (as much) grabbing the devoted fans of the series who would really spread this word-o-mouth, and also exhibiting a relatively underwhelming action game for action gamers, their focus seems a bit narrow.
If Fallout is awesome and people go Bioshock nuts over it after all, then that might not matter. But if it is simply really good and entertaining, but doesn’t quite make players demand that their skeptical FPS-mates at least give it a shot - then that marketing strategy, if not the quality of the game itself, would likely be to blame.
There is currently no shortage of wowlookatme FPS games on consoles.
Did you guys just all fall asleep during the parts where Todd showed you the character screen/PIPBoy stuff? How can you claim there was no attention given to the RPG aspects? I sure saw them. He went into the PIPBoy, talked about an aspect of it, then tried to demonstrate its in-game effect or implementation. I’m not sure what else you guys needed.
I was pretty incredulous to their E3 showing until I realized that they only had five minutes to demonstrate an RPG.
Then I thought, “Why not just release a bunch of footage showing off the RPG aspects?”. Then I watched the 1up special thing where they interviewed Howard and he said they’d like to get the presentation in dialogue and such right before releasing a bunch of footage. He said there are other, older games (Mass Effect or something?) that present (and in “present”, does he mean animation?) it better so he’d like to improve it before showing it off.
It’s understandable, as long as it doesn’t take them too long to release a shit load of footage featuring dialogue, quests, towns, sneaking etc.
Um, in what interview? He shot stuff and made it go boom. The closest thing to him showing off the RPG aspect was explaining the bloody mess perk. Sure, he showed a bunch of tables, but his decision process while playing wasn’t an RPG. I don’t doubt there are RPG elements beyond stat tracking, but we could have used some dialogue and maybe going on a small quest with two different outcomes.
Um, the interview I just mentioned. Read usedpilot’s post above yours, it summarizes the bits from it that explains this. I guess you guys can call Howard out for being dodgy if you like, or whatever the current counter is for not showing you exactly what you wanted and how you wanted it in the limited time he had to preview the game.
Mordrak
2848
I’m not calling Howard on anything, rather just pointing out that his demonstration was definitely one of VATS and combat rather than the RPG aspects. It’s a valid observation of the demo. They may have good reason to, but if at this stage the RPG elements are too incomplete to show I might be worried. Mass Effect has been out awhile and they’ve had plenty of time to compete on that level if they wanted. The game’s release is only a few months away.
It’s less to do with what I want to see and more to do with what I see as challenges to the sort of game that it is vs. what it would be sold as. I don’t disagree that he didn’t have much room to demonstrate the depth of an RPG game in a brief span, but putting the focus on the combat doesn’t help much.
In the three live demos I saw, in three separate instances, he previewed pretty much the same shootemup stuff - half of which probably could have been dropped.
It certainly can’t be easy to market this game, but I don’t think simply acknowledging that changes the situation any.
He previewed exactly what the mainstream 360 audience needed to see to get excited about Fallout 3. It’s pretty, it’s gory, it’s open-world, it’s funny. Oh yeah, and there’s this thing on your wrist with stats and traits and stuff, but you’ll find out more about that when you play it.
Just like with Oblivion, you show the fighting and the pretty grass and the huge environment, and by the time people realize they’re leveling up skills and shit, they’re already enjoying it. I see absolutely no reason why the E3 demo wasn’t a smart move.
(WARNING: ANECDOTE APPROACHING) I’ve had several casual gamer friends mention Fallout 3 to me this weekend saying how cool it looks and they’re going to preorder it. That demo may not have done much to sell the game to the handful of Fallout devotees (and didn’t need to, since they’ll all play it anyway), but I believe it caught the attention of people who have never heard of Fallout before, which is frankly more important at this point.
If you’ve specifically heard otherwise, then that’s great.
I’d consider myself a Fallout devotee who will definitely be buying the game. I was speculating from the perspective of someone who wouldn’t already have an interest in the game - and from that angle it didn’t seem like Fallout is strong enough in the action to interest action gamers. When compared to the competition, I mean.
It seems from my limited experience with casual players who hadn’t heard of the game before that the post-nuclear setting plus violence beyond any other game coming to market this year seems to have been enough to turn heads.
And I can agree with that to an extent. However, with the game still months from completion stuff still isn’t, you know, complete. Also if you’re gonna show a quest, you’re not only spoiling the quest, you’re eating up plenty of demo time if you plan to show it to completion. And if you aren’t, then you’re only partially showing a feature anyway, which would just foster more complaints. I can see the concern, but I can see the reasoning as well.
Good to know.
Whether this game properly satisfies the Fallout love or not, I want it to be ultimately successful so as to see the series thrive, and to see more action games at least trend in its direction.
Grifman
2856
So why are they upset? If someone who doesn’t like the Rock-It-Launcher of Fatman plays, they don’t have to even use these weapons. They can treat it like they never exist. In fact, you have to build the Rock-It-Launcher - don’t build it and it will never appear.
I do like the general concept of the Rock-It launcher, but it does seem pretty goofy to have a teddy bear gib someone. It’d be cool if various items had varying effects when launched.
Sarkus
2858
I agree with this. And, I’d point out that when they were promoting Oblivion, the RPG elements were often front and center. Don’t you remember the whole thing with the NPC casting a spell on her barking dog? We haven’t seen anything like that with Fallout 3.
However, as others have pointed out, I also see it from the Bethesda PR side. They know the Oblivion fans are already sold. They know there are a bunch of Fallout fans that are already sold. They know that Bioshock was successfully promoted as a shooter even though that game wasn’t entirely a shooter. So, yeah, this was all about convincing a mass market that this is a game with all the cool violence and shooter aspects that they are interested in.
Of course, they also allowed at least a few people to spend several hours with the game, and both of the articles I’ve read based on those experiences have definately talked about the RPG elements. Those pieces are getting lost in the deluge of 30 minute impressions, but they are out there.
What really made me perk up my ears about Fallout 3 … The description of the character creation, and how infused it was with the actual life cycle. The face generation right as you are born, learning to walk as a control tutorial, customizing stats with learning books.
That seemed like a very appealing RPG-focused concept that would probably benefit demonstration.
anaqer
2860
Errr… wait, that’s in the game now? I’ve been kind of holding back a little on the previews and discussions about them so as not let the accompanying flamestorm turn me off the game too much… but man, teddy bears? Really? I’ve got to see this.
