Fallout3 Shortcomings & your ideas

[Burbinator]

As for animated hair and clothes we need to remember the game has to run on old PC tech (consoles), we can't expect too much detail.

 

If you can refer me to somewhere where i can buy PCs with the same performance as the PS3, for the same price as the PS3, i will be very very grateful.

Keep in mind i will not be satisfied if this increased performance on games comes with a penalty on storage space, run speed outside of games, or the like.

 

Note that this comes from an incarnated PC gamer.

 

I thought fallout 3 was designed for the 360?

 

I didn't see a position open for someone who can whine about shortcomings

 

Being able to point out glaring flaws like YOUR MAIN QUEST IS TERRIBLE. X, Y, AND Z ARE BAD GAME MECHANICS would be pretty useful I think. I pointed out why they failed in certain areas and how they could've improved, even excluding the basic flaws such as the entire Gamebryo engine. A few examples off the top of my head: skill/special system, perks, crit chance balancing on weapons, basic plot/quest, karma system.

 

But hey, why be reasonable when you can be totally condescending instead?

 

I do think that there will never be a perfect game and here's why: if there was a perfect game why buy any other game? As soon as you find 'the one game' all others are thrown out the window, accept it or not it's true.

 

Uhh, that's not really so much a counterexample as a continuation of a chain of reasoning. If indeed there were a perfect game, then there wouldn't be a need to buy anything else. A perfect game is unreasonable for other reasons, but not needing to buy another game is a natural result of such, NOT a reason it can't exist. But I get what you were trying to say.

 

Either good graphics and 'bad' flaws or perfect everything else and 'bad' graphics. That how it goes.

 

here's the important part that bethesda apologists seem to be missing:

 

graphics are nice because they increase immersion. When the very gameplay mechanics of fallout3 itself destroy immersion, then there is a problem. Bullets colliding into invisible walls, enemies requiring 20 headshots to die, no real penalty for being a mass murderer, 2dimensional characters... These kill immersion way more than slightly blurry detail on a tree ever could.

 

I play the game to play, not to take a ton of pretty screenshots. Graphics are NOT equal to rest of gameplay, so when you sacrifice the rest of the gameplay to work on graphics, then there is a failure.

 

If you don't like it change it! That why we have mods

 

I do and am very grateful to modders and those who have written tutorials for such. The mods make fallout3 from merely a decent game to one of the best.

[Tony the Wookie]

 

I didn't see a position open for someone who can whine about shortcomings

 

Being able to point out glaring flaws like YOUR MAIN QUEST IS TERRIBLE. X, Y, AND Z ARE BAD GAME MECHANICS would be pretty useful I think. I pointed out why they failed in certain areas and how they could've improved, even excluding the basic flaws such as the entire Gamebryo engine. A few examples off the top of my head: skill/special system, perks, crit chance balancing on weapons, basic plot/quest, karma system.

 

But hey, why be reasonable when you can be totally condescending instead?

 

 

So basically you want to be a QA tester then...

 

No openings for that I'm afraid, though you could always be a Senior Engine Programmer since you seem to know so much about Gamebryo :teehee:

[Burbinator]

 

I didn't see a position open for someone who can whine about shortcomings

 

Being able to point out glaring flaws like YOUR MAIN QUEST IS TERRIBLE. X, Y, AND Z ARE BAD GAME MECHANICS would be pretty useful I think. I pointed out why they failed in certain areas and how they could've improved, even excluding the basic flaws such as the entire Gamebryo engine. A few examples off the top of my head: skill/special system, perks, crit chance balancing on weapons, basic plot/quest, karma system.

 

But hey, why be reasonable when you can be totally condescending instead?

 

 

So basically you want to be a QA tester then...

 

No openings for that I'm afraid, though you could always be a Senior Engine Programmer since you seem to know so much about Gamebryo :teehee:

 

Well, all I know is that it didn't work out so well as a shooter. I do admit that my knowledge is severely limited on such matters, and you probably know much more about it than I do.

