Fallout 3 at E3 - Gamehelper

[generalissimofurioso]

Hey, Violence is funny – lets all just own up to it! Violence done well is f—ing hilarious. It’s like Itchy and Scratchy or Jackass –now that’s funny!

So... I'll be able to make glass out of cats in Fallout 3?

Or better yet, I'll should be able snort radioactive waste into my nose!

Or that grandest of all things...I should be able to play my enemies lung's like a bagpipe!

Todd Howard must have the mindset of a 14-year old boy.

 

[Mick1965]

The team has spent two years conceptualizing everything in the game from the design of the ‘Vault Suit’ to the PIPBoy hardware to the robots (Mr. Handy, Robobrain) and mutants (Death Claws, Rat Scorpions)

Dear god, Rat Scorpions?!? What new unholy creatures have Beth been dreaming up now?

Hello, long time lurker here, first post.

Run along little troll.

Mick

 

[I_eat_supermutants]

With no new news, no new footage, no new screenshots. Nothing new to say.
All demos viewed on the same path.
With nothing new, it is still managing to be frightening.

And now a thought from Todd Howard
*Todd walks into the room* "Boys I just watched jackass number 2, and I got the funniest thing. We can have a Steve-o appearance like in da Tony Hawk games, he will hide behind a nuclear car and poop in a toilet, then film the vault dweller try to drink it"

The future of Fallout is looking grand

 

[Jiggly McNerdington]

Hello, long time lurker here, first post.

I've been visiting this site on a daily basis since I heard about FO3, and I gotta say this site is amazing, there are loads of sources of information on the game and many varying opinions and discussions. I gotta say I am absolutely psyched for FO3 and before you write me off as a Bethfanboy or a child who loves "NUKLEAR EXPLOSHONS" let me give you some of my personal history with the Fallout series. I've played FO1&2 repeatedly over the years and loved it each time, and I seriously hated both Morrowind and Oblivion.

This doesn't make sense. You loved FOs and hated Morrowind/Oblivion and you're happy because bethesda is turning Fallout into more oblivion-like game than Fallout game?
Oh no, it's first person and uses Oblivion's engine. All first person games, especially ones with RPG bents, end up like Morrowind and Oblivion. Bloodlines, for example. And Deus Ex. When I was attacked by a vampiric cybernetic mudcrab-in-black I about cried.

I think the atmosphere of the fallout world and the immersion remains intact. So there are no groin shots and eye shots, yes this will be missed. No hookers to pay for sex, sad I agree. No isometric view

Wow, all this + nuclear explosions wherever you fart and they still managed to make the Fallout atmosphere... beth's talents are second to none!
I definately don't recall any nukes in Fallout 1 or 2. It makes sense that every nuclear weapon was used, but vast stockpiles of plasma and laser weapons remained.

If I wanted all those things I'd play FO1 or 2 again, which I'm actually doing (FO2 right now).

Pretty much but it's sad that Fallout fans who want to play Fallout game will have to play F1 and 2 when there's F3, huh?
It's also sad that there are Fallout fans who won't give a F3 a chance unless it's exactly like the previous games and made by the exact same people 10 years down the line. Black Isle is dead, there is absolutely nothing to lose by Bethesda making a F3, and everything to gain. If it's the shittiest RPG known to man, well, Black Isle died on their own anyway, so Van Buren (Which also has flaws if you want to pick apart every fucking thing seen in the movie) was never going to be made. If it's a decent RPG, then score, you got a decent Fallout RPG. If it's great, even better.

It's post-apoc

Yet you still are nuking everything.
See above nerd rage over nukes in Fallout 1 and 2.

it's dark

With all that bloom? ~~
Oh god, I've been playing a 10 year old RPG so long I've forgotten that games let you adjust graphics and turn bloom off. Woe is me.

it's immersive

Key-word.

it offers many endings and choices to get there.

