1Up interviews Emil Pagliarulo

Sander

This ghoul has seen it all
Staff member
Admin
Orderite
1Up has released a new interview with Fallout 3's lead designer, Emil Pagliarulo.
The interview talks about a few new things, including some more detail about schematics and item construction:
<blockquote>
In Fallout 3, the player will come across schematics for different custom-made weapons. These might be found in different places in the world, or obtained as quest rewards. Each set of schematics lets you build a certain, pre-determined weapon, as long as you've got all the components, and most of the components are junk objects you'll find in the world.

So, one weapon might require the brake assembly from an old motorcycle, and that's where you'll find it, near a destroyed motorcycle. Or maybe you need some surgical tubing, located in an abandoned hospital. Once you have the schematics and all the components, you can create the weapon, and your Repair skill dictates its condition. </blockquote>
Emil also talks about karma, and mentions that dialogue decisions will not impact the ending:
<blockquote>EP: We went back and forth with the impact of dialogue on the character, and ultimately decided we didn't want to penalize or reward the player for carrying on a conversation. What you say and how you say it will certainly affect how NPCs react to you, and whether or not they'll give you quests, but not the ending of the game. [That] really depends on some of the big decisions you make during the course of the game, as well as your karma. And your karma changes based on your actions. So [if] you destroy Megaton [a city built around a supposedly inert atomic bomb], your karma plummets, so that will certainly affect the ending. But there are other moments too, key moments during the game, that greatly determine which ending you get.</blockquote>

Link: 1Up interview with Emil Pagliarulo

Thanks, Briosafreak
 
Oh, for the love of the Emperor... I liked the customization thing when it sounded like we'd be adding scopes, stocks and the like to our weapons, but it's getting ridiculous. It's starting to sound like we'll be building railguns with tinfoil, rubber bands and a flashlight.

And I guess the dialog thing mean we won't get the option to go through the game without firing a shot. So much for dialog options mattering. And sounds like the ending will only be determined by a karma check. Whee.

This one really got me down.
 
Emil said:
Not unless our intrepid politicos are afraid of China or a sentient supercomputer nuking the world, or our nation's capital becoming overrun by hideous Super Mutants.
Hmm?

When did that happen in Fallout? Could've sworn it was a lot more complicated than that.

You know, depleted resources and everything. I guess "evil computar make world go boomzor" is a little easier to understand, though.

Sounds a lot like Terminator. And remember Fallout 2 had Skynet durrrrr

OH WAIT.

WASN'T EMIL WAS THE ONE WHO MENTIONED FALLOUT 3 WAS A SPIRITUAL SUCCESSOR TO TERMINATOR: FUTURE SHOCK?

(Today has not been a very good day)
 
Kan-Kerai said:
Hmm?

When did that happen in Fallout? Could've sworn it was a lot more complicated than that.
Heh, yeah. Although it has been implied that it could've been an AI to fire the first bomb.

Justicar said:
Oh, for the love of the Emperor... I liked the customization thing when it sounded like we'd be adding scopes, stocks and the like to our weapons, but it's getting ridiculous. It's starting to sound like we'll be building railguns with tinfoil, rubber bands and a flashlight.
I believe they've confirmed before that you can only build new weapons, not modify existing ones. I think.
Although maybe I'm confusing this with Bioshock.

Emil said:
We went back and forth with the impact of dialogue on the character, and ultimately decided we didn't want to penalize or reward the player for carrying on a conversation.
This is the most un-Fallouty thing someone can say, probably. It shows they still haven't graduated past the rogue-like mindset of Oblivion, and certainly aren't moving the genre forward, as they claim.
 
So basically, dialogue is ultimately meaningless, and you'll be constructing toaster weapons and nuclear catapults from brake pads, plastic tubing, and some Elmer's glue. Yeah, these guys have really got what made Fallout great down pat. :roll:
 
Sander said:
I believe they've confirmed before that you can only build new weapons, not modify existing ones. I think.
Although maybe I'm confusing this with Bioshock.

No, you're right. it was confirmed a little while ago. I'd much rather it be the other way around.
 
They only had meaningful dialogue in the first two games because they didn't have the technology to include the Fatman.


It seems like they always go back and forth on whether or not to actually try and make it like the originals, but always seem to end up deciding that making it like Oblivion is for the best. Odds on these supposed arguments ever actually happening?
 
Sander said:
I believe they've confirmed before that you can only build new weapons, not modify existing ones. I think.
Although maybe I'm confusing this with Bioshock.

I don't know if it was confirmed or not in Fallout but you can modify existing weapons in Bioshock, so I don't think you are confusing them.

Sander said:
Emil said:
We went back and forth with the impact of dialogue on the character, and ultimately decided we didn't want to penalize or reward the player for carrying on a conversation.
This is the most un-Fallouty thing someone can say, probably. It shows they still haven't graduated past the rogue-like mindset of Oblivion, and certainly aren't moving the genre forward, as they claim.

True, but its also only sounds like he's only talking about dialogue not directly affecting the end-game.

It actually clashes with some of what has been "confirmed" in the game, namely being able to only get certain quests through dialogue choices and pick fights through dialogue choices.

I mean, if you only get the Megaton quest from a specific dialogue choice (insulting the sherrif's hat), and the megaton quest affects the end game...

I would be very dissapointed in nothing but meaningless dialogue choices. But, it doesn't make sense at all, even in his statement, to say they don't want to punish or reward you based on dialogue choices AND that some quests will be opened up/closed off through dialogue choices.

