I enjoyed Oblivion way more than Fallout 3

OakTable said:
Lightsabers make everything better. Except for Revenge of the Sith.

I liked ROTS. And about the topic, Fallout 3 is much better than the fairy tale Oblivion where every dungeon is the same. Got sick of it quickly. Only mods make it playable
 
ROTS sucked. Fallout 3 sucked. Oblivion didn't suck as badly. I even enjoyed Oblivion for a while, but it did become repetitive rather quickly. I haven't returned to it since (unlike Fallout and Fallout 2 which I return to often).
 
Oblivion gave me sense of freedom whereas Fallout 3 gave me environments that didn't look like the same damn thing every time.

I like them both for what they are, but Fallout 3 more because the combat isn't a snore as it is in Oblivion.
 
Jet1337 said:
I like them both for what they are, but Fallout 3 more because the combat isn't a snore as it is in Oblivion.

*Spot enemy*
*Enter VATS*
*Use up AP*
*If target is not dead yet, kite it until your AP replenishes*
*Repeat as necessary*

Yeah. OK.
 
TychoTheItinerant said:
Jet1337 said:
I like them both for what they are, but Fallout 3 more because the combat isn't a snore as it is in Oblivion.

*Spot enemy*
*Enter VATS*
*Use up AP*
*If target is not dead yet, kite it until your AP replenishes*
*Repeat as necessary*

Yeah. OK.

Sorry, but I'm not an inexperienced nub who has to rely on VATS. I play this game as an FPS first, RPG second.
 
FO3 is a JRPG. Linear as a stick, reliant on a single cheesy story with repetitive battles most of which are hard to lose.
 
Ausdoerrt said:
FO3 is a JRPG. Linear as a stick, reliant on a single cheesy story with repetitive battles most of which are hard to lose.

LOL, you should check out the official ( and pretty gay ) forums. There's like two or three topics every day made by people who want other's opinions on what character to role-play.
 
UnidentifiedFlyingTard said:
There is nothing RPG about Fallout 3.
Not much of an FPS either (at least not a good one).

The aiming mechanics and the accuracy of 90% of the weapons is horrible. All weapons are on a slant, and having no Iron Sights just add to this pile of shit. And can you guess what they do to make up for shitty aiming and no iron sights? Oh yes, an "I win" mode, also known as V.A.T.S.

Look at Borderlands, it's not much more of an RPG than Fallout 3 is (Bounty Boards?) but it has Iron Sights and makes a pretty damn good FPS, in my opinion.
 
Reconite said:
UnidentifiedFlyingTard said:
There is nothing RPG about Fallout 3.
The aiming mechanics and the accuracy of 90% of the weapons is horrible. All weapons are on a slant, and having no Iron Sights just add to this pile of shit. Can guess what they do to make up for shitty aiming and no iron sights? Oh yes, an "I win" mode, also known as V.A.T.S.

LOL @ "I win" mode. xD

I agree that the aiming is shit. I wish it was more like Borderlands. Also, the turning sensitivity on the console version is also shit. One time I got off Borderlands, which I had turning on max settings, and got onto Fallout 3. It felt so unplayable that I almost didn't want to play it ever again.

Fallout 3 should've had iron sights like you said, but I guess Bethesda really loves their "I win" function. I hope Obsidian nerfs it in NV.
 
Personally I just want Obsidian to ditch V.A.T.S. altogether and replace it with iron sights in New Vegas. At least give it good FPS mechanics and stop trying to make up for it not having Turn-Based. If not, I trust that Obsidian will balance it.

Or have they already confirmed it somewhere that the game will have V.A.T.S.?
 
As an FPS FO3 fails horribly. The number of times I yelled "FUCK YOU" at my screen when a PERFECTLY AIMED sniper rifle shot went THROUGH the target without hitting it has long since slipped my memory. The number of times a Raider has taken bullet after bullet from a .44 Magnum (ONE SQUARELY IN THE HEAD) and kept coming, the number of times an Enclave soldier's head has exploded like an overripe pomegranate with a SINGLE hunting rifle headshot... It tries to be an "FPS" and an "RPG" and fails miserably at both. Oblivion actually did a better job of forcing the two together (and that isn't saying very much.)
 
Jet1337 said:
Oblivion gave me sense of freedom whereas Fallout 3 gave me environments that didn't look like the same damn thing every time.

I like them both for what they are, but Fallout 3 more because the combat isn't a snore as it is in Oblivion.

Puh-lease! Oblivion got so f*ckin' boring for me after short time. The dungeons are always the same and you've pretty much seen everything there is to see after playing it for 5-6 hours maybe less.

Yeah, I think they should abandon VATS system in the next installment of the series and bring back good ol' targeted shots

I guess they should make a rule that every headshot targeted in unprotected head means instant death
 
sydney_roo said:
I guess they should make a rule that every headshot targeted in unprotected head means instant death

More like a successful headshot automatically has a greater critical threat range (16-20 instead of a normal 20) and a special critical roll is made to determine if the target is dazed, KOed or outright killed by the shot.

Did I mention that this is under the assumption that something miraculous and highly unlikely will occur and Obsidian will somehow take us back closer to the turn-based system we knew and loved? Honestly, I very seriously believe I would even rather see a NWN-style "RT+P" than the crap Bugthesda squeezed out for FO3.
 
TychoTheItinerant said:
Jet1337 said:
I like them both for what they are, but Fallout 3 more because the combat isn't a snore as it is in Oblivion.

*Spot enemy*
*Enter VATS*
*Use up AP*
*If target is not dead yet, kite it until your AP replenishes*
*Repeat as necessary*

Yeah. OK.

I believe Fallout 3 is better than Oblivion because of things like Random Encounters (which made wandering interesting and un-predictable), the more common hidden areas/easter eggs to be found in the Wastes, and the fact that almost every location was unique and had a backstory or theme to it such as a Raider Outpost or abandoned company building. In Oblivion each cave/fort/ruin was a copied and pasted hastily created bland enviroment which got repetitive very quickly. But there are many other reasons to like FO 3 more.

But apparently I'm one of the rare ones that both owns and enjoyed Fallout 1+2, 3, AND Oblivion. What I want to know is what would you guys have wanted Fallout 3 to be? You guys complain that all you have to do is run backwards in FO 3 while shooting until you kill the enemy, but the exact same thing can be done in Fallout 1 and 2, move back+shoot, repeat. Those of you who say the guns needed iron sights are totally wrong. The guns were designed to become more accurate with skill so iron sights wouldn't have worked. The bullets were never meant to take the same flight path because it's still an RPG, not a FPS. Others claim that you can shoot a enemy in the head and it won't die; exact same thing can happen in FO 1 and 2.

And as far as Fallout 3 being a JRPG: are you kidding man? The game has no trendy kids with spiky hair, the game is not LINEAR by any means AT ALL. If you think FO 3 is linear then I can only imagine what you think Fallout 1 and 2 were, where there was no Wasteland to openly roam; only travel across from city to city.

Fallout 1+2 had many flaws. I know I'm not the only one who noticed that your ability to survive in the beginning of the game was based purely on luck. You could either run into a molerat or 6 raiders with automatic weapons just traveling to your first town from the vault . Not cool, frustrating. Fallout 3 doesn't have that pacing issue. Fallout 3 was at least a completed game, Fallout 2 had to be completed by a fan who made a mod. Stop being so bitter guys Fallout 3 is a really good game, if you give it a chance with an open mind you'll find its an enjoyable experience with great graphics and many options for making a character however you want it to be. SORRY FOR THE LONG POST!
 
Back
Top