Choices and consequences... quoting one of the FO devs about oblivion's freedom- "don't like this quest? Don't do it! Don't like this sword? Use another one!"
Yay!
How many endings are there in Fallout 1? The vault gets found and dies, game over. The vault runs out of water and dies (Presumably, never let it happen before) game over. You get dipped, game over. You kill the master or make the master kill himself, game over. There's technically only one real ending, the others are just game endings due to doing things poorly. You could say there are infinite endings because the game ends when you die. You can say the slight variations on what happens to the different towns/groups at the end are "Different endings" (assuming the movies play due to Fallout's completely bug-free RPG perfection) but that's stretching it a bit.

Edit: Oh yeah, just in case people glaze over the quote blob and head to the body, the bolded chunks of quote are me. Seemed easier than breaking and remaking the quote that many times.

Christ, Fallout's my favorite RPG, and I've played a large chunk of all PC RPGs. Yes, even Morrowind and Oblivion. Both of which I completed and enjoyed, and didn't feel like they raped any of my other RPG discs while I wasn't looking. But for god's sake people, most of this isn't even as simple as "You know, that nuclear catapult sounds kinda stupid", it's "NUCLEAR CATAPULT!? WHAT THE HELL IS THIS, IN MY DAY WE HAD ALIEN BLASTERS AND LASER GATLING GUNS, NONE OF THIS UNREALISTIC BULLCRAP. BETHESDA MORE LIKE BETHESGAY FALLOUT 3 MORE LIKE FUCKUP 3 PIPBOY MORE LIKE VAULT BOY AND LORD HELP ANYONE WHO SAYS OTHERWISE". I agree, nuclear catapult sounds kinda silly, but given that Fallout 1 and 2 have silly weapons and large amounts of gibs (Not sure why people are bitching about the gore, of all things) I'm willing to go with it. Especially since I haven't seen it in action, it might be no fancier than a large grenade.


Ugh, and for people complaining about it being a first person shooter, see my bitching about Bloodlines and Deus Ex above. Both of which lean heavily on FPS and both of which have plenty of good dialogue and RPGing (Bloodlines especially). Yes, they're made by different people, but it proves that it's possible for a FPS/RPG hybrid to be good. Bethesda could completely fuck it up but I'm interested enough to see how it ends up.

For people complaining about the BoS being there, this is set what, 30 years after Fallout 2? And did the BoS specifically say what happened to their leaders and what they were doing in the time between Fallout 1 and 2? I can't remember, though I'm fairly sure not. Their dialogue, such that it was (God damn Bethesda using their time machine and limiting the dialogue in Fallout 2) was pretty limited as I recall in Fallout 2, and then the guy who DOES talk to you get killed. And considering how beat up and rag-tag the power armor looks in the FO3 teaser, I'd be inclined to believe that it might not even be a large "Official" branch of the BoS. Maybe they had more leadership disagreements along the lines of Fallout 1, and a group of paladins headed off on their own. The point is, nobody knows yet.

I come here because I want to hear any new Fallout 3 news since like I said (Or am I lying and actually Todd Howard in a mask? Ooooo boogy man) the Fallouts are my favorite RPGs. It just disgusts me that so many people who apparently have been playing the games non-stop for 10 years are so unwilling for a company to even attempt to make a third game in the series. I ignored it as long as I could, but I had to get it off my chest. I'll check back every once in a while if people want to dissect my post and I'll defend my points as I can, but ugh.

Speaking of ugh, way to promote people to post on the forum, pal. If you don't think FO3 looks like a steaming pile of shit you can GIIIIIIT OOOOOOOOOUT.

Hello, long time lurker here, first post.

Run along little troll.

Mick

 

[Mick1965]

*Random troll speak*

*Sigh* It must be troll season, they're crawling out of the woodwork.

You say Fallout's your favorite RPG, and yet you seem to have to show a <s>typical</s> surprising lack of knowledge for all things Fallout. No real surprise here.

Mick

 

[Plissken]

1) Aiming a product at a bigger market is not the same as producing more sales. Biggest common denominator games already exist a shitload, and that market is pretty much filled. The traditional RPG market a la Fallout, however, is a market that is wide open and would guarantee a shitload more sales.
2) If you're going to ignore the fans, then why did you pay a lot of money for the license? Could've just named the game 'Bethesda's post-apocalyptic adventure' and sold just as much.


3d graphics do not in any way conflict with an isometric viewpoint.

