Impressions thread for positive impressions

Hi! I Agree! Fallout 3 is a great game!

I did not read the full 23 pages.


The thing is. I came back here thinking that the poor hardcore fallout fans, that had to see their favorite franchise go from poor to abysmal with tactics and BoS, would finally be pleased. Or at least beginning to see the light in the tunnel.

No dice!

I have seen so many ridiculous complaints and nitpicks its not even funny. The ones that actually got me to re-register an account and bother to post this was the ones about how lazy the developers had been, and the stunning lack of attention to detail. You're kidding right? And massive complaints about its graphics and animation? I think it looks amazing (with a good enough rig), but then again, you picked fallout's graphics over quake 2's graphics back then, why is it so important now?

Don't like magic hats that give you bonuses? Don't use them. Don't like insta-travel don't use it. It's as if everyone forgot that fallout 1&2 had a whole bunch of irritating features, exploits and less than stellar attention to detail.

All shotguns and rifles look the same and so on. Critical hit death animation disregards where you hit. (shoot the eyes, chest explodes.)

Slavers with knives come running full speed when you're in powerarmour wielding a gaussrifle.

The turnbased combat is in my opinion pretty dull when you compare it to other TB-combat games of the time. Notably x-com and Jagged alliance 2.

Sneak kill someone with superstimpacks.

New reno boxing and martialarts fight bugged like crazy.

You can probably think of a few things yourself. And i hope you see where I'm going with it. We still loved it because it had story and flavor that no other game had.

Until now. Fallout 3 is the best game i've played in a long time, and anyone that's still crying over losing van buren is missing out big time. Yes, yes, main story not so good and a few other things annoy me (weightless bullets anyone?) but the sum of its parts, crushes anything that stood before.

Ok, a little pointless sales pitching at the end there but i have to end this.. now.
 
It's one of the best, if not _THE_ best, game I have ever played. It fixes many of the flaws with Oblivion and fits into the Fallout universe almost perfectly.

The only things I could ask for are more factions, seamless environments, a better stealth system (it seems worse than in Oblivion, what gives?), more NPC's, larger cities, slower combat out of VATS, better accuracy in VATS, less levelling of creatures. But these are minor flaws really (that will hopefully be fixed in Fallout 4 please) and really Fallout 3 is a grand masterpiece.
 
I don't agree with you that the game is "mainly crap" in any way, shape, or form or that its "not Fallout." I think the dialogue isn't always great but they certainly didn't fail at all, imo there's plenty of good dialogue and I never particularly noticed it as being "miserably" bad.

How did the enclave or the father behave illogically? Just because they don't show farms it doesn't mean there are none.. one of the major things in all the Fallout games is the size and well-developed nature of the setting.. in ALL Fallout games there have been important elements which were implied or bleedingly obvious without having to specifically show them.. personally it surprises me that you would even give a fuck about something so incredibly tiny like a few farms here and there, especially when its obviously implied.. why do you care about something like that?

The game world looks just fine to me, especially given there were undetonated nukes in the DC area, so logically it wouldn't be taking as much damage as some of the other places.
 
And massive complaints about its graphics and animation? I think it looks amazing (with a good enough rig).
Click to expand...
Fallout 3 IMO looks far worse than most current titles. Crysis comes to mind.

but then again, you picked fallout's graphics over quake 2's graphics back then, why is it so important now?
Click to expand...
Fallout 3's developers made graphics one of the major selling points. The original Fallouts were not about graphics, but now Fallout 3 is about graphics and it's simply subpar.

Don't like magic hats that give you bonuses? Don't use them. Don't like insta-travel don't use it. It's as if everyone forgot that fallout 1&2 had a whole bunch of irritating features, exploits and less than stellar attention to detail.
Click to expand...
Just because Fallout had issues does not excuse Fallout 3's issues.

All shotguns and rifles look the same and so on. Critical hit death animation disregards where you hit. (shoot the eyes, chest explodes.)

Slavers with knives come running full speed when you're in powerarmour wielding a gaussrifle.


Sneak kill someone with superstimpacks.

New reno boxing and martialarts fight bugged like crazy.
Click to expand...
Most of these things were issues with limited time. Fallout 2 had to be released so Interplay would not go down under IIRC. Many of these things are technological limitations also, I think. With 10 years worth of new advances in AI, I am sure we would have slavers running like crazy away from a powered armor figure.

