Funny and Stark Example of Beth's Laziness...

Lishe said:
FPS doesn't bother with such a tedious character creation system, because most FPS fans like jumping right into the action
Click to expand...

If you note the current spawn of shooter games, most have customizable characters, I personally cant think how long I've spent tweeking the look of my Rainbow 6 character.

So, YES FO3 can be compared to a shooter... DIRECTLY compared to a shooter.

Can I play FO3 and think to myself;

"oh god I've just been in a 6 hour session of D&D, I don't need any more of this number crunching roleplay..."

or

"Gee after 6 hours of D&D its nice to kick back with FO3 roam around a bit and blow crap up.."

Please.. bear in mind I'm playing FO3 and ignoring the MQ for the very fact it is so railroad, and my very first experience of unkillable character made me turn the game off.
 
Public said:
WE'RE SO F*CKING HAPPY LIKE ONE BIG MOTHER F*CKER!! BETHESDA IS F*CKING DEAD, YEAHHHH!! TAKE THAT BITCH!! WHOHOOO!! Now where is my beer??
Click to expand...

I need to book a trans-Atlantic ticket now to enjoy this party...

on topic (laziness)

Also, as a backward look at the Dunwich. I found this building, wandered in shot some crap, found a statue, wandered off none the wiser giving not a damn about the whole experience.

Dialogue keeps making my soul cry.

The 'side quests' rather than adding any depth to the game or the game-world are simply 'yay XP!' frankly I've felt nothing but disassociated from pretty much every NPC in the game, even the whiney little feck that runs up to the PC and cries about his dad going missing (Grayditch.. Yawn)

The repair skill now being the end all of how to survive why does my Rifle fall apart after like 3 clips through it from near full 'health' sure its old but it isn't made from putty.

The game (for me) is most fun simply wandering about finding crap and/or blowing crap up. Which in a role play game seems a little lacking, usually I like things like an immersive quest with fulfilling outcome and perhaps some character attachment. And from a fallout game, some humour.

"OH MY GOD my aRmo0r addz +10 to sneeks, this im are bestest PLay1ng of r0lez"
 
Eyenixon said:
Well he indirectly named video games art, you could have just quoted that and left it there.
Video games, art? Only in Bizarro World.
Click to expand...
There is certainly an art to getting them right.

It's people who think games can be designed by numbers that are flooding the market with formulaic tripe.
 
Erny said:
You guys are so cruel! No need to destroy Beth. They just need good writers and designers. Like those who had worked on the real Fallouts. If only they had some of them from the start...
Click to expand...
Good writers and designers wouldn't save Fallout. It would make it better, but it can never reach its true glory while at Bethesda. Bethesda is too "teen" rated to allow Fallout to fully prosper. "Child killing? No no no, we can't allow that." "Extorting people for sex? Noooooo What would the parents of our consumer base think?" "Spend more money on depth than on detailed gore? Shiney objects sell better, the hell with depth make it sellable."
 
AndreiD said:
And that brings us to "Why didn't Blizzard buy the Fallout rights? :("
:mrgreen:
Click to expand...

Frankly, I had been a Blizzard fan since Warcraft 2. I enjoyed D2, until FO came out, and I played Starcraft for 10 years. Blizzards long track record of fucking over their fans makes me glad that they didn't buy Fallout.

I don't think any of us would be happy with "Fallout 3: The clickfest", "Fallout Stratigo" or "World of Fallout: A post apocalyptic game for losers with computers"
 
Because reality is cruel, so cruel. I would take Blizzard ANY day over the current, untalented bethesda.

The old beth was better, but oblivion one is just awfull. They released fallout 3 as a buggy piece of crap, after 4 YEARS of development. Did they snort all the playtesting money up their noses ? :evil:
 
Patton89 said:
Because reality is cruel, so cruel. I would take Blizzard ANY day over the current, untalented bethesda.

