Voodoo 3D looking ahead to Fallout 3

[Brother None]

Another top ranking for Fallout 3 as most anticipated game of 2008, ranking at #3 behind StarCraft II and...ehr...Left 4 Dead (why not just spell it "Left 4 Ded Yo" while you're at it). With this insightful blurb:<blockquote>Bottom Line: It's a sweet ass Oblivion plugin set in a 1950's era World War 3! Oh, just kidding, relax ladies. While the drastic change in gameplay philosphies have frightened more than a few Fallout fans (imagine if Half-Life 3 became a turn-based strategy game or something wacky like that), Bethesda has a pretty good track record. Before you eat that entire case of radioactive creamed corn, try the game out, you might like it!</blockquote>Link:Top 10 Most Wanted 2008 Games on VE3D.

Thanks Polynikes.

 

[Wooz]

Bethesda has a pretty good track record

A good track record of what, exactly?

 

[junkevil]

try the game out, you might like it!

how would that guy know? has he played the finished game? oh, he hasn't? so wtf?

 

[Yamu]

The statement still stands though, doesn't it? Whether or not he's played it, any given fan may still end up liking it for what it is (a pretty PA game) more than hating it for what it isn't (e.g.:canonical, for starters). There were a good number of fans that appreciated Tactics for what it was: Full of holes and not wholly in the spirit of Fallout, but a decent game. Who's to say that F3 won't be enjoyable on at least that level?

(Sorry to nitpick, and I'm not saying that the LIKELIHOOD of satisfaction with the end product is looking at all sunny right now, but knee-jerk negative reactions are what we as a fanbase are infamous for, and the resultant loss of credibility is kind of a peeve.)

 

[junkevil]

Who's to say that F3 won't be enjoyable on at least that level?

i'm not saying fo3 will be enjoyable or joyless. i haven't played it. and i couldn't care less what people thought of the fanbase. most of the same people sit around wishing every game were just like halo 3 or bioshock.

besides, any most anticipated games list of 2008 that forgets about tim schaffer's "brutal legend" (see: all of them) can fuck right off in my book.

 

[Tyshalle]

Left 4 Dead (why not just spell it "Left 4 Ded Yo" while you're at it).

I think it's a reference to the 4-person cooperative nature of the game.

Not a very good reference, mind you, but at least somewhat excusable.

 

[Ravager69]

Man. I don't think writing anything on such articles has any sense no more. We should just acknowledge their existance, then forget about them.....

 

[myzko]

Alan wake, Spore, Starcraft II, 'n Left 4 Dead is the games on that list I'm looking forward to the mos

What's up with the hating of the name of Left 4 dead?

 

[TwinkieGorilla]

Bethesda has a pretty good track record

A good track record of what, exactly?

somehow convincing people that their games should be bought and played.

 

[iridium_ionizer]

Bottom Line: It's a sweet ass Oblivion plugin set in a 1950's era World War 3! Oh, just kidding, relax ladies.

Ouch! Calling Fallout 3 an Oblivion plugin. Even in jest it's an obvious slight. Someone's not going to get an early preview build to review once the game's getting ready to ship.

 

[generalissimofurioso]

A good track record of what, exactly?

DUDE!

They like totally made PBA Bowling 2004 and IHRA Drag Racing: Sportsman Edition!!!!

And let's not forget the Home Alone game on the NES, that was a bonafide legend!

Ewww... I feel so dirty just for typing that.

 

[sanyok21]

try the game out, you might like it!

how would that guy know? has he played the finished game? oh, he hasn't? so wtf?

what exactly in the word "MIGHT" didn't you understand? From what we know of the game so far, we can't already be absolutely sure we won't like it, so there's nothing wrong with what he said.

 

[Brother None]

what exactly in the word "MIGHT" didn't you understand? From what we know of the game so far, we can't already be absolutely sure we won't like it, so there's nothing wrong with what he said.

Cool! From now on I'll say "Don't try the game, it might suck!"

Try = purchase, note, since Bethesda doesn't do demos. Kind of a sucky advice to give, innit?

