Fallout 3. Is it really so bad?

Confalone said:
I don't know about that, there's nothing wrong with change if you ask me. I love fo1 and 2 to death but I'm also having a blast with fo3, I think it's wonderful. If that makes me a filthy whore then so be it, I'm OK with that.
Whether or not you like these changes, the fact is that they have changed Fallout's core design and that because of that, we will not have a Fallout game that is based on the same core design as the first games, ever.
 
cratchety ol joe said:
my reply may have had a sarcastic edge, but my reason and meaning are sound, you asked if the fact that

A: it didn't follow on from Fallout 1/2
B: enjoy MMO / Oblivion.
C: stomach the dumbing down of RPG's

to answer;

A: I want FO:3 to kinda follow FO:2 or 1, makes more sense to me just in simple logic terms, 1 2 then 3...
B: I'm not a big fan of those style game, but I do enjoy the turn based goodness of FO:1-2-T
C: why should I suffer ANY amount of dumbing down, I enjoyed the interaction that Fallout offered me on a level higher than 'my mouse and and the WASD keys'

A: That's a personal preference, which is why I cited it. Not arguing it's not a valid point, but to me it's not a deal breaker because the narrative focus has shifted.

B: I didn't say you have to like MMOs or Oblivion to like this game, just the exploration aspect. And I enjoy the turn based system of Fallout 1/2/Tactics as well. It's not in Fallout 3, but that's not a deal breaker because they warned us ahead of time that it wasn't turn based.

C: Again, that's person preference. Myself I have a flexible additude about RPG systems, so long as the system isn't complicated just for the sake of complication ( like V:TM - B, I played Spore longer than that game, and I played Spore for one week and then gave up on it, and I'm a RPG fan). Personally I think the only big disservice Fallout 3 does to the other three Fallout games is that it is simply not as extensive.
 
I'd actually like to thank you for your last response Gooscar. (you gain 800xp)
It was nicely written and made sense.

My only retort would be that yes, these things are a personal preference, but if my preference for games is no longer being catered to by the one franchise which offered me these things, the world looks quite bleak from my side of the fence.
 
cratchety ol joe said:
My only retort would be that yes, these things are a personal preference, but if my preference for games is no longer being catered to by the one franchise which offered me these things, the world looks quite bleak from my side of the fence.

exactly how i feel.

the more console, the more pirating, the less pc, the less intelligent games become, the less my preferences are catered for.
 
Many years I was thinking about it..Probably we can't create a FALLOUT 3.. Maybe ,just by adding new maps and missions into Fallout 2..
 
Sk8erBender said:
Many years I was thinking about it..Probably we can't create a FALLOUT 3.. Maybe ,just by adding new maps and missions into Fallout 2..

What about getting a new engine for the same mechanism of the game? Not 2D ISO view, but 3D ISO view? With realistric graphics like Fallout 3 has?

Still Fallout, but improved.
 
Public said:
What about getting a new engine for the same mechanism of the game? Not 2D ISO view, but 3D ISO view? With realistric graphics like Fallout 3 has?

Still Fallout, but improved.

Something like a post-apocalyptic, turn-based combat version of Diablo 3 with role-playing and dialogue instead of hack-n-slash...
 
I guess what scares me the most about playing it is that I have never touched EverCrack, didn't enjoy WoW, and am generally not a fan of MMOs.

I played Morrowind to the extent of a spent 25 minutes designing my character, forgot to save, decided to be a jerk and try robbing the first merchant I came across, and suffered a quick death. after playing for 2 minutes, i never touched it again.

Never played oblivion, but I would rather have a small map that's interesting and fun to play than a huge map full of nothing, with encounters simply for the sake of having an encounter.

I have a feeling I'm going to like FO3 for the minor things that slightly remind me of the other two, but hate it because I don't enjoy the style of game Bethesda normally produces.

Really it's my fault for buying a game style I know I don't like in the first place, but I can't help feeling robbed that a franchise I grew up on changed itself so dramatically.