1) The traditional RPG market has a majority of the time been a niche market. People who are hardcore "gamers," that like intelligent games. This is one of many reasons why great game companies like Troika died out.

2) Because Fallout plus Bethesda (w/its rep. from Morrowind and Oblivion) combined equals name brand recognition. Using the Fallout name will probably gain Bethesda extra bucks because as you can see from these damn magazine previews, some "fallout fans" (meaning the people who have seen the demos) are liking the new fallout 3. Plus, using a license may be cheaper because there is game content already provided....it would take more time (Which equals money) for Bethesda to start from scratch.

It's like a cotton t-shirt at Value Village is the same damn thing as a cotton t-shirt at banana republic but kids are going to want to buy at Banana republic because it's "cool to wear" brand names.

As for 3d graphics, my point is that better 3d graphics is the way the industry is moving towards. The game industry also seems to glorify on "immersion," and supposedly they think that FPS is better immersion than any other form.

 

[Jiggly McNerdington]

*Random troll speak*

*Sigh* It must be troll season, they're crawling out of the woodwork.

You say Fallout's your favorite RPG, and yet you seem to have to show a <s>typical</s> surprising lack of knowledge for all things Fallout. No real surprise here.

Mick

Give me examples. Keep in mind I've replayed Fallout 1 maybe 10 times, and Fallout 2 only once. Also keep in mind that I rarely replay ANY of my games, as I wait for the price to drop before buying games, and thus I tend to get more of them at once when they are cheap, and generally don't need to replay things.

So far all I see is me trying to express my distaste in other Fallout fans spewing bile about Fallout 3, and getting called a troll for it. What am I trying to troll up? I'm honestly disgussing why I'm irritated that people attack Fallout 3 so much. I'd probably be less irritated if I saw anything at all positive, even something as simple as saying "Hey, that medical area screenshot is pretty cool. Remember that sort of vent? Not too shabby." but instead I'm more likely to hear people complaining that it's not isometric and blurry sprites.

 

[Black]

Oh no, it's first person and uses Oblivion's engine. All first person games, especially ones with RPG bents, end up like Morrowind and Oblivion. Bloodlines, for example. And Deus Ex. When I was attacked by a vampiric cybernetic mudcrab-in-black I about cried.

It's first person, it's real-time, it's not staying true to FO's core. Anything else you wanted to say?

I definately don't recall any nukes in Fallout 1 or 2.

You don't recall any nukes? Uh-huh.

It's also sad that there are Fallout fans who won't give a F3 a chance

I also didn't give Manhunt a chance... It's not my type of game, if I wanted to play fpsrpg I have Deus Ex. And excuse me for having some standards for Fallout game...

If it's a decent RPG, then score, you got a decent Fallout RPG. If it's great, even better.

1. Fallout title, pip-boy and Ron Perlman don't make decent Fallout rpg.
2. beth has shown how good they are at making rpgs. Not being able to piss of your daddy is cool for rpg feel? Playing as a retard and still having normal dialogue options, too?

Oh god, I've been playing a 10 year old RPG so long I've forgotten that games let you adjust graphics and turn bloom off. Woe is me.

Oh god, it was joke! Something I was thinking about since I've seen super-orc with his Mace +2 against Vault Dwellers.

How many endings are there in Fallout 1? The vault gets found and dies, game over. The vault runs out of water and dies (Presumably, never let it happen before) game over. You get dipped, game over. You kill the master or make the master kill himself, game over. There's technically only one real ending

Wait, what? What are you talking about?

Christ, Fallout's my favorite RPG

This is some kind of magic... Thanks to bethesda's hype, everyone's favorite rpg is Fallout!
Doesn't matter that there are people out there who:
didn't like iso view
didn't like tb combat
didn't like int affecting dialogue
didn't like killable kids
many other things
And they all are Fallout fans... thanks to bethesda.

and I've played a large chunk of all PC RPGs. Yes, even Morrowind and Oblivion. Both of which I completed and enjoyed

Somehow when you're saying that you played a large chunk of all PC RPGs and then you come up with Morrowind and Oblivion (which aren't really very good rpg games) is... weird.

