DoktorVivi
First time out of the vault
Asking other people if you should buy a game will get you nowhere. You'll get a hundred different opinions and none of them are yours.
Rent it.
Rent it.
Should i buy fallout 3?
- Thread starter jupiter2
- Start date
First time out of the vault
I'm sure not all of the reviews were bought out, but I can't believe that someone would give Fallout 3 a perfect score if they a) weren't paid to do it, b) actually played the game, or c) weren't entirely ignorant. Fallout 3 is a decent game, but it's far from perfect. There're bugs all over the place, the writing is terrible, and the storyline barely holds together. Not to mention the fact that the level cap severely limits the game's enjoyability, because once you've hit the level cap, what else is there to do? Then there's the horrible merging of FPS and RPG elements. The FPS mechanics are far from good and the RPG elements are barely used.makemeasammich said:
Basically, Fallout 3 deserves a score around a 6. When I first played it, I would have said closer to an 8, but that was before I actually started following the storyline, and could ignore the bad dialogue no longer.
As a side note, when looking at a site like metacritic, it's much better to look at the user reviews. In general, assuming that not all of them are just trolls, they'll give a more unbiased look at the product. Don't ignore the critics' reviews entirely, but certainly don't place too much emphasis on what they say.
UncannyGarlic
Sonny, I Watched the Vault Bein' Built!
I'd suggest doing some research on game journalism, it's a truly a cesspit (politics, money [rely on publishers to stay afloat basically], legal bribery, no standards, little training [a journalism, english, or game design degree is the rarity rather than the norm], rushed deadlines [results in most games not being played to completion],etc.). Now I'm not saying that there aren't some good journalists out there, simply that most are not and their numerical scores are all but worthless, especially for AAA games with well managed PR. If you have such a game then you've seriously fucked up if you get less than an 80 on Metacritic, it really is quite bad. If you want an idea of how bad game ratings are then just take a look at how Metacritic has to adjust their scale to sort of fit game reviews, scores are ridiculously inflated.makemeasammich said:
Again, the game is somewhere in the 5-7 range and I'm being generous. The game is, at best, an above average product.
makemeasammich said:
I have to point out that each and every one of those 84 reviews has been posted in the newsforum by Per, and commented on in hilarious levels of detail by various users of the forum, who have pointed out where these reviews were accurate, inaccurate, educated, misinformed, or blatantly lying.
so no, i don't think you're going to get an overall answer on all of them, but if you're interested what is said here about the reviews you may as well start reading the threads. good luck on that.
and OP:
rent it.
I'm happy i did.
Stats and tagged skills matter so little that every character is practically the same, so there's zero replay value. If i had bought it i would have wasted the extra 30 euro, as i stopped playing after 2 weeks.
makemeasammich
First time out of the vault
zag said:
A game that has zero replay value would be the new Wallace and Gromitt title that was just released. Fallout 3 will provide you with upwards of 100 hours of gameplay for one character, and if you take advantage of the karma system, you'll be able to get a fairly fresh experience each time you start a new game. Call Fallout 3 what you will, but it is an indisputable fact that it gives you your money's worth.
UnidentifiedFlyingTard
Vault Fossil
yeah I kinda have to agree, not a huge fan of the game but that doesn't mean its not a fun game to play every now and then.
radioactive_penguin
First time out of the vault
let me put it simply if you liked S.T.A.L.K.E.R. and thought "wow, now if only somebody would add bullet time and better graphics" then fallout 3 is the game for you. If you are a fan of fallout 1 & 2 and loved the in depth story telling and multiple solutions to every quest and quality writing then you will be disappointed. fallout three fails as a successor to fallout 1 and 2 but it is a fairly decent game in its own right. At any rate I enjoyed it and you might too.
UnidentifiedFlyingTard
Vault Fossil
I know people who really like Fallout 1 and 2 and still think Fallout 3 is a great thing.
Humans are a funny critter.
Humans are a funny critter.
makemeasammich said:
Oh yes the karma system, forgot to mention that one. Steal Y pieces of junk and you're on the Dark Side. Give X times water to the town beggar and you're a Knight in Shiny Armor again.
Too bad the available quests and their resolutions are practically the same, and the dialog doesn't change much either.
I love how denying other peoples' experiences is an indisputable fact. If i had bought Fallout 3 instead of renting i would have paid 40 euro for 2 weeks of casual playing ~2 hours/day.
My advice is get it for the mods, it is the easiest to customize post apocalypse experience you can get, and a really good game in my opinion.
But yeah, one mod will turn it into a scavenger hunt for survival, your character constantly hungry, tired and low on ammo.
