Go Back   Forums > Community Chatterbox > Gaming Zone
Memberlist Forum Rules Today's Posts
Search Forums:
Click here to use Advanced Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 21-06-2007, 05:37 PM   #241
gufu1992
Inscrutable annoying boss
 
gufu1992's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Derry, United States
Posts: 465
Send a message via MSN to gufu1992
Default

the fallout cap was 30 BTW
__________________
gufu1992 is offline                         Send a private message to gufu1992
Reply With Quote
Old 21-06-2007, 07:35 PM   #242
Doubler
Resident Llama
 
Doubler's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Groningen, Netherlands
Posts: 798
Send a message via MSN to Doubler
Default

21, last I heard
A theoretical 99 in Fallout 2. Practically unattainable though, since gameplay is (artificially) limited. Most people I heard would end up 30-35.
__________________
Doubler is offline                         Send a private message to Doubler
Reply With Quote
Old 21-06-2007, 07:36 PM   #243
12turtle12
Game freak
 
12turtle12's Avatar


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 146
Default

<<<NooB --- What is LARP?
12turtle12 is offline                         Send a private message to 12turtle12
Reply With Quote
Old 21-06-2007, 07:42 PM   #244
Doubler
Resident Llama
 
Doubler's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Groningen, Netherlands
Posts: 798
Send a message via MSN to Doubler
Default

Live Action Role Playing
Playing RP's in real life. Put on some costume, etc.
__________________
Doubler is offline                         Send a private message to Doubler
Reply With Quote
Old 22-06-2007, 04:05 AM   #245
Eva02Soul
Game freak

 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: ,
Posts: 106
Default

Yeah, but I don't think there was enough Quest xp in the game to get that far. Anything past 16 would require grinding, I think.
Eva02Soul is offline                         Send a private message to Eva02Soul
Reply With Quote
Old 22-06-2007, 10:13 PM   #246
12turtle12
Game freak
 
12turtle12's Avatar


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 146
Default

A little grinding isn't too bad, a lot of grinding sucks. Except for Fire Emblem, which I'd rather "a buffalo take a diarrhea dump in my ear" than ever play that game again. No grinding, no problem. Just keep playing maps where the enemies are stronger than your guys and many times can kill in 1 hit. Woohoo! Fun! (Sorry off-topic) LARPS. That's weird. But thanks for the heads up. I could be wrong and missed it, but it seems no one caught, or no one was upset by, the fact that your weapons deteriorate. Could there be anything closer to Oblivion than that? I think that by far would be the most out of place among the Fallout universe. (Okay, I do agree that a hand-held nuke is pretty stupid)
12turtle12 is offline                         Send a private message to 12turtle12
Reply With Quote
Old 22-06-2007, 10:55 PM   #247
Doubler
Resident Llama
 
Doubler's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Groningen, Netherlands
Posts: 798
Send a message via MSN to Doubler
Default

Weapon deterioration has been present in plenty of games and feels rather natural to me. Identifying it purely with Oblivion is a mistake.
__________________
Doubler is offline                         Send a private message to Doubler
Reply With Quote
Old 24-06-2007, 04:56 PM   #248
12turtle12
Game freak
 
12turtle12's Avatar


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 146
Default

I'm not applying it specifically to Oblivion. There's Fire Emblem for one. (Which I also hated but not for that reason) plus a few other RPG's I've played. Also, you could say that games that give you a limited amount of ammo for guns w/out a lot of ammo pickups (Unlike Doom or Duke Nukem) could be "deteriorating" in the fact that once it's used up, it's gone. All I'm saying by my last statement is that Oblivion has a certain flavor where you have a repair skill and need a tool or two to repair your deteriorating weapons/armor. Bethesda makes Oblivion. Now they made Fallout. Fallout never had that system before. Now it does. Is there a connection? Yes. If Fallout is the great game we say it is, why add new things that drastically affect the way it plays? I think a weapon that loses quality over time would be considered a big chance for the Fallout universe. Will it make it a bad game? No, I don't think so. But with all the petty griping that has gone on (not so much from this thread but other sites I've visited) you'd think you'd hear more about a change that effects all your weapons, rather than one weapon like a hand-held nuke that seems to be optional use anyway.
12turtle12 is offline                         Send a private message to 12turtle12
Reply With Quote
Old 24-06-2007, 08:05 PM   #249
Doubler
Resident Llama
 
Doubler's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Groningen, Netherlands
Posts: 798
Send a message via MSN to Doubler
Default

Quote:
Is there a connection? Yes.[/b]
If that's a conclusion, your reasoning is fallacious.
To be honest I think there's plenty of connections between Fallout 3 and Oblivion, but this isn't one. It fits more in the line of the other survival elements added in. Did you need to eat, drink etc. in Oblivion? You never had to before in Fallout (unless you can't that non-substantial 'lose-1-health-per-chance' gimmick in the original Fallout) :P

Quote:
If Fallout is the great game we say it is, why add new things that drastically affect the way it plays?[/b]
Because adding things is good, if done well (that's the issue with the catapult - it's ridicilous even in the Fallout universe, not a good addition. Really, there's enough wrong with the avid Fallout fanbase if you ask me, but you can't blame them for thinking purple ponies wouldn't improve their game :P). The real problem starts when you start changing things that are already good, or vital to the feel and gameplay qualities of the old game (determining the audience for example).
__________________
Doubler is offline                         Send a private message to Doubler
Reply With Quote
Old 26-06-2007, 09:18 PM   #250
12turtle12
Game freak
 
12turtle12's Avatar


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 146
Default

Okay, but by your own admission, why change something that isn't broken? I don't want to have to drink water. I don't want to have to worry about my gun deteriorating. I want to concentrate on story and doing whatever I want. That's Fallout. I understand where Bethesda is coming from considering it's a post-nuclear thing in the vein of The Road Warrior, but really...why not give the option? There's a game on this site...and I forget the name, but it's 1st person, and you can choose survival or arcade mode. Arcade would be considered regular Fallout, survival mode, ifyou get hurt, you need to disinfect, use antidote, wrap it up, etc. Why not give the option? I would say it's a big deviation from traditional Fallout.
12turtle12 is offline                         Send a private message to 12turtle12
Reply With Quote
Reply


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Fallout RP Kugerfang Forum Games 10 17-11-2008 09:16 AM
Fallout And Fallout 2 Kestral Gaming Zone 54 04-01-2006 08:27 PM


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump
 


The current time is 07:33 PM (GMT)

 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.