Will Fallout 3 suck?

[Mef]

texturing is certainly not up to the level of Oblivion

Duh - I'd raether think Gothic didn't need much polygons because textures WERE great - take any of buildings, rocks, caves etc into consideration; they look really life-like although "poor in polygons". What does up to level means? Oblivion looks for me largelly exagorated - there are tons of graphic shit, and "life-likeness" is on similiar level. The true genius of Gothic sits in making things look very well using minimum resources from computer itself... Also Gothic has GIANT locations, VERY distant horizon an short loading times in trade...

[Stewsburntmonkey]

Compare: Gothic II

http://img39.exs.cx/img39/7158/24qu.jpg

http://www.deafgamers.com/gothic2pic4.jpg

to Oblivion:

http://cache.kotaku.com/gaming/Oblivion.jpg
http://media.pc.gamespy.com/media/702/7 ... 25197.html

[Mef]

This is pointless, I do realise Oblivion's graphic superiority... It's just Gothic makes me feel much more "in" the game's world. Period. Other thing is You selected shitty screenshots for Gothic which is somewhat unfair...

[xander]

This is pointless, I do realise Oblivion's graphic superiority... It's just Gothic makes me feel much more "in" the game's world. Period. Other thing is You selected shitty screenshots for Gothic which is somewhat unfair...

So, post a better one. If you assert that another person's view is invalid (especially with regards to something as subjective as aesthetics), it is upon you to prove your point.

xander

[Stewsburntmonkey]

I just posted the first one I found that had a significant field of view and the first I found that was in a highly textured environment (a city). Sorry if they are not to your liking.

Here is a full gallery of screenshots so people can pick their own.

Here is a gallery for Oblivion.

As you say given the 2-3 difference in the games development it is not at all surprising that Oblivion looks better. Although Morrowind which was released before Gothic II still tends to have better textures and modeling than Gothic.

There is a lot that goes into the immersiveness of a game beyond graphics. Gameplay elements and setting make a huge difference. If you found Gothic immersive then great. It was certainly a solid game (dispite having many flaws). I just don't feel it quite made it to FPS level in terms of graphics and environment. If you think it does, that is certainly fine. It really doesn't matter either way (at least as it relates to my argument).

[The GoldFish]

compare;

Bethesda soup

Modders input on the situation

Before you ask, no, there is no performance impact using that mod. The soup effect was apparently someone not even CARING to see what was possible. Do you feel that this effect doesn't matter? Look through the gamespy shots and there are several with large patches of soup in view - ie, it's not just cause I'm looking over water.

Also please note the binary LOD line next to the rock in the left of the picture. Perhaps you have found an impressive view you wish to capture but find that there is a massive eye soar on it like this. Obviously, this effect is worsened if using Beth soup.

You have amazing graphics, what are people going to want to do, take screenshots of the awesome views - so much for that, eh?. You're right, it really CAN be compared to FPS games where you + 200 meteres doesn't exist.

In this case, I'm an RPGist, I don't really CARE what it all looks like in general - I know MANY people who have bought new PCs *JUST* for Oblivion. What I DO care about is eye soars. Oblivion has many of the latter. Someone apparently didn't even think about the possiblity someone would ever look that far away, else they would have said, can we make this look any better? I have found that there were many avenues where that was the feeling I got from playing - linking you a screenshot of a graphical issue like this is simply easier than trying to explain to you the places where I get that feeling.

Would you have given up some up-front uber graphics OR additional development time for;
- Better armour/clothes system
- Better level/scaling balences
- Better distance LOD effects
- Better enchanting system
- Better/More realistic character models
- More quest choices and outcomes (I think I've found at most 2 outcomes in quests)
- Self Shadowing being fixed
- A GUI system that wasn't designed for a TV display when you dont HAVE a TV display
- Better combat balancing between 1v1, 1v2, 1v3 and 1v4+
- More spells and/or weapons, eg, the return of the spear, levitation, jump, etc (which were all removed because they couldn't get them to 'work right' (though I expect they really did try, here)
- The re-addition of object reflections*
- The re-addition of dynamic shadows, or any shadows at all, on objects, and the removal of the 5-times-more-intensive-than-normal softshadows*
- Implimentation of HDR effect which a) works with previous generation Graphics cards AND b) is compatible with FSAA
- The E3 textures*

*s were removed, in theory, because they would make everything too slow. Which is funny because of all the stuff they kept which is bloated, but still.

