3 Days of Fallout on GameBanshee

IMO: If you guys are waiting for a new Fallout game that will be as good as Fo1 or maybe Fo2 then I think, you will be disappointed. I personally think there will never be a new Fallout game, that will be like Fallout 1 - And I think, you guys are only waiting for a kind of nostalgia trip or such a thing, that will never happen. o_O
 
Standard Reply to Newbies #31:
We know we might never get a game as good as Fallout. But did you bother to notice why Fallout had "Remember Wasteland?" on the inside flap?* All it takes is someone who cares to take the same depth of care to a game's design, instead of allowing marketing to dictate, to again capture the essence of what we looked for in Fallout, Wasteland.

Since we cover Fallout news (duh, take a look at the site), we will observe and mock those who foolishly fuck around with Fallout, and just like Wasteland, we'll probably find some other game title to cover when Bethesda cooks up Fallout's "Fountain of Dreams" (basically, the Wasteland engine with psycho assclowns...kind of what Oblivion did to TES with that lovely Radiant AI). Until then, we sit back and point and laugh at the media whores. Thank you for discovering NMA, but since it's clear you haven't done so yet, please go back and "lurk" (read older threads) about these subjects to get a better background and please enjoy your stay.

* - Which was noted in the article. Fuck...it says something when GameBanshee has more of a clue. :shock:
 
Okay, this is what you say. But why do I write that... I am not interested in an Fallout 3 because it will be only a new game with the name "Fallout 3" and maybe some storyparts or backgroundthings are the same. Yeah, I think I will play it, if it´s done, but I will never see it as a "Fallout 3" like some other people are doing it... [include some devaluing remark here]

So long...
 
Lexx said:
I will never see it as a "Fallout 3" like some other people are doing it...
Click to expand...

All thanks to your magic chrystal ball? No matter what happens, no matter how the game turns out, you will never see it as Fallout 3.

Good on you. Meanwhile, we're news-people, we can't afford to be that blind.
 
Yes. Maybe it will be a really really great game. But the game "Fallout" is for me Fallout 1 and Fallout 2. Fallout 3 will be a new game with a new engine, a new team behind it and yeah, maybe this game will rock out everything, but for me it´s not Fallout... it can be a great game -> yes, but a Fallout -> no. Thats my point.
 
Your point is invalid. Saying something is incapable of being Fallout because it is not Fallout 1 or 2 doesn't make any sense unless you define "Fallout" as "Fallout 1 and 2". And why would you do that? There are a lot of requirements to being a Fallout game, "being Fallout 1 and 2" is not amongst those requirements.
 
I'm with Lexx on this, but he needs to understand that we have the obligation of keeping the newscoverage and the discussions about the game since we owe it to the community.
 
Lexx said:
Okay, this is what you say. But why do I write that... I am not interested in an Fallout 3 because it will be only a new game with the name "Fallout 3" and maybe some storyparts or backgroundthings are the same. Yeah, I think I will play it, if it´s done, but I will never see it as a "Fallout 3" like some other people are doing it... [include some devaluing remark here]

So long...
Click to expand...

Try more reading next time, less preaching to the minister, thank you.

The "Standard Reply to Newbies" is probably going to become a regular feature as we have to repeat ourselves...well, repeatedly...for the sake of some people who can't read between the lines on their own.

So in other words, while we understand the likelihood of receiving a Fallout 3 in the same spirit and design detail as the originals is extremely low, in particular given how Todd and crew are progressing given Chuck Cuevas' treatment of the franchise and how Bethesda is not much better when it comes to licenses or treating their own IP decently, it would mean that Fallout went the way of Wasteland as nobody cared to keep to the same level of design with the "sequel" of Fountain of Dreams.

To make the "Standard Reply" a bit clearer, figure out what the hell Fountain of Dreams was compared to Wasteland, and understand why Fallout's designers didn't write "Remember Fountain of Dreams?" on the inside flap of the game box.

Todd might as well do that for Fallout 3. So if Fallout dies like Wasteland, someone else can come along and use "Remember Fallout?" to make a nod to Fallout's design with a game designed with the same solid P&P gameplay, and further point out Todd's failure in the same note. Which is exactly what happened with Fallout pointing out the failures in Fountain of Dreams. Fallout Tactics was ripped apart as well for not being what the game was billed, a Fallout game like Jagged Alliance 2, when it fellated goats on both counts. Oh, and F:POS, which also counted as "a good game" for some people.
 
Suffer said:
Roshambo said:
But remember, it's also Bethesda's target audience.
Click to expand...

What, all 17,000 of them? Shit, talk about a small target audience.
Click to expand...

That's the problem with aiming for the Lowest Common Denominator. Make it TOO stupid for even them, and nobody will really care for it.

Bethesda's been aiming lower each time.
 
i actually sat through that piece of shit game.

god damn i wanted to hit my tv the entire time.
thats the ones thats a rip off of baldurs gate dark alliance, right?
im pretty sure that the game was cut off long before it was finished, but even if it was finished it would have been fucking horrible.
 
Close but not really, the game was cut in two (at least, they said the storyline was cut in two) for two games, and then the first part was the only part that saw the light of day. I doubt if they left the game "intact" if it would have been much better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top