The aspect of Fallout 3 that i liked better then New Vegas

Crni Vuk said:
the reall issue I have with all of this is that both Bethesda AND Bay exactly know what they are doing and they are happy/proud about it.

The comparison between Bay and Todd is not even that far away actually.


Boom! Exactly. Maybe they are proud, maybe they did put heart and soul into it. Yet the resulting finished work has no heart or soul. No depth. Doesn't say much for the heart of the designers, suggests they may take a shallow view towards things. I wasn't going around nitpicking about farming etc. Those are just the small details they neglected. The big details are often absent or hollow too.
 
I work overnights and it's completely dead. I think I'm gonna rant for a bit...

First of all, people, it's Sci-fi. It always has been and it always will be. To bitch about the water purifier is like bitching about the GECK. They are SCI-FI plot devices. The water purifier is at least somewhat original. The GECK is the Genesis device from Wrath of Khan except in a briefcase instead of a torpedo... Use your imaginations, they won't hurt you.

Raiders terrorizing the wastes? I'll buy it for the time being. Nobody bitched about Raiders just taking over the guy in the Hub's house. Or the shit ton of random encounters you have with them. It is clear some are more civilized and organized than others. So you kill a bunch of raiders. Never saw the raider hierarchy? Oh, probably because you killed their leader on the baseball diamond. They're dumbfucks. IMAGINATION.

I'd rather critique the fact they have human bodies hanging as decorations in their hideouts. Then again, people in the dark ages were throwing dead bodies in their water supply. You're giving our species waaaaay too much credit on the intelligence meter. You think we're a 9, we're more like a 4 overall.

The ending was a little thin, but it was an open and shut linear conclusion for the game...much like Fallout 1. You had two choices, to purify the vault or not to purify the vault, then you had a small choice of whether or not to kill the Master first or last. It was that simple. The Master was 100x better than Eden, but you cannot complain about the meat behind your choices since they were so slim before.

The aliens...yeah. Bullshit. But I believe the suits were crying for more content, hence we receive Broken Steel and Mothership Zeta. This is just the nature of the business nowadays. If you look at this old article, there were only supposed to be three add-ons initially... Didn't other designers make all dlcs besides Point Lookout? That's what I've heard, just want to clarify if I'm wrong.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/88061-Fallout-3-Designer-Talks-DLC

One of the above posters mentioned Canterbury Commons. I would most definitely agree. Fallout 3 was highly lacking in the town department. There were always about one or two structures in each and very little content between said structures.

Obsidian had two years to utilize an already built engine and it's assets to create a new, unique environment. It looks more alive, but we as consumers have gone through hell to experience it to its fullest. I guarantee you setting up a functioning reputation system and the crossing paths was a major bitch to do, but they had all the necessary pieces pieces from the beginning. Look at the most recent patch. It looks like they had a hell of a time re-tweaking and optimizing the memory to help improve high traffic areas like McCarran. This is showing the impact of how large amounts of NPCs really mess with the system...The point is, Obsidian needed a foundation to build off of. Bethesda now has a new foundation to build off of. If they backtrack, then fuck 'em.

I'm currently replaying Fallout 3 GOTY after taking a long hiatus from it and playing the shit out of New Vegas. I am rediscovering how much I did enjoy the game as a whole. The writing is definitely weaker, but the only thing that is consistently pissing me off is the fact they placed it 200 years into the future. Other than that, all I've seen is a different perspective and a different set of priorities being applied. Bethesda has the right idea. They need to learn the necessity of having a design bible. In this regard, F3 feels closest to F2-- as in the ideas are all over the place.

Simply put, Fallout 3 revitalized a dead franchise, New Vegas revitalized a dying genre. Both were necessary and both have their strengths and weaknesses. However, to say that one doesn't have heart and soul is to be close-minded. They just have different tastes and different views on what's important.

(BTW, Liberty Prime seems much more plausible than BOS Zeppelins. Discuss.)

One last point on the Elder Scrolls comment: wasn't each game (UNTIL Skyrim) set during the reign of Uriel Septim VII?...How could they be millions of years apart?
 
Simply put, Fallout 3 revitalized a dead franchise

No.

Again, like a million times already, if Bethesda wouldn't have picked up Fallout, someone else would have. Bethesdas wasn't the only one interested in the license.

@rest is typical deja vu discussion.
 
