New Fallout 3 Screenshots
- Thread starter 13pm
- Start date
I have a few problems with the "market sameness" argument.
First off, I realize development costs are higher, I realize that there is a need to appeal to the console fan base, and I realize that this is the way some companies operate.
But it raises a few questions from me. First off, I would question the notion that in order to sell, games must behave like shooters. I don't believe that to be true. Market saturation is not a good thing, and I am very much in favor of new ideas.
Next. If these are the realities of the market, and games must be made this way. Why do it with Fallout? Fallout wasn't like these games...so why take Fallout and make it into what it never was in the first place? And, if you are doing this, why insist on calling it a sequel, rather than the more logical "spin off" category? Doesn't seem right to me.
And of course, I have qualms with the entire notion of paying for someone else's idea.
Then there is the "This is the way Fallout 3 is, DEAL WITH IT" which is of course silly. I mean, that is what everyone is doing. They are dealing with it. Talking about doesn't exactly equal some kind of call to action of any kind of movement. I don't see the harm of voicing displeasure on an internet forum.
First off, I realize development costs are higher, I realize that there is a need to appeal to the console fan base, and I realize that this is the way some companies operate.
But it raises a few questions from me. First off, I would question the notion that in order to sell, games must behave like shooters. I don't believe that to be true. Market saturation is not a good thing, and I am very much in favor of new ideas.
Next. If these are the realities of the market, and games must be made this way. Why do it with Fallout? Fallout wasn't like these games...so why take Fallout and make it into what it never was in the first place? And, if you are doing this, why insist on calling it a sequel, rather than the more logical "spin off" category? Doesn't seem right to me.
And of course, I have qualms with the entire notion of paying for someone else's idea.
Then there is the "This is the way Fallout 3 is, DEAL WITH IT" which is of course silly. I mean, that is what everyone is doing. They are dealing with it. Talking about doesn't exactly equal some kind of call to action of any kind of movement. I don't see the harm of voicing displeasure on an internet forum.
Sometimes in life you are given options, say which basket of eggs to buy. Is it always preferable, to buy the most expensive basket of eggs?
Sebastian of the Wastes
It Wandered In From the Wastes
Brother None said:
You're right, I missed your point
Thanks for clarifyingSo how do you reconcile thier (Bethesda's) belief that they are being true to that legacy? Now we're back talking about opinions, instead of objectivity.
They think they have it right ... they think what their doing is expanding on the legecy that Fallout has brought to us. We say they're wrong ... okay, now what?
I never said any of us had to accept it .. I'm just saying that until you have a game in your hands to play how can you just dismiss it so handily. I go into it knowing it's not an isometric turn-based RPG like the other games that I enjoy. But I'm still going to at least try it and see for myself and let my own hands on opinion determine how much I like it.
But feel free to hate on FO3 all you like.
Sebastian of the Wastes said:
I don't say they're wrong at all. I know they're wrong. They've removed the core mechanics that can both be identified in the game and have been stated by the original designers as the core mechanics. That means their game is by definition not a sequel. There really is no argument or subjectivity about it, the game is what it is, and they changed it. Why they changed it is irrelevant to the argument.
Sebastian of the Wastes said:
Thank you we will. And if an NMA review pops up praising the game to high heavens, do you think no one here will be convinced to try it? What is the practical difference between your attitude and ours? Nothing, is what...
Except that you're going to buy this game just because it's called Fallout.
Doesn't sound very rational to me.
shihonage
Made in USSR
Tycell said:
Bzzt. C&C Renegade was a spinoff. It was never advertised as a real C&C sequel.
Doesn't it? Well, haven't you heard of a thing called sentiment? Everyone knows it will PROBABLY (a good word to use in this case) suck, but still....it is Fallout in some way....and for that reason only, I'm ready to give it a try. Choices you make aren't or shouldn't always be rational. Anyway, this discussion is getting way off topic and things said here has already been said before at least couple of times.
They're wrong if they really think that.
Well. I have this weird thing, where I don't like to waste $60. I trust my judgment, and to me, Fallout 3 doesn't look like a game I'd enjoy. So my $60 is worth more to me, than taking a chance on a game that looks crappy.
I guess I just like my $60 more than you do....
Nobody needs permission to voice their opinion.
It seems to me that development costs are higher because of the need to appeal to a mainstream base. You need pretty graphics, full voice-acting, realistic physics and other assorted shit that doesn't necessarily improve the actual gameplay. An important distinction in my opinion.gc051360 said:
Don't you know teh internet is serious business?gc051360 said:
***F.E.A.R.***MaNiaC
First time out of the vault
Sebastian of the Wastes said:
Theres a difference between believing and saying something.
Beth SAID many times they'll stay true.
Beth SAID they are Fallout fans.
Since you aren't able to look into their minds, you can't just assume because they SAY SO, that its true, dont you?
You're not that stupid, are you?
So, we know what they say... and if we want to know if thats true, then lets look at what they do.
And they are not doing what people would do that love fallout and want to stay true. They dont even defend themselfs saying they BELIEVE this is the true way. They dodge every concerning question. They don't talk to the fans (not about fallout, but about cookies... errr... yeah).
So... do you REALLY think, they BELIEVE that they are doing anything true to fallout?
Gnidrologist
Wasted
I like how these kind of discussions always end up with something like ''hey, that's my opinion and i'm entitled to keep it and yo may have your own blah blah yada yada useless crap''.
Well yeah, you're damn righ and this is how internet discussion boards basicly work. That's how discussion at large meant to look like. NMA is no different, despite of what some ignorant tards may say on teh other internets.
Yet there are always some newbies, that come to NMA mostly hoping to get flamed with baseless, imature couterarguments, so that they could easely take them apart, look cool and then proceed to look down on ''rabid fans'' from their high plane of rational opinion, but end up failing to stirr even a mini-shitstorm.
Well yeah, you're damn righ and this is how internet discussion boards basicly work. That's how discussion at large meant to look like. NMA is no different, despite of what some ignorant tards may say on teh other internets.
Yet there are always some newbies, that come to NMA mostly hoping to get flamed with baseless, imature couterarguments, so that they could easely take them apart, look cool and then proceed to look down on ''rabid fans'' from their high plane of rational opinion, but end up failing to stirr even a mini-shitstorm.
I still don't understand how people can still fucking like Oblivion, it's the worst RPG ever (okay the worst 'new' RPG)
I'm currently enjoying The Witcher, haha!
Sure the game has it's flaws but I like it so much because the people who made it grew up with and loved fallout
I'm currently enjoying The Witcher, haha!
Sure the game has it's flaws but I like it so much because the people who made it grew up with and loved fallout
shihonage said:
lol, i'd like to take this moment to also point out that c&c:r was an awful game. it was buggy, no recoil, not well thought out, and even with 10 players, it got boring after a few minutes unless your int was like <2. horrible game, not like the originals, not a sequel and anyone who likes c&c has probably done all they can to forget this one.
junkevil said:
That must be why EA is making Tiberium...
Another FPS set in the C&C universe, because the fans must really want it.
More halo crap for the console 'tards!
whirlingdervish
Brahmin Cavalry Commander
It's not that "the fans" want it..
They're making another shitty spinoff because EA wants more money, and they have a shiny IP that they bought to squeeze until it produces some sort of coin.
Same shit different IP.
They're making another shitty spinoff because EA wants more money, and they have a shiny IP that they bought to squeeze until it produces some sort of coin.
Same shit different IP.