I compared it to Indiana Jones before and I'm inclined to do so again just because it's a fitting analogy. In the first three, everything Jones did was implausible but still possible. After seeing this new monstrocity in Singapore, I've replaced the phrase "Jumping the shark" with "Nuking the fridge."

Anyway, I'll try and reupdate my opinion once I get home, buy a worthy video card and play the game. but I think following those steps, I'll wind up reinstalling FO1, FO2, Quake 2, Mechwarrior and Descent. Maybe I'm trapped in my childhood, but I can never get sick of those games, again, what they lacked in graphics, they more than made up for in fun.
 
I guess what scares me the most about playing it is that I have never touched EverCrack, didn't enjoy WoW, and am generally not a fan of MMOs.

I played Morrowind to the extent of a spent 25 minutes designing my character, forgot to save, decided to be a jerk and try robbing the first merchant I came across, and suffered a quick death. after playing for 2 minutes, i never touched it again.

Never played oblivion, but I would rather have a small map that's interesting and fun to play than a huge map full of nothing, with encounters simply for the sake of having an encounter.

I have a feeling I'm going to like FO3 for the minor things that slightly remind me of the other two, but hate it because I don't enjoy the style of game Bethesda normally produces.

Really it's my fault for buying a game style I know I don't like in the first place, but I can't help feeling robbed that a franchise I grew up on changed itself so dramatically.

I compared it to Indiana Jones before and I'm inclined to do so again just because it's a fitting analogy. In the first three, everything Jones did was implausible but still possible. After seeing this new monstrocity in Singapore, I've replaced the phrase "Jumping the shark" with "Nuking the fridge."

Anyway, I'll try and reupdate my opinion once I get home, buy a worthy video card and play the game. but I think following those steps, I'll wind up reinstalling FO1, FO2, Quake 2, Mechwarrior and Descent. Maybe I'm trapped in my childhood, but I can never get sick of those games, again, what they lacked in graphics, they more than made up for in fun.
 
UniversalWolf said:
Public said:
What about getting a new engine for the same mechanism of the game? Not 2D ISO view, but 3D ISO view? With realistric graphics like Fallout 3 has?

Still Fallout, but improved.

Something like a post-apocalyptic, turn-based combat version of Diablo 3 with role-playing and dialogue instead of hack-n-slash...

Uhhh :roll:

@tattooed_pariah- no double posting!
 
I was born on such games as Another World, Wasteland, Fallout.. With a great books like Forgotten Realms, Lord of the rings, Roadside picnic..And nowadays I see just graphical progress in games..A few things like Nano-suit in Crysis or healing methods in Far Cry 2.. These are a silly mouse clicking games for a 15 minutes of play. This happens with books as well .. Authors writes a bestsellers ..that people want to hear..
 
Public said:
UniversalWolf said:
Public said:
What about getting a new engine for the same mechanism of the game? Not 2D ISO view, but 3D ISO view? With realistric graphics like Fallout 3 has?

Still Fallout, but improved.

Something like a post-apocalyptic, turn-based combat version of Diablo 3 with role-playing and dialogue instead of hack-n-slash...

Uhhh :roll:

Just trying to envision what you're getting at. :)

Diablo 3 has 3D graphics with an isometric view. Granted, beyond that it has little in common with Fallout...
 
UniversalWolf said:
Just trying to envision what you're getting at. :)

Diablo 3 has 3D graphics with an isometric view. Granted, beyond that it has little in common with Fallout...


Sounds like Van Buren?
 
Well, I fianlly got my copy today and at the risk of getting banned or whatever the mods do here, i'm triple posting (sorry Public)

I played for a few hours and as a Fallout game, It doesn't really have any factors at all that remind me of the originals. as a completely new game which happens to be called Fallout 3, it's not that bad so far. I'm only in Megaton right now, but so far I think I actually like it.

bottom line, if you're looking for Fallout 1/2 glory, then reinstall Fallout 1/2. If you want a good game, it's not bad.

