The Positive Thread

I will love the game!

I have been playing fallout well since it was wasteland on the C64,
and I admit it would have been great to have the original folks make the 3rd installment..but thats not going to happen.

So choice was no game (not good) or someone else buy license rights and try to make it, and I for one am happy that bethesda did just that!

But you wanted good comments posted here:

1) I am ecstatic the game is being made period, and I don't worry about it being like the other fallout games as I will enjoy whatever twists they throw our way.

2) graphics are going to be amazing (imho) But I love most if not all of bethesdas work.

3) I admit to not reading the proposed changed and so forth no point getting worked up when I may just have a great time playing the game despite changes. ;)

(please move this to the why I love the game thread..sorry)
 
Re: I will love the game!

Sheba said:
3) I admit to not reading the proposed changed and so forth no point getting worked up when I may just have a great time playing the game despite changes. ;)

So you don't know anything about the game except that you'll love it?

'k
 
I guess he only meant that he MAY have a good time even if it's not Fallout anymore. And he doesn't seem to be bothered by the far going changes.
 
Ravager69 said:
I guess he only meant that he MAY have a good time even if it's not Fallout anymore. And he doesn't seem to be bothered by the far going changes.
Sorry not he "She" some woman do enjoy this type of game me being one of those lucky few.

And it's not that I have not read up on the game at all (as implied by a few posts up) , but my life does not revolve around what they may or may not do in the game. I check the bethsoft forums once in a while see what's new and move on. :)
 
Sheba said:
Sorry not he "She" some woman do enjoy this type of game me being one of those lucky few.
And what, if I may ask, is the "type of game" you're referring to?... 'cause I suppose you won't think that a first-person shooter and a turn-based RPG are the same "type of game" if they have the same title labelled on them, or that the settings is what makes a "type of game", will you?

Sheba said:
And it's not that I have not read up on the game at all (as implied by a few posts up) , but my life does not revolve around what they may or may not do in the game.
It's not that one's life must revolve around what Beth is destr... err doing in Fallout 3, it's that an average consumer usually will want to have information about the product he is considering to acquire. Blindly buying a game and expecting to "enjoy whatever twists are thrown one's way" without knowing anything about them doesn't hit me as the most intelligent buying decision.
 
Sheba said:
Ravager69 said:
I guess he only meant that he MAY have a good time even if it's not Fallout anymore. And he doesn't seem to be bothered by the far going changes.
Sorry not he "She" some woman do enjoy this type of game me being one of those lucky few.

And it's not that I have not read up on the game at all (as implied by a few posts up) , but my life does not revolve around what they may or may not do in the game. I check the bethsoft forums once in a while see what's new and move on. :)

My apologies.
 
LionXavier said:
Sheba said:
]
And it's not that I have not read up on the game at all (as implied by a few posts up) , but my life does not revolve around what they may or may not do in the game.
It's not that one's life must revolve around what Beth is destr... err doing in Fallout 3, it's that an average consumer usually will want to have information about the product he is considering to acquire. Blindly buying a game and expecting to "enjoy whatever twists are thrown one's way" without knowing anything about them doesn't hit me as the most intelligent buying decision.

Sorry really that I even posted that I would like the game despite the fact bethesda is putting it out. As mentioned I have enjoyed all games I have gotten from Bethsoft and based on that am fairly certain I will enjoy their version of F3.

This was the positive thread I posted in correct? Yet I seem to have to defend myself, sounds like you have issues with the game or rather with bethsofts vision of it...please take it out on them not me.

Btw some of the best games I have purchased and played came when I was at my least intelligent! ;)
 
I posted a similar thread twice with a "positive take" on the official forums, but both times it got overly flamed. Maybe it will actually get better treatment here (I'm trying to compare Fallout3 to Oblivion, not the original Fallouts, so it should be easier to find positive things to say):

"What have you noticed Bethesda seems to be doing differently (better) with their newest title? Almost all of us are scared of the Oblivion With Guns concept (even though I enjoyed playing Daggerfall and Morrowind), so I'm looking for things that you see/heard were changed for the better.