Ugh, and for people complaining about it being a first person shooter, see my bitching about Bloodlines and Deus Ex above. Both of which lean heavily on FPS and both of which have plenty of good dialogue and RPGing (Bloodlines especially)

Is Bloodlines or Deus Ex emulating tabletop p&p rpgs?

For people complaining about the BoS being there, this is set what, 30 years after Fallout 2? And did the BoS specifically say what happened to their leaders and what they were doing in the time between Fallout 1 and 2?

In FO1 they way stationed in Lost Hills Bunker or something- 80 years later there are 3 more bunkers, each with one man... And after 20 years they are supposed to reach East Coast with a force that can fight with super mutants? And people who liked to sit in their bunkers decided "ah, what the hell, let's go to Washington"?
The same goes for Enclave? "Ah, what the hell, we couldn't kill all those bastards but let's at least run a radio station"
Yay.

If you don't think FO3 looks like a steaming pile of shit you can GIIIIIIT OOOOOOOOOUT.

Lovely,
If you can provide any good arguments how Fallout 3 is staying true to old FOs then be my guest... If you can do this, of course.

 

[Brother None]

To all you first-time posters, welcome.

Can I ask you a honest question: why register here to tell everyone we're wrong, idiots or to tell us how to behave on your first post?

Discussion is welcome, telling everyone to "calm the fuck down guys" or telling us we're posting in the wrong way is just bad netiquette.

BloodNinja's post is a good example of how to act (and that's a strike for calling him a troll, Mick1965). Jiggly is halfway there, since he's half-concerned with talking to us, half-concerned with telling us what to do, so that's a strike, again. Shinymans is just way off the money, so that's a vatted post and a strike.

Opinions are welcome. People who have this big urge to tell other people how to behave aren't. From here on out, try discussing the game, rather than each other.

Jiggly; your complaints that nobody is being positive is patently ridiculous. Look up Desslock explaining level scaling, look up the NMA indirect FAQ or look up the teaser thread on this forum, plenty of positive and neutral comments. I'm sorry if we don't adhere to your standards of behaviour, but this isn't your forum.

Also, there were nukes in both Fallout games.

 

[ivpiter]

“So why the f— are we doing Fallout?”, ..."We loved the series! And then the crack began – ah, we should do it! I was like – yeah, that’d be cool..."

“Violence... Violence is funny – lets all just own up to it! Violence done well is f—ing hilarious. It’s like Itchy and Scratchy or Jackass –now that’s funny!
.

I believe this is the most disturbing report I've seen to date, and I wonder what type of PR the Executive Producer is hoping to generate by lacing his press conference with expletives. I can only imagine a few possible scenarios for this choice of tactic:
<blockquote>
A. He was upset / angry or otherwise emotionally disturbed
B. He was in a chemically induced altered state of mind.
C. He's developed turrets syndrome
D. And what I think is most probable - he was attempting to recreate the humorous style to be used in FO 3 by lacing his presentation with the same type of humor.... and it failed
</blockquote>
If all the writer notes is one chuckle from the audience you need to work on your humor - or better yet, don't attempt it at all and use a method more in line with the professional, intellegent and insightful commentary that might be expected of, oh say, an Executive F---ing Producer for a major game developer! Or at the very least quote the party line from marketing, admit you’re not much of a speaker and more of a background guy and Get The F-- Off the stage!
<blockquote>
(you see Todd the reason I believe profanity works here as I'm an anonymous forum poster venting at problems with design choice by belittling your attempt at humor with ironic vulgarity of my own, and yes, I feel the need to include this, so, should Todd happen to see it he'll understand that it's nothing personal, but rather my own sad attempt at being funny.)
</blockquote>
I don't think this is on par with John Romero's Diakatana ad "This Summer John Remero with make you his bitch," (or something to that effect) however, after this I'd be slightly surprised if Todd isn't on a tighter leash. Seriously for a mature rated game Todd is coming across as having some maturity issues.

I'm reminded of the Ghoul in Gecko with the "Flaming Skull Story" where you can resond with "Did you have issues with your mother?" or something to that effect [...I wonder if the devs would take it personally if we poised such questions in the dev thread...]

