GFW Top 10 PC games of 2008 features Fallout 3

Brother None

Brother None

This ghoul has seen it all
Orderite
Games For Windows magazine of December 2007 has an unranked list of the top 10 (PC) games of 2008, with Fallout 3 amongst them.<blockquote>THE GOOD + THE BAD: The last Fallout game came out 10 years ago, so you are forgiven, sort of, if you don't quite know what the big deal is. For those of you who did play these classic RPGs, set in burned-out, mutant-filled, postapocalyptic 22nd-century California, the very idea of a Fallout 3 has been one of PC gaming's holy grails. When the original developers moved on and the publisher flamed out, it seemed like the franchise might be gone forever. So it was huge news when PC RPG developers Bethesda Softworks--makers of Oblivion, our 2006 Game of the Year--announced that they had acquired the rights and were, at last, going to deliver a third Fallout game. Since the announcement and the first early previews, the reaction to Fallout 3 has been all over the map. Some gamers (including us) are thrilled by how faithfully Bethesda is preserving the look and tone of the old games while bringing the franchise into the current millennium, while others (especially some of the more rabid Fallout fan communities) continue to deride every new fact, screen, or random piece of info that comes out of Bethesda about the game. The truth of the matter is no one knows a damn thing yet about whether the game will be good or not. Everything crucial to the success of the game ("success" being measured partially in terms of how much it lives up to the series' pedigree)--the storyline, the combat system, the dialogue--is still a huge unknown. Not that there's any reason to be defensive. Bethesda has been making great RPGs since the original Fallouts were around. They love the old games, just like you do. And if Fallout 3 sucks, they'll be letting themselves down along with everyone else. And we do like what we've seen--so for now, we're keeping hope alive, and keeping Fallout 3 on this list.

SOMETHING YOU DIDN'T KNOW: "We can confirm that, yes, you can have a dog," says VP of public relations and marketing Pete Hines, "and yes, his name is Dogmeat."

THE PC FACTOR: Fallout 3 is being developed from the ground up as a multiplatform title for PC, Xbox 360, and PS3. Don't fret, though. What this means is that, as they did with Oblivion, Bethesda is customizing the entire experience and user interface for each particular platform. You're not going to be playing a console port. -Jeff Green</blockquote>Actually, the Dogmeat in Fallout 3 fact was already public knowledge amongst a lot of Fallout fans. About time someone confirmed it, though.

A bit odd to place a game of which "everything crucial to its success is still unknown" in a top 10. But I guess that only applies to criticism, not praise.

Thanks ETHugg.
 
C'mon, Jeff, you're not making any sense here. Nobody is criticising the dialogue or quests (beyond Megaton) yet because we don't know. We're criticising what we can see, just like you praised what you could see.

And now you're claiming one is ok and the other is not? You said this:
Most important, right now, is what others have said about this work-in-progress: that Bethesda has captured the essence of what made the originals so unique: the odd juxtaposition of apocalpytic future nightmare with retro-50s kitsch, folksy humor mixed with mutant monsters, --a creative challenge that in the wrong hands could be utterly cheeseball, but that Bethesda is so far recreating beautifully.
Click to expand...

Does that sound like a reasonable conclusion to make about a game considering "no one knows a damn thing yet about whether the game will be good or not"? Does it sound vastly more reasonable than saying "Fallout 3 looks like a well-produced, very pretty, very fun game that'll provide quite a few people with a lot of hours of enjoyment. However, I don't think it's anything more than a very pretty and fun game"? Not to me, it doesn't.

And this is the 3rd or 4th time Games For Windows has taken a stab at Fallout fans, including the rather underhanded "My precious" article in which no journalistic standard of audi alteram partem was applied at all and I was not properly forewarned that my words would end up in an article that was borderline slander.

Did we kill your puppy or something? This panicked reaction to our critical attitude has to stop.

And in case you missed it: parts of the game were praised in our article. The article on the PIPBoy on the official site got a very positive reaction on this site. Several dev Q&As got positive responses. Saying "continue to deride every new fact, screen, or random piece of info that comes out of Bethesda about the game" is an outright lie. Not that it's the first time people have lied or misrepresented our opinion wilfully, but whatever.

One last thing:

What this means is that, as they did with Oblivion, Bethesda is customizing the entire experience and user interface for each particular platform.
Click to expand...

You don't remember that the PC experience sucked in Oblivion? Even Pete Hines has admitted that they did a bad job porting from Xbox to PC for Oblivion.
 
I sometimes wonder whether there's a huge sack of cash involved, or people decide to throw reason and journalistic standards out the window by their own will.

This article makes me lean towards the former option, considering the Freudian slip stating that "there's not enough info to decide whether the game will be good or not, but it sure seems awesome!".
 
Stupid mofo's. The dogmeat thing was THE first thing we knew for sure about Fallout3, thanks to brios, of course...

pkt-zer0 said:
I sometimes wonder whether there's a huge sack of cash involved, or people decide to throw reason and journalistic standards out the window by their own will.
Click to expand...
It's quite simple actually. They say good about crappy games that everybody likes (Halo 3, Oblivion, Bioshock...) and they get a lot of sales. They sey true things, they loose readership... It's that simple.
 
