Trying to play F3 in a fluffy (canon) way

[Public]

You have to understand that games are not made for graphics. And if you ignore games, because they don't have shiny graphics, you might miss a lot of great games (especially the games from 90's, when cRPGs had their right spot on the shelf). And then, you shouldn't call yourself a gamer, you'll be a fan of nice graphics.

Just give it a try. Most of us didn't get Fallout at the first try (it took me personally few tries), but then we loved it.

 

[Alphadrop]

I love the previous Fallouts graphics (especially tactics, if only F3 had tactic's graphics). Then again I'm a sucker for 2d sprite work but it also has a very post apocolyptic feel and character models are just so damn cool. Also it has some of the best death animations this side of Soldier of Fortune

Judging a game by screenshots is a bit like judging a book by its cover so still give a go.

 

[Tagaziel]

I've checked out FO1 and FO2 at Gamespot, and though I like the idea of learning the lore by playing the first two games, I'm affraid the graphics and interface will prevent me from really giving it the credit it deserves. 11 years on, I've just been too spoiled.

Really, play them. Play them both. Judging a game by screenshots is foolish, especially since there is a high resolution patch available and Fallout's interface is really simple, even if you just skim the manual (which is a damn good read on it's own).

 

[cratchety ol joe]

I'm here to backup the idea of 'play FO1 / FO2' it really is worth it and may shed some light as to why we here at NMA are the glittering gems of hatred that we have become known as.

We're not bitter for the sake of being bitter, sadly we have reasons for it.

 

[UncannyGarlic]

Mules and Hinny's are sterile, too. (They are bred from horses and donkeys)

Neither Mules nor Hinnys are considered species though. He might be right, Mutants and Ghouls probably aren't species (as classically defined) but what exactly they are is unclear.

 

[failout]

I've checked out FO1 and FO2 at Gamespot, and though I like the idea of learning the lore by playing the first two games, I'm affraid the graphics and interface will prevent me from really giving it the credit it deserves. 11 years on, I've just been too spoiled.

In some ways the graphics are better than FO3's. The interface is better too.

 

[13BEAST]

Mules and Hinny's are sterile, too. (They are bred from horses and donkeys)

Neither Mules nor Hinnys are considered species though. He might be right, Mutants and Ghouls probably aren't species (as classically defined) but what exactly they are is unclear.

Hmm...It was never made clear to me whether or not they were classified as a species (mules and hinnys).

That said, since both mutants and ghouls are born as humans, I don't think they'd be considered a new species.


And to my knowledge, the defining difference between mutants and ghouls (in the Fallout universe) is that ghouls are changed by radiation, whereas mutants were changed by FEV. If that is the case, Harold is a mutant because he was changed by FEV exposure, not radiation exposure, persay.

 

[Ausir]

And to my knowledge, the defining difference between mutants and ghouls (in the Fallout universe) is that ghouls are changed by radiation, whereas mutants were changed by FEV. If that is the case, Harold is a mutant because he was changed by FEV exposure, not radiation exposure, persay.

Ghouls (and other creatures mutated by radiation) are also mutants.

 

[13BEAST]

And to my knowledge, the defining difference between mutants and ghouls (in the Fallout universe) is that ghouls are changed by radiation, whereas mutants were changed by FEV. If that is the case, Harold is a mutant because he was changed by FEV exposure, not radiation exposure, persay.

Ghouls (and other creatures mutated by radiation) are also mutants.

According to who? I've never seen that. If that were the case then why are there mutated versions of mutants. For instance pigrats and mutated pigrats? I always assumed pigrats were the result of radiation, and mutated pigrats were pigrats who were infected with FEV.

2 our of 3 developers agree...
http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Ghoul#Controversy

Looks like this one is more or less up to a personal descision..

 

[Idiotfool]

To the OP: I've seen a lot of cell phone games with shitty graphics and simplistic GUI. I don't understand how people can sit around and play RPGs on tiny-ass screens on their phone but are disgusted with the thought of playing games of comparable design on the computer.

If you screw around with games on your phone then you're not as graphically spoiled as you think. Give the games a shot.

 

[Ausir]

According to who?