Edit Formatting clean-up

 

[Jiggly McNerdington]

It's first person, it's real-time, it's not staying true to FO's core. Anything else you wanted to say?

Yes. To me Fallout's core isn't in the gameplay, it's in the setting itself. I certainly enjoy Fallout's gameplay, but a big reason why the game itself is enjoyable is the setting. On the whole, I haven't seen enough reason to believe that Bethesda is ruining the setting, but I will agree that the gameplay itself has been completely changed. And if that's all you liked about Fallout, then I can understand being upset over Fallout 3.

You don't recall any nukes? Uh-huh.

I was being sarcastic/a dick then. The point being, there were nukes in Fallout 1 and 2. Not mini-nuke slingshots maybe, but nukes themselves. Since "NUKULAR EXPLOSHUNS" seems to be a popular talking point here I was pointing out that the old games had them as well. If there's a preview somewhere where they mention more nukes than the one in that town they keep talking about and the slingshots, I must have missed it. If you could link it I'd be much obliged.

I also didn't give Manhunt a chance... It's not my type of game, if I wanted to play fpsrpg I have Deus Ex. And excuse me for having some standards for Fallout game...

But right there, you admit that Deus Ex is an enjoyable FPSRPG. Couldn't a Fallout FPSRPG be enjoyable? You could even consider it non-canonical like Tactics and the console game if you were so inclined.

1. Fallout title, pip-boy and Ron Perlman don't make decent Fallout rpg.

I never said it did, but they certainly don't hurt either. So far I haven't seen enough to decide if it's a good RPG judging by one teaser trailer, maybe 10 screenshots, and a few previews that mostly mention the same things over and over. But I haven't seen enough to decide it's a bad one, either.

2. beth has shown how good they are at making rpgs. Not being able to piss of your daddy is cool for rpg feel? Playing as a retard and still having normal dialogue options, too?

I'm not sure what not being able to piss off your daddy means, either that's something I haven't seen or what. I'm under the impression your dad in Fallout 3 is mostly in the pseudo-tutorial of the vault while you're building your character, and the rest of the game hinges on finding him. As for playing a retard and having normal dialogue, I haven't heard this either, though I never played a retard in the other Fallouts so it's not something I would particularly miss. Though I have read that you miss a large number of quests playing a low INT character, so it's not like it's a huge drawback to have it missing.

Oh god, it was joke! Something I was thinking about since I've seen super-orc with his Mace +2 against Vault Dwellers.

What I said was a joke as well (Well, me being a dick 'cause I'm a bit pissed off, but a joking dick).

Wait, what? What are you talking about?

Looking back, I think I got a bit derailed there. The point I was getting at was there's mostly one ending to Fallout 1 and 2, but looking at what you said you were talking about a Bethesda developer talking about Oblivion, which I guess isn't really connected.

This is some kind of magic... Thanks to bethesda's hype, everyone's favorite rpg is Fallout!
Doesn't matter that there are people out there who:
didn't like iso view
didn't like tb combat
didn't like int affecting dialogue
didn't like killable kids
many other things
And they all are Fallout fans... thanks to bethesda.

I like the iso view, I like the combat, I like the int in dialogue, I like the killable kids. But I can live without the view, I can live with different combat, the int in dialogue would be the hardest to live without, but I haven't seen them say it won't affect dialogue at all so I've still got hope there, and I could live without killable kids though I'd prefer it.

Somehow when you're saying that you played a large chunk of all PC RPGs and then you come up with Morrowind and Oblivion (which aren't really very good rpg games) is... weird.

I agree they aren't near the top of my list, but I thought it was most relevant to mention them as they seem to be the arch-nemesis of Fallout, apparently. I've also played all of Troika's RPGs before they died if you'd prefer better RPGs.

Is Bloodlines or Deus Ex emulating tabletop p&p rpgs?

Bloodlines would be, but Deus Ex isn't. But emulating tabletop P&P RPGs is a different kettle of fish to playing a computer game, and since Fallout 3 is a computer game, again, the view and combat don't ruin it for me. Well, the combat actually could ruin it for me, but since I haven't even seen the combat in action yet I don't know what I'll think of it. But the idea of FPS combat doesn't ruin it.

