New pics, new perks and no traits for Fallout 3
by Ross Miller 
{ Jul 9th 2008 at 3:00AM }
click to embiggen
For the Fallout purists, chances are you'll be dismayed to hear that traits have been taken out of the game and melded into the perks system, which has been modified to where you're allowed a new perk with every level. "That was a hard decision for us, and one that took, literally, years," said executive producer Todd Howard, who noted that the traits and perks system were so related that many of the design-a-perk contest entrants were actually traits.
According to Howard, if you include ranks, there are about 100 perks available and only 19 chances to pick a perk each game (level cap is 20). No worries, though, because "Bloody Mess" is still available, and that's all we need to hear to be satisfied.
Gallery: Fallout 3
Get a WordPress.com Blog
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Mike @ Jul 9th 2008 3:51AM
"dismayed to here" should be "dismayed to hear"
It does make me wonder, will they be able to include small frame, gifted, skilled, etc.? It wouldn't really make sense to become gifted all of a sudden after the start of the game.
Jakka @ Jul 9th 2008 4:15AM
These could be exclusive starting perks.
eldee @ Jul 9th 2008 3:50AM
in before the whining fanboys.
Jakka @ Jul 9th 2008 8:34AM
in before in before jokes...aww shit!
Jakka @ Jul 9th 2008 4:17AM
I don't mind perks but the level cap is really annoying.
As far as I know Fallout there will be a shit load of things to do so anybody who doesn't rush the main story will probably max out their characters abot half-way through the game.
Jakka @ Jul 9th 2008 5:34AM
Or even worse, we'll be killing Super Mutants at Level 1.
Oblivion suxxorz.
Veko @ Jul 9th 2008 6:51AM
Did none of the development team of Oblivion play Final Fantasy 8?
Enemies that level with you sucks. It's annoying and progress smashing, not 'challenging'.
The architecture of a game's design shouldn't be as glaringly obvious as it was in Oblivion and probably will be in Fallout 3.
AwesomeTown @ Jul 9th 2008 7:36AM
Well, the Bethesda guys did mention that they wanted to have some areas that were hard for a low level character, and others that were easy for a high level character. But they did want it to be open in a sense that you can go anywhere and do anything whenever you want, basically no linearity. That's the problem I guess, but I still don't see what was wrong with the Morrowind way. Hell, MMORPGs are designed to have increasingly harder areas but aren't linear.
Anyway I still enjoyed Oblivion. I think Bethesda is really good at making in engrossing world with enjoyable gameplay even though it's not perfect. And hell that's all I really wanted for Fallout 3 in the first place.
Oh and about FF8, that was the first RPG I remember getting to level 100 with my characters. It was pretty easy, but it still made me feel good.
MosquitoControl @ Jul 9th 2008 7:36AM
Veko - the difference between FF games and Oblivion is that FF games are insanely linear. Oblivion wasn't. You couldn't avoid enemies leveling up with you. One person would do all the main story missions to start. Another guy would do the Thieves Guild. Another would do the Fighters Guild, then the Thieves Guild, then the main story. How do you balance those decisions?
If enemies don't level up with you, you force the player down a narrow, pre-planned route. Oblivion strove hard to avoid that.
They just didn't do it right. NPCs didn't level up. You could play the whole game on level 1. Amongst other issues.
The right way to do it would have been a mix. In other words, don't set the level of your enemies, but set a minimum level. In other words, if a player should go up 15 levels doing the main mission alone, make the later enemies at least a level 15. If you choose not to level up, you die. And, for some missions, make it higher, forcing the player to do some other work (but not much.)
We'll see how this works in Fallout, especially compared to the old Fallout.
Mr.ESC @ Jul 9th 2008 12:16PM
Yeah I always thought it was weird I could go to the other side of the map, exactly the opposite way of where the story wanted me to be, without being killed by a LVL 80 Troll like let's say every RPG and its Grandma.
I thought running around doing whatever I wanted to in Oblivion was pretty cool, is the kind of options that makes the game more enjoyable since you feel you are really creating your character own story.
Now hate me all you want but I find JRPG incredibly overrated especially the latest Final Fantasy games. You can’t create your own character, the characters have no personality whatsoever, the girls seem to be retarded and way too innocent like if they were 5 years old or something (The creator should be ashamed of himself) the story line is too anime-ish but not like a good anime like Cowboy be bop, Trigun, Getbackers, Cyborg 009 or Robotech but more like Inuyasha and not even the good Inuyasha episodes or the very first Dragon ball episodes.
Also the level up system is too pretentious, it tries to be complicated too give the game some sort of deep but it just a gimmick.
I still like Oblivion and Fallout 3 seems to be following the same exact route, probably because the creator couldn’t wait longer for Diablo III (J/K) but Fallout games are awesome most of the time so in other words yes I’m going for the Limited Edition of Fallout 3.