The old beth was better, but oblivion one is just awfull. They released fallout 3 as a buggy piece of crap, after 4 YEARS of development. Did they snort all the playtesting money up their noses ? :evil:
Click to expand...

Well, I think Blizzard was always quality over quantity so I would of preferred if blizz would of bought fallout.
 
It helps to remember that Blizzard now is not Blizzard of before. Most of the group fragmented after Diablo and Starcraft.
 
Well, you have to remember Blizzard's game design theory:

1) Gameplay
2) All other considerations

It's also very apparent that the current incarnation of Blizzard is uninterested in additional properties. Ghostbusters, Brutal Ledgend, and a slew of other great properties have been floating in production limbo in mostly finished products, and Blizzard didn't so much as sniff the air. Lenoard might be one of the Fallout's holy trinity, but the man is a Blizzard man now.

Blizzard operates much like Valve. If it wasn't from in house, it ain't worth the paper it's printed on. That's why I see Blizzard's involvement in any Fallout bid past and present as matter of factly IMPOSSIBLE.

While I admire their games, I do not see Blizzard as a saint within the video game industry. They're more like the Swiss stereotype, clocks, money, and chocolate are second to none, but screw anything else. UbiSoft is probbably the closest thing to a saint, but they have their own problems.
 
Sad but true Gooscar...
If Starcraft 2 is at least as good as Starcraft 1, I think nobody would doubt Blizz.
I do hope FO4 will be better than 3 also.
 
Gooscar said:
It's also very apparent that the current incarnation of Blizzard is uninterested in additional properties. Ghostbusters, Brutal Ledgend, and a slew of other great properties have been floating in production limbo in mostly finished products, and Blizzard didn't so much as sniff the air. Lenoard might be one of the Fallout's holy trinity, but the man is a Blizzard man now.
Click to expand...
Well, considering they've developed and published the best selling computer RPG, computer Strategy game, and MMORPG of all time, I can't really blame them with not wanting to branch out.
AndreiD said:
Sad but true Gooscar...
If Starcraft 2 is at least as good as Starcraft 1, I think nobody would doubt Blizz.
I do hope FO4 will be better than 3 also.
Click to expand...
I canceled my SC2 preorder when I found out they split the game into 3 full price releases. That pissed me off pretty good...
 
Though Diablo is technically an rpg, its the rpg that occurs when red blooded americans design an rpg. Myself I always considered it more of a dungeon crawler, however, it was immercive. Though, im unsure if a fallout made by Blizzard would be much better. Have you seen the videos for diablo 3? It looks like world of warcraft. But back to topic. I personally took a good two weeks to formulate my opinion of fallout 3. Sure, it had some good things in it, but it had many more mediocre things, and quite a few things that infuriated me. I found the only way to truely play a neutral indavidual from a roleplaying standpoint was to, get this, do absolutly no side quests, since obviously those can only be completed by saints or Rip-out-your-splean-and-feast-upon-it-nee're do wells.

Though the armor system... that, that really, really turned me off. Having saturated myself in fallout from an early age, I fermented in item and weapon stats and thier effects. I had assumed these would be present in fallout 3. But no, i got the oblivion armor system, which states, no matter what, you will always take damage, because you are hated by the developers. If you read about Powered armour, even in bits and pieces preasent in fallout 3, it becomes apparent that something just aint right about it when using it. Such as the fact a raider, can shoot you, with a BB gun, from 40 yards away, in the chest, covered by the immence ceramic and steal composite plate and you get a screen shake, and a little umph, and your health goes down.... WHAT THE F*CK IS THAT?! What happend to the "Designed to be impregnable from all current small arms and laser weaponry." To the point that Plasma and Gauss weaponry were developed in the likely event the chinese developed thier own powered armor. I wanted to wade into a group of raiders a listen as little pings and poinks happend as thier ordinance bounced harmlessly off me. But no, we get treated to every god damned person with a limitless supply of magic bullet amunition. Not to mention thier apparently herculian strength with melee and fists.

