lugaru said:
I would think that high awards for things like Fallout 3, Left 4 Dead, GTA 4 and Far Cry 2 only serve to revive the market for intelligent, adult games.
GTA is not a mature series aimed at adults, it's a very immature series aimed at teenagers and college students whose only adult content is the language, violence, and subject matter, all of which are treated very immaturely. Haven't played Far Cry 2 but the first game wasn't an adult game either, it was a FPS with a bad sci-fi action movie plot whose only adult content was again, the language and violence. Fallout 3 falls into the same camp as GTA, though it treats it's subject matter better, violence more immaturely, and is again not written for the mature adult crowd. Can't say for L4D.
lugaru said:
If anything the success of something like Fallout 3 makes the No Mutants Allowed vision of a fallout sequel more plausible, since in the industry minds the game is now associated with money and critical success.
No, it makes the NMA vision of a Fallout sequel and good western RPG even less plausible since it proves that the amusement park "throw in everything that's cool" approach is a profitable (maybe, Gatt9 on BSGF sighted something interesting which is that Fallout 3 has sold, at best, half of the retail games they shipped) and successfull one.
lugaru said:
The first two fallouts where essentially boutique projects, with lots of time and talent left undisturbed since it was intended for a small audience.
The first two Fallouts were intended for RPG fans which, while a specific part of the market, wasn't some tiny group of people. Fallout 3 is a AAA game targeted at a general audience and thus simplified and changed to be more generally appealing and less good at anything in specific.
lugaru said:
I am not saying it was better written than GTA4 and by the reviews that loved the writing in that game I think it is likely that GTA4 is the better man. I havent played it though, I dont touch Rockstar Games on PC until they cool a little and people iron out the bugs. I used to be the same with Beth but I made an exception for Fallout due to my enthusiasm for the franchise. As for me calling the game smart, I think it has a lot of subtle interactions and great moments, especially in rivet city with the romance subplot, the suicide one, the junky and all that. Again maybe not the best this year but a step forward none the less.
Oh really, well I guess that you never posted the following then...
lugaru said:
I know what you will say, "Fallout 3 is teh stupid" because you don’t want to lose board status, but it is seriously one of the smartest games since Vampire: Bloodlines.
lugaru said:
I think the tutorial sequence was extremely clever.
What's so clever about the tutorial? It's certainly more clever than Oblivion's tutorial but it seems like a pretty standard tutorial done pretty poorly. The only new idea there is going through certain stages of your childhood.
lugaru said:
Also I pretty much admire anyone who makes their game extremely modable, it is rare for companies to actually trust their customers.
You mean their "bug fixing, patching, and post release support" community, don't you? There is no trust there, it's all about making money because they know that by releasing a CS that it will drag over part of the TES modding community. It's all about making money.
lugaru said:
In the end though we still arent even at apoint where "mature" means "grown up" as opposed to "dirty" so I am glad to see developers rewarding the games they did over stuff like Gears of War 2.
Fallout 3 really isn't much, if any, more mature than Gears of War 2. Fallout 3 is more complicated for the player than GoW2 but it's nothing compared to The Witcher or really any western RPG from the 80s or 90s. Both games are meant to be fun and don't make a serious effort, if any at all, to be truely smart because if they had, Fallout 3 would have allowed you to use your allies at the end of the game instead of the developers being content with the ending that exists.
