Fallout 3. Is it really so bad?
- Thread starter Booze Zombie
- Start date
BurkeAvenger
First time out of the vault
in Fallout 2, you pause and leisurely and slowly queue up all your attacks while the entire world mysteriously FREEZES. Enemies will be right by your face and they will just stop and wait until you queue up everything and use items.
Cut me a break I don't need that teddy bear shit. I prefer fighting it out like a man, charging head first into a group of 5-6 Super Mutants and start hacking left and right. But for all you pansies who are used to Fallout 2's baby-sitting turn-based combat, you can even utilize VATS.
So, people who have good reflexes and are good at shooters can play it the way they want to, and people who prefer planning out attacks and letting the computer do all the work get what THEY want. Sounds good to me
Of course, the people who aren't good at shooters and don't have the brains to utilize VATS properly will always complain but that's to be expected
Cut me a break I don't need that teddy bear shit. I prefer fighting it out like a man, charging head first into a group of 5-6 Super Mutants and start hacking left and right. But for all you pansies who are used to Fallout 2's baby-sitting turn-based combat, you can even utilize VATS.
So, people who have good reflexes and are good at shooters can play it the way they want to, and people who prefer planning out attacks and letting the computer do all the work get what THEY want. Sounds good to me
Of course, the people who aren't good at shooters and don't have the brains to utilize VATS properly will always complain but that's to be expected
Tapakidney
First time out of the vault
BurkeAvenger said:in Fallout 2, you pause and leisurely and slowly queue up all your attacks while the entire world mysteriously FREEZES. Enemies will be right by your face and they will just stop and wait until you queue up everything and use items.
Cut me a break I don't need that teddy bear shit. I prefer fighting it out like a man, charging head first into a group of 5-6 Super Mutants and start hacking left and right. But for all you pansies who are used to Fallout 2's baby-sitting turn-based combat, you can even utilize VATS.
So, people who have good reflexes and are good at shooters can play it the way they want to, and people who prefer planning out attacks and letting the computer do all the work get what THEY want. Sounds good to me
Of course, the people who aren't good at shooters and don't have the brains to utilize VATS properly will always complain but that's to be expected
Thanks for volunteering yourself as a perfect example for our observation...
These are the idiots that Fallout was plundered and raped for.
Games for people like you are called FIRST PERSON SHOOTERS.
SoylentNinja
First time out of the vault
I think somebody has missed the boat when it came to TURN BASED combat. You see you take turns in combat much like chess, GURPS, or any other game that requires more thought than the 'oh shit something is coming' reflex. You do whatever actions you are allowed to do for your turn, then your opponent takes his turn. Rinse repeat till enemies die or until you do. Oh and if you think turn based combat is easy, I challenge you to go play a decent game with turn based combat and then come back and tell us how a broom got handle shoved up your character's backside.
Oh if you wanna talk about hand holding, this game is about as huggy bear as it gets. I am comparing to games like STALKER,R6, and CS
Oh if you wanna talk about hand holding, this game is about as huggy bear as it gets. I am comparing to games like STALKER,R6, and CS
BurkeAvenger said:in Fallout 2, you pause and leisurely and slowly queue up all your attacks while the entire world mysteriously FREEZES. Enemies will be right by your face and they will just stop and wait until you queue up everything and use items.
Cut me a break I don't need that teddy bear shit. I prefer fighting it out like a man, charging head first into a group of 5-6 Super Mutants and start hacking left and right. But for all you pansies who are used to Fallout 2's baby-sitting turn-based combat, you can even utilize VATS.
So, people who have good reflexes and are good at shooters can play it the way they want to, and people who prefer planning out attacks and letting the computer do all the work get what THEY want. Sounds good to me
Of course, the people who aren't good at shooters and don't have the brains to utilize VATS properly will always complain but that's to be expected
Observe the modern-day console gamer.
Fallout & Fallout 2 were meant to emulate pen & paper role playing games, hence the turn based combat.
BurkeAvenger
First time out of the vault
Exactly. Fallout 3 is not meant to emulate pen & paper role playing games, hence the nerd rage.rcorporon said:
ShatteredJon
It Wandered In From the Wastes
So then if its fine for them to change the core of the game, is it cool if I lobby for Halo to become a JRPG?
