Bethesda Defends "3" in Fallout 3.

[FeelTheRads]

Chris Avellone or Feargus Urquhart

They didn't have anything to do with the development of the original game.

its with people sayin' "its not Fallout" or "its a spin-off" or such things.

For real? And yet you seem to think it's Fallout without playing it while others have played it and say it isn't.

so you can all shut up with your whining and accusations towards "teh evil Bethe$da".

Oh, yes, because then it would totally mean Bethesda is a trustworthy company.

What?

 

[Ausir]

They didn't have anything to do with the development of the original game.

Well, Feargus probably did have some influence on it as division director.

 

[Grey_Ghost]

Which reminds me... Fallout Tactics is arguably way more Fallout-ish then F3.

 

[beverageleverage]

Fallout 3 MAY BE a Fallout game but it MAY NOT BE a sequel, despite the 3 in it.

Unfortunately Fallout 3 is not a Fallout game, it is not even a good game, it is an unfinished elder scrolls game that is worse than Oblivion. For some this is somehow great. For some it is somehow Fallout because it takes place in a nuclear wasteland full of Bethesdian elements with Fallout names.

 

[Mord_Sith]

I only pray they don't get ahold of X-Com or anything remotely decent in yesteryear's gaming, I'd rather not cry myself to sleep again.

 

[Zeld]

I only pray they don't get ahold of X-Com or anything remotely decent in yesteryear's gaming, I'd rather not cry myself to sleep again.

Try to keep your voice down, Beth could be listening.

Todd in 2011
"We really are the Fans. You know, Fans of X-Com. That's why we bought the license. Cause we're thiiiiiis big fans. So, instead of doing what original X-coms did, were gonna do our kind of game, with lot of aliens for you to blast and big world to explore. From making Fallout 3 we learned lots of things and were gonna use that knowledge to create our kind of game."

Todd in 2022

"We really are the Fans. You know, Fans of Super Mario Bros. That's why we bought the license. Cause we're thiiiiiis big fans. So, instead of doing what original Mario's did, were gonna do our kind of game, with lot of goombas for you to stomp and big world to explore. From our previous games, such as Half-life 3, Civilization 5 and Monkey Island 5 we learned lots of things and were gonna use that knowledge to create our kind of game."

Scary....

Oh yeah, that reminds me that Deux ex 3 is gonna have "some nice changes from the originals". This phenomenon could be called "doing the Fallout 3". It means that any intelligent and original (often cult)game you could imagine will be turned to shit for teenagers.

 

[pkt-zer0]

I only pray they don't get ahold of X-Com or anything remotely decent in yesteryear's gaming, I'd rather not cry myself to sleep again.

The IP is owned by Take Two. Meaning: 2K Games. Ken Levine. Gonna get Bioshock'd.

Still, better than the Bethesda treatment.

 

[TychoXI]

I WUV quoting!!

With this you fall flat on your face. Fallout tactics IS a Fallout game but it IS NOT a sequel to Fallout 1 and 2. So in the same manner Fallout 3 MAY BE a Fallout game but it MAY NOT BE a sequel, despite the 3 in it.

That's the kind of whining I was talkin' about... thanks for the example JR!

Unfortunately Fallout 3 is not a Fallout game, it is not even a good game, it is an unfinished elder scrolls game that is worse than Oblivion. For some this is somehow great. For some it is somehow Fallout because it takes place in a nuclear wasteland full of Bethesdian elements with Fallout names.

More whining... this time our friend beverageleverag doesn't even try to stay true to reality: "is not even a good game"; "unfinished elder scrolls game" etc..... WTF?

They [chris and feargus] didn't have anything to do with the development of the original game.

No, not with the original, but with the sequel, FO2. I'm more of a FO2 person, I can't help it!

For real? And yet you seem to think it's Fallout without playing it while others have played it and say it isn't.

Yep, as far as I've seen I think its a faithful fallout sequel. Perhaps when I play it I will discover its not a faithful fallout game, thats why I made it clear I haven't played it yet. Its just about being honest and coherent.

Oh, yes, because then it would totally mean Bethesda is a trustworthy company.

What?

No, it would mean you have finally grown up. I mean, Bethesda's objective is to create games... and that's what it does... is it so untrustworthy if you create games, and you are, like, a game developer?

PS: What?

 

[Pope Viper]

Cut the personal insults, Tycho.

