Will Fallout 3 be remembered?

Will Fallout 3 be remembered in 10 years' time?


  • Total voters
    896
TorontRayne said:
Precalculus isn't as important as Fallout. Get your priorities straight woman!
Fixed that for ya. =)

TorontRayne said:
Already happened. It was called Fallout: New Vegas. :mrgreen:
Much as I agree, I said that I hold out hope for a "better Fallout game" in the future, practically speaking, that would be better than FO3, yet not shrugged off like FONV. If I had hair to pull out, I would have been every time reviewers kept calling New Vegas "more like an expansion to Fallout 3". It was like this year's nominations (in the US) with media deciding FOR the viewers that New Vegas wasn't what it really was. It far outshone FO3, but the media covering it wouldn't allow that opinion to float around. From a practical standpoint, despite surpassing FO3 in damn near every respect (if not every), people still don't recognize it as the clear superior. My hope is for a future title that WILL, and deservedly so, no less.
 
Calling FONV an 'expansion' of FO3 is rediculous, stupid, and just shows the idiocy of mainstream critics anyway. When I want to buy a game, I ignore the mainstream critics; even though I have a subscription to GI, I don't listen to THEIR reviews, I see what the people who actually play the damn thing say about it.

It's messed up that critics can have such a huge sway on how a game sells, and even people's opinion of it. I've often disagreed with the critics when it comes to games, and likely always will.

Have you ever thought of trying to be a game critic, Slav? You *might* breathe a bit of umm...sanity into the field. Oh, and thank's for the correction in that first quote <3
 
FOvet said:
Have you ever thought of trying to be a game critic, Slav? You *might* breathe a bit of umm...sanity into the field. Oh, and thank's for the correction in that first quote <3
No problema, senorita.

I have given all manner of different fields consideration. My latest return to the prospect of reviewing games was a long, contemplative stare at The Escapist's "submit a review" page, wondering if there was anything I'd offer to such a well-established site that could be original, and not come off as self-satisfactory (after all, Jim Sterling already has that ^_< ). It's certainly something I definitely do on my own time, but it's like my writing, in general. Yeah, maybe it's good, and if it's expositional maybe it's even right, but have I refined it enough to meet an entire industry's standards? Eh, maybe I'll just have to take a dive to finally see...
 
Hey, I know what you mean about your writing. I currently have written 2 manuscripts myself that I need to edit and get sent to a damn literary agent. I love to right, and I like to think I can see a good writer when I come across one.

So many of those worthless critics are biased, or fanboys of a certain game or genera and can't see beyond their own personal opinions and give an acurate review of a game. You seem to be able to do this *most* of the time. If you ever do publish a game review, I want to read it.
 
SnapSlav said:
TorontRayne said:
Precalculus isn't as important as Fallout. Get your priorities straight woman!
Fixed that for ya. =)

TorontRayne said:
Already happened. It was called Fallout: New Vegas. :mrgreen:
Much as I agree, I said that I hold out hope for a "better Fallout game" in the future, practically speaking, that would be better than FO3, yet not shrugged off like FONV. If I had hair to pull out, I would have been every time reviewers kept calling New Vegas "more like an expansion to Fallout 3". It was like this year's nominations (in the US) with media deciding FOR the viewers that New Vegas wasn't what it really was. It far outshone FO3, but the media covering it wouldn't allow that opinion to float around. From a practical standpoint, despite surpassing FO3 in damn near every respect (if not every), people still don't recognize it as the clear superior. My hope is for a future title that WILL, and deservedly so, no less.


A woman huh? My bad. I second what FOvet said about you writing a review Snap.
 
Ah geez... So much praise. Always makes me uncomfortable! XD

But thank you, I appreciate it.

Actually, I DID write a FO3 review (well before FONV was announced, let alone released) some years back... I think it was on Achievement Hunter, or maybe ps3trophies.com? I'd have to hunt it down, but it was just a collection of my thoughts, and limited to what most sites allow users to post, not really structured into some kind of article. Remembering that I even wrote it brings back some memories. I wonder if I can find it. I'll re-post it if I ever do.

EDIT: Whaddaya know... I managed to find it. I haven't even re-read it yet, but I imagine it looks horrible compared to my current standards. But, this is what I wrote, way back in late 2008 or early 2009...

[spoiler:bf3b13f2e8]
If Fallout 3 could be summed up in one word, it would be "disappointing". Give me room to use MORE than one, and... well, you'll get this review!