Ok, the armor bits been pissing me off since about 3 seconds after finding the Vault security armor and wondering "Where has my armor class and Damage threshold gone? I can see my damage resistance, but where my other stuff? And why is there no desciption on anything?"

It would have been a good game, not set in the fallout universe, but its own post appocolyptic setting, but... seeing the fallout name on it, with a 3 there no less... I just keep wanting to call it Fallout:Brotherhood of Steel-2: This time, we kill harold again, or we don't, but if you dont kill him your evil, and if you do kill him, but not in the way he asks your also evil.
 
I think the old Blizzard would be better then bethesda (then again, who wouldn't?!), but please keep in mind that they did dumb down the style of Diablo to increase consumerbase. Diablo 1 was very dark, with some weird shit in it, like some enemies or the textbooks. Diablo 2 is a dumbed down version, with nicer enemies and a nice comic graphic.
So if they made F3 they would alter it, but then again it couldn't be worse then bethesda.

@dragon1972
your text has so many "sure...X...BUT..." in it that it is really unnecessary to argue with you. You already said it yourself: the game is shit. If you cover it up with "BUT" - fine. I don't. I want a good game, not some game I pretend to like but when I write about it I need to defend it in order to make it sound better. If you have fun with it thats fine with me, but the game remains an aweful piece of crap.
 
I really tried to enjoy the game, as i payed 50+ euros for the darn thing. But i simply couldn't , there was nothing amazing or great about it. It didn't feel like fallout 3, a sequel to the originals, what it felt and played like, was nothing but mediocre,FP action rpg with few good bits, like the first time i saw the wasteland. It was bugged so badly that you couldn't play it at points. And it had awful 3rd person camera, and easy simple, untactical combat, with over glorified VATS that made combat an easy chore. So as a game 7.

But it is trying to be a sequel, and as a sequel, it was nothing like the originals. It had badly written main story, absolutely appaling dialogue and horrible, dull, unrememberable NPCs, and the way they used old factions was unacceptable. It disgarded almost everything the old games were, and replaced it with new bethesdas trademark unimaginative, simplified features. They destroyed SPECIAL, they made perks superpowers and they still DARE to call it fallout 3 ? More like Oblivion 2: Post apocalyptic adventure. It was improvement over oblivion, but thats it.
It like saying being stabbed in the hand is pleasant compared to being stabbed in the balls. You are still being stabbed. And it hurts a lot. As a sequel 3-4-
:evil:
 
Patton89 said:
I really tried to enjoy the game, as i payed 50+ euros for the darn thing. But i simply couldn't , there was nothing amazing or great about it. It didn't feel like fallout 3, a sequel to the originals, what it felt and played like, was nothing but mediocre,FP action rpg with few good bits, like the first time i saw the wasteland. It was bugged so badly that you couldn't play it at points. And it had awful 3rd person camera, and easy simple, untactical combat, with over glorified VATS that made combat an easy chore. So as a game 7.

But it is trying to be a sequel, and as a sequel, it was nothing like the originals. It had badly written main story, absolutely appaling dialogue and horrible, dull, unrememberable NPCs, and the way they used old factions was unacceptable. It disgarded almost everything the old games were, and replaced it with new bethesdas trademark unimaginative, simplified features. They destroyed SPECIAL, they made perks superpowers and they still DARE to call it fallout 3 ? More like Oblivion 2: Post apocalyptic adventure. It was improvement over oblivion, but thats it.
It like saying being stabbed in the hand is pleasant compared to being stabbed in the balls. You are still being stabbed. And it hurts a lot. As a sequel 3-4-
:evil:
Click to expand...

Finn-high-five :drunk:

Yeah, the game is pretty terrible... i might not feel so strongly about this if it weren't done by like 90 people who praised the game as jesus's next coming for so long and acting so arrogant about it
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top