Another mod will have you blasting twin laser chainguns riding on a nuclear motorcycle, all this in bullet time.
(if I was not at work I would post links to these mods, the youtube videos for the second are pretty cool)
You can make the wasteland green and gorgeous or even more desertlike. You can add 1 weapon or 100+. You can make it more like oldschool fallout (level progression, weapons, creatures) or help with a total conversion (WH 40K, Walking Dead) that actually might get finished.
And yeah, for the most part the game is not as good as the most enthusiastic people say (they just havent played a good rpg in a while) and not nearly as bad as many of its detractors state (but they are open about their bias). But the mods make it your game.
But yeah, one mod will turn it into a scavenger hunt for survival, your character constantly hungry, tired and low on ammo.
Another mod will have you blasting twin laser chainguns riding on a nuclear motorcycle, all this in bullet time.
(if I was not at work I would post links to these mods, the youtube videos for the second are pretty cool)
You can make the wasteland green and gorgeous or even more desertlike. You can add 1 weapon or 100+. You can make it more like oldschool fallout (level progression, weapons, creatures) or help with a total conversion (WH 40K, Walking Dead) that actually might get finished.
And yeah, for the most part the game is not as good as the most enthusiastic people say (they just havent played a good rpg in a while) and not nearly as bad as many of its detractors state (but they are open about their bias). But the mods make it your game.
DexterMorgan
A Smooth-Skin
radioactive_penguin said:
Thanks to the amazingly atmospheric lightening system, S.T.A.L.K.E.R. looked a zillion times better to me.
Falllout 3 is at most, 70/100= okay game.
I would give it 65-66/100 =somewhat mediocre.
Cons:
-Combat is unbalanced to your favour, as AI is bad, and VATS is overpoweringly strong mechanic. -Poorly executed RPG elements, such as stats not effecting gameplay properly, unbalanced skill point gaining making specialization almost impossible as you can EASILY max your skills and now even stats (with broken steel ).
-Some of the writing and dialogue is outright atrocious
-Superficial choices
-Broken Karma system
-Animations
Inbetweens
*Some of the quests are intresting, others are just blatant dungeon crawling.
*It is coded and it mostly ? works
*Combat isnt horrible, but it is just mediocre
*The radio host
*replayability is highly questionable if you dont like repetition
Pros
+The exploring is best part of the game.
+Landscape
+some of the visuals
+radio
Fallout 3 is mediocre, just mediocre. Not awful game, not horrible game. It isnt however a good "sequel" to Fallout, nor is it a excellent classic or somehow amazing RPG. The cons clearly outweight the pros, and i can easily name a better game of the FPS-RPG hybrid type.
Deus Ex. If you want a better openworld game, go for Morrowind + The expansions and mods. You should play those instead.
You could rent it however, just to test it.
I would give it 65-66/100 =somewhat mediocre.
Cons:
-Combat is unbalanced to your favour, as AI is bad, and VATS is overpoweringly strong mechanic. -Poorly executed RPG elements, such as stats not effecting gameplay properly, unbalanced skill point gaining making specialization almost impossible as you can EASILY max your skills and now even stats (with broken steel ).
-Some of the writing and dialogue is outright atrocious
-Superficial choices
-Broken Karma system
-Animations
Inbetweens
*Some of the quests are intresting, others are just blatant dungeon crawling.
*It is coded and it mostly ? works
*Combat isnt horrible, but it is just mediocre
*The radio host
*replayability is highly questionable if you dont like repetition
Pros
+The exploring is best part of the game.
+Landscape
+some of the visuals
+radio
Fallout 3 is mediocre, just mediocre. Not awful game, not horrible game. It isnt however a good "sequel" to Fallout, nor is it a excellent classic or somehow amazing RPG. The cons clearly outweight the pros, and i can easily name a better game of the FPS-RPG hybrid type.
Deus Ex. If you want a better openworld game, go for Morrowind + The expansions and mods. You should play those instead.
You could rent it however, just to test it.
Andy-Spacetrain
First time out of the vault
So much hatred over a game...
The game is good, people on here will tell it is god awful because it isn't the way they wanted it, and that you are stupid / braindead unless you agree with them, and then have the audacity to call you ignorant without realising the hypocrisy. The general opinion on NMA is so badly skewed towards a horrible distaste of change. If you want a good immersive RPG, get it. If you want a book, buy a book.
The game is good, people on here will tell it is god awful because it isn't the way they wanted it, and that you are stupid / braindead unless you agree with them, and then have the audacity to call you ignorant without realising the hypocrisy. The general opinion on NMA is so badly skewed towards a horrible distaste of change. If you want a good immersive RPG, get it. If you want a book, buy a book.