ok, last post in this thread. later
 
I think we all know that, while this is a pretty good RPG by the standards of today, it just doesn't live up to its predecessors. People keep asking "Well what's so bad about it? All I hear is Beth bashing and whining" but the truth is the reasons are hard to define. I think in aesthetics and setting, even in lore it does a good job as a Fallout. But for me the disappointment came when I reinstalled Fallout 1 and started to replay that today. I realized, wow, they really have gutted it. The mechanics were so much of the feel, and now instead of intelligent character design we get to play dress up. The original game mechanics are just gone, period. Aside from the bland writing in FO3 compared to the originals, the other thing that I noticed instantly when I started to play FO1 was that, hey, you can fuck up. You can say one wrong thing to a person and they will never talk to you again, or blow someone else's head off. Most people already hate you in the first place. You can easily shoehorn yourself into a corner with a quest and leave yourself few options out. And all this, I think is a good thing. I think they tried to make FO3 way too fool proof, it just doesn't seem like there are any lasting consequences past blowing up Megaton. Almost everyone loves you from the start, and I've murdered people in broad daylight only to have their friends forgive me a minute later. They made it so that you can't fuck up, and that pretty much removes any emotional stake from the game. Your character really is pretty much the god of the sandbox, playing with all these grimy faced dolls. It just feels so shallow and vacuous at times.

Is Fallout 3 a bad game? No it's the best game I've played in a while in spite of these things.
Is it a bad Fallout game? Fucking eh it is.
 
UniversalWolf said:
Just trying to envision what you're getting at. :)

Diablo 3 has 3D graphics with an isometric view. Granted, beyond that it has little in common with Fallout...

Yup. I WISH Troika got to release its PA RPG.
 
Btw I don't mind isometric graphics, but the turn based combat for Fallout 2, personally for me was annoying.

I'd have perferred it if Fallout 2 had a combat system more like Diablo 2.

Now comments about npc's in Fallout 3 acting like it doesn't know you killed their friend and five minutes later they like you. I can see that point.

To me that is a legitimate point whereas wishing bethesda did isometric graphics is sorta like asking "Can we all not drive cars anymore and just go back to using horses". No, the world has moved on.
 
Willybean said:
Btw I don't mind isometric graphics, but the turn based combat for Fallout 2, personally for me was annoying.

I'd have perferred it if Fallout 2 had a combat system more like Diablo 2.
Maybe similar to Fallout Tactics, but Diablo 2? You're kidding, right? :crazy:

Personally, I would have liked something similar to Baldur's Gate. But I'm crazy like that. I would have also liked GURPS rules, but then again, I'm still crazy like that.

Now comments about npc's in Fallout 3 acting like it doesn't know you killed their friend and five minutes later they like you. I can see that point.
Yeah, AI actually seemed better in Fallout 1 and 2.

To me that is a legitimate point whereas wishing bethesda did isometric graphics is sorta like asking "Can we all not drive cars anymore and just go back to using horses". No, the world has moved on.
"Moved on"? People keep saying that. That's a bad argument. Command and Conquer 3 sold pretty well, I think, and it was isometric perspective; so has every C&C title I know of, save one (and I believe that did horribly). Starcraft is still popular in quite a few countries (well, maybe just Korea.. :) ) There's plenty of other isometric games that I can dig up, modern ones as well, but I don't want to risk belaboring the point.

The *right* argument to make here, in my opinion, is -- should Bethesda Softworks make an isometric game? And the honest answer I can give is "no". They shouldn't. It's just not what they do. They make games in first person perspective, and that's the way they've done it for a while. To put it simply, it's the best thing they know to do, because they've done it for so long. I'd rather see them stick to what they're good at, than risk them making it four fold as horrible.

Other than that, I'll have to see if I hate Fallout 3 as some people here. I don't think I will, though. If I was willing to overlook the faults in Oblivion, I'm pretty sure I could enjoy this game. Besides, most of the time I had fun making up stories in my imagination more than inside of the game anyways. I think half of the conversations I had in Fallout 1 and 2 were in my imagination, honestly. :)
 
Lonewulf said:
Personally, I would have liked something similar to Baldur's Gate. But I'm crazy like that. I would have also liked GURPS rules, but then again, I'm still crazy like that.

Do that and you get Commandos... with pause.

All a matter of taste though, I'm personally a sucker for TB in RPG.
 
Back
Top