Some example changes I noticed and think are very positive:
- less NPCs/dialogues/quests, but with more effort to make them more varying and interesting (less fed-ex quests, repetitive dialogue, bland faces etc.)
- some real dialogue trees (with branches, speech/skill checks and the works)
- separate interfaces for Xbox and PC (no more huge text and icons)
- an experience system instead of a skill grind system (no more letting yourself get bitten by a rat for half an hour to level your block skill)
- more contact with the community (I'm not talking about the one little perk contest, but some actual dialogue as in the meet-the-devs threads)"
 
I think it'll be superb. I really love Bethesda's work with Morrowind and Oblivion, i played their earlier games too.

Imo, there arent any other RPG's that are so interesting to explore, no other RPG with so many different items/armors (yeah i love looting that stuff, love outfitting my character etc)..

Bethesda has also gotten better with both NPC's and with Quests if you compare Morrowind to Oblivion, so i believe it'll be even better with FO3.

The mod-community for Oblivion and Morrowind is bigger than any other RPG that i know of, if FO3 will have an editor there's really no limit to how good it can get.

Playing FO2 again really makes me want a new FO, in 3D and without many of its annoyances.
 
Allthough oblivion was a bit of a dissapointment for me, i think it had some potential to be a good game. So far what ive heard from reviews and seen from the screens nothing has ruined this game(f3) for me yet (though i hope theyd get rid of exploding cars).

So whats positive about the game for me is that im positive about the game as a whole so far even though it has some things id do differntly.
 
I like the idea of a "good" BOS just not in the extreme goody two-shoes fashion that Beth has given them.

I think a more interesting BOS idea would be to keep the main force of the BOS residing in the pentagon fortress, the same indifferent tech hoarding faction from the other games, and have the outcast group as the "good" BOS faction with a twist.

I hate the idea of a goody two-shoes help the community out of the goodness of our harts BOS as this is not only atypical for the BOS but also for the whole wasteland as anyone who has been in the wasteland for over an hour knows that selflessness is not an option if one wishes to survive for any extended amount of time, and so my thought for a "good" BOS would be paladin becomes self obsessed and defects bringing some followers with him and only does "good" things for the community so he/she can garner favor with them granting him more power with the idea of ruling the "capital wasteland", or something more interesting but along the same lines of being good for selfish reason or the like.
 
I went through the all the screenshots I could find. From what I saw I liked:

Environmental Work. Yes, it is amazing. My only gripe with it is, that it's greyish, which makes it look more cold/indifferent, whereas in the original game it was brownish, as in the Leone West - warm and welcoming - it's tough, but it's home.

Talking heads. There are none, but some high-quality modeling went in the characters, although the attention to detail is not the same as with the originals. But then again, in the originals Talking Heads were made for the more important characters only.

Weapon design. I only saw a stock of a rifle on the back of a Vault-Dwelling character, but it was awesome.

The man and his dog screenshot. Despite the generic 'fantasy' orc dwellings, it had atmosphere.

Chuck Norris.

Were it not for the pityful redesign of the armor, suits and 'supermutants' I would've loved to play it. But the power armor looks as though Darth Vader is missing a brother and I mentioned the pip-boy/belt/robe things, obviously made by mutant elven Warlocks.
 
The only positive thing 'bout the game is that it's gameplay *may* not suck.

And, after all those years, Fallout has another moment of glory, even if only before dying the Final Death.
 
Ravager69 said:
The only positive thing 'bout the game is that it's gameplay *may* not suck.

And, after all those years, Fallout has another moment of glory, even if only before dying the Final Death.

I agree with that. It might also bring attention to the classic Fallout games that came before and bring more people to the Fallout community.
 
You know what? I like the way Fallout 3's shaping up.

I played Fallout when it came out. I played Fallout 2 when it came out. I've played them both dozens of times over in the decade since then. I have a tremendous appreciation for the setting, tone, and artistic design of the games.

I don't think Bethesda's screwing it up.