 

[Herr Mike]

Can anyone give an answer as to why it matters if it's called Fallout 3 or not? Why would anyone possibly care? I can't imagine someone liking the original more than me (aside from cosplayers) but this game being called "Fallout 3" just doesn't stir any kind of emotion in me.

 

[TheRatKing]

If the game were called Fallout: Blah Blah, then the main Fallout series could still have a chance to stay true to its roots and remain TB and iso. As it is now, however, there is no chance of getting a true fallout game unless it is in the form of a spin off (unlikely) or a very elaborate fallout 1/2 mod. Beth is definitely not going to be wondering how to make Fallout 4. Just imagine Todd right now going "Hmmm should Fallout 4 be turned based or real time???" Obviously Todd and friends will be making the games they make best, shitty real time Action games with lite rpg elements.

 

[ushdugery]

How is it a true sequel if it breaks cannon, is made by a different developer and it's links to the previous game are tenuous at best?

 

[I_eat_supermutants]

Alls I can really say about Pete defending the 3 in Fallout 3 is...............




Fallout: DC Metro Adventure

It is not a sequel in my eyes but at times they really did try and fail it seems......I wonder if they weep.

At any rate it's a somewhat decent game but at times it does things that make me squirm in a bad way.....

 

[Leon]

Fallout: DC Metro Adventure

Sounds better than Fallout 3: Nuclear Jamboree

 

[golfmade]

Fallout: DC Metro Adventure

I like it.

 

[UncannyGarlic]

I mean, Bethesda's objective is to create games... and that's what it does... is it so untrustworthy if you create games, and you are, like, a game developer?

Wrong. Bethesda's objective is to make money, ideally maximizing income from their product. Bethesda's product (method of making money) is video games. What's untrustworthy is false advertising (labeling their game a sequel to a series which has completely different gameplay and large amounts of canon retconned to fit their game, 300+ endings would be a worse case of this), lying (their statement about DRM), and making incorrect statements (which may or may not be correct at the time) which are never corrected (essentially unintentional lies).

 

[beverageleverage]

More whining... this time our friend beverageleverag doesn't even try to stay true to reality: "is not even a good game"; "unfinished elder scrolls game" etc..... WTF?
...
Perhaps when I play it I will discover its not a faithful fallout game, thats why I made it clear I haven't played it yet. Its just about being honest and coherent.

You should keep your complaining about complainers to a minimum, especially since you haven't even played the game. I suppose it explains why you had nothing to add other than your childish WTF'ing. I think you need take your honest and coherent advice to heart given your professed ignorance on the subject of actually playing Fallout 3.

 

[JR Jansen]

I WUV quoting!!

With this you fall flat on your face. Fallout tactics IS a Fallout game but it IS NOT a sequel to Fallout 1 and 2. So in the same manner Fallout 3 MAY BE a Fallout game but it MAY NOT BE a sequel, despite the 3 in it.

That's the kind of whining I was talkin' about... thanks for the example JR!

I'm not going to go into a yes/no debate here but if you're only defence is that people who are saying a certain thing are whining, then you've got a very weak one. Come up with something better and more logical next time.

At least i gave you an example. Seems that wasn't good enough.

 

[Freudian]

To many posters here Fallout 3 can't add to the series, only detract from it. Which is a shame because there are things it does much better than the originals.

It adds a new level of physical immersion the originals never had. It has a vastly superior exploration side (arguably by far the strongest element of Fallout 3). That adds to the series and the universe.

I find myself not captured as much by the quests (which are ok but nothing that amazes me) in Fallout 3. Combat is ok, I never really loved the combat in Fallout 1 & 2 either. Both are more functional than exciting. Sure aiming at stuff is novel for a while but eventually all combat systems get a bit repetitive. What makes Fallout 3 work is when you go into a building and spend an hour exploring it, finding out a little story that doesn't have much to do with anything (like the story I found in Springvale School). Or just exploring the wasteland, seeing something that catches your eye from afar and deciding to see what it is about.

Sure, the random buildings (dungeons) will probably get old but until now they add a tonne of atmosphere. So that is definately one of the things the game does better than the earlier games and it adds to the series.

 

[Ulysses]

That was a pretty dumb question to ask, thinking about it. You'd have to be incredibly unprofessional to take an IP then act as if it were your creation.

As for Fallout 3 continuing the series, I don't feel it is. I'm running around in a post-nuclear environment with ragged survivor communities and so on - but something about it doesn't give me the same feeling as the old games did.