Do you think i dislike fallout 3 for the sake of disliking ?
Why did i like Morrowind ? Perhaps because i actually found it good.
How can it be immersive RPG when its RPG elements are badly done ?
Dialogue is bad, and this is obvious to anyone who actually has seen good dialogue.
Skills are not used as much as they should have been used.
You also gain skill points at ridicilous rate, making meaningfull choice non-existant. Combat skills scale DAMAGE instead of accuracy/reload , making the game easier.
Stats are not used to determine how people and the gameworld react to you,nor do they effect gameplay beyond intelligence that gives extra skill points.
Writing is generally sub-standard, and doesnt simply cut it.
If i compare this game to other cRPG games, it doesnt look that impressive. But you probably read my post already.
The combat isnt good, and it should be obvious if you compare it to any decent FPS game.
VATS is unbalancing , with its 10% damage reduction. It is a superpower. It makes the game even more easier.
AI is again, sub-standard. You would think after FEAR we wouldnt see banzai charging bum rush AI, well i was wrong. Fallout 3 AI is just that.
Did i say i am against change ? Change can be good, as long as its beneficial. No, i am against making games very easy and dumbed down and simplified , like oblivion compared to Morrowind.
How is oblivion simplified ? For one skill system has been simplified so much it doesnt make sense. Also, most classes can learn a lot of skills easily when compared to Morrowind. Level scaling guarantees it wont be challenge. Dialogues are generally worse.
You can also join every guild , a thing that is ridicilous.
Not to mention the omnipotent AI that knows if you stole a apple two years ago across half the world.
And why do you need the feel to use the old and worn out argument that videogames cant and shouldnt have good writing.
Its a argument that doesnt make sense. Why shouldnt there be good writing ? There is no real reason for this way of thinking.
So, could you please try to explain how fallout 3 is good, beyond just stating it ? People just state, "fallout 3 is good/amazing/great"
Also, dont even try to say that we all think in the same way and we are lemmings types, mainly because your claim could be as well applied to bethesda fans and fans of fallout 3,just because they like the game. I doubt THAT will get us anywhere.
Why did i like Morrowind ? Perhaps because i actually found it good.
How can it be immersive RPG when its RPG elements are badly done ?
Dialogue is bad, and this is obvious to anyone who actually has seen good dialogue.
Skills are not used as much as they should have been used.
You also gain skill points at ridicilous rate, making meaningfull choice non-existant. Combat skills scale DAMAGE instead of accuracy/reload , making the game easier.
Stats are not used to determine how people and the gameworld react to you,nor do they effect gameplay beyond intelligence that gives extra skill points.
Writing is generally sub-standard, and doesnt simply cut it.
If i compare this game to other cRPG games, it doesnt look that impressive. But you probably read my post already.
The combat isnt good, and it should be obvious if you compare it to any decent FPS game.
VATS is unbalancing , with its 10% damage reduction. It is a superpower. It makes the game even more easier.
AI is again, sub-standard. You would think after FEAR we wouldnt see banzai charging bum rush AI, well i was wrong. Fallout 3 AI is just that.
Did i say i am against change ? Change can be good, as long as its beneficial. No, i am against making games very easy and dumbed down and simplified , like oblivion compared to Morrowind.
How is oblivion simplified ? For one skill system has been simplified so much it doesnt make sense. Also, most classes can learn a lot of skills easily when compared to Morrowind. Level scaling guarantees it wont be challenge. Dialogues are generally worse.
You can also join every guild , a thing that is ridicilous.
Not to mention the omnipotent AI that knows if you stole a apple two years ago across half the world.
And why do you need the feel to use the old and worn out argument that videogames cant and shouldnt have good writing.
Its a argument that doesnt make sense. Why shouldnt there be good writing ? There is no real reason for this way of thinking.
So, could you please try to explain how fallout 3 is good, beyond just stating it ? People just state, "fallout 3 is good/amazing/great"
Also, dont even try to say that we all think in the same way and we are lemmings types, mainly because your claim could be as well applied to bethesda fans and fans of fallout 3,just because they like the game. I doubt THAT will get us anywhere.
radioactive_penguin
First time out of the vault
yeah V.A.T.S. is one of the big problems it either unbalances the game by making kills far to easy or it just doesn't work properly giving minuscule chances to hit at point blank range. It also doesn't calculate critical hits for several of the guns properly
Andy-Spacetrain
First time out of the vault
wow, calm down Patton.