Common sense - or would you seriously not call their transformation a mutation by the very definition of the word? And Harold, for one. In FO1, when you ask him about ghouls, he says:

Mutants. Doesn't matter what they call themselves.

And I don't see why a mutant can't be mutated even further.

2 our of 3 developers agree...
http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Ghoul#Controversy

The developers disagree on whether ghouls are a product of FEV or not. Not on whether only a mutation through FEV should be called a mutation. Both FEV and radiation are sources of mutations.

 

[13BEAST]

According to who?

Common sense - or would you seriously not call their transformation a mutation by the very definition of the word? And Harold, for one. In FO1, when you ask him about ghouls, he says:

Mutants. Doesn't matter what they call themselves.

And I don't see why a mutant can't be mutated even further.

2 our of 3 developers agree...
http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Ghoul#Controversy

The developers disagree on whether ghouls are a product of FEV or not. Not on whether only a mutation through FEV should be called a mutation. Both FEV and radiation are sources of mutations.

K, so we're arguing different points. Yes, ghouls would be defined as mutants. Ghouls, however, would not be part of the mutant race. Though they are mutated, they are not mutants by race.

 

[Ausir]

How do you define "mutant race"?

 

[Scowl]

In the interest of full disclosure, I don't hate FO3 as much as the average NMA forum poster seems to. Having never played the other FO games, my default basis of comparison is with Obliviion. That being said, I see many of the discrepancies and such that I've read in this forum, I just don't get furious about them.

I don't think anyone's going to get mad at you for not hating Fallout 3 with a passion. Well, okay, maybe a couple of guys.

I've checked out FO1 and FO2 at Gamespot, and though I like the idea of learning the lore by playing the first two games, I'm affraid the graphics and interface will prevent me from really giving it the credit it deserves. 11 years on, I've just been too spoiled.

Give it a shot. Try something new. It may seem pretty old and dated, but it is essentially the same with all entertainment - the substance never changes, only the packaging. Good gameplay is good gameplay.

Of course, some people will never be able to appreciate it - they are mesmerized by slo-mo, blood, and graphics. But just by asking the questions that you've asked in the first post in this thread, I think that maybe you'd be able to recognize good gameplay for what it is, even if the graphics and interface are too outdated for you.

I will look into the Mad Max movies.

You won't regret it!

If you see anything in the films that seem familiar, well, those movies are probably where it came from.

 

[13BEAST]

How do you define "mutant race"?

In Fallout or elsewhere?

 

[Crni Vuk]

Harold was unique though.

Harold is a mutant, not a ghoul.

Doesnt change the fact that he was still "unique" when it comes to the known Fallout world thus the ability to grow a tree out of the head might be only a "harold" like feature. We all know how Tactics messed up with Fallout canon for no reason (like talking furry death claws and such)

 

[Chancellor Kremlin]

Having never played the other FO games, my default basis of comparison is with Obliviion. That being said, I see many of the discrepancies and such that I've read in this forum, I just don't get furious about them.

Perhaps that is because your basis of comparisson is flawed? You should compare a third game to its previous two, and not to an unrelated game. Trust me, play the first two games, not for the sake of comparisson, but just for its own sake. You WILL have fun.

I'm affraid the graphics and interface will prevent me from really giving it the credit it deserves. 11 years on, I've just been too spoiled.

That saddens me, it really does. In the same way FO3 'passes' in graphical quality, it fails in storyline, imagination, consistency, depth, dialogue and humour. Now, FO1/2 'passes' in all of the above, considering its graphics were moderate for the time it came out. But if you are one of those people that can only read books with pictures then don't bother.

PS: OP?

 

[Crni Vuk]

I dont know why people have that much issues with fallout 1/2s interface though.

Its not like the inventory and menues in Fallout 3 are miles more comfortable. A bit yes, but I think people are more "turned off" by the graphic then the menues and their mechanics.

 

[Tagaziel]

To end the debate:

Ghouls and supermutants are mutated humans.

 

[13BEAST]

To end the debate:

Ghouls and supermutants are mutated humans.

Noone is denying that...My argument is that they are different races. Here's some ascii art to illustrate my point...

            Mutated Humans
__________________________________________________________
|                                |                       |
Super Mutants                 Mutants                    Ghouls
(Lou)                       (Harold)                     (Set)