BurkeAvenger said:
Fallout 3 (according to its very own title) is meant to be a successor to Fallout 2.
It fails miserably in this aim.
As a stand alone shooter, it fails miserably as well.
Go back to Gears of War and it's "manly chainsaw guns" and I'll keep my RPG and 'nerd rage.'
Good point. Please tell me why it is called Fallout 3, then.BurkeAvenger said:
I also fail to see how turnbased combat is supposed to be "baby-sitting", what do you mean by that?
ShatteredJon
It Wandered In From the Wastes
This new generation doesn't understand the concept of strategy. It's all mountain dew and twitch gameplay for them.
BurkeAvenger
First time out of the vault
Didn't fail as badly as Black Isle did. You realize that franchises change platforms and developers all the time, right?rcorporon said:
See: Ninja Gaiden. See: Super Mario, See: Fallout 3.
The truth is, the pen and paper formula is an antique artform. FPS is the next step up and I'm glad someone took charge and did a splendid job.
But then again, I come from an old school paper and pencil D&D background so this may be why I'm more excited about the immersion.
ShatteredJon
It Wandered In From the Wastes
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
Omg I just popped a lung with that statement. FPS is the next evolution of PnP games. HAHAHAHA! Not to sound like a troll or anything but for fucks sake. Have you ever actually sat down with a group of your friends and played DnD or GURPS. I will tell you right now, its infinitely more fun than any video game. That's why after 10 years I still do it on saturdays.
Omg I just popped a lung with that statement. FPS is the next evolution of PnP games. HAHAHAHA! Not to sound like a troll or anything but for fucks sake. Have you ever actually sat down with a group of your friends and played DnD or GURPS. I will tell you right now, its infinitely more fun than any video game. That's why after 10 years I still do it on saturdays.
First-person shooters are the next evolution from P&P RPGs?BurkeAvenger said:
That's the biggest crock of bullshit I've heard so far.
Let's try to explain this very slowly: Fallout was created as an emulation of pen and paper gameplay. This was its very basic, core design criterium.
Now sequels are supposed to be continuations of previous games. Which is exactly what Fallout 3 is not, it is more a spin-off than a sequel.
How big do you think the outrage would be if Half-Life 3 turned out to be a pinball game?
Also, turn-based combat is an abstraction and doesn't pretend to be anything else. If you think about it, it often allows for more strategy and thought throughout combat.
On the other hand, FPS games try to be a simulation. These are two entirely different things. One isn't an evolution of the other, it's simply something different.
Your rant on how turn-based games are hand holding (go play Jagged Alliance 2 Gold and come say that again) shows perfectly how Fallout 3 is not a Fallout game: it was never meant to simulate charging headlong into a group of 6 Super Mutants to mash buttons until one dies.
If you want to do that, you can go play Gears of War 2, or Crysis: Warhead. It's not what a Fallout game is supposed to be.
ShatteredJon said:So then if its fine for them to change the core of the game, is it cool if I lobby for Halo to become a JRPG?
Man, can I join you on this endeavor?? I want HALO to be a JRPG as well, maybe it will become playable.
As for the turn-based vs RT argument here, it has barely anything to do with how good or bad FO3 is, it comes down to personal preferences. All i can say is that I'm a big fan of CS and Unreal series, and I'm not finding FO3 nearly as fun as an FPS game, and I won't even mention the RPG dimension of the discussion.
BurkeAvenger, chill down a bit man.
chaosapiant
It Wandered In From the Wastes
I'm lost on where this conversation is going, so I'll conclude by saying F3 is awesome. And i'll probably post again when it becomes relevant to the OP.
Bloody William
First time out of the vault
Shared failings: rose-colored glasses and the FO/TES games
I'm new, but I'm very honestly not trying to troll in any way, nor am I apologizing for what are distinct, undeniable flaws in Fallout 3. However, I'm amazed by the kneejerk hatred for the game on this board.
