The Positive Thread

[Sander]

He's expressing that everyone who thinks there's a wrong and a right way to do Fallout 3 is mad. Yes, that's trolling.

Also, baiting someone into an argument by being sarcastic is not the sole form of trolling.

Also also, if you're going into a thread just to nitpick on something as small as that, don't post at all please.

 

[Texas Renegade]

Sander:

I wasn't saying anything about other people.

I was saying that the way they are interpreting FO3 doesn't make me mad as I don't think ISO and TB are essential for it to be FO.

Then I put but if I did believe these things, I would be mad (read: angry) about it.

I was saying I could understand why the people who are angry are angry

 

[Sander]

Okay then, I misinterpreted the word 'mad' (I read it as 'insane'), so oops, my fault.

 

[Public]

BTW, you don't see those buildings until vault city, which is well into the game so it is entirely reasonable to expect those buildings may exist later in the game.

Vault City has buildings because they had a GECK.

 

[FeelTheRads]

What did Shady Sands (first town in Fallout 1, I will add for the less knowledgeable among us) had then? Good luck?

 

[Sander]

What did Shady Sands (first town in Fallout 1, I will add for the less knowledgeable among us) had then? Good luck?

Shady Sands was built by Vault 15 residents.

 

[FeelTheRads]

Damn it, Sander! Good thing you didn't also mention the entrance to New Reno, which is from real-life.

Anyway, fair enough, those buildings are tied to Vaults/GECKs. They don't seem to show in Fallout 3, though. That still stands.
Also, there are other... well, white buildings, like here

These buildings appear in more cities - Redding and Broken Hills come to mind.

There's also buildings like this one which appear pretty much everywhere in Fallout.

None of these seem to be real-life buildings or imitations at least.

 

[Moving Target]

Damn it, Sander! Good thing you didn't also mention the entrance to New Reno, which is from real-life.

Let's... just not mention New Reno at all with regards to FO1/2 internal inconsistency. It's for the best. That sign there was cool... but really made no sense. Just like New Reno itself, really.

 

[Public]

Also, there are other... well, white buildings, like here

There are 2 possibilities IMO:
1. Because it belongs to Navarro, which belongs to Enclave (they have technology to even build a new building like this)
2. Navarro was based on the middle of nowhere, close to the sea shore, so a cement building, for a gas station would survive IMO (not every part of the country was bombed, they would never bother to nuke a place where nobody lives and the probably would not have enough nukes to bomb everything )

These buildings appear in more cities - Redding and Broken Hills come to mind.

Yeah, mostly shacks made of pieces of junk and yes, some buildings too, but they are not skyscrapers, they are maximum one floor high, usually have a basement and most of them fell apart lots of years ago So the ones you see in the game, are like "lucky ones" which survived probably It would happen in the real life.

 

[Slymanx]

Ugh, I think I'm starting to look forward to Fallout 3

I can't believe I'm saying this, but I'm actually getting a little bit excited for this game. Sad isn't it? I mean, I love Fallout 1 and 2, but this game is starting to look pretty good for me. I won't consider it a true "Fallout" game, but I'm going to probably enjoy it. Maybe it's because I loved games like S.T.A.L.K.E.R. which is essentially an FPS with lite RPG elements. I don't doubt this will be a great game. A great Fallout game, no. A great RPG, meh. A great FPS with RPG integration, very possible.

Please don't shun me.

 

[thefalloutfan]

Why should anyone shun you? You're entitled to your opinion.

I too am looking forward to FO3, despite it not being as I would imagine a third sequel to Fallout to be, and the game itself is far from perfect.

Never the less, it's an RPG (for me), it's a sandbox game, it's got a post apocalyptic setting, and it also has Fallout elements (whether it has strong fallout elements or not remains to be seen, I'll judge this when I play the game myself).

 

[PastaMasta]

Ron Pearlman, that is all I can really think of. However when it comes to fallout I expect AWESOMENESS!!!1 in the highest and most mightiest form. That is until BoS came out.

 

[Blackfyre]

i for one think that most of the core changes beth. made to fallout where necessary to bring the game to a broader audiance (and actualy survive the sales) and to move forward with the franchise.
After replaying F2 again im quiet sure the iso turn based gameplay cant work nowdays for the mainstream gaming with the exception of a niche game.
Now i enjoyed the turn based pen and paper combat in its day, but that was nearly a decade ago. Hence i look forward for the fps / rpg approach. I strongly belive Fallout was / is far more that the initial turn based gameplay.

Open ended environment, hacking / lockpicking, vats, post apo. word, conversations, itemisation... look quiet promising and if the game turns to be fun i really wont give a damm about certain fallout dogmas that are beeing so diehard defended by some here.

 

[Moving Target]

So, wait... how's this an addition to the positivity thread? This is more a mini-editorial on why those who dislike the changes should buck up and take it. And assumes we haven't read this a ton of times. Even in the last two months, let alone further back.

Anyway, I'll follow my own proscription and try to post something positive: Um... the radscorpions look good. I'm sort of reaching here. Honestly I'm running out of things to be positive about on this one. But I am trying.

 

[Blackfyre]

And assumes we haven't read this a ton of times.

funny...just one quick look at most of the threads concerning fa3 brings almost a consistent flow of repetitive complaints about the same things basically. So yes i belive many have shared opinions that might be similar to mine in the past. Since bias ain't same as being objective, especial if trying to hijack this thread to spill all the hate out.