Did you miss my reference to it being similar to comparing classical music and modern music? You can stand here and complain about modern music as much as you want, it doesn't change anything. Music has been dumbed down, films have been dumbed down, and games have been dumbed down, but so what? It doesn't mean you can't enjoy them.
You want me to explain why I enjoyed Fallout 3, but you don't mention why you enjoy Morrowind ("because I actually found it good" doesn't qualify). It is much easier to point out a games flaws than it is to point out why you enjoy it. I could play through Fallout 1 and make a note of every single non-realtistic moment and complain about it, but it's much harder to pin-point why I enjoy it. In fact, I'd have far more success in pointing out all the many flaws in your post.
*EDIT*
Sorry, I should also remind you, as you seem to have imagined a large section of my post, that I at no place stated that games SHOULDN'T have good writing. I simply stated that they don't for the most part, and might never regain the mid-90s standard again.
Did you miss my reference to it being similar to comparing classical music and modern music? You can stand here and complain about modern music as much as you want, it doesn't change anything. Music has been dumbed down, films have been dumbed down, and games have been dumbed down, but so what? It doesn't mean you can't enjoy them.
You want me to explain why I enjoyed Fallout 3, but you don't mention why you enjoy Morrowind ("because I actually found it good" doesn't qualify). It is much easier to point out a games flaws than it is to point out why you enjoy it. I could play through Fallout 1 and make a note of every single non-realtistic moment and complain about it, but it's much harder to pin-point why I enjoy it. In fact, I'd have far more success in pointing out all the many flaws in your post.
*EDIT*
Sorry, I should also remind you, as you seem to have imagined a large section of my post, that I at no place stated that games SHOULDN'T have good writing. I simply stated that they don't for the most part, and might never regain the mid-90s standard again.
I can easily point out why i enjoyed Morrowind.
It has a lot of good, well done quests and content increasing replay value, decent, competent writing in dialogues and story, somewhat challenging and rewarding skill system that makes decisions matter as you cant learn easily everything so you must specialize, large world that feels like it could be actual functioning world things like the conflict between the empire and the old dark elves wanting to keep land slavery.
Magic items are powerfull but the more powerfull are rarer, and guild system is good, as you cant join all guilds and there are some benefits in joining certain guilds. Even the visuals were enjoyable, the landscape changes in different areas, you have dry deserts, fens, hills etc.
Combat system works well, isnt too easy, even though it sometimes can look silly as you can miss with lower skills but that is something i can live with. Its better than hitting with every blow.
Spells are deadly, as they should be. It makes up for the fragile caster.
and UI is well done and is easy to use, it doesnt impede gameplay.
Its a good action RPG. Writing could have been better, combat engine could have used a increase in chance to hit if the enemy is closer, bugs could have been squished before launch. Also the skill system ends up bit grindy as you have to improve your skills by grinding.
Its not that hard. Its rather bad excuse to say you cant point out what you like.
I dont see how i was poiting out little nitpicks or non-realistic moments, as you seem to suggest. These are serious design flaws that seriously hurt the replay value of the game and hamper roleplaying a lot as your characters play out the same as you max your skills too easily same thing with the combat faults. If i was complaining that cars explode when you shoot them, it would be nitpicking. It would be nitpicking to complain on weapon calibers.
Its ISNT nitpicking to complain on unbalanced game mechanics.
Also, you said if you want a book go buy a book. That seemed clearly stating or hinting that writing is unimportant and it doesnt have a place in games. There was nothing to even allude to lowered state of writing.
And there was no claim in your post that said that comparing fallout 3 to other games is like comparing modern music to classical music, so how do you assume i would know that you said this ? Which doesnt even make much sense as we arent talking about 400 years of timeframe and entirely different genre.
I am talking about comparing its FPS combat to FPS combat and its RPG elements to RPG elements. ANd comparing it to other ARPG/FPS hybrids. Its relevant. If i compared its choices to ones of FPS, then it would be incorrect. Like comparing Bach to Madonna.
And unlike music, games have actual more tangible things like codes and graphics and mathematical calculation systems like SPECIAL.
Its more akin to comparing cars.
It has a lot of good, well done quests and content increasing replay value, decent, competent writing in dialogues and story, somewhat challenging and rewarding skill system that makes decisions matter as you cant learn easily everything so you must specialize, large world that feels like it could be actual functioning world things like the conflict between the empire and the old dark elves wanting to keep land slavery.
Magic items are powerfull but the more powerfull are rarer, and guild system is good, as you cant join all guilds and there are some benefits in joining certain guilds. Even the visuals were enjoyable, the landscape changes in different areas, you have dry deserts, fens, hills etc.
