It's precisely why I wouldn't get it. It's simply not worth that much of my money. I want it as a novelty but eventually small funny things aren't worth that much. 5 bucks is good. 10 is even a little steep lol.
Unpopular Fallout Opinions
- Thread starter hag
- Start date
Everything you wrote is technically correct, I suppose. Can't fault you for that.
I still think most people think 3 is better than POS because it still has some appeal. If I was a braindead retard I could probably derive a good time from fallout 3. POS just has no appeal at all regardless of how idiotic one is...
joevonzombie
Buried alive in Golgotha
I understand it's an unpopular opinion hence why I posted it here, but shitty dark alliance clone that's functional is far more appealing to me than an open world fps with the worst shooting mechanics of any triple A release of the last 20 years that's gonna crash my system periodically.
I'm not saying BOS is good by any means, but it's less offensive to me than FO3.
Last edited:
Norzan
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
Brotherhood of Steel is also non canon, so it doesn't really matter. Fallout 3 is just as bad but it's canon, actively harming the series with lore and continuity nonsensical breaks, regardless if you choose to ignore Fallout 3 from canon.
Not to mention being the game that turned the franchise into a FPS, which had no business being one. BoS at least wasn't followed up by a game using the same mechanics. Just makes me remember how much better New Vegas would have been as an isometric turn based game and not one with mediocre gunplay made possible by Bethesda's shit version of Gamebryo.
Not to mention being the game that turned the franchise into a FPS, which had no business being one. BoS at least wasn't followed up by a game using the same mechanics. Just makes me remember how much better New Vegas would have been as an isometric turn based game and not one with mediocre gunplay made possible by Bethesda's shit version of Gamebryo.
Greentoast11
First time out of the vault
I disagree, New Vegas showed that being a first person shooter is not the obstacle. Detailed rpg's with vast,consistent and detailed lore can exist in first person, Bethesda's goal of maximizing its target audience in pursuit of profit is what is the problem
Norzan
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
New Vegas was held back by being a FPS game. It could have been so much more gameplay wise, but Bethesda's version of Gamebryo is absolutely terrible for gunplay.
Playing ATOM RPG just solidified this because New Vegas could have been like this game gameplay wise.
Playing ATOM RPG just solidified this because New Vegas could have been like this game gameplay wise.
Last edited:
Isn't that more New Vegas being held back by the abomination that is Gamebryo, rather than New Vegas being held back by being first person? It isn't out of the question that if the game was able to be built from the ground up with plenty of time and resources, a first person system could be figured out that jives well with RPG mechanics.
Norzan
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
It's both really. Whatever they could come up with FPS gameplay, it would be worse than isometric turn based because the latter emulates RPG elements much better.
Negativity
Take a dirt nap
Ok, here's my unpopular opinion. Fallout 2 was only interesting because Tim Cain wrote the entire story arc before leaving interplay, and Fallout 3 (Van Buren) wouldn't have been as good as people think it would.
D
Deleted member 98605
Guest
Van Buren would had been a simple 'stop the bad guy from destroying the world with space nukes', which, yea. leaves a lot to be desired, no?
D
Deleted member 116891
Guest
The nice thing about Van Buren is that everyone is free to paint the details they would want into it. It's the mythologically perfect game, and no actual game could ever measure up.
I mean VB did have a lot of design documents you can read. They had a plan for the game. The features and stories they wanted are there at least mostly. But how good they actually would have turned out? I guess you could leave that up to your imagination.
I think a lot of people fail to grasp what the core of RPGs are. I know that I'm just opening a can of worms with such a claim but I believe it to be true. The thing is, RPGs aren't much without character's skills being vastly more important than the player's. FPS games are more focused on the user's skills while RPG games are not. Sure, you can learn to make a better and more optimized character but otherwise they seem quite contradicting to me. I enjoy both genres a lot, I don't think their mix is the best thing ever though. I do enjoy FPS-RPGs and action-RPGs in general but isometric does fit RPGs better than a FPS viewpoint. One genre was based on the player's reaction times, accuracy, movement, things they had to input. The other genre was based on rolling dice or chance systems to see how well a character could do something. Feels contradicting to me.
I can agree with this. I think a lot of people think it would be good because of the piece of shit we got in comparison. Of course the proposed idea would look good next to fallout 3. So would anything else.
Atomic_Spawned
Radiation-soaked, needs a towel.
Fallout 1 and 2, while having a great story, and being a nice revolutionary game, have terrible graphics. I know for the time it was okay, but Interplay's style is what grosses me out most.
D
Deleted member 116891
Guest
That will be an unpopular opinion around here Haha. Respect your bravery in stating it.
Is NV your favourite then? Or is it a Bethesda one?
(Welcome to the forum)
Atomic_Spawned
Radiation-soaked, needs a towel.
TheOtherManInTheRoom said:
I really liked New Vegas, and it brought a lot to the table in terms of new ideas. I also liked the idea that it (sort of) bridged the gap between 2 and 3, as a kind of nod to the fans of both. I liked 3 the most, but I've got my Rose-Tinted T-45 lense mod on. I started on 3, so that may be why I love it so much, but the game was extraordinary. I loved the radio, Threedog, exploring the DC ruins, and more. This kind of thing is also why I'm interested in the Capital Wasteland project.
(Thanks. Like the profile pic, by the way. Rorschach's my favorite DC character. Hurmmm.)
R.Graves
Confirmed Retard
Hold on now there son this is the unpopular opinions thread not the wrong opinions thread.
Atomic_Spawned
Radiation-soaked, needs a towel.
R.Graves said:
Hmmm... I seem to recall this is an opinion thread. Maybe I clicked on the wrong one.
D
Deleted member 116891
Guest
What were your favourite new ideas that you think NV brought to the table?
Have you finished both the classic games or did the graphics turn you off completely?
Fair enough. I don't think anyone can disagree with an emotive response.... if you start arguing it's better than NV or the classics in most objective senses (design wise) then we may have to differ.
(Thank you)
No harm in being nice surely?
Atomic_Spawned
Radiation-soaked, needs a towel.
TheOtherManInTheRoom said:
And I understand that. It seems a lot of fans on this and other sites seem to have a rigid 'If you don't agree with me you're wrong!' standpoint. That's not inherently true. Liking it doesn't make it good, but hating doesn't make it bad either. I did like the top down isometric view, and the turn-based RPG style, but I think people has a strict view of what an RPG is, and in truth, it's more than that.