Fallout 3 is a game that many people have been waiting to get their grimy paws on for over a decade. Yes, a decade. Eat that, Duke Nukem Forever! (Alright, those fans have been, and are STILL waiting even longer...) From being put on hold due to budget cuts, to being indefinitely ceased when the entire group of programmers behind it got shut down, several years back, many a Fallout fan has held out hope that some day, one day, the third in the trilogy would appear!

But before I go any further, let's be clear on Fallout 3's place in the series. It is NOT the 3rd game, by any means, whatsoever. After Fallout 1 and 2, fans were treated to another game that took a different, strategic approach, set in the Fallout universe: Fallout Tactics. This was an awesome game, but it lacked much of the fantastic RPG elements, such as dialog choices, sandbox-type quest arrangement, and it was almost entirely linear, from start to finish. Despite that, Fallout Tactics was, in my opinion, a great game to play. And still is! Following that might be the greatest shame in all of the Fallout franchise: Brotherhood of Steel. This last-gen console RPG (and it was "RPG" in name ONLY) was rife with flaws, lousy gimmicks, and suffered from extremely low replay value. In addition to that, hardcore fans would seethe in rage at the innumerable attacks on Fallout canon, making it horrible to play, experience, or even read about!

In the ashes of Brotherhood of Steel, 4 years later, comes Fallout 3! In the wake of such a tragic bombshell, this title has ONLY room to improve. So, from that perspective, this game has done nothing short of fulfilling the emptiness in our souls that many of us Fallout fans were left with, after BOS. But that's if you compare it to the LAST Fallout game. With it's title, Fallout 3, comes certain expectations to live up to. For starters, most won't consider the 2 Fallout titles that came between it, and it's sequential predecessors. They'll just think about 1 and 2. Well, rightfully so, it IS Fallout 3 after all!

Fallout 3 arrives on the scene, following in an epic series, set in a surreal, dark, yet morbidly-humorous backdrop of an environment, where your choices mattered and came back to haunt you later on. At the very least, Bethesda TRIED to replicate these features. And in some cases, they did well to preserve the old Fallout charm. Where they failed, however, lies in the very gameplay mechanics that they touted were so magnificent! With the inclusion of eating/drinking radiated food to restore health, Bethesda wanted to instill in the players a sort of "weight" to their desicions. "Patch myself up a little here and there, but get a small dose of radiation in the process?" Not knowing what lies ahead, many would make that painful choice much quicker than you'd expect. In fact, TOO quick. At the start of the experience, you WILL weigh your choices. You WILL stop and consider your rad count versus your HP, and which seems more pressing. You WILL feel bad (or, if you're that sort of sick bastard, delighted!) when you receive a deduction to your karma score. But in very short time, all that wears thin, and all that's left is a shallow experience, with a few, negligible quirks here and there.

The game never manages to arrive at any point that I could describe as "challenging". For hardcore players, "challenging" isn't enough, they want, crave- nay, they NEED "HARD". I would have said that "Impossible Mode" on Dead Space was a slight exaggeration in naming, but that it was a fun challenge, regardless. With only 3 difficulty settings to choose from, "Hard" difficulty in Fallout 3 never offered any challenge above the previous 2. During my first playthrough of the game, I believed that my choice in armor was among the many painful choices I'd have to make. Unlike Fallout 1 or 2, armor gives your character various skill boosts, here and there. A jumpsuit might enhance your repair skill slightly, while a pre-war business suit would enhance your charismatic sway over people. But wear these out in the field in the heat of battle? Surely not! But then again, by the end of the game, you actually take into consideration the stats that certain armor offers OVER it's damage resistance. Case in point, Power Armor. When I had to choose between a combat armor with good damage resistance, and excellent stats for a sniper (more chance to critical, and more action points, anyone?) and Power Armor, the classic Fallout icon, which (for once) gave me a deduction to my agility in order to reward me for enhancing my strength, I bitterly chose to stick with my combat armor. The choice was hard, but I stuck by my decision... Well, it WAS hard, at first.

In very short order, I found myself (to quote Yahtzee) "swimming in meds", so my choices had no weight, nor consequences to them, at all! I had thousands of caps to pay any doctor to rid me of any chemical addiction, and dozens, if not hundreds, of said drugs, meds, and anti-rad chems to pump myself full of at the drop of a hat, whenever I needed it. By my third playthrough, I decided to go crazy, and I stripped my level 3 character naked, and ran about Megaton, wrecking utter havoc and malevolence, as I proceeded to systematically eradicate the citizens of the town, with my bare hands! I managed to take out the town sheriff with his assault rifle with relative ease, and my slaughter was cut short ONLY when the town's ex-raider citizen (and potential companion of yours) filled me full of holes quicker than I could heal myself away, while remaining practically invulnerable to my efforts. Besides this ONE character's intervention, my massacre of Megaton went almost flawlessly! And once more, I did it with my freaking hands! NAKED!