Just because they don't show farms it doesn't mean there are none.. one of the major things in all the Fallout games is the size and well-developed nature of the setting.. in ALL Fallout games there have been important elements which were implied or bleedingly obvious without having to specifically show them.. personally it surprises me that you would even give a fuck about something so incredibly tiny like a few farms here and there, especially when its obviously implied.. why do you care about something like that?
Click to expand...
In Fallout, all of the cities in towns were simply abstractions, and your character was really only going to the most important parts of the city when he/she went to the green exit grid. In all of the towns, a means of survival was evident, and the world seemed believable (with a few notable exceptions). Arroyo, Klamath, Modoc, Shady Sands, etc. had farms and Brahmin herds. Modoc had a slaughterhouse. While there weren't acres and acres of farmland, it was implied from one patch of farmland that the city had more. In Fallout 3, there are basically only two towns. I haven't been to Rivet City, but Megaton has one (1) brahmin and no farms at all. This does not lead to a believable land because it does not satisfy the question WHAT DO PEOPLE EAT? Do they simply eat old (200 years old!) packaged food? Do they take turns milking their one brahmin? This is one of the limitations of 3d (who woulda thunk it?), you cannot make 100% believable lands, because 3d does not create an abstraction of a world as believably as 2d. How can it be implied that there are farms everywhere when there is only one that I know of in the game (Arefu). That's like saying that it is implied that there are alien blasters all over the wastes.

Also, in Fallout (2 more so than 1), the cities really affected each other. Smiley the bartender in the Golden Gecko in Klamath gets his goods from the Den, so he can give you a better price. The Jet industry in New Reno affects the town of Redding very much. Look at the relationship between Gecko and Vault City, Modoc and the Ghost Farm. Is there anything similar in Fallout 3?
 
I hate to say it... Crysis isn't an RPG in the slightest. Get a hybrid title... get hybrid quality. The whole 'let's go crazy over Crysis and Farcry 2' Fallout 3 hater idea casts them as a different type of game than they are.
 
TheRatKing said:
And massive complaints about its graphics and animation? I think it looks amazing (with a good enough rig).
Click to expand...
Fallout 3 IMO looks far worse than most current titles. Crysis comes to mind.

but then again, you picked fallout's graphics over quake 2's graphics back then, why is it so important now?
Click to expand...
Fallout 3's developers made graphics one of the major selling points. The original Fallouts were not about graphics, but now Fallout 3 is about graphics and it's simply subpar.
Click to expand...

Fallout 3 has great graphics and they work great in game. Who cares if it has 500 less polygons per frame than Crysis or w/e. It's how the game feels that matters.

It seems all this forum is is people complaining.
 
Why can't hybrids have the same graphics as first person shooters, especially if the game practically is a FPS? Oblivion looked good for it's time IMO, but Fallout 3 does not. But seriously, the devs really were going all out about the graphics, and how they were going to be great. They were the ones who made graphics the issue. While I admit it's better than most, it was much too over-hyped, and it isn't that good.

Edit:
Shut up.

Fallout 3 has great graphics and they work great in game. Who cares if it has 500 less polygons per frame than Crysis or w/e. It's how the game feels that matters.

It seems all this forum is is people complaining.
Click to expand...
And what you are doing isn't complaining?

The graphics issue really isn't a big deal, and I don't really care about stunning graphics, it's just that the devs focused a lot of time and marketing telling people how great it would be, and in my opinion, it was over-hyped.
 
TheRatKing said:
Why can't hybrids have the same graphics as first person shooters, especially if the game practically is a FPS? Oblivion looked good for it's time IMO, but Fallout 3 does not. But seriously, the devs really were going all out about the graphics, and how they were going to be great. They were the ones who made graphics the issue. While I admit it's better than most, it was much too over-hyped, and it isn't that good.[/i]
Click to expand...

Because Fallout 3 has all the deep AI running, bigger environments, more NPC's, friendlies and hostiles, etc.

Who cares about graphics that much anyway - as long as they are good enough to show clearly what is happening. I don't see how more HDR or bloom would help fallout 3.
 
Read my edit that responded to you. If it's okay with you, I would rather not have an argument about graphics, as I too don't really care that much about it. If you want to respond to my argument about the believable world, feel free,
 
I'll admit. I wasn't too satisfied with the PS3 console graphics. Running it on the computer I haven't had nearly the the same reaction though. I'm satisfied.
 
TheRatKing said:
Read my edit that responded to you. If it's okay with you, I would rather not have an argument about graphics, as I too don't really care that much about it. If you want to respond to my argument about the believable world, feel free,
Click to expand...

Yeah, some parts of the game (like the end of the main quest) feel rushed but most of what people are complaining about is just nitpickery. It's still a great game overall and I think the world is believable enough as it is.
 