 

[Black]

try the game out, you might like it!

how would that guy know? has he played the finished game? oh, he hasn't? so wtf?

what exactly in the word "MIGHT" didn't you understand? From what we know of the game so far, we can't already be absolutely sure we won't like it, so there's nothing wrong with what he said.

Oh shit, from what I know, I'm absolutely sure I won't like it because I don't like fps games dressed up as rpgs. Also, I don't like Fallout without turn-based combat, iso view, int affecting dialogue and I don't like Fallout with Fatman, exploding cars and super-orcs that can't have normal dialogue with humans.
And there's nothing wrong with what I said, 'cause it's already been confirmed.
Oh, and it's very strange that *I* won't like it because I'm a Fallout fan, I've enjoyed F1 and F2 so it's "strange" that I won't enjoy F3... maybe because it's a big, fat fail.
I'm lika a god or something... I know things other people do not.

 

[katja86]

Bethesda has a pretty good track record

A good track record of what, exactly?

Their record of using bloom is second to none!

 

[TheSHEEEP]

Nono. It must be the track record of promises they didn't keep.

 

[LuckyOasis]

I don't understand why so many people on these boards think Fallout 3 is going to be a first-person shooter. If Fallout 3's gameplay looks similar to any type of game on the market, I'd say it looks similar to Mass Effect.

Bethesda has said you can play the game in an over-the-shoulder view, and that's how I intend to love playing Fallout 3 a number of times.

I understand that a lot of people around here don't like Bethesda, but I think you all need to understand that a lot of people do like Bethesda and the games they have been making.

I submitted a news blurb that never got posted. Bethesda now has a blog on IGN. You can read Todd Howard's entry here:

http://blogs.ign.com/Bethesda_Softworks/2008/01/22/77856/

Todd Howard has said a number of times that he loved the first two games and that the team is trying really hard to make Fallout 3 great. I've said on here before that I think the changes the team is making to the formula were very much needed, so I won't rehash them all again right now.

I think the "try it, you might like it" statement is more telling about the general public's view of the small portion of the Fallout fanbase that is obscenely opposed to Bethesda's updating of the franchise than many of you seem to realize.

Try the guacamole, you might like. Try a piece of sushi, you might like it. Try a bottle of extra-pale ale, you might like it.

Honestly... step back and think about it for a second. Doesn't it seem possible that maybe the only reason you don't like the direction Bethesda is taking is because you're not allowing yourselves to open your minds to a new experience?

I hope Fallout games keep getting made until we have some sort of completely immersive virtual reality gaming system. I hope one day I'll be able to wander around the Fallout universe in a true first person perspective. In the meantime, I am really happy to soon be able to experience a fictional universe I love in a more immersive way than was possible a decade ago.

As far as there not being any demos made available by Bethesda, well, use a little networking. Find a few friends who might be on the fence about the game, and have everybody throw in 20 bucks towards the purchase. Twenty dollars isn't all that much money these days... that's one case of beer, or just more than half a tank of gas. You can all trade off time playing the game... maybe one or two days each... and then if nobody likes the game you can bring it in to GameStop and get a chunk of your money back. Or, if one person (shockingly) really likes the game, he or she can have the option to buy the other people out of their shares.

So, I agree. Give Fallout 3 a chance.

 

[Neamos]

Yeah, well some people like Bethesda and TES: Oblivion and you're going to have to accept that, bitches

Are you the guy who said to "go see the world, see other people, maybe you'll change your mind about fallout 3"? I think you don't really get it.

 

[Black]

I don't understand why so many people on these boards think Fallout 3 is going to be a first-person shooter

First person - check
Guns - check
and stupid guns like fatman - check
dumbed down gameplay (minigames) - check
lots of shooting - check (because obviously when it comes to Super-mutants/FO3 dialogue isn't an option)

Here.

Bethesda has said you can play the game in an over-the-shoulder view, and that's how I intend to love playing Fallout 3 a number of times.