(About Diablo III, well it doesn’t reinvent the wheel but it still looks good and maybe it will be better when it is released )
Lars @ Jul 9th 2008 12:59PM
I love it when the enemies and loot level with you. I hate having to seek out level-specific areas and having a serious lack of challenge in lower level areas. I much prefer if the difficulty is based on the enemy type instead of level (ie. wolves=easy, demons=hard).
Veko @ Jul 9th 2008 6:52AM
I recommend most Fallout fanboys do as I do. Realize this isn't, contrary to its name, Fallout 3. That's just a cash in game. This game is part of the fallout universe but I don't expect it to be as good as the first two games. I expect it to be on the same level as Fallout Tactics.
Azerael @ Jul 9th 2008 7:19AM
Do you want a tissue? If not for the tears, maybe for the next time you play Fallout 1/2...
Veko @ Jul 9th 2008 7:25AM
Uh...what? Did you even read the Q and A about Fallout 3?
In it they say "It has the themes of the previous games, but is not a continuation of that specific story and those locations."
In other words, as I said, it is Fallout 3 just as much as Fallout Tactics was. Stating facts is not crying.
Maverick Saturn @ Jul 9th 2008 7:22AM
Things are looking down.... I mean up
OtakuReborn @ Jul 9th 2008 8:07AM
Good god, how much more could they botch this up?
It doesn't even play like Fallout 3 anymore. I'm about to just find another copy of Fallout 1 and 2 and skip this "entry." It's like putting beer into a wine bottle, and selling it as wine.
FOXHOUND @ Jul 9th 2008 8:09AM
-looks at Bud'Select bottle-
NO WONDER IT WAS SO CHEAP! I'M BACK TO SAM ADAMS FROM NOW ON! >_<
AwesomeTown @ Jul 9th 2008 9:31AM
Your logic seems backwards, Otaku. I think someone needs to read up on the complexities and history that makes beer an extremely diverse and sophisticated beverage.
OtakuReborn @ Jul 9th 2008 10:55AM
Sorry, I'm not well versed in the language of Alcohol, but the point stands. Maybe I should have said cheap beer and extravagant wine bottle.
Regardless, the game just doesn't feel like Fallout. It's like they made a random game, tacked on some random elements from Fallout, and called it Fallout 3. If I recall correctly, it's an action RPG type game, which, I'm not sure if you've played the first one or second one, but those were, quite clearly, Turn-Based RPGs.
Sure, change is good and all, but if you're going to change a significant amount of the game, don't call it "Fallout 3" anymore, because at this point, it's just a marketing tool.
AwesomeTown @ Jul 9th 2008 11:39AM
Yea, I understand. It's kind of like a spin off, Fallout: The College Years. But either way, they got me wrapped around their finger. I'm too excited either way.
Titanium_Orchid @ Jul 9th 2008 1:43PM
Have fun not playing Fallout 3
OtakuReborn @ Jul 9th 2008 9:16AM
Good god, how much more could they botch this up?
It doesn't even play like Fallout 3 anymore. I'm about to just find another copy of Fallout 1 and 2 and skip this "entry." It's like putting beer into a wine bottle, and selling it as wine.
Exo @ Jul 9th 2008 8:07AM
damnit everything is fucking shiny. bethesda, please learn how to fix your fucking shaders
xGeneral DEATHx @ Jul 9th 2008 9:07AM
I don't think I'd drink the booze they serve...
Adoring Fan @ Jul 9th 2008 9:26AM
why is the dude from limbo of the lost wearing a diaper on his head?
eldee @ Jul 9th 2008 11:24AM
-1 for stealing a joke from the Q&A article link.
ThePerfectCompanion @ Jul 9th 2008 10:43AM
I'm all confused about this game. On one hand it seems like everyone is all excited and hyping it up as if it will be the greatest RPG to date when it drops...
On the other hand it seems kinda meh to some people who seem to have played the previous games. And from my POV I'm not seeing anything that makes this game interesting. Are there any gameplay vids? What's the story behind this 3rd installment of the series. Is it actually a continuation of the previous 2 games or like another poster said a "cash in" title?
eldee @ Jul 9th 2008 11:21AM
sounds like you're the one who didn't read the QA. In the very same sentence he said Fallout 2 wasn't even a direct continuation of the main storyline.
eldee @ Jul 9th 2008 11:23AM
Fallout 3 will have the option to play it as a turn based RPG. One of many indicators in your post that you have not been keeping up with this game, thus your fanboy whines are irrelevant and immature.
OtakuReborn @ Jul 9th 2008 11:49AM
You know, this sounds a hell of a lot like Fallout Tactics, which also had an option for turn-based combat. From what I played, that didn't mesh very well. I never got into that game.