Slashdot Mirror
More Rumored Fallout 3 Graphics, Details
Although not officially announced, both the No Mutants Allowed and Duck And Cover fan-sites for the Fallout series of PC RPGs have much new info on Fallout 3, including some new alleged Fallout 3 concept art, as well as pictures of it on the wall in Black Isle HQ. NMA has a good unofficial FAQ, missing the newest info such as there "..being just one playable race in Fallout 3, humans" , but including many more details from the game codenamed 'Van Buren', as being widely discussed in online forums by lead designer J.E.Sawyer.
Please tell me an Anonymous Coward like myself isn't going to get FP. BTW Fallout 1 & 2 hardcore r0x0r!!! I really wanted to be a deathclaw though.
I thought they were making a fallout MMORPG?
I just started playing Fallout: Tactics again and really wanted another Fallout game to come out. All the Fallout games are awesome.
www.jeffgoldblumiswatchingy
Where will the main story be located and will the player be able to pick multiple races?
[...] It also allows the PC to plausibly be any of the races we are allowing the player to pick.
That's good...I like being able to play whatever race I pick.
Player: I wanna play a diseased rat
Fallout3: Nope, sorry, just because it's an option doesn't mean you get to pick it!
--trb
I have seen this graphics already, and I really like it. I wonder when graphics designers are going to follow game engine coders and release their work under a copyleft license, so everyone could use their work in free software games. It would be very useful for the WorldForge Project, which I am sort of into. This graphics could be great to start this new trend.
Karma: Positive (probably because of superiour intellect)
While the "Don't fix what ain't broke" philosophy worked well for Fallout 2, I would like to see some upates for the 3rd one. Interplay basically came out and said that the entire engine was going to be the same for the 2nd one because the first one was so well received. For a third one, I would like to see a little more difference in the joinable NPCs and how they respond to your reputation. For example if you are evil and notorious, evil characters will be drawn to you and want to join your party. If you are the good noble character, you will get the "nice" characters. I think it will add to the replay of the game... Vehicles would definitely be nice as well. I don't want a radical departure from what worked, I would just like to see it updated a little
Either way, I love to hear about a 3rd installment of the the only game that can call itself the decendant of Wasteland.
http://www.tomandemily.com
My main question is will they ever have another NPC as cool as Dogmeat? I deffinately agree with an above posters opinion about the NPC's you team up with having more to do with your characters karma and the like. I also wonder if the quest will be different depending on the race, for the most part the different races don't have a common enemy. Also who is left to be the bad guy really? First it was Mutants and their creator. Then it was our own government. I suppose now it will be the mutant form of our government. I would also hope they will make the explorable world larger. All in all it's a very exciting time for Fallout Fanatics.
You do realise that Fallout and Postal were released on the same day, right? Silly old troll...
Postal Review
Fallout review
Robots are everywhere, and they eat old people's medicine for fuel.
What is a "ripe" off anyway?
... what cities are they going to use in it? I mean, will they keep going north or what? They've done postapocalyptic SoCal (in the first one) and postapocalyptic north California (in the second one), now what? Nobody wants to explore postapocalyptic Oregon.
Assuming everyone is playing fairly, this setup gets most of the benefits of both client server and peer to peer. Taken to the extreme, it could allow for massively multiplayer games to be run cheaply (perhaps with no monthly fee) with lots of the processing being done on the clients.
Unfortunately, giving clients such control over the state of the game opens up serious issues with cheating. For example, in the article it appears that the client would have control over AI ground units it is flying above. What's to stop the client from disabling the ground unit so that it doesn't attack? When two clients are attacking each other, assuming peer-to-peer interaction, which client controls who hits who? A cheater could setup their client to make all their shots "hit" and their enemies shots "miss".
(Note that I may be making some wrong assumptions about how this particular game works. I'm just going by the article and what I know about networking and games in general.)
I would be very interested to see this type of network setup in a manner where it could prevent or stop cheating altogether. Perhaps for any entity in a game require multiple controlling clients (clients acting as servers for that entity), and see if there is any clients that is constantly comes up with a different opinion on the state of the game and kick them out. I believe similar techniques are used for non-game P2P networks, such as SETI (correct me if I'm wrong about this).
Another possible option might be using something like Palladium to ensure clients are running the exact same code, though I'd have to know more about it to know how feasible that would be.
Surak is completely hard, now. All the way. Not partial, completely.