Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Role Playing (Games)

Fallout 3 Trailer Available Online 110

Posted by Zonk from the nice-vault-you've-got-there dept.
Voodoo Extreme and 1up are both hosting the long anticipated Fallout 3 Trailer. Looks like we'll be seeing the game in stores Fall of 2008. Says Bethesda's Pete Hines, Bethesda's PR point man: "Yes, that's in-engine (in-engine means it's done with game assets in our rendering engine, but isn't done real-time. If it was done in real-time, that'd be gameplay footage. This isn't something, for example, that was sent to some house [e.g. Blue Studios] so they could build assets and render it out, and create something for us to release [e.g. Dawn of War 40K intro cinematic]). Yes, that's The Ink Spots singing "I Don't Want to Set the World On Fire" Yes, that's Ron Perlman [voiceover man extraordinaire of Fallout 1 and 2]." The official site doesn't have a lot more in the way of detail than that.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Fallout 3 Trailer Available Online More

Fallout 3 Trailer Available Online

Comments Filter:
  • ...the in-game currency is bottle caps. Awesome trailer!

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Aladrin ( 926209 )
      You know, I didn't remember that from Fallout 1 ,but somehow the idea of bottle caps being currency post-war is very ... Warming.

      (I just looked it up... I actually didn't like Fallout at the time, since it was supposed to be the sequel to my then-favorite game, Wasteland, and was nothing like it.)

      It's the little things in a game that really make it memorable, and I hope they spend the time for all those little touches.

      • I actually didn't like Fallout at the time, since it was supposed to be the sequel to my then-favorite game, Wasteland, and was nothing like it.


        Fallout wasn't a sequel to Wasteland. It has often been referred to as a "Spiritual Successor", though.
        • IIRC, the original idea is they *wanted* to do a Wasteland sequel but secure the rights to Wasteland. So... they designed Fallout instead with a few references to Wasteland. Nonetheless, you are correct, it is a spiritual successor to the game.
          • (could NOT secure the rights, sorry!)
            • They were developed by the same company, so I doubt that was the problem
              • Maybe they didn't retain the rights. Wasteland was published by Electronics Arts (Fallout by themselves thru Black Isle).

              • Re: (Score:1)

                by elzahir ( 442873 )
                Although the game was developed by Interplay, Wasteland was actually published by Electronic Arts, who held the rights while Fallout was being made.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by naoursla ( 99850 )
            Fallout was also supposed to be GURPS computer adaptation, but "they" had a falling out with Steve Jackson games.
            • It's still got that Steve Jackson flavored absurdity and dark humor...the image of Pip-Boy blowing people away for "Bloody Mess" fits right in there with Munchkin and INWO. I'm sure we've all heard the rumors that they cut out a lot of that wonderfully twisted comic relief...I hope it's not true, that's the icing on the cake for that game...

              I'm stoked as hell for this game, I just hope it can live up to Fallout 2 and not be as constraining as Fallout: Tactics (not to say I didn't like Tactics, but it wasn'

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Aladrin ( 926209 )
          That's not how it was marketed/hyped at the time. ;) Now, it's quite obvious that it's not a sequel.
      • I agree, Wasteland was my favorite game at the time, I totally skipped Fallout 1 since I'd rather go back and play WL.
        Jonah HEX

    • Re: Here's hoping... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by vertinox ( 846076 ) on Tuesday June 05, 2007 @01:15PM (#19400629)
      And I hope they have caved into restricting the player in what they can or cannot do for moral choices.

      One of the big sticking points with me is that the FO series allowed you to be good or evil. It gave you total freedom and even some in between.

      But this entailed of course stealing from anyone, doing drugs, killing children, having sex with prostitutes, being a porn star, and basically killing everything that moves, but you would have some repreccusions such as encounters with bounty hunters or various other groups who were mad at you.

      But at the same time you could also be a saint or follow the path of good.

      Personally, I joined the brother hood and spent my time being a vigilante cleansing places like New Reno with healthy dose of burst fire.

      And it still allowed you to beat the game without firing a single shot.

