Impressions thread for positive impressions

[yester64]

Actually i found the review in Wired very helpful.
What Fallout 3 does very good is to show and give you the feel how a fallout feels like. And also, as was stated in the review, the serious presentation.
Its bleak, dark and very unfunny, but thats how it might look like after a fallout and i actually enjoyed it.
And yes, you can go which path you choose. You do not have to go in order to play the game.
As someone who never played Fallout before it was an amzing experience and i got hooked for hours to play the game.
From that view it was a highlight in gaming to me.

 

[nemetoad]

I think they pulled off the game well. Worse than what people expected, less than what was advertised, but more than what other games have promised in the previous history of Fallout Post-Fallout 2. I think they did decent detailing the world, gave lots of things to do, gave the ability to add more finally(Yay GECK editor), etc. I believe they did some bad decisions, but I don't think going first person and twitch-gameplay based as being bad ones. Those only effect combat afterall and really they make exploring more enjoyable to me. Work on story more, add more quests next time, and I believe they'll do a sequel justice.

 

[Tycn]

"It's not THAT kind of bar, stranger" - Megaton Settler

That was the closest thing to humour I encountered in my game.

I believe they'll do a sequel justice

I actually laughed. They never do a sequel justice. And they never will, since they always get away with it.

But on a positive note, I only discovered Fallout 1 and 2 because of immense hype for the third iteration. How ironic.

 

[BloodyPuppy]

"It's not THAT kind of bar, stranger" - Megaton Settler

That was the closest thing to humour I encountered in my game.

I believe they'll do a sequel justice

I actually laughed. They never do a sequel justice. And they never will, since they always get away with it.

But on a positive note, I only discovered Fallout 1 and 2 because of immense hype for the third iteration. How ironic.

Same happened with me. Heard about Fallout 1 and 2 as a result of three, love them, despise 3.

 

[Holocausto]

Work on story more, add more quests next time, and I believe they'll do a sequel justice.

Why would they work on the story more when most their audience is perfectly content with what they've been given? I don't hear too many 12 year olds complaining about the lack of depth or choice. Come on man you MUST be new to PC gaming (or gaming in general) to still have such a naive outlook toward big game cos.

 

[Ravager69]

I think they pulled off the game well. Worse than what people expected, less than what was advertised, but more than what other games have promised in the previous history of Fallout Post-Fallout 2. I think they did decent detailing the world, gave lots of things to do, gave the ability to add more finally(Yay GECK editor), etc. I believe they did some bad decisions, but I don't think going first person and twitch-gameplay based as being bad ones. Those only effect combat afterall and really they make exploring more enjoyable to me. Work on story more, add more quests next time, and I believe they'll do a sequel justice.

http://www.nma-fallout.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=48382&start=0

Read this and tell me that they did an honest job with creating the world. I ought to have a good laugh today.

Game mechanics are also a joke. Anyone who spent 100+ hours on this game are guilty of wasting their time.

 

[BloodyPuppy]

I think they pulled off the game well. Worse than what people expected, less than what was advertised, but more than what other games have promised in the previous history of Fallout Post-Fallout 2. I think they did decent detailing the world, gave lots of things to do, gave the ability to add more finally(Yay GECK editor), etc. I believe they did some bad decisions, but I don't think going first person and twitch-gameplay based as being bad ones. Those only effect combat afterall and really they make exploring more enjoyable to me. Work on story more, add more quests next time, and I believe they'll do a sequel justice.

http://www.nma-fallout.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=48382&start=0

Read this and tell me that they did an honest job with creating the world. I ought to have a good laugh today.

Game mechanics are also a joke. Anyone who spent 100+ hours on this game are guilty of wasting their time.

Well you could say the same thing for the originals (about wasting your time I mean) or any game.

 

[OldOpaque]

I liked fallout 1 and 2.

I liked fallout 3.

I sort-of think that the isometric view doesn't really show off the "pretty colors" "and cool looking environments," and thus would not be as appealing as other graphically intensive games that people tend to purchase.

So I sort-of understand why they made fallout 3 how they did.

Am I a bad person?

 

[Patton89]

No. Your not evil.
But i cant enjoy fallout 3 as a RPG. Or as a "sequel".
maybe as a spin-off.

 

[TheLastOutlaw]

No. Your not evil.
But i cant enjoy fallout 3 as a RPG. Or as a "sequel".
maybe as a spin-off.

I agree, "Fallout: Vault 101 adventures" would have been fine. It would sell just as much Fallout 3 because BethSoft has the mighty hype machine. The only difference being that fans of the original franchise wouldn't have expectations as high.

 

[Patton89]

yes, after FOOS it would have been great spin-off. And its not like the other people becides the fallout fans, would want a sequel. It wouldnt have hurt the sales. And it would have made the criticism smaller.

 

[Ovg]

I luv this game! Gives me so much immershun!

 

[Shattering Fast]

Work on story more, add more quests next time, and I believe they'll do a sequel justice.

Why would they work on the story more when most their audience is perfectly content with what they've been given? I don't hear too many 12 year olds complaining about the lack of depth or choice. Come on man you MUST be new to PC gaming (or gaming in general) to still have such a naive outlook toward big game cos.

