Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Fallout 3 Discussion' started by Big No, May 14, 2018.
Is this one of those joke topics?
Seems we are going through a phase where games that were criticized somewhat heavily on the past (i.e, mid to late 2000s), now suddenly have a bunch of defenders and they want to convince you how wrong you were.
My profile picture is making fun of Fallout 4. You registered here in 2018. Are you sure you want to sarcastically assume I think Fallout is all about mindless shooting and building settlements because I like Fallout 4 over New Vegas?
The RPG elements and authentic Obsidian Fallout lore in New Vegas does not carry the game enough for it to be more fun to play then Fallout 4 imo. I could replay Fallout 2, Fallout Tactics, and have a far more enjoyable experience right now then replaying New Vegas.
Well, that's you. But the same RPG elements and authentic Obsidian lore in New Vegas kept me playing it. I'm on my 3rd 100% playthrough of New Vegas and I'm still about to do another two. I'm doing 4 playthroughs in total for each of the 4 endings and 1 more NCR 100% modded. I love doing the same quests and at one point different quests for a specific faction. And regarding Fallout 2 and Tactics, they're great games but I'm absolutely shit at isometric RPGs. I could only play Fallout 4 once. ONCE. I can't stand how they dumbed down the core elements of Fallout games. Fallout 4 is just a FPS/TPS with RPG mechanics like Far Cry 3. And even Far Cry 3 is more enjoyable for that matter. Fallout isn't a Far Cry-inspired series.
Yes, but all these doesn't necessarily means that Fallout 4 is a better Fallout game than New Vegas. The problem here is that you keep bringing up that you're "That guy who loved Fallout 2, and will say Fallout 4 is better than New Vegas." It confuses people because, what does you loved Fallout 2 has anything to do with you loving Fallout 4? Again, what's in Fallout 4 that makes you prefer it than New Vegas, in relation to Fallout 2? Surely, there are little to no RPG elements and authentic Fallout lore in Fallout 4 that can make you love it as you once loved Fallout 2?
Although, I think I'm smelling some strong trolling here...
Since he says it's not the RPG elements or the writing, I'd wager it's the less clunky and more streamlined way of producing the same sort of open world simulation and FPS experience that New Vegas also had going for it, and Beth's much busier "go see what useless shit lies behind that next hill" -touch. And I can sort of understand that. Beth's games are about depleting content casually rather than really experiencing it, it's easier.
Fallout 4 is also the easiest game in the series. On Very Hard or Survival you can still defeat a Deathclaw by shooting at it with a minigun and moving backwards away from it. It disregards logic like Nora not being able to use Power Armor. Like where did she learn from? She's just a fucking lawyer. But nobody that plays Fallout 4 minds that because who cares? It's more convienent than working your ass to earn the training or the power armor itself. Fallout 4 is fun to people because it's the most basic, streamlined and dumbed down Fallout game I've ever seen. I can tell you that if I put my 9 yr old cousin to beat Fallout 4 on Very Hard, he will. The only way to make Fallout 4 harder is through challenges that strip you away from specific things like drugs, armor or even weapons. People find fun from streamlined easyness, sure, but it makes no sense especially when our boy, @MKSaibot says Fallout 2 was the best SP experience in his life. And Fallout 2 is no easy game.
I know, I know, but why mention Fallout 2 at all? Why mention that he's disappointed in the city of New Vegas itself compared to New Reno of Fallout 2? What does all that, or even Fallout 2 itself, have anything to do with him liking Fallout 4? Do you see why I, and maybe couple of others here, were confused with his statement? I think it's obvious now that he mentioned Fallout 2 as a some sort of 'apology' for liking Fallout 4 more than New Vegas.
And not only that, he also mentioned that Fallout 4 is the better Fallout game than New Vegas. And he still haven't elaborated what he mean by that. He mentioned that it wasn't the RPG elements and the authentic 'Obsidian' Fallout lore (when Obsidian consisted of mostly the developers of Fallout 2 at them time, and the game absolutely shown it was every bits faithful to the originals despite of having to make due to Fallout 3's lore), so obviously it's the mindless shooting, and the settlement building, and what you just mentioned right? Nah, he also denied that the first two points, so let's see what he have to say to what you just said.
maybe he likes how you can bang Piper after pick a lock.