I loved Fallout and Fallout 2. Black Isle made some amazing games and FO/FO2 are among my favorite RPGs ever. I also loved Morrowind and really enjoyed Oblivion. I also really enjoy, perhaps "love" (inasmuch as a game can be loved) Fallout 3, and expect it to be a candidate for this year's GOTY in many, many publications.
However, I'll gladly admit that Fallout 3 is a deeply flawed game. Scripting, characterization, and often ridiculously stupid AI regularly pull you out of an immersive experience. Bethsoft has a long history of this sort of thing, to release a game that, from any other developer, would be considered a beta, but to offer so much depth and freedom that it's still not only playable but deeply enjoyable.
This is where we need to remember what Fallout and Fallout 2 were like. The characters, in both conversation and combat, were slow at best and broken at worst. Dealing with companions in the original Fallout was nothing less than excruciating. Turn-based combat, while satisfying when it worked, was clunky and slow. Who hasn't waited minutes upon minutes to get through a random encounter because every single raider had to make their own move, even if the move made no sense or they did nothing? Who hasn't dealt with a broken save because a script triggered incorrectly or not at all, leaving you stuck or hated with no way to go on in the main game or a major side quest?
The Fallout and Elder Scrolls series share many of the same flaws. Awkward, uneven combat. Erratic scripting. Broken AI. These aren't ailments Bethsoft has plagued the Fallout series with, they were present from the beginning and still the games are loved.
I won't deny Black Isle Studios' great writing, which made a major part of Fallout, nor will I deny that Bethsoft isn't quite up to the challenge. However, Bethsoft came a lot closer to the feel of Fallout, both in writing and visual design, than I had hoped. The humor isn't always there, but if you don't go into the game KNOWING you're going to hate it, you can easily feel like you are walking through the Wasteland, exploring the Vaults and ruins, and doing everything both the Vaultdweller and the Chosen One did, but from a first-person perspective. Moira, Three Dog, the Church of the Atom, President Eden, these are all aspects that, if you didn't already decide that you hated the game, really help you feel like you're part of Fallout's strange, darkly funny world.
For the most part, Bethsoft has captured Fallout where it counts. The story and humor are both mostly there. The visual design is spot-on and whether I'm in a Vault or the ruins, I feel like I'm experiencing in first-person exactly what the Vaultdweller and the Chosen One experienced isometrically in Fallout and Fallout 2. The combat system, while radically different from the turn-based, hex-based system that felt clunky back then and would feel antiquated now, works surprisingly well for what it tries to do. In a first-person, generally single-character (non-party) RPG like Fallout 3, the cycle of using VATS to "take your turn," then hide/cower/soak damage while the enemies "take their turn" and your action points recharge, is the closest thing you're going to get to turn-based combat in this day and age.
The Elder Scrolls series has always had a number of flaws, but for the most part those flaws match the same flaws the Fallout games had. Both had laughable character animation, horrible AI, and unreliable, sometimes gamebreaking scripting. Combining those same flaws with a marked improvement in both visual design, immersion, and writing compared to the TES games, Bethsoft made a worthy successor, even if it's not the Van Buren release everyone wanted.
Fallout 3 has problems and I'll be the first to admit them. But they're not what's keeping you from enjoying the game, and they're certainly not keeping it from being a worthy successor to the equally flawed (and equally excellent) Fallout and Fallout 2.
Flame on, if you want.
I'm new, but I'm very honestly not trying to troll in any way, nor am I apologizing for what are distinct, undeniable flaws in Fallout 3. However, I'm amazed by the kneejerk hatred for the game on this board.
I loved Fallout and Fallout 2. Black Isle made some amazing games and FO/FO2 are among my favorite RPGs ever. I also loved Morrowind and really enjoyed Oblivion. I also really enjoy, perhaps "love" (inasmuch as a game can be loved) Fallout 3, and expect it to be a candidate for this year's GOTY in many, many publications.
However, I'll gladly admit that Fallout 3 is a deeply flawed game. Scripting, characterization, and often ridiculously stupid AI regularly pull you out of an immersive experience. Bethsoft has a long history of this sort of thing, to release a game that, from any other developer, would be considered a beta, but to offer so much depth and freedom that it's still not only playable but deeply enjoyable.
