Fallout 3 if Troika got the license....

[Apocalypse]

Originally posted by pg
i don't understand - you'd rather troika got the fo license than bethesda? i thought morrowind was much more well received than any troika game to date. or are you one of those fallout fanatics that thinks troika/obsidan could make fo3 better just because they are "true fans"?

I'm one of those people who believe Bethesda has a good chance of screwing it up because they said Baldur's Gate style RPGs aren't what they do well. They are better with RPGs like Morrowind, which is nothing like Fallout.

[LDiCesare]

Here's what makes me feel Troika would have been better fit than Bethesda for this game:
Troika would have done it from a 2D iso perspective. Bethesda almost clearly said they wouldn't. I don't like the Morrowind first person view. And Morrowind dialogue system is awful whereas Arcanum (and even ToTT) is very good. ToEE was crap because of the scenario, which was imposed upon the developpers by whoever chose to make a game out of a hack'n'slash pen and paper scenario. Troika releases buggy games, but once patched they are very good. Bethesda hasn't proved anything in terms of atmosphere and dialogue, but their skills systems were quite interesting, so they can still provide a good product. I'd just have preferred Troika.

[Apocalypse]

Originally posted by LDiCesare
Here's what makes me feel Troika would have been better fit than Bethesda for this game:
Troika would have done it from a 2D iso perspective.

No, it would have been 3D....exactly like the screenshots I posted since that is what they were going to use.

[LDiCesare]

It may be 3D but it's still a 3rd person top view seen from an angle, which is what I ment. Whereas Bethesda will probabl not use such a camera angle.

[pg]

you guys have no idea what bethesda will do. i imagine they'll keep most of the aspects of fallout the same as they were. there is a reason they bought the license. it doesn't make sense to change that much because fallout just works how it is now. i'd be really surprised if they didn't keep special, turn based combat, and have a 3d engine that didn't allow a isometric view(eg fps pov only).

also bethesda from my understanding is fairly loaded with cash right now so they can take the time and effort to get it right. i'm not sure any of the other dev houses(troika, obsidian) could do that.

[LDiCesare]

We have some ideas. They did talk about it after all. They said they liked the combat system so they're likely to keep something close to it. Point is we know what it'd have looked like with Troika, not with Bethesda. They may do something very good, but they said they would do something with which they were familiar, so they are very likely to use a 3D engine like that of Morrowind As for first-person or not, I 'm not sure they have decided on it yet themselves.

[Apocalypse]

Originally posted by pg
you guys have no idea what bethesda will do. i imagine they'll keep most of the aspects of fallout the same as they were. there is a reason they bought the license. it doesn't make sense to change that much because fallout just works how it is now. i'd be really surprised if they didn't keep special, turn based combat, and have a 3d engine that didn't allow a isometric view(eg fps pov only).

also bethesda from my understanding is fairly loaded with cash right now so they can take the time and effort to get it right. i'm not sure any of the other dev houses(troika, obsidian) could do that.

Well, Bethesda has said they don't do the top down style well. And they have made no comment when asked if they were going to keep the storyline either. Now, it's alright if Doom 3 retells Doom's story since there wasn't much in there, but Fallout and Fallout 2 created a very rich atmosphere and storyline already in place. There is no reason why they shouldn't try to stay close to it.