 

are you actually considering working at bethesda some time?

[Tony the Wookie]

 

I didn't see a position open for someone who can whine about shortcomings

 

Being able to point out glaring flaws like YOUR MAIN QUEST IS TERRIBLE. X, Y, AND Z ARE BAD GAME MECHANICS would be pretty useful I think. I pointed out why they failed in certain areas and how they could've improved, even excluding the basic flaws such as the entire Gamebryo engine. A few examples off the top of my head: skill/special system, perks, crit chance balancing on weapons, basic plot/quest, karma system.

 

But hey, why be reasonable when you can be totally condescending instead?

 

 

So basically you want to be a QA tester then...

 

No openings for that I'm afraid, though you could always be a Senior Engine Programmer since you seem to know so much about Gamebryo :teehee:

 

Well, all I know is that it didn't work out so well as a shooter. I do admit that my knowledge is severely limited on such matters, and you probably know much more about it than I do.

 

are you actually considering working at bethesda some time?

 

Well, in case you are interested, the engine really doesn't effect much of what made Fallout 3 a sub par FPS. I can't be 100% sure, but I would really doubt that any game studio would use physics and the like on bullets. Calculating the stuff with an engine just seems like it would take up too much processing power to be worth it. For things like bullet spread and falloff over range is simply calculated by a program added onto the First Person Shooter Mechanic (as it is called in Unity, which is the game engine I personally am most familiar with, they probly call it something else in Gamebryo.

 

But the point is, it is all part of the programming of the game mechanics and controls, not really a game engine thing. Like I said before, I have worked with Unity more than any other game engine, and though I may not know much about programming I could still go in and adjust stuff about how the first person or third person mechanic works without ever modding the engine.

 

The same goes for most of the stuff people blame on the engine. The only things that I would think are really the fault of gamebryo are the issues with the neck seam and the lack of shadows. Though I can't be 100% sure becase I havn't worked with the engine first hand, only with the GECK.

 

 

But anyways, long story short, if the game designers at Bethesda were more expereinced and familiar with FPS mechanics and the like they could have done a better job makeing a FPS even with the Gamebryo engine, even though Gamebryo doesn't have built in mechanics fo FPS like Unreal or whatever would have. The problem is not that the engine is only good at makeing games like Oblivion, but that the designers are used to makeing games like Oblivion and not games like Call of Duty.

 

 

But this is all just a logical guess on my part, being that I don't know the engine or Bethesda's workflow first hand.

 

 

Game Mechanics are not part of the Game Engine.

 

 

 

And to answer your question, I don't plan on working for Bethesda in particular, though I would take the job if they offered, but I am more looking for any job being a Level Designer / Environment Artist at any game studio that isn't named Rockstar. I still have a lot to learn, but I plan on getting a job at some studio in the next year or two.

[ecksile]

