Your opinion is worthless

I’ve always felt that Beth puts their best efforts into TES rather than Fallout. Fallout seems like their test bed for ideas in gameplay or narrative that wouldn’t make it to the next TES game either for risk of bad reception like voiced protagonist or quality control.

How will players react to this gameplay addition or voiced protagonist? Try it in the next Fallout.
This is really upsetting especially since they claim Fallout is in their DNA. Why not take better care of it then?
 
I’ve always felt that Beth puts their best efforts into TES rather than Fallout. Fallout seems like their test bed for ideas in gameplay or narrative that wouldn’t make it to the next TES game either for risk of bad reception like voiced protagonist or quality control.

How will players react to this gameplay addition or voiced protagonist? Try it in the next Fallout.
Probably not wrong but there's been too few releases to really tell that either. Fallout 4 is the only thing that really fits this bill. 76 was more to make money before selling the company, make them worth more to a buyer. They didn't care about the ratings as much as they cared how much it made them worth. You can see similar effects in a lot of other ideas like paid mods and whatnot. Fallout 3 didn't really do this and in fact, you could say Oblivion was the better tester for what Fallout 3 would be. And what's New Vegas? It was critically acclaimed and not made fully by them but where's the New Vegas of Skyrim or Oblivion?

I get what you mean but it's not quite quantifiable either.
 
Yeah, I’m going on gut feeling here really just based on comparing the quality and replay value of Oblivion and Skyrim vs F3 and F4 along with some of the wonky design choices in the two Fallout’s. A lot of that will be subjective though too.
 
I do love when people conflate Fallout 1 and New Vegas “backstories” with the backstories forced on you in 3 and 4. Like, how can you not see the difference between saying your character is a courier or a vault dweller versus saying your character is a pre-war veteran married with children or your character is a 19 year-old raised by a single father and bullied by a gang of douchebags all his life.


This is best explained by simply pointing to the three premade characters of Fallout 1 and how different they are despite fitting under the exact same background premise, and even further variations thereof. Are you a mild mannered nobody, a meek vault beaucrat who's never wanted to hurt anyone and just got unlucky? Are you a miscreant that regularly stirs trouble and gets himself put in the brig, that everyone's happy to see you go? Are you one of the Vaults most hard working and intelligent scientists or Doctors that everyone is confident will succeed?

The Courier is a smidge more restrictive but not by much. There is a large degree of wiggle room behind "You had a job delivering packages at times, and you delivered two that are confirmed." New Vegas even allows you to inform your own background through different dialogue options, some defined by Perks (i.e methods of personalizing your character)
 
I have the same mindset with Disney Star Wars, anything that Disney released involving Star Wars isn't canon to me.

\/\/\/\/ This should've been imo Episode 7,8,9, not that mediocre, poor, bad sequel trilogy

I have read the Thrawn trilogy books and I like them.
Compared to a lot of the Star Wars books that came after them they still hold up very well, if perhaps a little too wordy.
And Thrawn is a little overcapable though that is part of his appeal.

For me the only books (ignoring comics and games for a moment) that are on relative equal standards are the Hand of Thrawn duology books, also by Zahn, and the Han Solo Adventures by Brian Daley (I wish the man had written more, and that he also had written Indiana Jones books)
I do think Zahn should have resisted of making Thrawn more 'nice', being more ethical/morally than some of the other Empire characters in an effort to make him a 'good' Imperial.

I also think that it would have been very difficult to turn the Heir to the Empire books into movies, the stories are simply too long for that.
Cutting and editing would have to be done to fit each book into a movie of perhaps two hours.
A series would have worked better in this case.


If I had been put in charge of a Star Wars sequel trilogy I would probably also have focused on the 'next generation' but with Luke, Han, Chewie, and Leia returning in secondary roles.

I would probably also have done something with a daughter of Luke Skywalker (I had this idea way before The Force Awakens), being Jedi student in the academy run by her father, but she would definitely not be a Mary Sue esque character.
She would have some flaws and limitations, perhaps good at being a Jedi, less at being a pilot for example or mechanic.