In FO1 there way stationed in Lost Hills Bunker or something- 80 years later there are 3 more bunkers, each with one man... And after 20 years they are supposed to reach East Coast with a force that can fight with super mutants? And people who liked to sit in their bunkers decided "ah, what the hell, let's go to Washington"?
The same goes for Enclave? "Ah, what the hell, we couldn't kill all those bastards but let's at least run a radio station"
Yay.

I realize they were hiding in one bunker in Fallout 1, but I was under the impression (As I said before, I couldn't remember every line of dialogue from every BoS NPC and computer in Fallout 2) that they didn't specifiy what the entire BoS was doing in FO2. Yes, the elders in FO1 were inclined to stay in their bunker and hide out, but over 120ish years things could change. Not to mention the other possibility I said that it was a single group of paladins, either sent by the elders or on their own. I haven't heard of a BoS base in FO3 yet, and if it was mentioned somewhere then that scraps that last theory, but there's still the possiblity that the elders learned something worth moving over there for. And as for enclave radio, it could just be a pre-war automated system running. I haven't heard anything making it a live broadcast with DJ Mr Metal Man.

Lovely,
If you can provied any good arguments how Fallout 3 is staying true to old FOs then be my guest... If you can do this, of course.

I'm not trying to say Fallout 3 will be perfect and stay true to the originals, I'm just saying that so far, to my eyes, it's possible that it will be a good Fallout game. Different combat, different view, different almost everything, but possibly a good Fallout game. There isn't a lot of information out on it yet, so that's kind of why I'm so upset about people slamming it so early. I'm not 100% rah rah Fallout 3 is awesome, but I'm hopeful.

 

[Brother None]

Oh, and do us all a favour and use the quote tags as they were intended, Jiggly. I'll edit this last post of yours for you, but from there on out, any mis-formated posts will be vatted as unreadable. phpBB's format is easy enough to work with, it's hardly any effort on your part.

 

[ivpiter]

So far all I see is me trying to express my distaste in other Fallout fans spewing bile about Fallout 3, and getting called a troll for it.

I believe your being called a troll for claiming that "other Fallout fans spewing bile about Fallout 3," which I happen to believe meets the defination of trolling quite nicely.

On Topic:

I read that 140 NPC's is the total according to this review(ref: http://production.gamehelper.com/magazine/features/the-original-fallout-boy?page=3), so I wonder if that is

A. A typo
B. The total NPC's which would be another huge reduction
C. The number of in-depth conversaion NPC's

I suspect the first case and hope it's the last.[/url]

 

[Black]

*Sigh*

Yes. To me Fallout's core isn't in the gameplay, it's in the setting itself.

Who ever said that Fallout is subjective?
2+2 = 4 - it's not subjective.
Earth is round (well, sort of), not square- it's not subjective.
Fallout can't be Fallout without iso view and tb combat- that isn't subjective either.

But right there, you admit that Deus Ex is an enjoyable FPSRPG. Couldn't a Fallout FPSRPG be enjoyable? You could even consider it non-canonical like Tactics and the console game if you were so inclined.

You're missing something. From a game with 'Fallout' in it's title I expect the game to be, well, Fallout, not any other 'enjoyable fpsrpg'.

I'm not sure what not being able to piss off your daddy means

Um... it means you can't piss of your daddy. You love him, end of the story.

it's possible that it will be a good Fallout game

Different combat, different view, different almost everything, but possibly a good Fallout game.

...
Changed almost-everything but it's still the same?

 

[Jiggly McNerdington]

Oh, and do us all a favour and use the quote tags as they were intended, Jiggly. I'll edit this last post of yours for you, but from there on out, any mis-formated posts will be vatted as unreadable. phpBB's format is easy enough to work with, it's hardly any effort on your part.

I'll try. Just realized I could select a chunk of text and click quote to throw quote tags in which should make it easier to keep track of.

 

[Brother None]

Oh, and do us all a favour and use the quote tags as they were intended, Jiggly. I'll edit this last post of yours for you, but from there on out, any mis-formated posts will be vatted as unreadable. phpBB's format is easy enough to work with, it's hardly any effort on your part.