I don't suppose I need to point out that MANY games manage to offer many of these things. I know I'd say yes to a good few of those if given the choice. I should also point out that at least one of those screenshots you linked for Oblivion is prerelease. Oblivion's graphics were damaged a lot in the period of E3 shows to release, so, I would try to avoid any shots you can't check are modern (for example, that guy has a sword while on a horse, which you can't actually do, so, it may be conceptual in at least some respect and it's legitmacy would not be gaurenteed)

It feels like someone tried to turn it into an FPS without adding the things that make FPSes good, or keeping all of the things that make RPGs good. Maybe it would feel like an immersive world if it didn't keep reminding me every few minutes that it's not - if it didn't do such a good job in between maybe I wouldn't notice? I agree there are many good things about the game, but there are many BAD things at all that, for me, MASSIVELY detract from the experience. That I can see how it could have been so much better is the worst part.

[Gravitron]

they wouldn't just give them a binary the toolset, and a piece of paper with their permission on, now would they?

Actually, this is how licensing starded, and upto recent years also conducted by majority.
Since it wasn't exactly a business based on leasing out the engine (until ID/Epic started being more focused on doing that than actually making games) rather than an engine a company made for its game - saw it's good and in demand and decided to make money on the side by leasing it to gothers, you were lucky to even get a two-page manual telling you what it does.
Both source code and tools were given completely undocumented and entirely unsupported.
If you knew the people behind and they had spare time you could IM them and ask for some directions here and there, but not much...


I like you Goldfish.
As for that twat, I wish I could push this and make him go away, for good.

[Stewsburntmonkey]

compare;

Bethesda soup

Modders input on the situation

Before you ask, no, there is no performance impact using that mod. The soup effect was apparently someone not even CARING to see what was possible. Do you feel that this effect doesn't matter? Look through the gamespy shots and there are several with large patches of soup in view - ie, it's not just cause I'm looking over water.

Oh, I certainly think it looks better, but the original doesn't bother me.

Also please note the binary LOD line next to the rock in the left of the picture. Perhaps you have found an impressive view you wish to capture but find that there is a massive eye soar on it like this. Obviously, this effect is worsened if using Beth soup.

That's really not that bad considering what most other games do.

You have amazing graphics, what are people going to want to do, take screenshots of the awesome views - so much for that, eh?. You're right, it really CAN be compared to FPS games where you + 200 meteres doesn't exist.

Precisely.

Would you have given up some up-front uber graphics OR additional development time for;
- Better armour/clothes system
- Better level/scaling balences
- Better distance LOD effects
- Better enchanting system
- Better/More realistic character models
- More quest choices and outcomes (I think I've found at most 2 outcomes in quests)
- Self Shadowing being fixed
- A GUI system that wasn't designed for a TV display when you dont HAVE a TV display
- Better combat balancing between 1v1, 1v2, 1v3 and 1v4+
- More spells and/or weapons, eg, the return of the spear, levitation, jump, etc (which were all removed because they couldn't get them to 'work right' (though I expect they really did try, here)
- The re-addition of object reflections*
- The re-addition of dynamic shadows, or any shadows at all, on objects, and the removal of the 5-times-more-intensive-than-normal softshadows*
- Implimentation of HDR effect which a) works with previous generation Graphics cards AND b) is compatible with FSAA
- The E3 textures*

*s were removed, in theory, because they would make everything too slow. Which is funny because of all the stuff they kept which is bloated, but still.

Heh, I think the balance is pretty decent as I have said. You seem to be comparing this game to your idea of a perfect game. No game ever made would satisfy all you are asking for.

I don't suppose I need to point out that MANY games manage to offer many of these things. I know I'd say yes to a good few of those if given the choice.

Yes many game do offer some of those features. However you could easily list many features that Oblivion has that those games don't. Developers have a huge bag of features (it is basically infinite really) which they can pick from. They can only impliment a small subset of features. They have to pick and choose what to impliment. You cannot say that if Oblivion had worse graphics it would neccessarily mean some other those other features you want would have been able to be implimented. The choice of implimenting features depends on a huge number of things. The developers made their choices and have released their game. I for one enjoy it a great deal and it has been very well recieved by both gamers and critics. In fact it is the top ranked game on Gamespot in the last year (9.6 for the Xbox 360 version) and the PC version is ranked 4th (9.3). User reviews are about 9.6 for both. Obviously people are pretty happy with the choices the developers made.

I should also point out that at least one of those screenshots you linked for Oblivion is prerelease. Oblivion's graphics were damaged a lot in the period of E3 shows to release, so, I would try to avoid any shots you can't check are modern (for example, that guy has a sword while on a horse, which you can't actually do, so, it may be conceptual in at least some respect and it's legitmacy would not be gaurenteed)

At least one of the screenshots I linked of Gothic II is pre alpha, so I didn't feel too bad about using a pre-release shot from Oblivion. I have linked full galleries for each, which support my point just as well.