Fallout graphics are okay. Not good, but also not bad.
Textures however are far below standard. Guess thats because of the consoles.
Animations are shitty as hell. Anybody can play in third person? I can't, the running animation is just awful.

Oh and for the record: Rivet City is not an idea, but a copy of Fallout 2s tanker. Sorry to disappoint you, but it has been done before.
 
Yeah I remember entering Rivet City and thinking that it's a ripoff of the San Fran tanker.

Playing Gothic 2 now, and despite the archaic graphics, I think they do a lot better job of conveying the world than the segmented animations of Fallout 3.

Third person in all Beth games is unnatural looking and awkward. It's like as if your character is floating above the ground treading water.
 
I hear you.
To be honest, i think the oldstyle rpg's are dying. At least i don't see any really. Everything goes 3D and more action oriented.
Fallout 3 reminds me a little off Resident Evil. Going through building etc, fighting mutants, discover evil plans and the goal is known.
Still it has his highs, but yeah not much roleplaying really.

Crni Vuk said:
yester64 said:
But even with this game, since you can not choose any classes, you still give your point towards base stats. Also you do improve your skills (although at some i did not even notice an improvement) and get the added perks.
To me its not a real rpg, but it is still a action oriented rpg (or elements if that suits better).
Overall not bad at all.
Click to expand...

Sad is only that I did not wanted a action oriented RPG with Fallout 3 ... I wanted a game that has the same quality as RPG like the past Fallout 1/2 :cry:
Click to expand...
 
Ravager69 said:
I both agree and disagree.

Also, their world is very inconsistent and many things don't make sense. There are no farms, the world looks like the war was yesterday, not 200 years ago, illogical behaviour of the NPCs (look Enclave or your Dad for example) etc.
Click to expand...

Funny thing you know. After playing for (how do i know how many hours i spend?) and robbing through the whole map across i have to say that
a) there are not many animals. i have seen about 9 in total which includes mainly ants, flies, scorpions, cows, dogs etc...
b) true for 200 years there is not much happening at all.
c) after playing about 50% of the game you got a lot of quests, if you come closer to the end, quest are very very limited. i completed the game and reloaded an earlier save but could not find a real quest anymore. i got the quantum nuka cola quest (wow).
d) death by pixel. it happen a couple of time if you wander of rocks, that you get stuck and can not get out anymore
e) there are indeed not many farms at all and for some reason you still find prewar food everywhere. after 200 years?
 
Third person in all Beth games is unnatural looking and awkward. It's like as if your character is floating above the ground treading water.
Click to expand...
Third person in all Beth games is only there for the PR people to say it's there, and the reviewers will so it's there, and spike up the score. No one actually plays in 3rd person, because it is so incredibly horrible. Most reviewers, because they don't even test it for long, simply state it as a viable option, and obviously haven't even tried to find flaws.

Oh also yerster 64 don't double post, use the edit button instead.
 
jamesmcm said:
Yeah, some parts of the game (like the end of the main quest) feel rushed but most of what people are complaining about is just nitpickery. It's still a great game overall and I think the world is believable enough as it is.
Click to expand...

Just nitpickery ? I wouldn't consider poor dialogue, badly written NPCs, awful main story and ending( where are my 500 endings) , easy, non-tactical combat , butchered skills, perks, no traits and badly implemented SPECIAL , poor AI, bugs and glitches, lack of choices and consequences and downright stupid faction usage "just nitpickery" Pretty valid reasons not to like the game.

World wasn't that believable, mainly because:
1:No real interaction between settlements. They are just there
2:Food production is non existant, as farms are not present. Its 3D game that tries to immerse,using the graphics, it should be there if it exists. Several other issues of same type, like working unmaintained generators.
3:Players actions have little to no effect on game world, you can actually complete quests when you have nuked megaton. No real difference.
4: people are friendly, and this is supposed to be post apocalyptic wasteland ?

Now some of these are just my opinions, but they are based on facts . Some of them are just facts, like the glitches and poor dialogue, FOR A RPG.
 
TheRatKing said:
Third person in all Beth games is unnatural looking and awkward. It's like as if your character is floating above the ground treading water.
Click to expand...
Third person in all Beth games is only there for the PR people to say it's there, and the reviewers will so it's there, and spike up the score. No one actually plays in 3rd person, because it is so incredibly horrible. Most reviewers, because they don't even test it for long, simply state it as a viable option, and obviously haven't even tried to find flaws.

Oh also yerster 64 don't double post, use the edit button instead.
Click to expand...

I'd say I play in 3rd person about 80% of the time, actually. I like showing off my well-made characters.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top