Your last post is in the Vats because of this, Jiggly. I repeat: using quote tags isn't difficult, please do so, because your posts are unreadable when you don't. I'm not going through the effort of fixing your posts again.

That said: to understand the local POV better, consider the following: a good game is not the same thing as a good Fallout. You're constantly intermingling the two.

 

[Black]

I'll try to clear up things a bit...
Good game isn't always Fallout game.
Fallout game isn't always good (see: PoS)
Good Fallout game isn't always Fallout game (I know, f-ed up logic but see F:Tactics)
RPG Fallout isn't always good Fallout game...

To make good FO3 beth would need to make good FO3 rpg which stays true to previous FOs and to it's core.
And they aren't doing that.

 

[Jiggly McNerdington]

*Sigh*

Yes. To me Fallout's core isn't in the gameplay, it's in the setting itself.

Who ever said that Fallout is subjective?
2+2 = 4 - it's not subjective.
Earth is round (well, sort of), not square- it's not subjective.
Fallout can't be Fallout without iso view and tb combat- that isn't subjective either.

I disagree with that, but if that's the case for you I can't really debate it. All I can state is that, for me, Fallout isn't the gameplay, it's the setting. Fallout 1 and 2 gameplay was fun, but different gameplay could be fun as well.

But right there, you admit that Deus Ex is an enjoyable FPSRPG. Couldn't a Fallout FPSRPG be enjoyable? You could even consider it non-canonical like Tactics and the console game if you were so inclined.

You're missing something. From a game with 'Fallout' in it's title I expect the game to be, well, Fallout, not any other 'enjoyable fpsrpg'.

Same issue as above. I could enjoy a Fallout FPSRPG if it's done well, but I guess you can't.

I'm not sure what not being able to piss off your daddy means

Um... it means you can't piss of your daddy. You love him, end of the story.

As in, that's the reason you leave the vault? That's the reason they've said so far, but maybe there are others and they haven't mentioned them yet. Again, not a game ruining issue for me.

it's possible that it will be a good Fallout game

Different combat, different view, different almost everything, but possibly a good Fallout game.

...
Changed almost-everything but it's still the same?

It wouldn't be the same, but it would be the same setting. Same issue as the first part, again.

Edit: Crap, don't delete this yet. Trying to figure out how to break the quotes up.

Edit again: Hah, got it.

 

[Black]

Same issue as above. I could enjoy a Fallout FPSRPG if it's done well, but I guess you can't.

How should I say it... Because fpsrpg Fallout wouldn't be Fallout at all!

As in, that's the reason you leave the vault? That's the reason they've said so far, but maybe there are others and they haven't mentioned them yet. Again, not a game ruining issue for me.

That and some Vault-gang, thugs who are after you because the Overseer think you helped your dad escape...
Game ruining? Not really. Role-playing ruining? Yes.

It wouldn't be the same, but it would be the same setting.

Then it shouldn't have "3" in it's title. If only setting is the same (and they're changing quite a lot) then it's a spin-off, not sequel.

 

[Brother None]

I disagree with that, but if that's the case for you I can't really debate it. All I can state is that, for me, Fallout isn't the gameplay, it's the setting. Fallout 1 and 2 gameplay was fun, but different gameplay could be fun as well.

And we can go in looptieloop circles around this for infinite. You think it's this, I think it's that. Well, guess what, that's all personal opinion, and can be discounted as such.

There are only two objective measuring rods for "what is Fallout", what the original designers intended it to be or who has the license. Either you argue it has to stick to the original design tenets or you argue that being called Fallout makes it Fallout. Anything other than that is strictly opinion.

If you want a clearer reason...we're not talking about a setting here. Fallout wasn't designed as a setting, it was designed as an emulation of GURPS (later SPECIAL) on the PC, with a setting wrapped around it. The mantra "only the setting matters" isn't actually valid except for things that are designed purely as settings. For instance, would a D&D game set inside the D&D universe but without any D&D rules by a D&D game? Not really.

This whole setting = franchise thing is so last century.