That's punishement/reward right there.
 
That's interesting. I didn't expect this. I wasn't that pessimistic though...
 
Autoduel76 said:
True, but its also only sounds like he's only talking about dialogue not directly affecting the end-game.

It actually clashes with some of what has been "confirmed" in the game, namely being able to only get certain quests through dialogue choices and pick fights through dialogue choices.

I mean, if you only get the Megaton quest from a specific dialogue choice (insulting the sherrif's hat), and the megaton quest affects the end game...

I would be very dissapointed in nothing but meaningless dialogue choices. But, it doesn't make sense at all, even in his statement, to say they don't want to punish or reward you based on dialogue choices AND that some quests will be opened up/closed off through dialogue choices.

That's punishement/reward right there.
If that's true, then major world-influencing events, such as destroying a town, would not have any influence on the final ending. Which makes no sense.
 
Sander said:
If that's true, then major world-influencing events, such as destroying a town, would not have any influence on the final ending. Which makes no sense.

It doesn't make sense. That's the point.
 
Sander said:
In Fallout 3, the player will come across schematics for different custom-made weapons. These might be found in different places in the world, or obtained as quest rewards. Each set of schematics lets you build a certain, pre-determined weapon, as long as you've got all the components, and most of the components are junk objects you'll find in the world.

Arcanum, anyone?
 
gah it sounds like they are turning custom weps into alchemical formulas ... which wouldnt have been such a problem if they didnt bring in capt. obvious ... at least let us think we found a combination by ourselves .. using the immersive technique of LOGIC
 
I hate how they pan that line "Fallout Fans just want the original game" "Fallout Fans are old-skool gamurs who don't lieks console gamez" all the time just to ignore everything.

Bioshock might of been released on consoles, but from my playing of it, it plays very much like a slightly more combat orientated System shock 2. Not like Halo.
 
xu said:
Arcanum, anyone?
Yeah, that had crossed my mind as well. However, I find crafted items fit better in Arcanum than in Fallout. Most of those items do look as if they were made from scrap.
Then again, some less sophisticated weapons might actually work out pretty well.
 
xu said:
Sander said:
In Fallout 3, the player will come across schematics for different custom-made weapons... SNIP
Arcanum, anyone?
Yeah, that was the first thought. Adds to replayability, but looses the connections to the prequels... Confirming the direction of the development.

I might like the idea if implemented well and being not too oppressing to the gameplay.
 
lisac2k said:
xu said:
Sander said:
In Fallout 3, the player will come across schematics for different custom-made weapons... SNIP
Arcanum, anyone?
Yeah, that was the first thought. Adds to replayability, but looses the connections to the prequels... Confirming the direction of the development.

I might like the idea if implemented well and being not too oppressing to the gameplay.

Ahhhhh, I loved that game. Pain in the ass at times though.

It sounds like it'd make more use of the ingame skills though and would provide some extra entertainment in the game. I mean, other than the occasional quest related task, when did you ever use the damned Repair skill in F1 or F2? I'd personally love to see a reason to actually make each skill a taged skill. Higher repair/science skill = better weapons you built or modded yourself.

And its not that far from the old games idea wise. In F1&2 you had a couple of quests that allowed you to upgrade your weapons (flint anyone?).

Though I got a bit of a twitch in my eye when he said there was no forseeable downside to using Oblivion's engine for F3. The only upside I can imagine is that by using a prexisting engine they don't have to waste time building a new one and we'll get the game sooner.

Overall, I have to say this is the least disconcerting dev interview Ive seen so far for this game.

I'm still pissed that they haven't mentioned anything about the sex side of the sex and violence we're expecting from the Fallout series. Ah well, I can allways hope they'll mention something when they answer those damned questions on the forum.
 
Kan-Kerai said:
When did that happen in Fallout? Could've sworn it was a lot more complicated than that.

It's based on what ACE says in Fallout 2:

The suicide rate among true artificial intelligence machines was extremely high. When given full sensory capability the machines became depressed over their inability to go out into the world and experience it. When deprived of full sensory input the machines began to develop severe mental disorders similar to those among humans who are forced to endure sensory deprivation. The few machines that survived these difficulties became incredibly bored and began to create situations in the outside world for their amusement. It is theorized by some that this was the cause of the war that nearly destroyed mankind.

By the way, I just noticed a (probable) contradiction in the Fallout Bible timeline:

2053: ZAX 1.0 goes on-line, developed by Vault-Tec. Initially a prototype of some of the systems designed to govern the vaults, it is given to the government to help the Department of Energy collect resource data. Within a year, it is taken by the military for plague and tactical research; one version, ZAX 1.2 is constructed for West Tek (below).

2055: ZAX 1.2 is brought in to regulate conditions in West Tek. It is not part of the Vault-Tec preservation software, so it does not have any orders to protect humanity after the bombs fall. In the meantime, it calmly calculates data and plays chess with the scientists. Many scientists claim that ZAX is a big ol' cheater and draws the game out too much for a computer of his considerable abilities.

2059: The first artificial intelligence is born. Limited by memory constraints, its expansion is rapidly halted. The discovery paves the way for future AI research in laboratories throughout the United States.

So does it mean that ZAX is not a real AI, that he wasn't a real AI initially but eventually became one through its learning processes, or that someone (Avellone? Freyermuth?) screwed up? He does call himself a "machine intelligence".
 
Back
Top