      Without the freedom to be truly evil or good... It won't be Fallout.

      That is what I am worried about.
      • And I hope they have caved into restricting the player in what they can or cannot do for moral choices.

        Whooops! I meant I hope they have not caved into restricting the player in what they can or cannot do for moral choices...
      • Why do you think Bethesda would do this? It's not like their TES titles were bastions of moral absolutism.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Rallion ( 711805 )
        Considering the company that's making it, I would definitely say that limited freedom should be the least of your worries.
      • and, unfortunately, that is why you will be disappointed. Fortunately, it will be disappointment directed at fallout 3..... and how bad could that really be?

  • Finally! More single player games! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by VitrosChemistryAnaly ( 616952 ) on Tuesday June 05, 2007 @12:54PM (#19400209) Journal
    Oh man, I've been waiting for this for years

    I'm just not into those damn MMORPGs so it has been a bad few years for me. However, with the announcement of Starcraft 2 and now Fallout 3 being imminent, I'm quite excited.

    Am I the only person in the world who likes single player games anymore? Seriously all I hear about are MMO games.
    • I like single player games too, but I have to admit I enjoy MMORPGS because there is so much to explore, which I can do solo :)

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by skobar ( 890726 )
        There is something wrong with playing single player in an mmo but I understand what you mean. The quest and atmosphere is usually better in a single player game though as they can affect the whole storyline. The problem with mmo is that the world feel so static. They need to keep the same content so that everyone can enjoy it and not only 1 person.
        • I see no problem playing single player in a MMORPG. If I don't feel social why should I be?

          You should try Guild wars, it's a MMORPG with a single player focus.
          • GW isn't, and never has really been an MMO. Also, its made to encourage team-play, as the henchies are really only good early on or as cannon-fodder... though the heroes in Nightfall are a bit better.
            • Learning to use hencies is the key. I find Henchies are better than human players as I can focus how they fight. For example a team od ranged users used much more effectively than human players ever could.

          • Re: (Score:1)

            by skobar ( 890726 )
            I don't have a problem with playing alone in mmorpg either. I played my share of WoW and did solo quite a bit although I preferred playing with people. It is just that you don't really have a story involving you. You are not really important in the world. I know Guild War is a bit different but I would not call it a real MMo though. It is more of a Diablo clone and instead of having chat rooms to choose the game you want to play, you do it in the city with your character, everything else is instance, a la D
        • I just have a problem paying to play a game that I bought. I bought the game, now it should be MINE, dammit!

          • Re: (Score:1)

            by krelian ( 525362 )
            I feel the same. I actually enjoy WoW and EVE quite a lot, but I get this strange feeling that I don't really own the game, that it's not mine. WoW and EVE are probably not the best example but lets say that an new MMO comes out that I really like but it never actually takes off and the company shuts it down after a year or two. Now, although I paid for the game I simply cannot play it anymore (not to mention 10 years from now for nostalgia).

            MMO's are not perfect, but what I like about them is the huge worl

          • I just have a problem paying to play a game that I bought.

            I think you should really, really think about this sentence for a moment.
      • Solo? Look, I've tried that on both WoW and FFXI, and when you try to solo, you get your ass handed to you. In FFXI, by the monsters, by lvl 20, anything that gives XP will RAPE any single player character. In WoW, its possible to lvl soloing mobs, however above about lvl 25 or so, you get raped by played of the opposing faction. Who come along in a party and then corpse camp you for half an hour. It's pretty disgusting.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Drey ( 1420 )
      "Am I the only person in the world who likes single player games anymore?"

      Yes/no. I'd prefer more single *or* multi-player co-op RPGs, along the lines of Diablo 2 or the Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance stuff on the PS2. My wife and I would never have even begun on WoW if we'd had a new D2 to play.