Well actually the X-Ray engine used in stalker as well as the "Modified' X-Ray engine used by 4a games for metro2033 both use physics on the bullets (im not completely sure about the latter but if it really is just a modified version which it looked like then i would think it would have the physics but maybe not because it does use physX). You get bullet drop, ricochet, and penetration. And those engines are both much better then gamebryo on pretty much every level AI, Environment, Physics, Shaders/Lighting/Particles, Stability, Vehicles...The only thing i think gamebryo might beat them in is the massive cell loading that (oblivion/fo3) use but I'm not even sure about that because some of the levels in stalker where rather large themselves. There was a couple nice Playstation 2 games (which is very old technology and limited compared to fallouts gamebryo) that used physics on bullets sniper being 1 of them where wind and gravity effected trajectory i think rain did too but i cant member. and lets not forget revolver ocelots bullet ricochet in the MGS series including PSX xD. And of course the source engine the best physics I have ever seen. The gamebryo has to be the most unstable engine I've ever seen. As for Fallout3's shortcomings other then gamebryo so far everything posted here Ive noticed and i wont argue with any of it...but lets not forget the lighting that doesn't actually interact with anything and instead passes through objects like a ghost and if I'm not mistaken the lighting in oblivion was much better and casted true shadows even on the player/npc...So whatever they did to water down the engine used by fallout shame on you..And you have to agree fallout is much more unstable then oblivion ever was even with massive texture files and special shader effects that were added in as mods oblivion was still pretty stable other then loading stutter. Even after 8 patches...Collision is terrible as well as animations...I think they took a couple from oblivion for melee to be honest...>.> As a BASE building block the game is ok...only reason i grabbed it was for the moddability. Ill never forget the moment i started the game up and the first thing I noticed was the horrendous animations but those can be fixed so i played on...but after playing some in the wasteland and noticing all the graphical glitches and bugs, strange massive continuous fps drops, weird AA turning off bug and dancing skeletons as well as everything else that was mentioned above i was kinda ='[. Felt like i was playing a beta the game didn't feel complete in the least felt pieced together more like it was a "just get it out there for the money product". I think though in my opinion that after the enormous amount of patches? And not fixing some of the biggest bugs and glitches they should just release the source code and let us do it. Because they clearly don't seem to care that much...or at least try to reduce the limitations we face everyday. All the hardcoded crap like limited animation and UI control. I mean just to show how much effort they really did put into the game look at all the stuff they left in the geck that was never used or was supposed to be implemented...Look at the AUTOAIM feature that was included in the PC release i mean seriously? Auto aim...kinda defeats the purpose of even having a mouse...Did you know that in the geck there are 3 radiation Geiger counter ticks A, B, C which aren't used at all and instead for your radiation Geiger counter they used the test sound. which is simply all 3 of them put together in a single audio clip which loops when you go into an irradiated place. Just in case you ever wondered why when your standing in a 100+ radiation level zone your Geiger counter wasn't going crazy and was instead just subtly ticking along the way it does when your in a 1 radiation level zone. Thankfully they have a Getradiationlevel function which i can use to fix that little problem and make the Geiger work like it should. In all i give the vanilla game a 6/10.

 

P.S. On the other hand if this http://fallout3nexus.com/downloads/file.php?id=11434&navtag=file/images.php?id=11434&tab=3 turns out to be real and not someone who knows how to use Vegas and after affects professionally then i might reconsider some of my gamebryo rants...I really suggest you watch the teaser trailer it is rather stunning.

[Tony the Wookie]

Well actually the X-Ray engine used in stalker as well as the "Modified' X-Ray engine used by 4a games for metro2033 both use physics on the bullets (im not completely sure about the latter but if it really is just a modified version which it looked like then i would think it would have the physics but maybe not because it does use physX). You get bullet drop, ricochet, and penetration. And those engines are both much better then gamebryo on pretty much every level AI, Environment, Physics,

 

Sounds very interesting, if not just a little overkill. I should look more into that. I guess it could be usefull to have bullet physics for long range sniper shots and the like, though no one would even notice the difference in a close quarters gun fight with smgs and assault rifles shooting up the place.

 

But I guess with the stuff programmers pull of today it probly doesn't end up taking up any more processing power than the old way.

 

I guess I am just out of date with my engine technology. Lately all I have been working with is Unity, and as good as it is for a free engine designed mostly for web games, it isn't up to par with these engines profesional game studios have. Attatching bullet drop and the like to the projectile still works fine for me.

 

 

 

But anyways, your probably the first person to actually blame Gamebryo for what Gamebryo lacks, as opposed to things that really have nothing to do with the engine. It annoys me to no end that when I place stuff in an outdoor environment the sun shines straight through my roof... though honestly as a play and not a modder I would probably have never noticed.