[The GoldFish]

It's a checklist of possibilites, I'm not expecting all of them. I just feel them important factors that in some cases weren't even apparently considered.

Also, I'm comparing them with a game without painful flaws, not a game where everything is perfect and could never be improved. I'm sure you're aware of the difference. I already said I wanted a light grey wall with dark grey spots instead of a white wall with black spots. Do you understand where my analogy is comming from here, even if you do disagree with it?

If you like, please list some features that are important for improved gameplay experience and non-unsettling graphics (Oblivion's context is realistic graphics, leaving things out COMPLETELY is unsettling, as is REDUCING THE QUALITY TO THAT OF SOUP, if the graphics were poorer you would mentally accept their absence in some way, don't ask me why, that's just how it seems to be for me) that Oblivion DOES have over other games that recieve such acclaim. I do expect there are several of them that are in my 'taking for granted' catagory, and many of them in my 'never really bothered me' catagory, as the soup etc seem to be for you. Because you see, it seems that for you, the things that annoy me don't really bother you so much, and if you remove those black spots, ie, if you remove all of the things that annoy me to death about the game, then yes, it is really really good, which would explain your position. I'm just curious how you can get over some of those things. Alot of people have given Beth alot of stick because of the things they've just left out.

RE the screenshots - ok, fair play. I still feel the chain is only as strong as it's weakest link, ie, the graphics quality is as low as the most shitty thing you can see. :P

I feel I keep comming back to the thread because I'm not sure if you see and understand my view, regardless if you agree with it. I feel that, you still feel it is good game design practice to ignore the ideals of your roots, which is what I feel Oblivion has done, and has bought into the 'shiny graphics if they're in front of you' scene.

Graviton; what makes you so sure, I mean, where's your information sourced from, as I would be somewhat surprised if that were the case. You can't exactly apply a Quake 2 patch to SiN, can you? Unless you're talking about even before that, where to my knowledge little in the way of engine trading really went on because of how fundamental they mostly were. HL was based off of the Quake engines and it has a very noticable change in feel.

[Stewsburntmonkey]

Also, I'm comparing them with a game without painful flaws, not a game where everything is perfect and could never be improved. I'm sure you're aware of the difference. I already said I wanted a light grey wall with dark grey spots instead of a white wall with black spots. Do you understand where my analogy is comming from here, even if you do disagree with it?

Yes, a minor flaw in a master piece is far more visible (and distracting) than even a major flaw in a lesser work. However I don't feel people should simply create mediocre works just to hide any flaws that might creep in. Perfection is something to be strived for, not something to be attained. As I have said though, I don't find the flaws you point out distracting and it doesn't seem like most others do either. The fact that they distract you is too bad, since it means you largely miss out on the pleasure of such a good game.

I feel I keep comming back to the thread because I'm not sure if you see and understand my view, regardless if you agree with it. I feel that, you still feel it is good game design practice to ignore the ideals of your roots, which is what I feel Oblivion has done, and has bought into the 'shiny graphics if they're in front of you' scene.

I'm not the biggest fan of the RPG system of Elder Scrolls, but for me the open enviroment, significant freedom, and realism of the word. I like being able to buy houses, keep horses, see dear running in the fields, see NPCs leading something akin to realistic lives (not just standing in the exact same place for years on end). To me the biggest achievement of Oblivion is the world. It moves and changes in ways that are much more realistic than I have ever seen in any other RPG. Oblivion also has very few areas that to me are tedious. There is none of this running from place to place (you can just fast travel). Things like that are what make the game for me. Morrowind was the game of the year when it came out. Oblivion really improves on most of the short commings of Morrowind. To make such vast improvements on a game which was game of the year is very impressive. They did not fix everything, and broke (or at least downgraded) a few things, but overall things are vastly improved. Bethesda seems to genuinely listen to gamers and seem to be working to make the best games they can. I think being critical of their games are good, but people should be mindful of how high the quality of there work has been.

[The GoldFish]

"since it means you largely miss out on the pleasure of such a good game" isn't logically correct, since it's only good in your opinion because of all the awful things in it you don't mind. Find a really GOD AWFUL GAME and decide you don't mind all the things that make it god awful and it's >_< amazing >_<.

I feel that there is a lot of Oblivion which is really impressive and a great step forward. I also feel there is a lot of Oblivion that was just, forgotton about, and many poor decisions about if it should be included, or improved, were made.