    • Re:Finally! More single player games! (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Cadallin ( 863437 ) on Tuesday June 05, 2007 @01:14PM (#19400599)
      Nope, There's at least the two of us. The trailer was actually pretty encouraging to me. It looked much more like Fallout than I expected from Bethesda. I'm still concerned about it being first person though. I really like isometric games. On the other hand, if they can pull of a first person RPG-like in the Fallout universe that is as cool as Bioshock looks right now, I'll be happy. I just pray it won't be anything like Oblivion. I'm sorry, I've been playing TES since Daggerfall, and they've all failed pretty horribly to deliver on their promise. They suck IMHO.

      VitrosChemistryAnaly, I strongly suggest you look into Bioshock, it's a first person RPG/Shooter/Survival horror hybrid by much of the team that did System Shock (which you should also look into if you haven't played them). I have very high hopes for this game (shipping August this year on PC/XBOX360) on the basis of the history of the team. I really hope they can get some success this time, they really deserve it. System Shock 2 got killed by the release of the original Half-Life. The original by the release of Doom II. The same company also created the Thief series. Also, I don't work for them, I'm just a fan.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by 7Prime ( 871679 )
        Ummm, what makes you think it's going to be first person? The trailer didn't show any gameplay footage. I don't think they'll make Fallout first person. In Bethesda's other games, first person made sense. Not to defend them, Bethesda's made a lot of bad decisions in the past, but let's not jump the gun until we actually have any evidence.
      • Agreed. I was extremely nervous about Bethesda picking up the license. I really liked the little touches. The music, Ron, the same style in artwork. Here's hoping they pan out.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by GreggBz ( 777373 )
      No, me to. I enjoy not having to deal with people sometimes. I'm somehow always reminded that I'm connected to the Internet, and therefore, at the mercy of the whims of others, when playing an MMORPG. Single player games allow me to fall into that private, inner world if you will, rather like reading a good book. STALKER really reminded me of fallout. If it's like STALKER except more refined and with a better, conical plot, I'll be super happy.
    • Agreed! I haven't personally owned a computer for about three years, but with Starcraft 2 coming and now Fallout 3... I think I'll cave in and get one.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by harrkev ( 623093 )

        Agreed! I haven't personally owned a computer for about three years, but with Starcraft 2 coming and now Fallout 3... I think I'll cave in and get one.
        Must be hard typing messages that long on your cell phone keypad. Moleskin is supposed to work quite well for thumb blisters.

        • Must be hard typing messages that long on your cell phone keypad. Moleskin is supposed to work quite well for thumb blisters.

          Public libraries nowadays have public, Internet-connected computers. Quite a few cafes have them too, for that matter. I'm kinda afraid of what kind of comments we start seeing when the pubs follow the example.

    • Not to mention BioShock right around the corner. A lot of old favorites are being resurrected in the near future. The original Starcraft, Fallout 1 and 2, as well as System Shock 1 and 2, are some of the best games ever made, in my opinion anyway. Here's hoping these new incarnations live up to the old legacies, and that this isn't another Fallout Tactics.

    • Am I the only person in the world who likes single player games anymore? Seriously all I hear about are MMO games.

      You're certainly not. MMOGs just don't appeal to me. The misanthropist in me strongly resists the idea of a game where my enjoyment rests largely on the good faith of others. Not to mention relying on the continued support of the game developers in that you're at their mercy with the direction they take the game (very rarely a choice to not "upgrade") and that the game stops when the company chooses (or folds).

    • there are some 2007 PC games that offer solid single player experience:

      _ Command and Conquer 3
      _ S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Shadow of Chernobyl
      _ Tomb Raider 10th anniversary edition
    • That and it seems there might be more of a time commitment to play many, many hours a week so I haven't tried a MMORPG yet. Battlefield 2 was fun to go online and play though I thought. I'm not going to pay a monthly fee for a game I already bought, I must be too cheap I guess. Elder Scrolls to me is one of the best series of games evah! I trust Fallout in their hands, looking forward to seeing this trailer at lunch. I may have to try the upcoming Conan MMORPG though...that's the plan anyways, we'll see.
  • I know it's way to early to throw out such phrases... but Fallout is such a break from the normal video game. I was completely drawn in by the first and second one... and cannot wait for another =)
  • "War...War never changes." Thank God neither does Ron Perlman's voice.
    • Actually, now that you mention it, it is a little known fact that Ron Perlman is the world's only sufferer from Perlman's Syndrome, a genetic mutation that causes the vocal cords to go through their full adult development while still in the womb. Literally, Ron Perlman's voice has never changed.