This is where we need to remember what Fallout and Fallout 2 were like. The characters, in both conversation and combat, were slow at best and broken at worst. Dealing with companions in the original Fallout was nothing less than excruciating. Turn-based combat, while satisfying when it worked, was clunky and slow. Who hasn't waited minutes upon minutes to get through a random encounter because every single raider had to make their own move, even if the move made no sense or they did nothing? Who hasn't dealt with a broken save because a script triggered incorrectly or not at all, leaving you stuck or hated with no way to go on in the main game or a major side quest?
The Fallout and Elder Scrolls series share many of the same flaws. Awkward, uneven combat. Erratic scripting. Broken AI. These aren't ailments Bethsoft has plagued the Fallout series with, they were present from the beginning and still the games are loved.
I won't deny Black Isle Studios' great writing, which made a major part of Fallout, nor will I deny that Bethsoft isn't quite up to the challenge. However, Bethsoft came a lot closer to the feel of Fallout, both in writing and visual design, than I had hoped. The humor isn't always there, but if you don't go into the game KNOWING you're going to hate it, you can easily feel like you are walking through the Wasteland, exploring the Vaults and ruins, and doing everything both the Vaultdweller and the Chosen One did, but from a first-person perspective. Moira, Three Dog, the Church of the Atom, President Eden, these are all aspects that, if you didn't already decide that you hated the game, really help you feel like you're part of Fallout's strange, darkly funny world.
For the most part, Bethsoft has captured Fallout where it counts. The story and humor are both mostly there. The visual design is spot-on and whether I'm in a Vault or the ruins, I feel like I'm experiencing in first-person exactly what the Vaultdweller and the Chosen One experienced isometrically in Fallout and Fallout 2. The combat system, while radically different from the turn-based, hex-based system that felt clunky back then and would feel antiquated now, works surprisingly well for what it tries to do. In a first-person, generally single-character (non-party) RPG like Fallout 3, the cycle of using VATS to "take your turn," then hide/cower/soak damage while the enemies "take their turn" and your action points recharge, is the closest thing you're going to get to turn-based combat in this day and age.
The Elder Scrolls series has always had a number of flaws, but for the most part those flaws match the same flaws the Fallout games had. Both had laughable character animation, horrible AI, and unreliable, sometimes gamebreaking scripting. Combining those same flaws with a marked improvement in both visual design, immersion, and writing compared to the TES games, Bethsoft made a worthy successor, even if it's not the Van Buren release everyone wanted.
Fallout 3 has problems and I'll be the first to admit them. But they're not what's keeping you from enjoying the game, and they're certainly not keeping it from being a worthy successor to the equally flawed (and equally excellent) Fallout and Fallout 2.
Flame on, if you want.
ShatteredJon
It Wandered In From the Wastes
What keeps me from truely enjoying the game is not the technical flaws, but the rather blatant disregard or re-writing of the cannon. I came across more than a few situations where what was presented didn't make sense to me as a veteran fallout fan. The only cannon they didn't change, they just copied over, such as the Maxson journals. Rather than take what was already established and work with it, they make up ridiculous reasoning to support their breaking of original cannon. Play the game fully through with a high science and you will see what I mean.
Bloody William
First time out of the vault
How did they disregard canon in the game? I'd like to understand the specific complaints, and if you're talking about the canon of Fallout and Fallout 2, or the "canon" of behind-the-scenes notes and the Van Buren outline.
I'm pretty sure I said this a few minutes ago, but it's not a valid excuse for a sequel to have glaring flaws just because the prequels did.
And I don't have any rose-tinted glasses thank you, I still play Ultima 4 on my laptop because it's fun, not because I feel that it's better than anything else in its genre despite its age.
Fallout 1 and 2 did have problems, but they are two separate games, and Fallout 3 is its own game as well, therefore their problems are independent.
EDIT: Whee, canon discussions.
And I don't have any rose-tinted glasses thank you, I still play Ultima 4 on my laptop because it's fun, not because I feel that it's better than anything else in its genre despite its age.
Fallout 1 and 2 did have problems, but they are two separate games, and Fallout 3 is its own game as well, therefore their problems are independent.
EDIT: Whee, canon discussions.