 

Gamebryo is far from perfect in a lot of way, but the point I was trying to make is that you can't blame the engine for Game Mechanics. Having physics is far from neccessary to have a good FPS. I just find it funny when people blame Gamebryo for something that is the fault of not very well designed mechanics.

[Burbinator]

Gamebryo is far from perfect in a lot of way, but the point I was trying to make is that you can't blame the engine for Game Mechanics. Having physics is far from neccessary to have a good FPS. I just find it funny when people blame Gamebryo for something that is the fault of not very well designed mechanics.

 

I was blaming bethesda more than the tools they used. If, indeed, gamebryo is not responsible for the terrible game mechanics, then it means that the problems are more easily fixable (as they are not inherent issues with the engine) and that bethesda did an even poorer job than at first glance. I had simply been giving bethesda benefit of the doubt, as it would be more understandable that they don't want to overhaul the gamebryo engine.

[Tony the Wookie]

Gamebryo is far from perfect in a lot of way, but the point I was trying to make is that you can't blame the engine for Game Mechanics. Having physics is far from neccessary to have a good FPS. I just find it funny when people blame Gamebryo for something that is the fault of not very well designed mechanics.

 

I was blaming bethesda more than the tools they used. If, indeed, gamebryo is not responsible for the terrible game mechanics, then it means that the problems are more easily fixable (as they are not inherent issues with the engine) and that bethesda did an even poorer job than at first glance. I had simply been giving bethesda benefit of the doubt, as it would be more understandable that they don't want to overhaul the gamebryo engine.

 

I don't think you understand the process of fine tuning a game mechanic to perfection, makeing a FPS mechanic on the level of Call of Duty or something is every bit as hard as fixing a game engine. The only difference is a game engine has a pretty clear correct answer, but with a game mechanic everyone expects something different.

 

The idea of trying to tune first person shooter mechanics and first person meele mechanics, as well as not only makeing a 3rd person camera that can be adjusted on the fly but haveing to make sure that the mechanics still feel good for shooters in 3rd person near, shooters in 3rd person far, meele in 3rd person near, meele in 3rd person far. Then ontop of that tuneing the mechanics to work with a large multitude of different stats and weapons that can change the entire feel of how the game is played.

 

It isn't an easy task by any means. If it was up to me I would have just thrown out Meele entirely and tuned it to a set 3rd person camera over the shoulder, because I think that haveing too vast a number of variables made the thing incredibly hard to tune correctly. The different camera positions really complicated things. (I don't think many people realise how big a part camera placement plays when it come to mechanics)

 

I am by no means saying that Bethesda is great at mechanic design, I would say they are about average, not horrible but deffinatly no great as well. They just bit off way too much to make everything as fine tuned as a game like Call of Juarez or something, especially considering they don't really have and FPS experence as a company.

 

You just shouldn't underestimate how hard it really is to tune all of those mechanics if you have never been inside of an engine and tried to make something feel and play good. It is every bit as hard as programming an engine, just more right brained then left.

[csgators]

and tuned it to a set 3rd person camera over the shoulder,

 

Noooooo!!! Don't take my first person away, it's the only way to play! :blink:

[Tony the Wookie]

and tuned it to a set 3rd person camera over the shoulder,

 

Noooooo!!! Don't take my first person away, it's the only way to play! :blink:

 

Well, then be glad I am not making the game :smile: (if I did however own Bethesda you would be out of luck though :ninja: )

 

 

First person is however about 10 times easier to tune the mechanics for, and if Bethesda would have stuck with that then the final product would have been a lot more polished and fine tuned. There is a reason that games like Call of Juarez and Call of Duty only allow first person even though they have all the animations needed and all the ability to give a 3rd person option. The mechanics between first and thrid feel too different and they don't want to mess with fine tuneing both.

 

Same reason Gears of War doesn't offer a first person mode.

 

I think people take for granted that Fallout gives you the option to change, which I personally like because I switch between the two a lot. But the mechanics do suffer for that.