  • Nice choice of music. (Score:5, Informative)

    by efence ( 927813 ) on Tuesday June 05, 2007 @01:16PM (#19400647)
    "I Don't Want to Set the World On Fire" by The Ink Spots. It was supposed to be a title track for Fallout 1, but Black Isle couldn't get the license.

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by hemorex ( 1013427 )
      I feel quite ashamed to be the one to point this out, but a clip from that song was also used in an old Megadeth song... which happened to be about the aftermath of nuclear war.
  • Long long ago I was looking for information about sequel for TES: Daggerfall. There was a site about Morrowind with some "Project frozen..." and something like that. When project was reanimated and then completed it became one of best CRPGs. Now Fallout 3...
  • Yes I am one of those angry and unreasonable Fallout fans. Yes, I cried a little at the trailer. I can honestly say that this trailer has given me a shred of hope that Fallout 3 might just turn out alright.

    • Re:Shred of hope (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Rallion ( 711805 ) on Tuesday June 05, 2007 @09:03PM (#19405997) Journal
      I know what you mean. It's obvious that the sole purpose of the trailer was to say, 'Look, we get it, we know what Fallout is supposed to be.' And they convinced me. And I truly did almost shed a tear of happiness.

      I'm a little uncomfortable with the realization that it means that much to me, but it does. I wouldn't say that either Fallout 1 or 2 is my favorite game ever, but there is absolutely no series that I would be sadder to see messed up. (Tactics wasn't a super-great game, but I didn't feel like it 'corrupted' the series in any way. Just a sub-par entry.)

  • So where's the gameplay? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by hindumagic ( 232591 ) on Tuesday June 05, 2007 @01:37PM (#19400995)
    Great, yet another hype video that shows the "engine" - whatever that means. Let's see some gameplay! Given the lovely engine that they have, I guess that we won't have the isometric view as per Fallout 1 & 2 - or will we?

    Fallout had some nice graphics for its time, but it was the gameplay, story, and amazing art direction that made it a standout. This preview shows nothing, other than a 3D engine that could be swapped out for ID's or Epic's - hell, it could be Duke Nukem reborn for all we know. Yeah, it looks cool, but there is really nothing here.

    Yawn.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by revlayle ( 964221 )
      TEASER VIDEO - HELLO? When has a teaser video a year and a half before release (at least) ever shown gameplay footage? At best, the gameplay is in a rough alpha state, with bugs to fix, tweaks to make, and possibly a action item list for the interface and executions of said gameplay miles and miles long. No company (well, almost... the half-way smart ones) wants to show off something that is not ready for the public eye yet. Closer to the end of the year, I bet stabler beta states of the gameplay engine

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Mondoz ( 672060 )
      "it was the gameplay, story, and amazing art direction that made it a standout."

      At least this gives us a taste of the new game's art direction...

      Just knowing they've kept the old 'War never changes' gives me warm fuzzies all over. The old-school retro look of the radio brings back memories of the devices from the first games. Fallout Boy was a nice touch as well. Hopefully that shows they're not forgetting about #1 or 2 in favor of some reboot of the series.

      This trailer might not have shown gameplay, but

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by The G ( 7787 )
        Oh man. I heard that "War. War never changes..." and it just brought back so many memories right there.