I feel that perfection is something to be strived for in an *excersize*. I feel that Oblivion WAS trying to aim for that white wall. You said yourself, you can't really succeed at that, and I frankly feel Oblivion disn't come close - In fact, I actually believe that perfect is that imperfect balence of good and bad, where you almost always enjoy it and come away feeling good about the experience (eg, in a book, the ending is VITAL, if it's bad, it WILL ruin the whole experience), as really, this is what I would like to see more of it. I also think it's much harder to attain that balence than it is to create the patchwork that Oblivion feels like. Embrace the inferior environment you've created and play off of the weaknesses.

I know many people who have had to work VERY hard to try to get any enjoyment out of Oblivion. It literally sucks the fun out of you because you can see how it wouldn've been good if X and Y, and you strive to attain that fun! Horrid, really, hehe.

I should add that basically the whole game is tedious for me now. I could be rich if I could be bothered hulking piles of armour to shops, I doubt there's a more powerful weapon, or better armour, done alot of the guilds, bar the Dark Brotherhood because you don't get a choice to refuse at a particular instance (which would otherwise be a spoiler). I closed about 30 oblivion gates as well...

Oh yeah that's another thing. There's only 7-8 actual different instances of Oblivion for you to warp to each time you do a gate. There's a HELL of alot more gates than that. It just looks stupid to go back to the same realm of oblivion over and over like it was an entirely new place. That bugged me too cause I Was expecting like, all sorts of different realms and such. Can you imagine how stupid it feels to find yourself in the same place again but it be treated like it's the first time you've been there ever?

[daset]

Meh, never really understood about games and graphics. Maybe I just have an overactive imagination, but I never look at graphics for a game. Really, it's a game, about gameplay. If you want cool cgi, go watch terminator or something. You play a game for the gameplay, and perhaps the only time you should ever use graphics is for immersion, but I rarely play to be sucked in; usually I just want to have fun, to enjoy myself. Games are for gameplay, books are for story, movies are for graphics, music is for sound. Combining them can be interesting, but usually I am looking for a specific experience.

Nowadays, I am actually turned off by uber-shiny graphics, since I realize that this probably means that they spent too much time on graphics than gameplay. Probably why I still enjoy text-based rpgs so much even in this day and age.

[Stewsburntmonkey]

"since it means you largely miss out on the pleasure of such a good game" isn't logically correct, since it's only good in your opinion because of all the awful things in it you don't mind. Find a really GOD AWFUL GAME and decide you don't mind all the things that make it god awful and it's >_< amazing >_<.

Quite right. What is goodness but a lack of things we consider bad? If you didn't mind those things you feel as faults of the game, then you would certainly have far more pleasure in playing it. My statement is totally logical. Whether it is realistic could be argued.

I feel that there is a lot of Oblivion which is really impressive and a great step forward. I also feel there is a lot of Oblivion that was just, forgotton about, and many poor decisions about if it should be included, or improved, were made.

You're certainly entitled to think that.

I feel that perfection is something to be strived for in an *excersize*. I feel that Oblivion WAS trying to aim for that white wall. You said yourself, you can't really succeed at that, and I frankly feel Oblivion disn't come close - In fact, I actually believe that perfect is that imperfect balence of good and bad, where you almost always enjoy it and come away feeling good about the experience (eg, in a book, the ending is VITAL, if it's bad, it WILL ruin the whole experience), as really, this is what I would like to see more of it.

Speaking of illogical arguments, defining perfection in terms of imperfection is fully illogical.

I know many people who have had to work VERY hard to try to get any enjoyment out of Oblivion. It literally sucks the fun out of you because you can see how it wouldn've been good if X and Y, and you strive to attain that fun! Horrid, really, hehe.

Well then you know a great many fools. If they are having a hard time enjoying a game then they need to find something better to do with their time. If you are going to work hard at least make it something you either enjoy greatly or are getting paid for. There are a great many games I think are very good, but can't stand to play. I get no real enjoyment out of even the best RTS and FPS games. I in no way consider that the fault of the games; it's just personal preference.

I should add that basically the whole game is tedious for me now. I could be rich if I could be bothered hulking piles of armour to shops, I doubt there's a more powerful weapon, or better armour, done alot of the guilds, bar the Dark Brotherhood because you don't get a choice to refuse at a particular instance (which would otherwise be a spoiler). I closed about 30 oblivion gates as well...

With more or less open ended games like this there is always going to be a point where the game become pointless (it is no longer all that fun and there is nothing new ahead that would make it fun). At this point in my life I reach that point during the demo of most games.

Oh yeah that's another thing. There's only 7-8 actual different instances of Oblivion for you to warp to each time you do a gate. There's a HELL of alot more gates than that. It just looks stupid to go back to the same realm of oblivion over and over like it was an entirely new place. That bugged me too cause I Was expecting like, all sorts of different realms and such. Can you imagine how stupid it feels to find yourself in the same place again but it be treated like it's the first time you've been there ever?