BobNotHerbert said:
First of all, people, it's Sci-fi. It always has been and it always will be. To bitch about the water purifier is like bla bla bla ...

Sci-Fi =/= Science!

Star Wars and Star Trek are both Sci-Fi. Yet the one can not work with Klingon's and the other not with a Light saber wielding and force using Spock.
PicardVsVader.gif


The purifier is just an example of the many many (and more many) lulz crap of Fallout 3. Supermarkets full with food. factories completely untouched next to communities. Villages in the middle of nowhere with 4-5 people surrounded by deathclaws, super mutants and raiders (and who knows what else). Computers runing without any visible source of energy or protection for 200 years.

While Fallout 1 and 2 sure had quite a lot of "lulz" as well. But many times you didn't just walked over all kind of equipment. Remember the cave in Clamath ? If you had no repair skill there was no way to get that elevator working again. Same when you encountered the Glow for the first time as well. Other places have been populated by humans which kept the place in some running condition (vault 15 in Fallout 2, or Vault 13)

BobNotHerbert said:
Simply put, Fallout 3 revitalized a dead franchise,
This is an interesting stake. Since in which way did Fallout 3 by Bethesda for example ad something "new" to the genre to speak with ?

Was it really a necessity ? Not every game needs a sequel to a sequel from a sequel. Not if there is no potential to add anything substantial to the Universe. And at the end of the day the stuf Fallout 3 did was very little. For example the two main factions are recycled and you have again a plot starting with vaults and focused around vaults. Vegas was here a very nice and fresh air where actually things like the War between the Legion and NCR have been a focus and not so much that someone needs a "GECK" to rescue the wasteland. And in terms of gameplay Fallout 3 was neither an evolution. It is Oblivion with guns. And the gameplay feels closer to a shooter then a Fallout game.

BobNotHerbert said:
The aliens...yeah. Bullshit. But I believe the suits were crying for more content, hence we receive Broken Steel and Mothership Zeta. This is just the nature of the business nowadays. If you look at this old article, there were only supposed to be three add-ons initially... Didn't other designers make all dlcs besides Point Lookout? That's what I've heard, just want to clarify if I'm wrong.
It is the business of people which decide to throw content they think is "cool" regardless if it makes sense or not or if it fits the overall game. - And this might be now harsh but I call anyone who approved of Motherfuck Zeta NOT a Fallout fan.

Maybe the Heads of Fallout 3 have been forced to throw out content. But I doubt someone told them to do brain-dead writing or not think about something with content that also makes sense. See Obsidian. They got the contract to do another Fallout game. Yet they managed not to do the exactly same like Bethesda. And each of their DLCs blows the Fallout 3s away.

BobNotHerbert said:
One last point on the Elder Scrolls comment: wasn't each game (UNTIL Skyrim) set during the reign of Uriel Septim VII?...How could they be millions of years apart?
I would recommend playing those games then. Or something like that. Each game has no connection with the previous games and some stories have even several 100 years of difference between each other. Except between Morrowind and Oblivion eventually where it might be less but still both games have no connection to each other. You can blame Todd for that because he thinks it is better to always make a "fresh and new" start.

dont get me wrong. I am not flaming you. You seem to be well mannered in your opinion anyway.
 
Obsidian had two years to utilize an already built engine and it's assets to create a new, unique environment. It looks more alive, but we as consumers have gone through hell to experience it to its fullest. I guarantee you setting up a functioning reputation system and the crossing paths was a major bitch to do, but they had all the necessary pieces pieces from the beginning. Look at the most recent patch. It looks like they had a hell of a time re-tweaking and optimizing the memory to help improve high traffic areas like McCarran. This is showing the impact of how large amounts of NPCs really mess with the system...The point is, Obsidian needed a foundation to build off of. Bethesda now has a new foundation to build off of. If they backtrack, then fuck 'em.

I think you are missing a point, though. To design a world and the gameplay you don't have to wait for the engine and the graphic to be 100% ready. Obsidian designed a game that blows FO3 out of the water with half the development time. This has little to do with tech and time, the Capital Wasteland being unbelievable even in-universe is just Beth's modus operandi.

Nothing wrong if you don't mind it but don't defend the undefendable.
 
/shrug, if there was no FO3 we'd have no New Vegas. I'd rather the franchise continue then get all "Star trek nerd" about contuality or tweaks to the formula.
 
Felspawn said:
/shrug, if there was no FO3 we'd have no New Vegas.