Yes, yes, but what does that have to do with his love for Fallout 2???
God bless Jogre for actually watching the whole thing and then replying to it in great detail.
Personally, I stopped watching after about 7 minutes after it became evidently clear what that video was going to be about: cherry picked examples of positives in FO3 and strawmanning of NV fans in order to spin a narrative.
His points about the Vault 101 quests are fair and give a good insight into what Bethesda's writers can do if they try hard enough, but for some reason he brings up Sunny's tutorial as something negative in NV because she teaches you to shoot a gun while FO3 apparently denies you the violent option.
Afterwards, he strawmans NV fans by claiming that finding keys and passwords in alternative ways is what they want from a Fallout game. No, people want to roleplay and find those by utilizing skills they invested in, like repairing the Submachine Gun or making some Stims in the NV opening by putting points into Repair and Science.
In preparation for Ghost Town Gunfight you also get checked for other skills while having skill magazines scattered around town to help you pass those if wanted.
All in all he fails to make meaningful counter-arguments to Hbomb's video, which seems to be the whole point of its creation. Harris destroys FO3 on the basis of what Fallout is about, MATN merely picks positive instances while ignoring the whole because he knows he can't win on those grounds.
Ahhh, the infamous shitstained like/dislike thing for companions. Just because of that, they made the companions all bisexual and completely broken. I keep Arcade and ED-E with me because I genuinely like them as actual beings in the universe, not for their perks. And I remember having to actually work and do actual stuff in the world to make them like me.
In the same "non-violent" FO3 tutorial you get to kill almost all of the Vault's security guards without any talking, somehow let Butch have more depth than the guards that were genuinely good at your birthday. And what's the problem with violence? It's what you have to do to survive in the wastes, for Christ's sake. I can't believe people are still trying to defend this fucking shit mess that is the Fallout 3 tutorial. I really like MATN, but I can't agree with him on that.
Arcade is a gay profligate, Raul is the way to go. /s
But yeah, I keep Raul because of his views (especially on Legion playthroughs) and his backstory, which is deeper and better than all the FO4 companion stories combined. Also, MacCready being alive is a retcon in my book, since I splattered his annoying brains all over the Little Lamplight entrance gate.
That's how I understood it. An attempt to underline - as a tangent - that he does like the original form of Fallout, so as to not be labeled simply as a bethtard, and from thereon that he thinks 4 does what it does better than NV since the games are mechanically and conceptually comparable.
Likely that, and the age old notion that Beth's Fallouts are visually "more post apocalyptic" than NV (more wreckage and anarchy, whereas NV has a lot more orderly setting).
Anyways... I'm not trying to excuse ramblings or inconsistencies, I haven't even read the whole exchange. It just seemed to me that the mention of Fallout 2 had a purpose in attempt of clarifying the context under the comparison, as much of a veiled "apology" as it might've sounded like. He just doesn't like New Vegas, and that can be understood under the notion that the current understanding of "what Fallout now is" seems to mostly be running amidst (and collecting) piles of garbage and rubble and shooting things (and hence the - rather misguided - idea that "4 is betterer Fallout than NV").
I kind of gagged a little when he called Fallout 3 an "utter classic" in the video description, which is blasphemy. I think it was Cobra Commander that said he also liked Fallout 4, that just leads me to believe that he's just a Bethesda fanboy.
Hbomb's video is pretty much the perfect video that explains why Fallout 3 is so terrible. He doesn't cherry pick or make small things seem bigger than they are, the game as a whole is just broken and poorly designed.
I don't think he was looking to debunk Hbomb's video. He said he disagreed with a few things but that this video was to point out the smaller things he feels Fallout 3 does right. So, you're technically correct when you say it's largely "positive cherry picking", but he does acknowledge that's what the video is about so I don't see the problem.
In both games, you can get laid.
Haha, maybe that's why he thinks New Vegas is inferior, too much trouble to bang Red Lucy. You have to pick all that eggs and such.
But hey, one can always pay a visit to Sweet in casa madrid apartments......or Maude, if you are short of caps