Combat system works well, isnt too easy, even though it sometimes can look silly as you can miss with lower skills but that is something i can live with. Its better than hitting with every blow.
Spells are deadly, as they should be. It makes up for the fragile caster.
and UI is well done and is easy to use, it doesnt impede gameplay.
Its a good action RPG. Writing could have been better, combat engine could have used a increase in chance to hit if the enemy is closer, bugs could have been squished before launch. Also the skill system ends up bit grindy as you have to improve your skills by grinding.
Its not that hard. Its rather bad excuse to say you cant point out what you like.
I dont see how i was poiting out little nitpicks or non-realistic moments, as you seem to suggest. These are serious design flaws that seriously hurt the replay value of the game and hamper roleplaying a lot as your characters play out the same as you max your skills too easily same thing with the combat faults. If i was complaining that cars explode when you shoot them, it would be nitpicking. It would be nitpicking to complain on weapon calibers.
Its ISNT nitpicking to complain on unbalanced game mechanics.
Also, you said if you want a book go buy a book. That seemed clearly stating or hinting that writing is unimportant and it doesnt have a place in games. There was nothing to even allude to lowered state of writing.
And there was no claim in your post that said that comparing fallout 3 to other games is like comparing modern music to classical music, so how do you assume i would know that you said this ? Which doesnt even make much sense as we arent talking about 400 years of timeframe and entirely different genre.
I am talking about comparing its FPS combat to FPS combat and its RPG elements to RPG elements. ANd comparing it to other ARPG/FPS hybrids. Its relevant. If i compared its choices to ones of FPS, then it would be incorrect. Like comparing Bach to Madonna.
And unlike music, games have actual more tangible things like codes and graphics and mathematical calculation systems like SPECIAL.
Its more akin to comparing cars.
Andy-Spacetrain
First time out of the vault
Apologies, you're quite right. I got mixed up between threads.
I could point out everything I like about Fallout 3, but I've no doubt you, and many other people on here would flame me for it. Insult me, ridicule me, etc, like what has happened to so many people on here, so I don't really see the point in specifying every good point (in my opinion) so that you can attempt to disregard each one.
I wasn't implying that writing has no place in games. I was impying if that is all you're after, then books are the only legitimate place to get it.
Also design flaws are only opinion. I don't really see many big design flaws with Fallout 3. Yeh, it's unbalanced, but so was Morrowind and many other good games. What you see as major design flaws, other people don't mind at all.
But enough of this, we could keep offending each other all day for no real benefit to anyone. I was making my point to the OP so that he might make a more "informed" decision but it's already become an argument. I hate this place, it used to be good :/
I could point out everything I like about Fallout 3, but I've no doubt you, and many other people on here would flame me for it. Insult me, ridicule me, etc, like what has happened to so many people on here, so I don't really see the point in specifying every good point (in my opinion) so that you can attempt to disregard each one.
I wasn't implying that writing has no place in games. I was impying if that is all you're after, then books are the only legitimate place to get it.
Also design flaws are only opinion. I don't really see many big design flaws with Fallout 3. Yeh, it's unbalanced, but so was Morrowind and many other good games. What you see as major design flaws, other people don't mind at all.
But enough of this, we could keep offending each other all day for no real benefit to anyone. I was making my point to the OP so that he might make a more "informed" decision but it's already become an argument. I hate this place, it used to be good :/
Andy-Spacetrain,
If you follow the forum well you know we do not flame people for their opinion or liking Fallout 3.
At best you will get opinions or arguements why we feel that there are problems or flaws with the things you point out.
We start flaming people when they start saying "Fallout is teh awesum! Bethesda is the r0xx0r and you all are retarded turds for not recognizing their brilliance or how good Fallout 3 is. They improved Fallout, it is finally a good game."
Basically these people do not come here to tell what they like, they come here to agitate the people who feel different about Fallout 3 and Bethesda.
Capiche?
If you follow the forum well you know we do not flame people for their opinion or liking Fallout 3.
At best you will get opinions or arguements why we feel that there are problems or flaws with the things you point out.
We start flaming people when they start saying "Fallout is teh awesum! Bethesda is the r0xx0r and you all are retarded turds for not recognizing their brilliance or how good Fallout 3 is. They improved Fallout, it is finally a good game."
Basically these people do not come here to tell what they like, they come here to agitate the people who feel different about Fallout 3 and Bethesda.
Capiche?
Trithne
Still Mildly Glowing
I see this argument a lot. It can be summarised as "Everything has become shit, so start to like the taste of shit." I shouldn't, and won't, settle for shit.