Be realistic, now: if Bethsoft wanted to appeal to 12 year olds, they would not have revived a cult game from the 90's.

I, for one, found plenty of choices to be made in Fallout 3. In fact, there doesn't seem to be nary a single quest without some sort of moral choice put in the hands of the player.

 

[Nuchaleft]

Love the explosive cars, and VATS

 

[DexterMorgan]

Be realistic, now: if Bethsoft wanted to appeal to 12 year olds, they would not have revived a cult game from the 90's.

Since they're apparently starved for imagination, not to mention talent? YES.

 

[Ulysses]

Work on story more, add more quests next time, and I believe they'll do a sequel justice.

Why would they work on the story more when most their audience is perfectly content with what they've been given? I don't hear too many 12 year olds complaining about the lack of depth or choice. Come on man you MUST be new to PC gaming (or gaming in general) to still have such a naive outlook toward big game cos.

Be realistic, now: if Bethsoft wanted to appeal to 12 year olds, they would not have revived a cult game from the 90's.

I, for one, found plenty of choices to be made in Fallout 3. In fact, there doesn't seem to be nary a single quest without some sort of moral choice put in the hands of the player.

I wouldn't say they revived it, none of the new fans seem to even know about the earlier games. Everytime a fan breathes a word about Fallout 3 they mention Oblivion, not Fallout 1 or 2. Oh well, mass appeal has a price, heh.

Moira's quests don't put a moral choice in the player's hands, so there's one., but there are a lot that do - I'll give you that. It's just that at the end or even while playing, a lot of them didn't seem to have any consequences within the game world.

 

[Commiered]

Well they didn't REVIVE Fallout, they just wanted to paste a semi-well known brand name on a generic post-apocalyptic game.

They also used Fallout as the setting and lore, perks etc. were already readily made, so it was easier for them to get started.

If they called the game 'Apocalypto: battle for the wastes' I doubt whether it would have the same appeal.

 

[rcorporon]

Be realistic, now: if Bethsoft wanted to appeal to 12 year olds, they would not have revived a cult game from the 90's.

I, for one, found plenty of choices to be made in Fallout 3. In fact, there doesn't seem to be nary a single quest without some sort of moral choice put in the hands of the player.

They didn't "revive" a game from the 90s. They created a sequel to Oblivion, which would appeal to console gamers.

As for moral choices, there are quite a few, but they mean nothing.

Go blow up Megaton, and see how the rest of the game world reacts. Detonate the nuke, then go to Rivet City and see what people say about the atomic explosion they witnessed... oh ... wait... you can't because nobody reacts to it.

Moral choice my ass. It's not right or wrong if nobody gives a shit.

 

[Shattering Fast]

Work on story more, add more quests next time, and I believe they'll do a sequel justice.

Why would they work on the story more when most their audience is perfectly content with what they've been given? I don't hear too many 12 year olds complaining about the lack of depth or choice. Come on man you MUST be new to PC gaming (or gaming in general) to still have such a naive outlook toward big game cos.

Be realistic, now: if Bethsoft wanted to appeal to 12 year olds, they would not have revived a cult game from the 90's.

I, for one, found plenty of choices to be made in Fallout 3. In fact, there doesn't seem to be nary a single quest without some sort of moral choice put in the hands of the player.

I wouldn't say they revived it, none of the new fans seem to even know about the earlier games. Everytime a fan breathes a word about Fallout 3 they mention Oblivion, not Fallout 1 or 2. Oh well, mass appeal has a price, heh.

Moira's quests don't put a moral choice in the player's hands, so there's one., but there are a lot that do - I'll give you that. It's just that at the end or even while playing, a lot of them didn't seem to have any consequences within the game world.

Wrong on a few counts:

I was in introduced to the Fallout universe in the 3rd installment, but I also happen to enjoy the 1st and the 2nd (Tactics, too, but I'm an RTS nut).

Secondly, in Moira's quest you have the ability to discourage Moira from even finishing her book - netting you negative karma and a perk which dampens opponent's critical hits.

rcorporon: It's not right or wrong if no one gives a shit? That statement is wrong on so many levels - not even limited to the realm of gaming.

 

[rcorporon]

rcorporon: It's not right or wrong if no one gives a shit? That statement is wrong on so many levels - not even limited to the realm of gaming.

Really?

How about this. I steal something from a store. The rest of the world knows I did it, but it doesn't even register to them. There is no judgement of my actions whatsoever, at all.

Is what I did wrong? How can it be wrong if nobody even thinks about it. If my actions are not judged by anybody, ever, period, then yeah, I'd say that there is no "right" or "wrong."

Especially when you think of detonating a nuclear weapon inside a city, knowingly killing everybody there. Yet, nobody in the entire world even says a thing. Nobody acts as if you did anything wrong, or even mentions is.

Yeah, there are real tough "moral" decisions in this game.

At least in FO1 and 2, if you killed a child or children somewhere, you had a hell of a time doing any sort of interacting with any NPC's afterwards.