It's the old PR trick. Say that something is good enough and people will see it as such. Now, game companies involve the press in there PR hype machine because if they don't say it'll be good before the game is out, they wont get anymore info and get blacklisted.
Just as now, some of them now say that Oblivion was flawed but not back when it was developed. The press has became the whore for the gaming industry.
 
I see Todd Howard sitting on a couch, threads on his fingers, rubbing his hands together, uttering "gooood, gooood."
 
I don't know, guys, despite the flagrant violation of audi alteram partem in their My Precious article and the fact that I've heard GFW has been in decline for some time, the magazine is one I respect and Jeff Green is a good journalist. This isn't Delsyn or Matt Peckham we're talking about, this is an experienced veteran who generally knows his stuff.

It's possible they're trying to curry favour, but it seems unlikely to me.
 
I recall reading the Crysis article in the GFW magazine during a free period in school, and it only seems that they're a Microsoft endorsed company. Reason I say this was because they were flaunting the DX10 features of Crysis, when the real-world graphical differences between DX9 and DX10 are virtually nil with a 50% performance impact due to immature drivers and other API mis-handlings. Not to mention, all games tested on Vista have run cleanly with lower framerates than their XP counterparts.*[1]

Microsoft <=> Developing House <=> Magazine

The very name also, sort of gives it away. Personally, I don't trust them. The NMA review of Fallout 3 was the most honest I've seen, so far. :D
 
Games For Windows magazine of December 2008
Click to expand...
You mean 2007 don't you? Or are they publishing a year in advance now? Urm okay not read the article, but how can a game not even finished let alone released be in a top ten of games of this year? Has pc gaming sunk so low that they couldn't find 10 games actually released in 2007?
 
I wonder if they included Spore in their list?

If anything, it belongs up there. It's a fresh new idea in gaming; deserves at least some praise, I guess.
 
The truth of the matter is no one knows a damn thing yet about whether the game will be good or not
Click to expand...

Though the writer's opinion is obvious, this sentence seems rational and i believe everyone should remember it.
 
Literacy_Hooligan said:
Though the writer's opinion is obvious, this sentence seems rational and i believe everyone should remember it.
Click to expand...

'k. The gaming media first, then we'll follow. Sounds fair?
 
Brother None said:
Fixed, requiem. I switched dates, it should be top list of 2008 in 2007 magazine, not vice versa.
Click to expand...
Ah I get you it's a list of their most anticipated upcoming games, rather than a review of the year.

I'd be more interested if they restricted it to pc exclusives.
 
thanks to brios, of course...
Click to expand...

Well make it "thanks to Killzig".

as they did with Oblivion, Bethesda is customizing the entire experience and user interface for each particular platform. You're not going to be playing a console port.
Click to expand...

Actually they said they learned the MISTAKES in Oblivion, so they are making a slightly different UI in FO3, particularly using smaller fonts.

Jeff check with the Beth guys, this is what they are going to tell you.
 
Morbus said:
pkt-zer0 said:
I sometimes wonder whether there's a huge sack of cash involved, or people decide to throw reason and journalistic standards out the window by their own will.
Click to expand...
It's quite simple actually. They say good about crappy games that everybody likes (Halo 3, Oblivion, Bioshock...) and they get a lot of sales. They sey true things, they loose readership... It's that simple.
Click to expand...

Isn't that despicable? One reason why I enjoy Maximum PC so much is when they do review a game they are brutally honest. Their take on Deus Ex 2 was hilariously awesome and honest.
 
Briosafreak said:
thanks to brios, of course...
Click to expand...


Actually they said they learned the MISTAKES in Oblivion, so they are making a slightly different UI in FO3, particularly using smaller fonts.
Click to expand...

From what i have seen, the UI between the console and PC version will not be that different. Just, as you said, different fonts and such. Basically superficial changes but not anything more than that. Maybe i missed something but i doubt it.
 
Literacy_Hooligan said:
The truth of the matter is no one knows a damn thing yet about whether the game will be good or not
Click to expand...

Though the writer's opinion is obvious, this sentence seems rational and i believe everyone should remember it.
Click to expand...

Apparently, it's enough reason to know it will be in the top ten games of 2008. It's either going to be a shitty year for PC gaming, or someone needs to practice what they preach. At the very least, they provide laughable journalism.
 
Paladin Solo said:
Literacy_Hooligan said:
The truth of the matter is no one knows a damn thing yet about whether the game will be good or not
Click to expand...

Though the writer's opinion is obvious, this sentence seems rational and i believe everyone should remember it.
Click to expand...

Apparently, it's enough reason to know it will be in the top ten games of 2008. It's either going to be a shitty year for PC gaming, or someone needs to practice what they preach. At the very least, they provide laughable journalism.
Click to expand...

Just as i have seen Fallout 3 mention as 'one of the most anticipated western RPG's of 2008' in the Veronica magazine. It's easy to be 'one of the most anticipated western RPG's of 2008' when there are only a handful of them anyway. Not really a lie but it doesn't say anything for the quality of the game but it does give the impression that it's good.
 
i think at this point that spore is vaporware.

i havent seen or heard of any real updates as to its progress.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top