GFW on Fallout fans

Jeff... I think you have us all wrong. The problem is not really you, this community or the years that have passed without a valid follow-up to the first two installments of Fallout. The problem really seems to be Bethesda and their lack of communication or consideration for the original fanbase. Bethesda has made no attempts to communicate with the Fallout community at any stage of Fallout3's development.

Their lack of heart for the existing community behind Fallout is very disturbing and is viewed as an attack. That alone suggests they do not intend to please fans of the original two installments. Bethesda's own isolationist ways have proved fruitful in the past but will in the end come back to haunt them. Some of their recent titles have earned them irreparable black marks from the existing communities revolving around that particular product resulting in failure for Bethesda.

Asides from my statements above you of course have to take into account the environment Fallout communities have evolved in. With past promises winding up empty, we have been used, and abused.

Please understand our criticism and frustration are resulting from past events, our environment and seeing it unfold all over again.
 
...a Robotic Sidekick named K.I.L.L (WACKY ACRONYM!) who drinks hard liquor mixed with Nuka Cola's XTREME derivative GROUND ZERO and Skateboards on a giant razor-blade armed with rocket boosters and heavy machine guns...
Click to expand...

Wow, I think you missed your calling, I'll bet this would sell like hot-cakes.

On the flip side, don't give them any ideas, please :roll:

And on-topic, I love the irony...

Too little info to be critical, but plenty to declare this the greatest game ever created, because, well destruction is the new TREES!

/rant
 
ivpiter said:
Wow, I think you missed your calling, I'll bet this would sell like hot-cakes.

On the flip side, don't give them any ideas, please :roll:
Click to expand...

Seeing as how they probably never come around here, I don't think they'd put it in...

Besides, I haven't missed my calling yet...

I still haven't made DeathKill and BloodGun yet, a game about two renegade cops on the edge in a city trapped halfway to Hell...
(I'll see how long it takes for people to get that it's a parody of things that are in popular video games...)
 
Brother None said:
Yeah, they do.
Click to expand...

Indeed, how else would they get the ideas what fans definitely not wanted to see in a Fallout game.

-No action/adventure? Check
-No EXTREME weapons? Check
-No Oblivion dialogue? Check

See, its kind of like the opposite game, everything wish of request we write down, the opposite is put in the game.

Perhaps we are doing this the wrong way.
 
Sorrow said:
He never made any sensible comments here.
Click to expand...

Missed this post. Long and short of it: yes he did. If previewers could preview with as sensible a tone as he posted on NMA, the industry'd be in a better state.

The sad thing is he also didn't express any doubts when the opportunity was offered to do so, in his blog. I understand his explanation for it, but it's hard to take the positive seriously when you know it's that enforced.
 
Honestly, this is all really interesting stuff, and I think totally worthy of an article (and I mean this sincerely): the relationship between a game franchise, and its avid fan base, and the responsibility (if there is one) of a developer to address that fan base. (And, ya know, like I said, we recorded that snarky podcast before I had seen the original thread here about my blog post and then registered here. Had we podcasted AFTER that, I might have been a little less obnoxious. Maybe. :) )

You guys (to speak in broad generalizations) have what seems almost like a sense of entitlement about what the game should be---and please don't mistake that for a criticism. I'm just trying to grasp the sense of outrage, and I can't fully do it. I get that it's gotta be frustrating to you guys to see a franchise you love apparently being--in your eyes--sh*t upon, but what I equally fail to see, so far, is any sense of either hope or patience whatsoever that *maybe*, just maybe, this might not be the clusterf**k everybody thinks it is. The hostility is so heavy, and the lack of generosity towards them so profound, that if I were them I can't imagine I'd take you seriously either. It's one thing to love a game and be looking forward to a followup. It's another to be so passionate about it that you can't see that just because your vision doesn't match theirs that they aren't complete douchebags who don't understand the franchise and deserve to be burned at the stake. Similarly, it also doesn't mean that those of us in the press who are looking at VERY early versions and writing favorable comments think this is going to be the greatest game EVAR, or, hell, even GOOD. It's one thing to say "hey this early stuff this company is doing is pretty cool!" and another once we have the real game in our hands. As I said on the other thread, writing previews is a VERY tricky game---criticizing totally unfinished code is like previewing a movie where the actors are still in front of a blue screen--you have no real idea what the final product will be like. We err on the side of being positive because, in the short run, it's just more fair, especially if the early stuff piques our interest.