I actually haven't gotten that far into the story. I've just closed the first gate. However aren't there only supposed to be 7-8 planes of Oblivion anyway?

Although having played games like Diablo II revisiting the same level over and over is something I am far too used to.

[The GoldFish]

Size = 7 implies I don't really want you to reply regarding this, I guess you may if you like, but it's against what I'm trying to achieve, really.

What I meant was, 'it's a good game' isn't an agreed fact, it's an opinion; your opinion, or maybe even the gaming press' opinion, which you could argue makes my view irrelivent due to being outnumbered, but since we're explicitly DISCUSSING if it's a good game or not, it's a bit off to just say 'it's a good game', now isn't it? I could say "Your taste means you largely miss out on the horror of such an awful game". We're talking about the same game, and both statements are in the same vein, but you wouldn't think it to look at them, because they're whinging about taste, which is stupid. Regardless, I don't even care about if I could have enjoyed it or not. I was merely trying to raise the above, hence the ,

Maybe this isn't obvious, but I'm trying to reach a conclusion here. I'm trying to create a common ground, where I for the most part agree with you and it's obvious where our different tastes divide our thoughts towards the game's quality. Your responce was;

"You're certainly entitled to think that."

OK, yes, well, what about you, do you see some truth in what I've said maybe, or are you uber sure none of the things I've brought up could possibly ever matter? Give me some feedback here... do you accept that there were in fact several and possibly many poor decisions made in the development - that you feel they don't matter as much as those correct decisions isnt relavent to the statement.

And uh, there should be probably be a comma between imperfect and balence. Does that make sense now? Ie, the balence between good and bad, not aiming for 100% good and thus not trying to be perfect. If you still feel that's illogical, fine, let's call it illogical. Screw logic, you probably know what I was trying to say there, in that, I much prefer a product that accepts it's imperfections and works with them, since the alternative thumbs up solution, total perfection, is impossible. Who cares anyway, it was a passing statement and doesn't have any direct relavence.

I'd also appreciate not having my friends/aquaintences alike called fools when you have an incredibly tiny view on the situation, and their lives in general, especially when I may have incorrectly relayed to you said situation. You could perhaps be, you know, polite about them because you haven't even met them or know who they are, or anything like that. If you feel they were foolish for doing that single thing, then fine I guess, but to imply they're foolish in all regards is simply bad manners. I'm sure that's probably what you meant anyway, but it pays to be civil, right?

Look, don't take this the wrong way, but most of your post made me feel like you took the first part of each section, said something about it, and then ignored the point I was trying to make with the rest of the paragraph - ie, pointing out where you disagree. I'm trying to find out where we agree here, and on the side make reference and explain to you the views of people who've had similar experiences as myself. I wanted you to take the point and integrate that against your own opinion, and respond indicating why it doesn't effect or apply to you, but also challenge that against 'my' view. Then again, maybe you're doing that and it just isn't working for me, heh; it just feels like the ball is rolling around and around but never completing a full rotation. I don't just want to know how you disagree with me again and again, I want to know where you do agree with me each time - I already mostly understand your position from step one.

I would also consider it would be better practice to comment on the quality of the game when you've, you know, played more of it.
Maybe if you did, you'd have more of an opinion RE the awful scaling

(also, no, there are supposed to be at least twice as many planes, and the planes have little relavence to the actual environment you experience - a plane isn't a single island after all, if it was, Daedric princes would be very bored. There are in fact massive cities based in realms of Oblivion etc, which are where Dremora hail from, which are on the whole missing from this game. Also, if you return to the same plane, there should be dead bodies and all the items you left everywhere, as well as pretty much no new loot, were as there is magically no trace of your previous adventures and lost of fresh brand new loot)

[shinygerbil]

Meh, never really understood about games and graphics. Maybe I just have an overactive imagination, but I never look at graphics for a game. Really, it's a game, about gameplay. If you want cool cgi, go watch terminator or something. You play a game for the gameplay, and perhaps the only time you should ever use graphics is for immersion, but I rarely play to be sucked in; usually I just want to have fun, to enjoy myself. Games are for gameplay, books are for story, movies are for graphics, music is for sound. Combining them can be interesting, but usually I am looking for a specific experience.

Nowadays, I am actually turned off by uber-shiny graphics, since I realize that this probably means that they spent too much time on graphics than gameplay. Probably why I still enjoy text-based rpgs so much even in this day and age.

Too right. ZangbandTK is more enjoyable than any of those games