Why is Fallout 3 called "Oblivion with guns"?

[Norzan]

Also lol at this guy trying to dismiss what I say because 'hurr durr only 10 houers'' when I got 100s of cumulated hours across the whole series which is essentially the same game. People on steam love to do that too.

This logic is so laughable and stupid. I have hundred of hours through Final Fantasy 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 9. But i barely played 7 and 8 and yet, they play very similarly to the ones i played. And yet that doesn't make me able to have an opinion on either of those two games.

Same with Pokemon. Let's say i played the first three gens - by your logic that somehow gives me the right to criticize Gen 4 to 7 just because they all play the same, even though i played only 3 out of 7. Playing the same is only one of the things a game has. Story, characters, world, music and several other things can be wildly different between games.

So, no. You don't have the right to criticize Morrowind (and even go as far as call it the worst in the series) by just playing the game for 10 hours, when the game has hundred of hours of content.

 

[mfkndggrfll]

Worst in the series combat-wise, otherwise 3rd place. 10 hours is more than enough seriously. You learn like 80% of the game in the first few hours: The skills/class builds, the combat, the controls, the game engine, the dialogue quality, the quest variety, the world map.

What I havent seen yet are the late guild quests, different NPCs, different creatures and weapons. Game has hundreds of hours of contant that most likely plays out the exact same way as the early game.

Its like if you say the combat sucks in Pokemon after a few hours, well guess what, it stays roughly the same for the whole game until the very end. You get different moves but still are limited to 4.

 

[Hassknecht]

Daggerfall and Morrowind are hard to compare to begin with. Daggerfall is more of an open world dungeon crawler and very close to its PnP roots in many aspects. Morrowind embraced more of the possibilities of the "c" in cRPG, downsizing heavily, but giving the player much more detail in the process.
Also, if you actually thought that Morrowind had one-click-combat 10 hours are apparently not enough for you to actually understand the game. The control scheme changed due to the emphasis on free look, but other than that the combat is very much the same as it was in Daggerfall. It was in Oblivion where the different stats for different attacks were dropped, making different attack modes (besides power attacks) merely cosmetic.

/edit 1 and 2:
Weirdly enough I feel like Skyrim actually went back to some design choices of Daggerfall again. The heavy emphasis on dungeon crawls and randomly generated quests, mostly.

The combat got virtually dumbed down. In the first 2 games you had to click and swipe the mouse while actively dodging, in Morrowind you just click.

This here. It's blatantly false. Morrowind has virtually the same combat that Daggerfall had.

 

[CerberusGate]

when I got 100s of cumulated hours across the whole series which is essentially the same game.

Okay, now that is hilariously illogical. How do you come up with something like that?

It'll be like saying I perfectly understand every first person shooter because they are essentially the same game genre. Trying to present such a notion in any publication would get one laughed at by gaming audiences.

Seriously if you need more than a couple hours to analyse a game then you need some Mentats.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/analysis:

detailed examination of anything complex in order to understand its nature or to determine its essential features

True analysis requires detailed examinations rather than something from a cursory glance. So claiming that 10 hours is sufficient is a fallacy in itself especially if one wants to fully analyse everything a game with length longer than 10 hours has to offer.

EDIT:

likely plays out the exact same way as the early game.

Actually, the PC would be a living demigod at that point; being able to run at break-neck speeds, able to clear distances by seemingly Herculean leaps, carrying artifacts or custom enchanted items merely for utilities (like for Levitating, Water-Walking, Divine/Almsivi Intervention, Mark/Recall etc.), every uber-powerful attack connecting with whatever poor sap they encounter in a fight, NPCs addressing the PC differently (especially once they've complete the Main Quest), being the head of factions with the prestige and artifacts one gets from being in charge, and more.

It's quite different from the early game and does provide a proper sense of satisfaction as the early game has the player character start out with a slow running speed, only capable of hopping at best, using whatever weapon they can afford with their paltry amount of gold, needing potions and taking public transport (silt striders, boats, gondolas) to get around (i.e Levitation, Water-Walking etc), attacks missing due to no skills in combat, NPCs addressing the PC as an outlander (especially if you were a Khajiit or Argonian in which they had little respect for your kind), having to do errands for guilds.

 

[Norzan]

Worst in the series combat-wise, otherwise 3rd place. 10 hours is more than enough seriously. You learn like 80% of the game in the first few hours: The skills/class builds, the combat, the controls, the game engine, the dialogue quality, the quest variety, the world map.

Apparently not enough time to know that the combat of Morrowind is not just one click like you claimed, when you can execute several moves depending on you are walking towards. And each move is more effective depending on where the enemy is and the weapon type you are using.

If you are going to critique a game that has hundred of hours of content, playing only 10 hours barely gives you any right to criticize it as whole, let alone saying is the worst one. And yes, you said it was the worst in the series, not just in combat.

You backtrack on your claims and then come up with nonsense to try to dismiss arguments.

 

[CerberusGate]

dungeon crawls

I am somewhat fearful in imagining Skyrim using randomly generated dungeons. Mostly because I imagine such dungeons become buggy messes.

 

[Valdetiosi]

I am somewhat fearful in imagining Skyrim using randomly generated dungeons. Mostly because I imagine such dungeons become buggy messes.

I am the opposite, I would love randomly generated dungeons implemented in 3D. The most obvious way to make it work is to generate the templates then conncet all paths that would be "broken" (doors not being on the walls, clipping issues, one-way trips ect.)

 

[CerberusGate]

I am the opposite, I would love randomly generated dungeons implemented in 3D. The most obvious way to make it work is to generate the templates then conncet all paths that would be "broken" (doors not being on the walls, clipping issues, one-way trips ect.)

Knowing modern Bethesda and their Q&A though...