But, like I also said in the other thread, if the end game ends up sucking, if the combat is ridiculous, if dialog doesn't play any meaningful part, if the humor is offbase or dumb--whatever--Fallout 3 will get the bad review it would deserve.

But for now, it's just way too early to tell. All that all of us are doing--including those of us in the press--are speculating. None of us really know much about anything yet.

jeff
 
I don't think so, Jeff. While you may have taken the extra step in actually coming here and reading what we have to say, you still managed to use the same, ignorant stereotype that SA goons try their damnedest to perpetuate. All it takes is a few comments like that from yourself and others in your position to convince the masses of a false and unfair generalization.

We're largely negative not because we think Fallout 3 is going to be a bad game, but because we think it's going to be a bad Fallout game. Correction: fucking terrible Fallout game. This is our gripe. If half of the previewers had any Fallout experience, we would've seen the occasional negative review. As it stands, there isn't one. Not one from anyone that was there to witness the demo.
 
RhymeBomb said:
I don't think so, Jeff. While you may have taken the extra step in actually coming here and reading what we have to say, you still managed to use the same, ignorant stereotype that SA goons try their damnedest to perpetuate.
.
Click to expand...

And when I first came here after my blog post, what did I see? Totally hostile, personal attacks on me along the lines of me "having Bethesda's cum on my face". Just because I posted a few random comments about liking the demo I got.

And you wonder why you don't get taken seriously?
 
That was one person, Jeff. I'm not going to go and count the personal attacks against you in that thread, but I'm certain it's not enough to warrant the damage you've done to the whole community. I can't believe you're even using that argument.

Didn't you say earlier that you were not thin-skinned enough to be affected by these kinds of things?
 
Why is it that criticizing a game based on a few negative elements is wrong, but criticizing an entire community based on a few negative elements is acceptable?
 
Well, Jeff, let's put things into perspective.

You're looking at us from the vantage point, essentially, of a victim.

Now, please realize that we are the victims of a few things, as well.
-We've had 2 poor sequels. Two. (dos). One of which we've closed the forum for, and I can't even bring myself to think about.
-On the first page of news comments, there are about 35 boring Fallout 3 stories. All of these gave us the same damn information given out with such overwhelming positivity it seemed as though Bethesda's own PR people wrote them. That is not journalism. The only thing we've seen any different, IMO, was the PC Gamer article which was presented not as PR, but as two people discussing the available PR. The rest has simply been this bland bunch of "buzzwords" strung together, and presented by people pompous enough to claim they have "integrity" after writing it.
-We've also been the victims of frequent attacks from the gaming press, even reaching the levels of popular magazines such as PC Gamer UK.
-It has become a popular thing, trendy thing, really, to attack NMA users, or Fallout fans. This stems largely from SA users and their ilk. We've been attacked and flamed by droves of idiots who likely have never played Fallout, have never visited our forums, or read any threads on the forum.

This has lead us to become, above all else, tired. We don't want to have to deal with more heartbreak surrounding this thing we've put so much into. We come here to the forums everyday. We probably still play the game, and still laugh at the jokes. We love Fallout.

Of course, we're not entirely blameless.
Just minutes before I sat down, RhymeBomb made the statement that "[Fallout 3 is a]fucking terrible Fallout game". He can't know this. He's seen enough previews to know that there are some things worth changing, but he's chosen to go overboard and join the ranks of a few NMA doommongers.
He does, however, make the good point that F3 doesn't look like a good sequel to Fallout. As it has been said before (I believe by Kharn or DirtyDreamDesigner, though I don't quite remember...) that were F3 released simply as "Generic Post-Apocalyptic RPG", we would snatch it up and laud crazy amounts of praise on it.

