Fallout 3 GotY: Gamasutra PC #1, Edge #27

[PlanHex]

And worth a mention are the pretty big Edge awards, one of gaming's most prestigious, where Fallout 3 is completely absent.

Apparently, it's #27. http://www.edge-online.com/features/edges-top-30-2008?page=0,1

[a] The main story of this movie is cliché/bad/mediocre, but the actors do tell a couple of really funny anecdotes in the flick and the costumes are simply great. I'll give the movie a well-deserved 9/10.

I think they're judging it differently because of the genre.

Imagine if you judged Monty Python and the Quest for the Holy Grail based on its story alone. Most scenes are only loosely related through a bunch of MacGuffins.
The first half hour is King Arthur running around looking for knights, the next half hour is King Arthur and his knights running around looking for the Holy Grail in random locations and the last half hour is King Arthur and his knights running around looking for the Grail's resting place.
And yet, it's the best movie ever, because it's a comedy and should be taken as such.

They judge the game as a sort of timewaster where you can just "go wherever you want and do whatever you want". Reviewers sprout giant chubbies over this shit. They don't care if mechanics and story are mediocre if it has large amounts of content. When this is the goal, the game does its duty and excels at having a lot of boring crap to do and thus deserves high scores.
That's my theory anyway.

 

[Dionysus]

The main storyline pales in comparison to the larger breadth of experiences to be had throughout

This is something I don't get. How can one find the main storyline to be mediocre or even less than mediocre and still give the game excellent scores? 'Cause this is something I've noticed more reviewers saying.

They judge it that way because it's a videogame. Not only is the storyline relatively unimportant for a well-made game, it's entirely optional for many genres. For most people, an RPG can get by with a generic "save the world" plot as long as the interactive components are good. Fallout got good mileage out of a rather lame main plot.

Anyway, I'd have a little more respect for Edge if they didn't have Fable 2 at #3. They are a bunch of homers.

 

[Gentlemen]

Bethesda's Fallout 3 not only outshone the studio's previous game, The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion

Achievement unlocked! Gee, was that hard bethesda? Making a game better than oblivion?
For your next achievement- make a game that's worse than oblivion. This one actually requires some effort.

Really? It seems like Big Rigs: Over the Road Racing is way worse then Oblivion, and it looks like it was coded in like 1 hour.

Someone is a bit biased.

 

[shihonage]

Gamasutra is the new "Inside The Actor's Studio With James Lipton".

 

[jamesmcm]

They judge the game as a sort of timewaster where you can just "go wherever you want and do whatever you want". Reviewers sprout giant chubbies over this shit. They don't care if mechanics and story are mediocre if it has large amounts of content. When this is the goal, the game does its duty and excels at having a lot of boring crap to do and thus deserves high scores.
That's my theory anyway.

If anything I'd say the other way. Fallout 3 has a great engine but too little content. The building weapons system is great but there's only 6 schematics The main quest is good up until Raven Rock where it feels like they rushed it like mad. The world map is alright but there aren't any vehicles (which the engine supports).

 

[whirlingdervish]

by content, they must mean magical hats, a bunch of shit to kill and lots of rubble.

not quests etc..