Randomly generated dungeons could work and I do see value in it.

I just would not trust modern Bethesda to handle it plus I have heard stories of some dungeons and quests in Daggerfall being impossible to complete due to the RNG screwing the layouts too badly that progress becomes impossible.

 

[Valdetiosi]

Knowing modern Bethesda and their Q&A though...

Randomly generated dungeons could work and I do see value in it.

I just would not trust modern Bethesda to handle it plus I have heard stories of some dungeons and quests in Daggerfall being impossible to complete due to the RNG screwing the layouts too badly that progress becomes impossible.

That is actually and unfortunately true, but I find the charm in them, so it has not really bothered me much. It is good idea to save before accepting any quests though incase they might not work.

 

[TerminallyChill]

Wow, really wasn't expecting such a landslide opinion on this poll. I thought it would be closer to half and half. Since I voted no, I guess maybe I should inject some alternate viewpoints into this thread.

Disclaimer: I haven't personally played any of the Elder Scrolls games, but I am familiar enough with them to feel justified participating in this conversation. I acknowledge however, that this could very well be the reason I am in the minority here.

First off, I'll say right out that I think comparing Oblivion to Fallout 3 based on things like visuals, movement, inventory, combat, and AI is a little foolish. From what I understand, these games were built on essentially the same engine, and similarities of this caliber should be expected. The developers were simply using the tools they had access to. I doubt many here would agree New Vegas is a clone of Fallout 3 just because the menus work the same.

I do think criticizing Fallout 3 for sharing design philosophy with Oblivion is fair, however. The leveled enemies, focus on exploration, cramming of established groups into fantasy archetypes, and other similar atrocities committed by Bethesda are valid arguments to make.

Personally, I think Fallout 3 and Oblivion have enough differences in purpose and execution to warrant voting no in this poll. Are they flimsy, minor differences? Yeah, I admit that. But they do exist.

One of the paramount features of any Fallout title is being forced to make morally ambiguous decisions. While Fallout 3's main quest fails spectacularly at this, there are some portions of the game that at least made an attempt to stay true to the series. Harold in Oasis asks you to kill him because he is miserable, but he is also necessary to repopulate the wasteland with plants. In the Pitt, you have to decide whether to free the slaves or let Ashur continue working on a cure for mutation. These examples are far from perfect and one is from a fucking DLC, but it does show a shred of "Falloutness". Neither of those things explicitly scream Elder Scrolls to me.

Another thing that has been touched on already is the inclusion of SPECIAL, skills, perks, rads, and karma. While I get the implimentation of this stuff was not exactly perfect or even good, it is there.

One last thing, and I could be wrong about this, but is there any equivalent to Fallout 3's version of V.A.T.S. in The Elder Scrolls series? I wouldn't be shocked if there was, but if there isn't, that classifies as a relatively major gameplay difference in my book.

So do I think Fallout 3 and Oblivion share a lot of questionable, borderline lazy similarities? Yeah. Are they the same game but with different weapons? I think that might be a bit of an oversimplification.

 

[Valdetiosi]

You could see it this way, Oblivion is hack n' slash RPG and Fallout 3 is Run n' gun RPG. They are tied together by the combat, with the most famous tactic being chugging stimpaks/health potions before seeing if you or the enemy dies.

 

[Norzan]

@TerminallyChill

Oblivion has barely any different outcomes in quests, but i think the Paranoia quest alone has more different outcomes than any quest in Fallout 3.

It's basically a guy named Glarthir thinks he's being spied by three people of the city he lives. So, he hires you to spy on them. In the end you find out nobody is spying on him and he's just paranoid. But you can tackle the outcome in several ways.

- You can say one of them is spying on him, he'll ask you to kill that person and he'll reward you.
- You can say no one is spying on him and he'll attempt to kill you because he thinks you're part of that group of people.
- You can refuse to kill anyone he asks you to kill and he'll take matters into his own hands.
- After you say which person is spying on him, you can hand over the note to a guard and they will stop and kill him.
- You can say to two of the people Glarthir asked you to spy on, that he's going to try to kill them. Both of them beat him to death. The other one does nothing if you do so.

 

[TerminallyChill]

@TerminallyChill

Oblivion has barely any different outcomes in quests, but i think the Paranoia quest alone has more different outcomes than any quest in Fallout 3.

It's basically a guy named Glarthir thinks he's being spied by three people of the city he lives. So, he hires you to spy on them. In the end you find out nobody is spying on him and he's just paranoid. But you can tackle the outcome in several ways.

- You can say one of them is spying on you, he'll ask you to kill that person and he'll reward you.
- You can say no one is spying on him and he'll attempt to kill you because he thinks you're one part of that group of people.
- You can refuse to kill anyone he asks you to kill and he'll take matters into his own hands.
- After you say which person is spying on him, you can hand over the note to a guard and they will stop and kill him.
- You can say to two of the people Glarthir asked you to spy on, that he's going to try to kill them. Both of them beat him to death. The other one does nothing if you do so.

Wow, whoever wrote that quest must have been fired before Fallout 3 and 4 got made. I can see where the developers might have just gotten lucky with the ambiguous choice thing, though.

 

[Norzan]

Wow, whoever wrote that quest must have been fired before Fallout 3 and 4 got made. I can see where the developers might have just gotten lucky with the ambiguous choice thing, though.

Yeah, it's pretty baffling to me. If Oblivion had a lot of quests like this, i wouldn't be so harsh on it. Maybe a little less harsh on Fallout 3 too, but not as much.

 

[mfkndggrfll]

I voted yes even though I dont see it as a bad thing. Fallout 3 is 'like' Oblivion with guns more than Morrowind of Skyrim with guns.

 

[Gizmojunk]

I voted a long time ago.