Hard? Fallout 3 is anything BUT...
...continued from above

Which brings me to another disappointment, the Companion System. I played (as I'm sure many did) a freaking SAINT on my first journey through the Capitol Wasteland, and was disappointed to see a lack in choice of companions until much near the end of the game. Ironically, I was rewarded for my heroism by being granted 2 of the most powerful sidekicks to choose from, in quick succession! Yet once I was granted the choice of a second awesome follower, I was slapped in the face with the sad truth that only one may accompany me at a time. Another tough, weighty choice? Well, not as you might imagine. At first, I worried about my companion's health between battles. I'd select them in VATS simply to check up on their condition, only to find them at full health, so rest my worried little heart... some other time! Eventually I realized that your companion will ALWAYS be at full health in-between battles. It's almost as if they can shrug off every bullet wound, plasma burn, or rabid bite as soon as they get a minute to stretch their legs!

After this discovery, I watched their health DURING battles, to discover that, yes, they COULD take damage... but not much. In effect, while Bethesda make me THINK I had to make a tough call between 2 sidekicks to follow me around, and weigh their pros and cons to aid my decision, as it turns out, nearly EVERY companion you get to choose from has the option to grow into a walking tank that you'll hardly ever have to worry over! They carry infinite ammo, their armor never dulls, and their weapons never disappear! Some, you could outfit with bigger and better, making your survivalist buddy all but indestructible! Where was I, previously, about difficulty? Oh yeah, there wasn't any!

If I walked straight into a pool at the bottom of a dark, D.C. Metro chasm, and stuck it out for (in-game) hours, soaking up the rads and the vicious claws of the feral ghouls that roamed these halls, I could still pop out on the other side, inject a could Rad Aways and Stimpacks, NEVER worry about chemical addiction, and be about my merry way! Where was the difficulty in my travels? Where was the harsh, "survive by any means" theme of the Wasteland? At one point in my travels, I came across a small group of creepy cannibals, and when I caught on to their secret, a simple "Hey, you gotta do what you gotta do" eased their collective conscience over me. But while that may have been, thematically, true, the game itself NEVER felt that way. 200 years after the bombs dropped, and I was practically TRIPPING over pre-war Meds. Had I decided against scavenging for my wares, I could always buy them at ANY vendor, for INCREDIBLY cheap prices. Rare and valuable, my ass!

In the end, I realized that your choices for armor and weapons were little more than cosmetic. You had little room to decide how you wanted to play, because at certain points throughout the game, there was really only 1 way to move forward. But, despite these drawbacks, they had their appeals! The VAST menage of outfits you could adorn yourself with, the infinitely unique appearances you could generate for yourself (well, close to), being granted such a wide variety of aesthetics is hardly a bad thing, at all! Sure, my damage resistance may suck, and I have no combat bonuses whatsoever... but c'mon! A raider just got slashed to pieces by Freddy Krueger!!!

While it provides no challenge to your average gamer, and definitely zero for a Fallout veteran... Even though it merely simulated the SPECIAL system, and none of the stats had much of an impact on your character... Despite the fact that the voice cast of hundreds of Wastelanders seemed to be comprised by all of FOUR voice actors... Although every single ghoul, and every single mercenary, and every single Mutant sounds alike, with no audible distinction from one another... Fallout 3 is fun. It may not have NEARLY as much replay value as its predecessors, but as you've doubtless been able to gauge by reading my review, I played it A LOT!

So, yeah. Fallout 3 falls short of what many of us expected. But it's not at all a waste of money. I'm still glad that I purchased a Collector's Edition, and my Vault-Boy Collectible Bobblehead remains atop my desk. Fallout 3 shows obvious signs that it is NOT by the same crew as the original, but it earns the right to bear the name of "spiritual successor", and nothing less, to Fallout 2. "Disappointing" in one word... But in many, MANY more, worth your buy!



Sorry for the double post... I just wanted to complete my review... >_<
[/spoiler:bf3b13f2e8]
 
Fallout 3 is only good for those who have never played the old games, nor even CRPGs.

The bad news is that as Fallout 3 is advertised as a RPG, they begin to think that's what a CRPG should be like.

The good news is that it might act as a gateway to even better RPGs, such as the first 2 games in the series, as an obvious example.

However, as FNV already is a superior RPG, I think Fallout 3 may have become redundant.
 