Huh? There are 3 "views"

in FO3.
You can zoom out to iso-like but won't be able to play while in it.
FPP which seems to be the main perspective
And 3rd person- beth says that it works very well but hey, wanna ask them what they said about Morrowind's and Oblivion's tpp before it's release?

I understand that a lot of people around here don't like Bethesda, but I think you all need to understand that a lot of people do like Bethesda and the games they have been making.

But do you understand that bethesda makes very different games and has different target audience? If they can't even make FO3 similiar to previous FOs why buy the license?

Try the guacamole, you might like. Try a piece of sushi, you might like it. Try a bottle of extra-pale ale, you might like it.

Try this hot-dog, you might like it. Of course, it's not a hot-dog you paid for and expected but hey, you MIGHT like it! Despite the fact that it tastes like another mcdonald burger.

Doesn't it seem possible that maybe the only reason you don't like the direction Bethesda is taking is because you're not allowing yourselves to open your minds to a new experience?

Cute, another "you're not open-minded" 'argument' but dressed up.

So, I agree. Give Fallout 3 a chance.

Do you realize that right now this should look more like "give
Fallout 3 chance #xxx"? Give them chance with tb combat, screwed up, give them chance with iso view, screwed up, give them chance with super mutants and BoS, screwed up, give them chance with weapons design, screwed up.
The list goes on.

 

[Morbus]

I don't understand why so many people on these boards think Fallout 3 is going to be a first-person shooter. If Fallout 3's gameplay looks similar to any type of game on the market, I'd say it looks similar to Mass Effect.

Exactly! First person shooter. OTS camera? Who cares? It's a shooter anyway.

Anyway, I love going on about this for the nth type so here I go again: bethesda is not "updating" Fallout, they are CHANGING fallout. To put it simple, Fallout 3 has nothing to do with anything Fallout was ever meant to be to begin with. I mean, except for the part where it's a post apoc adventure game, ok, but besides that, where is the spirit of Fallout? Yeah, come, please, with that list bethesda published to defend themselves, a list of the things that Fallout was supposedly meant to be, a list made by Fargo who didn't put a finger on the actual game at all... Come, please, use that as an argument to defend Fallout 3 is much like Fallout was meant to be in the beginning, so we can all laugh at the idiocy of the point.

Seriously, you want it explained? Read articles, interviews and stuff, get some perspective. Better yet, wait! I'll explain it for you: Fallout was originally meant to be called "Vault 13: A GURPS Post-Nuclear Adventure". Now, do you know why? Because Fallout is a GURPS game (now GURPS inspired, ok), it's, above pretty much EVERYTHING else, a GURPS game, and everything comes AFTER that. Choices and consequences? No, that's NOT Fallout, Fallout is FREAKING NOT about choices and consequences, that's what EVERY RPG should be about. Fallout is not about gruesome death animations, that's eyecandy, you can live without it (although the game'd certainly suffer). It's not about, I don't know, survival. It's about, firstly and before everything else, the genre it fits in: roleplay. But that's too general. You have to add the ruleset: GURPS. But that's too general too. You have to add the setting and the tone and the style and everything else. Now bethesda got the first part right: it's a role-playing game. And they possibly got the third part right too, the tone, style and all that stuff. The thing they missed was the second part: the ruleset. It's not a GURPS game with point and click mechanics anymore, a game where you get to look at everything, have a narrator describe you every fact and act, where you get to use anything on everything (well, most of the times it does nothing, yeah), but that's what Fallout is. Now, do you call that an update? Changing the whole ruleset? I don't care if ti has stats, I don't care if it has skills. Oblivion has a GURPS inspired ruleset too and it's not Fallout's SPECIAL. Hell even Silent Storm's ruleset is closer to Fallout's and it's no where near it. And it's turn based. PURE FREAKING TURN BASED. Bethesda's piece is full real time, with a SPECIAL-like ruleset, which is, all points to it, not even the same as Fallout's basic sheet. Fallout rules are turn based, you change the turn based part, you change the rules, you change Fallout.

In the end, what do you thing came first: the rules or the content? You guess...

Anyway, thanks for reading my crappy rant... crappy...