To V.A.T.S? Or not to V.A.T.S.

by Steve Bowler on April 10, 2008 · 2 comments

in combat,control

 Why no % to nut-shot?  WHY?

That is the question.

Recently 1up looked at the new Fallout 3 build at Bethesda, and while the internet is up in arms about the new 500 possible endings (no, you read that right), what I’m most amused about is that fans are evidently getting into a fit over the idea that the new V.A.T.S. system (Vault-tec Assisted Targeting System) won’t be mandatory to beat the game.  You can also just play a “run-n-gun” FPS style of game and never even need to access the V.A.T.S. system.

I’m actually excited that they’re looking at balancing the game for both kinds of players. That’s no easy task! It’s hard enough to balance a game once for real time FPS, or balance a game for turn based strategy, but to make it so you can easily enter and leave each system at will, on the fly? That’s impressive.  That’s worth exploring right there.  Game be damned, let’s play with that system.

More to the point, I think this is a next-gen featureset that’s being overlooked in gaming. Lots of “next-gen” talk focuses on the graphics/engine, or character creation, or the 500 endings. But what’s amazing to me is that they’re attempting to cater to the player here. You tell them how you want to play the game. You like First Person Shooters? You’re covered. Oh, you want a little turn based combat? They’ve got that covered, too. Giving the player what they want in a game isn’t really something developers have done well in the past, and I find this course of action a bit on the exciting side.

I’ll actually be giving both systems a try. I’m a fan of both game genres, and I’m interested in seeing how they play back and forth with each other. It also doesn’t hurt that I’m a drooling Fallout fanboy.  So just out of curiosity, what are you a fan of here in this situation? Turn based Fallout or FPS Fallout? Which mode do you think you’ll be playing more, and why?