You can't simply say it will be forgotten because you personally don't like it. I know many people that played it, some of which loved it, others did not. I don't think it will impact the world, but it is well known and it will likely be remembered, especially if 1 and 2 are remembered. New Vegas was even more popular. Whether Fallout 3 was a good game or not is irrelevant; it will be remembered by default. It is part of a best selling franchise, so people will know of it. Of course, future generation can play it and make a decision for themselves too.
 
I'm honestly sorry to say that Fallout 3 does not fall into the standard criteria for getting into the "forgotten" bin. At my local Walmart, the only Fallout game they still sell is, like it or not, Fallout 3, which is a damn shame. What's even worse is that I still continue to see people get it, so I don't think it's going to go out of stock any time soon. Not to mention, you can visit IGN's trailer for the game at any time and see that the most popular comment is "thumbs up if you're still playing this game in 2009 or 2010, 2011, 2012, and now 2013.

I really don't like Fallout 3, but for some ungodly reason, the game is still quite recognized as "the best ever made", by 95% of the entire Earth's populace (BTW, I'm glad I found this site! Good to finally find some people who share my view). I'd like to think that this game will be forgotten, but... well, I'm much more than positive that I'm only trying to fool myself.
 
Fallout 3 will be remembered. For the right or wrong reasons? I dont know. Depends on if Bathesda can win the love and trust from the die hard Fallout 1&2 and Tactics fans or not.
 
I don't even remember most of the characters, which apparently 3 was far better for than New Vegas (BS btw) so chances are none of the mainstream audience Bethesda craves will either.

People will remember Fallout 3, as the "BEST GAME EVAR", but no one will actually 'remember' it. No one will remember the characters, or story, or anything important.
 
Token said:
Without Fallout 3, there would be no New Vegas so its alright in my books.
without fo3, there's possibility of Van buren by Josh sawyer or Tim cain.
And dispite of the fact that NV is one of my best game ever, I think it's unfinished Van buran. I want Van buren...
 
without fo3, there's possibility of Van buren by Josh sawyer or Tim cain.
These type of statements are about as LOLZY as you guys think the "FO3 saved Fallout" quotes are. Yes the world is full of "possibilities" but lets consider the probabilities.

First off there's the whole acquisition of the IP to consider, TIM CAIN is a self-proclaimed NON-BUSINESS MAN, so he probably wouldn't lead the charge, it would probably would have had to been FARGO which doesn't really make sense either because it would have been far easier to acquire the wasteland rights as he did.

ALSO troika had briefly developed a postapocalyptic role-playing game that it eventually pitched to Interplay as a potential Fallout 3
, Interplay didn't bite.

Seconed per JES FO3,

Hes a great designer, which still requires a company to pay him to design.So with interplay holding onto the IP until it found a good lump of cash, they would have probably let it die, which to some would have been a good thing.

So, NO MONEY = NO IP, = NO GAMES

If you listen to Cain and Fargo talk about getting RPG's funded pre-kickstarter in several video-interviews they talk about how much of a struggle it is/was. Take that into consideration along with the fact that pre FO3, FALLOUT was not much of a commercial success in the eyes of the industry and there is no funding other than CAIN or FARGO and neither seems probable.
 
without fo3 Fallout can be remembered.
but for fo3, it will be forgotten like oblivion.
and without fo3, Josh sawyer or Tim cain can have chance to their sequel of Fallout without name of Fallout.
Name means nothing important for Fallout thing is quest and rule.
 
without fo3 Fallout can be remembered.
but for fo3, it will be forgotten like oblivion.
and without fo3, Josh sawyer or Tim cain can have chance to their sequel of Fallout without name of Fallout.
Name means nothing important for Fallout thing is quest and rule.

So what is your definition of forgotten?

Forgotten by the media?
With all the fallout 4 hype around, theres bound to be comparisons,
wish list, etc that mention FALLOUT 3

By fans ?
How about this thread and the lobby it lives in??

By sales ?
http://www.joystiq.com/2013/03/31/xbox-lives-april-1-dlc-sale-includes-fallout-3-ac3-bf3-disho/
still selling it 5 Years later.

Like ES IV : Oblivion?
http://www.nma-fallout.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=52123&sid=3edf43ad326af0ee31e800ab9ecd3891
#46

Or is it something more obscure and irrelevant?


and without fo3, Josh sawyer or Tim cain can have chance to their sequel of Fallout without name of Fallout.
 
Kotaku is some sort of oracle or what?
Fallout 3 and Oblivion will be forgotten.
If game was hated by some part of community and loved by other, then it obvious it place in history is in shadows.
And yes, Oblivion was hated by big part of TES fans, and Fallout 3 by old fans.

Fallout 2 and Morrowind will be remembered... not their sequels.
 
Back
Top