From the screenshots and the demo reels, the wasteland looks perfectly in keeping with the artistic sensibilities of the first two games. The vehicles, architecture, advertising... it's all there. The color pallet is darker, admittedly, but the technology is different. And I agree wholeheartedly that a first-person perspective is the most immersive of all available views. Fallout 1 and 2 were wonderful for their time, using the technology available, and were immersive then partly because they made the most of available technology. The setting, story, and design made the rest of it so memorable.

But I believe the environment is straight-up fallout. It expresses the tone and setting in the most immersive available way with today's technology.

As far as everyone bagging on the demos and screenshots being combat heavy, and not being able to reason with the supermutants: has it occured to any of you that these are just like random encounters in the first two games? Getting yanked off the world map to fight a bunch of non-communicative supermutants on a mostly blank map is a fact of life for fallout. These are keeping with that tradition: pointless, brief combat situations thrown at you simply because you're going between locations in a hostile environment.

We haven't seen much of the dialogue, and there is cause to worry there, but at least there is the inclusion of the dialogue tree and not just the lousy word-prompter from Oblivion. Fallout, for all its strengths, usually presented options only in good/bad/ugly trios itself, as has basically every other CRPG... Planescape: Torment possibly excepted. I worry that the writing team at Bethesda does not seem as sophisticated as the old Black Isle team. But there will be player choice, and there will be morality options, and that's encouraging for me.

I don't like the Fat Man. I'll agree with everyone there. Nuclear weapons were always LOL SERIOS in the first two fallout games, and it's annoying to treat it so casually in this one.

I think the inclusion of the enclave is fine. To try and reclaim an area as symbolically important as DC is very in keeping with the Enclave's modus operandi, and with their oil derrick destroyed, what would keep them in California?

In regards to everyone ragging on the BoS being good-goodies, I seem to remember the Bethesda devlog detailing that the leader of this chapter of the BoS is not operating according to standard procedure, and is letting his personal morality interfere with the brotherhood's more callous approach.

The shooter elements go hand-in-hand with the first person perspective as far as speed and flow of gameplay is concerned. From an isometric view, turn based is easy to do and fun to play because it is tactical. First person cameras present a much more present, visceral experience that demands a faster pace... which real-time combat, punctuated by VATS, provides. It is an excellent cross between the tactical RPG elements and the pacing demands of the presentation.

I am also skeptical of their ability to pull off true fallout humor with consistency, but from what I've seen, they occasionally nail it. When the game actually comes out, we'll be able to experience far more of the little details, and it's in the little details where so much of the humor and personality of the fallout franchise is found.

I'm looking forward to this game. A lot. It might not be a sequel to Fallout in terms of gameplay, but I strongly feel that it'll live up to the franchise and usher Fallout into gameplay modernity.
 
I don't think Bethesda's screwing it up.

Oh, great, thanks for sharing.

Fallout 1 and 2 were wonderful for their time, using the technology available,

You know what game was released a year before Fallout? Quake. You know what perspective Quake used?
Oh, boy, looks like the technology was already there, but it wasn't used in Fallout. I wonder why?

And let's not get back even further in time.

and were immersive then partly because they made the most of available technology.

NO. They were immersive because of the story, the setting, the gameplay, the dialogs... how everything was put together. They weren't immersive just because they knew how to do isometric. That's idiotic, as much as is idiotic to claim that every first-person game is immersive for the sole reason that it is first-person.

I think the inclusion of the enclave is fine.

Oh, really? I thought they were destroyed.

In regards to everyone ragging on the BoS being good-goodies, I seem to remember the Bethesda devlog detailing that the leader of this chapter of the BoS is not operating according to standard procedure, and is letting his personal morality interfere with the brotherhood's more callous approach.
Just a stupid motivation to include them and make them saviors of the wasteland because obviously they couldn't come up with their own faction to do this.
 
Well, we've had a bunch of "anti-Fallout 3" rants lately as well. There's nothing particularly odd about this except for the "available technology" part.
 
I would like to be pointed in the direction of an occasion when Bethesda's Fallout 3 nailed the humor of the first two Fallouts. I haven't seen or heard anything comparable.
 
Back
Top