Anyway i think i did state quiet clearly why i think this product might be promising, even if positive opinions towards this game tend to produce quiet a stir

 

[Lepidus]

How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Game

Well, I viewed a slew of gameplay videos hosted on IGN.com, and I must admit that I am impressed with Bethesda's take on the Fallout universe. We still don't have a true Fallout 3, and we never will; we must accept that. The gamers of today demand billion dollar graphics and flashy gameplay; they have no interest in thoughtful story or deep gameplay. If you aren't a simple-minded teenager, then you're probably an overworked adult (or an honest teenager who completes their work (they do exist, or so I'm told)) who just wants to distress themselves after a long, grading day at work. In either scenario, the gamer will probably want instant gratification (as I said, they are either stupid or tired) over thoughtfulness and reward.

Bethesda softworks knows there is money to be made from the morons and the weary masses, and hey, who doesn't like massive explosions from time to time (read:Halo). In gaming terms, I would say a lot of the NMA veterans (and perhaps some newcomers, such as myself) are a bit old-fashioned in their ways and expectations. We like turn based and isometric. They like real-time and first person. Granted, there is nothing wrong with either game and being new to the gaming scene myself, I am able to see merit in both arguments, but I would say that the preponderance of gamers nowadays is geared towards the later type of game (first person, etc).

I apologize for being so roundabout in my point, but my little lecture is getting there, now. I am saying that things have changed. They're never going back. The easy thing to do is complain all day, but the right thing to do is move on. And hey, with a little imagination, you can have fun with anything.

"A life without introspection is a life not worth living"
-Socrates

 

[Brother None]

Can't beat 'em, so join 'em?

No thanks, I'd rather stick to having high standards. There's plenty of games of the explosion-action type out there for me without playing Fallout 3, a game I'd barely care about even if it weren't ear-nurping a classic franchise.

 

[Lepidus]

Can't beat 'em, so join 'em?

No thanks, I'd rather stick to having high standards. There's plenty of games of the explosion-action type out there for me without playing Fallout 3, a game I'd barely care about even if it weren't ear-nurping a classic franchise.

Perhaps their writers won't fail?
(Second Thought): Perhaps self-aware, literate pigs
will fly out of right nostril on Friday.

I guess you're correct.

 

[reticulate]

Can't beat 'em, so join 'em?

No thanks, I'd rather stick to having high standards. There's plenty of games of the explosion-action type out there for me without playing Fallout 3, a game I'd barely care about even if it weren't ear-nurping a classic franchise.

The alternative viewpoint there is that you could be missing out a fun game because of preconceived notions.

I'd say the point that it's not in the same vein as the previous ones has been belaboured the point of excess. Everybody who's interested in the game (for whatever reason) is aware that Bethesda have put a very different spin on it.

Does that make it a bad game? Hard to tell until you play it, I guess.
Does it take something you feel strongly about and destroy it? Again, shockingly, we don't know. Saying you have high standards because you don't want a game you haven't played based on what you've read and seen snippets of doesn't sounds so much like standards as it does an irrational fear of uncertainty.

Especially when the game doesn't look bad. Just different from what you perhaps want or expect. And to be fair, there aren't really many games out or expected that are of the same niche. STALKER, I guess, but it's definitely more on the side of the FPS than the RPG.

 

[Macky]

Can't beat 'em, so join 'em?

No thanks, I'd rather stick to having high standards. There's plenty of games of the explosion-action type out there for me without playing Fallout 3, a game I'd barely care about even if it weren't ear-nurping a classic franchise.

We live in a time right now - as others are beginning to point out after absorbing more bumblefuck reviews from countries that don't see daylight - where every negative is a negative and every positive is a negative. This is worse than political spin because there is no ground to stand on for saying EVERYTHING IS BAD. If experienced and prestigious writers and reviewers like Brother None have yet to comment on anything well done in the new Fallout, it simply must be because they would rather withhold these opinions and perpetuate the criticisms (...and perhaps justly so given the respective circumstances).

I can't believe that it is a result of inattentiveness or prejudice, perhaps just cynicism, grief, and ultimately mourning of those things in the original franchise that will simply never see the light of day again. In that respect, I understand... but a lack of awareness of what excels in Fallout 3 is not the same as a lack of humility for admitting what excels in Fallout 3. Most people at NMA are way too 'with it' to be within the former, though they present themselves to be in the latter. To disprove your ignorance in game development, everyone here would have to admit the areas (however trivial) where fallout 3 excels.

I think threads like these are important because they attempt to draw a polarized argument into something more realistic, more practical, and more honest.

My addition to what looks promising in a generally unpromising follow-up to my beloved Fallout?

Simple. There is a video on IGN where 101 is atop a steep mound of ruble. In a flash there are two feral ghouls that charge the hill from at least 30 meters away. They are eventually picked off through VATS. In short, the scene had a feel of 28 days later that has yet to be replicated in recent games. It is a scenario that, visually, and seemingly experientially, would bring at least the minimal amount of excitement.

And yes, this is a action-based element that does not particularly scream 'fallout'. but quite honestly, Bethesda has not released much of anything on the RPG element - aka fallout element - of the title.