Or they could have made a non-crappy FO3? Then we wouldn't have needed New Vegas as an apology game.
 
Hey Beth screwed up, you guys need to build a bridge and get over it. however they also revived the franchise, had the old devs make a love letter to the old fanbase (NV)and will hopefilly take what they learned (when they screwed up FO3) combined with what was loved about NV and make a great FO4. I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. I realize not everyone here is willing to do the same
 
Why should we? Considering the jump from Oblivion to FO3 to what we know about TES5 I think it's obvious what's their design philosophy. I'd like to be proven wrong but somehow I don't think I will. We'll see, I guess.
 
Crni Vuk said:
I would recommend playing those games then. Or something like that. Each game has no connection with the previous games and some stories have even several 100 years of difference between each other. Except between Morrowind and Oblivion eventually where it might be less but still both games have no connection to each other. You can blame Todd for that because he thinks it is better to always make a "fresh and new" start.
Actually, all the main games (Arena, Daggerfall, Morrowind, and Oblivion) take place during Uriel Septim VII's rule. While the stories of each consecutive game have little, to nothing to do with each other, chronologically, they follow. The only game, if I recall, that diverges by a few hundred years is Redguard.
 
From what it looks like, Bethesda is starting to realize little things that are important to their fanbase and to their franchises. Skyrim seems to be making a return to Morrowind environmentally. However, they are dialing back some of the skill trees that the series is known for. The removal of acrobatics and athletics is more in tune with J.E. Sawyer's consolidation of Fallout skills. Variety still exists, but the useless or confusing ones are being omitted. I think Skyrim is going to be a much more interesting experience than bland Oblivion was.

...

During my playthrough, I'm starting to realize how important the game was at the time and how much fun it truly was. However, the faults are glaringly obvious now. The weak and contrived dialogue trees. The "Good" and "Evil" Fable-esque quest paths, the voice acting (MY GOD THE VOICE ACTING)...But I do realize that I have been spoiled by Obsidian's treatment of New Vegas.

I think Moulinsky has this debate pegged down. You can't defend the undefendable. Three years ago, I didn't mind too much. It was a treat to see the wasteland from a fully realized 3d world in a much different environment from 1 and 2.

But now that New Vegas has come out, Fallout is back in full form. These are the types of stories and characters I fell in love with 10 years ago. The combat is taking on a life of it's own, evolving from the point and shoot method Bethesda created. Reincorporating Damage Threshold was the most important step they could have made to making combat right again. The Mojave Wasteland is extremely diverse and each of the DLC's feel like their own little piece of the world.

Bethesda better have used this as a learning experience as to how to diversify their franchises.
 
In full form ? Hmm. Well for your maybe. But me ? As much as I like Vegas but I find it horrorible and cant play it really anymore even though I would love to! Not because it is bad - writting and quests are pretty good. But aesthetics plays a huge role for me. And Vegas build on the F3 gameybro engine ... looks extremly ugly and "klunky" or "glitchy" (if you know what I mean ...) all those stupid animations, clipping errors and other glitches which give me a feeling I am playing a 3D graphic demo from 1991.

I dont know. I dont have the same feeling when playing a game like Fallout 1 or 2 or Jagged Alliance 3. The graphic is from the stone age. Though the aesthetics the details around it are awesome.
 
i guess its just not something i understand, i can play new games i can play old classics from my youth (Ultima 7, master of orion, Star control 2, Tie fighter, HOMM3) i can play early 3D games (System Shock 2, Deux Ex, Dungeon Keeper) and enjoy them all. a great game can stand the test of time to me. But i guess thats just one of those things that doesnt apply to everyone
 
Gamebryo is pretty dated, but the ugly parts of FO3 and NV isn't really the engine's fault. Lazy character design or low-quality textures are usually responsible for that.
 
James Snowscoran said:
Gamebryo is pretty dated, but the ugly parts of FO3 and NV isn't really the engine's fault. Lazy character design or low-quality textures are usually responsible for that.
The engine's a hog, the graphics need to look like that or it won't run worth a shit.
 
Never really saw anything wrong with them. I never was a graphics whore, but they're still fairly pleasing. The damn facial animations draw attention away from any ugly surroundings it seems
 
the faces ... I really hope Bethesda hirred some skilled person reworking the faces of their engine.

I really can not look in to this grimaces anymore already since Oblivion.
 
Back
Top