More from CanardPC

Brother None

This ghoul has seen it all
Orderite
CanardPC's write-up on Fallout 3 is pretty good, so I figured why not provide some translated quotes from the article, thanks to Seboss on the Codex:<blockquote>Fade to black and you're now at your tenth birthday, ready to get your Pipboy3000, "the indispensable companion of the modern man". This scene introduces your first social interactions.
You'll go then from a little flirt with a girl your age through the confrontation with a little bully desiring to strip you from your birthday cake, to a surrealist discussion with a schizophrenic Mr Handy.
And there, I feel reassured. The dialogs and the argument with the dumbfuck in the making come right into the series spirit. During your conversation with the little scum, the game offers you ten different dialog options: immediate cowardly capitulation, insult leading to a brawl, lies, [...] spitting on the cake before offering it to him. The list is more than satisfying.
(...)
While I was expecting an outright treason of the Fallout setting, more because of ineptitude than vice, I have the feeling the game is spot on. The ambiance, scenery and lighting of the Vault seem perfectly faithful to the series, with just the right dose of rust to enhance claustrophobia.
(...)
Now here's the point where things get messy. We're going to get onto the thorny problem of the combat. [...] We'll note that the developers repeated ad nauseam that the efficiency of your shots depend on your statistics and that the FPS skills of the player don't have any importance, and that all shots fired in real-time mode will be automatically aimed to the torso. [Here goes a lengthy description of the VATS system]
The idea seems to stand theoretically, but in facts I'm far from convinced. Firstly, during the presentation, either he was wearing a Power Armor and holding a Gatling gun and fighting hordes of super mutants armed with heavy machine guns, bakookas and supersledges or fighting ghouls with a 9mm and wearing just a leather armor, the demonstrator was just standing there, shooting long bursts without using any kind of tactics.
Besides, aimed shots, possible even with a minigun, looked far less effective to me than just "run right next to the baddy and empty my magazine in one burst".
(...)
Regarding monster design, I'm afraid they are completely off the mark. Forget about quirky, clumsy supermutants or weird ghouls with tree branches sticking out their skulls. All you'll get is overmuscular, overarmed orcs and undeads Oblivion style. But that was expected.</blockquote>
 
CanardPC said:
While I was expecting an outright treason of the Fallout setting, more because of ineptitude than vice, I have the feeling the game is spot on. The ambiance, scenery and lighting of the Vault seem perfectly faithful to the series, with just the right dose of rust to enhance claustrophobia.

Remember that the NMA preview agrees with this bit; the Vault is spot no. Though SuA thought it a bit too dark/steampunky, I thought it was as accurate as you could rebuild a Vault in 3D. Just point-for-point copying, great stuff.

It's outside of the vault where I felt it was more up-and-down.
 
I don't know if somebody has asked this yet, but how's the music? Does it deliver as well as the other characteristics to the "ambiance"?
 
Hopefully their impressions on combat were just influenced by the way Bethesda set up the preview and not on how the final product will operate.
 
This is a good and honest preview. It gives me a tiny bit of hope regarding the depth of the non-combat game. Also I think that if the combat is truly bad and the enemies are truly generic, maybe the overall gaming community will give it mediocre reviews and maybe Fallout 4 will improve upon the criticism.

It wouldn't be the first time that an attempt to cross-breed combat engines was a flop.
 
I love the fact that this preview, which actually mentions Fallout 3's blatant flaws, make me a thousand times more hopeful for this game than the legions of previews with lines like "Bethesda Softworks, a glorious pantheon of gaming gods, will be bringing us the only game anyone will ever play ever again!"
 
CanardPC said:
And there, I feel reassured. The dialogs and the argument with the dumbfuck in the making come right into the series spirit. During your conversation with the little scum, the game offers you ten different dialog options: immediate cowardly capitulation, insult leading to a brawl, lies, [...] spitting on the cake before offering it to him. The list is more than satisfying.

This is positive. It's the first comment I have seen that talks about conversation in any detail.
 
The monster design is pretty sad. Not much creativity - but there is a lot of time to fix it.

Combat. Turned based is what should be here. In lieu of that, honestly I would prefer an insanely hard version of Gear of War where you have to be good and really well armed to solve problems with guns. This would force people into smarter problem solving rather than brute force.


Killing a super mutant with a pistol should be impossible.
 
bazola said:
This is a good and honest preview. It gives me a tiny bit of hope regarding the depth of the non-combat game. Also I think that if the combat is truly bad and the enemies are truly generic, maybe the overall gaming community will give it mediocre reviews and maybe Fallout 4 will improve upon the criticism.

It wouldn't be the first time that an attempt to cross-breed combat engines was a flop.

Beth is like R*. Anything they do will get 9 or 10/10 scores. Pete doing the rounds insures it. A poor score will cut a site off forever.

If we can mod it, I don't care what they do. Assets can be changed. And VATS can be modified to turn based.

Even camera can be changed.
 
One thing you can bet on is that F3 will sell well - even to fans - because of the modding community - look at all the stuff that was put into Morrowind, much less Oblivion.

I'll buy F3 simply to dl the mods.
 
lewdvig said:
bazola said:
This is a good and honest preview. It gives me a tiny bit of hope regarding the depth of the non-combat game. Also I think that if the combat is truly bad and the enemies are truly generic, maybe the overall gaming community will give it mediocre reviews and maybe Fallout 4 will improve upon the criticism.

It wouldn't be the first time that an attempt to cross-breed combat engines was a flop.

Beth is like R*. Anything they do will get 9 or 10/10 scores. Pete doing the rounds insures it. A poor score will cut a site off forever.

If we can mod it, I don't care what they do. Assets can be changed. And VATS can be modified to turn based.

Even camera can be changed.


Speaking of Rockstar. At least GTA 4 stays true to the series. I don't think it deserves a 10 though and that doesn't say much for gaming journalism. However if F3 gets an 8.5 I would consider that mediocre, and if the real time combat isn't fun I don't think even IGN will give it 9.
 
lewdvig said:
Beth is like R*. Anything they do will get 9 or 10/10 scores.

I don't mean to undermine your comparison or anything, but the reason GTA games score so high is because they're actually good.

Does any game deserve a 10/10? Now that's a different argument, and before it even gets off the ground, I'll premptively spoil it for you: the majority position will be "probably not."
 
Bodybag said:
I don't mean to undermine your comparison or anything, but the reason GTA games score so high is because they're actually good.

I agree. Wether you like GTA games or not, they are undoubdtedly the best in what they do - hence the "GTA clone" moniker that gets thrown around a lot these days. The only good sandbox gangster flick to come out of anywhere but Rockstar was Saints Row, which also earned good reviews, by the way.

That's not saying it deserves all the hype it gets (wouldn't know about IV, didn't get it yet), or even perfect scores all around, but I do give Rockstar more credit than Bethesda.
 
For Fallout 3, I predict a score in the mid-high 8's. That'll be the the kind of scores the original games got, but I suppose they would be for a different reason.
 
lewdvig said:
And VATS can be modified to turn based.
That'd be kinda neat, but I'm not sure they'd have it moddable enough to let you. You need something along the lines of moving 5 game-feet = 1 AP, which I doubt it'd be open enough to let you. Not to mention I was under the impression that when you were in VATS, nobody else was doing anything, and it was just for fancy aimed shots. An all-VATS would probably freak the AI out.

All the same, it'd be neat.
 
What is notable for me is the fact that a preview which tries to be somewhat objective and critical (and even the most perfectest game should be subject to critical analysis from a journalist) stands out a mile. i.e. it really, really shows up the rest of gaming journalism.
 
Back
Top