        They may yet screw this game up. But keeping that chilling and evocative opening tells me that they aren't completely untouched by the magic -- and utter despair -- of Fallout.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by crossmr ( 957846 )

      yet another hype video that shows the "engine" - whatever that means."


      it means they're not done raping the corpse of your memories. They'll show you in game when they're done with it in 6 months.
    • It's a teaser video. It's a "Look, we're working on the game!" video. And it's a "See? It's the Ink Spots! We haven't forgotten Fallout's roots!" video. It's not a "Lookit! Gameplay!" video.
  • Owning a Mac Pro never felt so good!
    • Why? Will these games be released for OS X?
      • Not likely, but he's set up pretty well to run it with Bootcamp or Parallels.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by DarkJC ( 810888 )
          I can't speak for Fallout 3, but Blizzard has always released a native Mac version of their games on the same disc as the Windows release.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by Creepy ( 93888 )
            well I can speak for Fallout 3, and Bethesda has never written or had a game ported to mac, at least none that I'm aware of.

            according to this, [insidemacgames.com]they are open to it (and Linux), but will not do it themselves unless they get a porting house to make an offer. This makes sense to me because Bethesda uses DirectX and a true port to Mac and/or Linux would require a conversion to OpenGL. I don't know if it's DX9 or DX10, but if its the latter, it may also need the new OpenGL profile due toward the end of this year

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by 7Prime ( 871679 )
              I really don't know why they bother, and this is coming from a Mac user. I think it's just as well that they keep games of the Mac platform. The Mac is a production tool, not a toy. I just got my new Mac Pro in yesterday, and I'm not planning on loading any games onto it, at least not until I have a really stable work environment.

              A Mac is a tool. And, as fun as it is to play games with a hammer, it always ends badly.

          • Re: (Score:1)

            by narfbot ( 515956 )
            Um, Only their most recent game releases were hybrid disks. Their old PC games were not, and if they had Mac ports, they took a long time.

  • Hmmm (Score:1)

    by anduz ( 1027854 )
    I like the teaser, I didn't want too but I do.

    I am however still somewhat doubtful about Bethsoft pulling off another Fallout games, which will be to the liking of us old fanatical fanboys. Interesting narrative, dialog and npcs hasn't excatly been the most delicious thing on the plate in any recent Bethsoft game (if ever) - and those are some of the key aspects you will want to master if you're going to succeed in making a Fallout game. Naturally Bethsoft havn't gotten to the position they are in now by
  • did anyone else mentally complete this with:
    ... be a shame if something were to happen to it.

    Maybe it's cause I just got done reading a story on slate about mafiaa hitmen dropping their guns.
  • disappointing how short the trailer is... I'd like to get some background. The cities look like they were only just recently destroyed... does this immediately follow the nuclear attack?

  • Turn-based... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Braintrust ( 449843 )
    It can have all the style and charm of the first two games, but if they fiddle with the combat mechanics and move to a twitchy, real-time mode of gameplay... this will make Vault Boy shed radioactive tears.

    I've always felt that turn-based combat is what's really lacking in most modern games that disappoint... there are people that play tennis, and there are people that play chess; both great games, but the people who are drawn to crpgs tend to be looking for something a little more like chess, imo.

    I play th
  • This is probably going to be an unpopular opinion, but I really hope they modernise the gameplay. I never played Fallout back when it was fresh and current, I was playing all the games based off Bioware's engine - Planescape, Baldur's Gate, etc. I decided to dig up a copy of Fallout a few years back and give it a go since it's such a well-loved game.

    The setting is absolutely fantastic, and generally I liked most of the concepts behind it. The gameplay, however, felt incredibly clunky. So much so that I ende
    • Fallout 2 fixed MANY of the issues that were seen in Fallout 1. Truthfully, I really don't see any show stopping issues with either game.
  • I think the reason they made the trailer, and made such a big fuss that it was done in engine, was to show that they are capable of making the Fallout world in 3D. The funny part, at least to me, is they got the greenish-gray hue the first two games had. The thing is, the first two games did that most likely because of lack of a bigger palette. Still looks good, and I think they got at least the looks down. Graphics capabilities will change in a year and half though.
  • I think you either mean Blue Sky Studios [blueskystudios.com], or more likely, Blur Studios [blur.com], Who were the ones who did the Dawn of War cinematic. Blue Sky does more feature length stuff. Horay for using in game assets and all, but that was pretty unsatisfying for me. I don't think it conveyed enough of the fallout world to get me that excited.

Slashdot Top Deals

Every nonzero finite dimensional inner product space has an orthonormal basis. It makes sense, when you don't think about it.

Close