Instead, we're stuck with a game which seems to be discarding key elements of the Fallout spirit and universe for completely nonsensical and stupid things.
This isn't right. We're seeing something we loved be turned into something completely different, and we don't like it.

As I mentioned before, we love Fallout. To see something you love so much turn into something which is, at this moment, very suspect, is terrible. We're worried. I can promise that if this game is good, and a worthy sequel, we'll promote the hell out of it. We'll go wild.

For now though, we're going to worry and pick apart things as we wait for another year.
 
In fact I am not thin skinned. I really don't care about that comment. I am trying to tell you why you are perceived by some, at times, as rabid and unreasonable.

How about we talk about Fallout 3 iinstead, though? I'll stick around if we move on from this nonsense.
 
JeffGreen said:
How about we talk about Fallout 3 iinstead, though? I'll stick around if we move on from this nonsense.
Click to expand...

As someone who actually got to see a little bit of F3 in action, do you really think they've handeled the Fatman in a way that's consistent with the feel of Fallout? Many of us are concerned both because it doesn't seem consistent with the way that previous games handeled nuclear weapons, and because it seems like something that's along the line of "BFG" style guns in first person shooters.

Also, I seem to recall hearing somewhere that they might make visiting new locations contingent upon first visiting "earlier" locations. Do you know if there's any truth to that?

Drinking water as a way to heal has gotten quite a bit of criticism here as well. Any idea if the game will also feature the Stimpaks that earlier games had?
 
JeffGreen said:
In fact I am not thin skinned. I really don't care about that comment. I am trying to tell you why you are perceived by some, at times, as rabid and unreasonable.

How about we talk about Fallout 3 iinstead, though? I'll stick around if we move on from this nonsense.
Click to expand...

And I was agreeing with you in part, and trying to explain our behavior.

But whatever.

I think that I am much happier about Fallout 3 than most of us, but I'm still disappointed by things, mostly the "humor" that we've been hearing about, as well as the fact the IN does not affect dialogue.
 
Dougly said:
JeffGreen said:
How about we talk about Fallout 3 iinstead, though? I'll stick around if we move on from this nonsense.
Click to expand...

As someone who actually got to see a little bit of F3 in action, do you really think they've handeled the Fatman in a way that's consistent with the feel of Fallout? Many of us are concerned both because it doesn't seem consistent with the way that previous games handeled nuclear weapons, and because it seems like something that's along the line of "BFG" style guns in first person shooters.

Also, I seem to recall hearing somewhere that they might make visiting new locations contingent upon first visiting "earlier" locations. Do you know if there's any truth to that?

Drinking water as a way to heal has gotten quite a bit of criticism here as well. Any idea if the game will also feature the Stimpaks that earlier games had?
Click to expand...

Well, first, I will say that I personally found some of the weapons handling in the OLD games to be a little silly. (Like, I found my suspension of disbelief being challenged when I was missing shots from one foot away, consistently.) That said, I did think that the real-time combat in F3 is going to need work, and that I preferred the VATS interface much more (if only because it reminded me of the old games.)

Haven't heard anything about locations like that--that sounds odd to me...

I could swear they said something about Stimpaks but I just might be making that up now cuz it's late and I'm tired. Has it been mentioned that the water you drink might cause radiation sickness?
 
Well, if the combat is dice based, as I believe it will be in F3, you'll likely miss plenty of close up shots.
 
Stag said:
as well as the fact the IN does not affect dialogue.
Click to expand...

That was kind of a letdown for me as well.

It honestly doesn't seem to make much sense to me that someone with IN 1 should have the same speech options available as someone with IN 10.

They wouldn't have to do it the same way F2 did - with the hilarious "stupid" conversation choices for someone with less than 4 IN - but, at the very least, if they wanted to emphasize the role playing element, it might have been nice to have conversation options - and the usefulness of conversations - severely limited for characters that aren't intellegent enough to speak well.

I don't know. Perhaps Jeff is right, and I'm not giving the game enough of a chance. It seems as though a lot of the little things just aren't going to be there, though, and it was many of the little things that helped to make F1 and F2 so fun.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top