I would like to have paired her with a New Republic pilot, and later a young Imperial officer from the Imperial Remnant the New Republic now has peace with, the three having to work together to stop a new threat to the galaxy.
What that threat would be I do not know. It would not be the Yuuzhan Vong and I am also not that set on bringing the Sith back even if new Sith lords appearing would make the most sense, perhaps this time having a massive Sith army of their own. (feels too much repetition from the books, and the Old Republic MMO)


I do realize that a lot of this sounds similar to the parts of the later books in the old Star Wars EU. Luke's daughter being similar to Jaina Solo, the young Imperial officer being Jagged Fel (son of Soontir Fel), but that is probably because these concepts work very well.

Then again, prior to selling Star Wars and Indiana Jones to Disney, Lucas wanted to use characters from Star Wars Legacy.

In a way it kind of shows how Star Wars has restrained itself with some of its own lore, that is why I like earlier Star Wars a lot more in which the universe wasn't so 'hard' established yet.
 
If someone uses the word gatekeeper not in reference to Ghostbusters then they might be retarded.
 
Reading these Reddit posts makes me appreciate NMA so much more.

So much sperging about these boogeyman "gatekeepers", but when you browse the subreddit you can't see any. So many people "fighting the good fight" against the evil NV fanboys and NMAers.

Brave individuals posting their unpopular opinions how they actually like the best selling Fallout game.

Shut up retards and go play the game.
 
Oh no, they can't help but click on the backwater forum that doesn't even show up on page 1 of google if you type "NMA" and proceed to read 5 year old threads about us detailing why Fallout 4 sucks.

Seriously though, like we aren't that active and we don't plan raids on Facebook Groups or other forums or subreddits. The people who agree with us on there are just people who happen to agree. Oh no, you can't help but read every part of their essay instead of realizing you don't want to partake in any discourse about it and skipping over it! Someone help them!
 
Yeah, usually. It kinda makes them feel better to say they aren't elitist or snobby about it but it's almost like a circle where they come back to being no better because they'll judge you via association if you happen to agree that 3 and 4 weren't that great. OUROBOROS
 
However; I tried fall out 2, but the game mechanics were just too outdated and killed my enjoyment.
This was the most retarded line in the post. They can't just say they don't enjoy the gameplay in the first two Fallouts, they always have to throw the word outdated or archaic instead of just saying they don't like it.

Yeah, some stuff in the original Fallout games isn't exactly all that great and some games since then have improved them. But saying the overall mechanics are outdated is dumb as shit.

Like the "New Vegas is empty" meme, this is another meme that needs to die.

And i also like to point out the sheer hypocrisy of giving people shit for not liking the Bethesda Fallouts, but apparently people have every right to criticize the first two games. Double standards, i swear.
 
Last edited:
It's outdated because it's not action bang bang pew pew bazooka badonka donk BRRRRRR ZINGA ZINGA ZINGA HIT MARKER HIT MARKER KILLSTREAK!
 
They can't just say they don't enjoy the gameplay in the first two Fallouts, they always have to throw the word outdated or archaic instead of just saying they don't like it.
One must take into account that younger people tend to equate newness with quality—because they themselves are new, and so anything old tends to equate with poor quality. It's inaccurate sure, but that's been my experience.

The real trick to appreciation (if there needs be one), is to appreciate the work in the context of the required limitations; to be amazed that an artist could not just illustrate a great sprite, but to do it in 16 colors (or less); generally 229 colors in Fallout's case.

Mechanics-wise they have to fit the code in RAM, and in those days, RAM was incredibly expensive, and so players quite often had 4 megabytes or less of RAM —not gigabytes, megabytes; shared with the OS & its drivers no less. They had to build the game to suit the market, or few home users could run it.

Fallout runs in 16MB on a Pentium 90Mhz SVGA system.
 
Last edited:
One must take into account that younger people tend to equate newness with quality—because they themselves are new, and so anything old tends to equate with poor quality. It's inaccurate sure, but that's been my experience.

As a young person myself ironically I actually find classic Fallout more intuitive than most modern cRPGs like Pillars of Eternity or Baldur's Gate 3.
 
As a young person myself ironically I actually find classic Fallout more intuitive than most modern cRPGs like Pillars of Eternity or Baldur's Gate 3.
Probably because relatively speaking Fallout was intended for a wider audience than modern CRPGs, which is kind of funny when you think about it
 
As a young person myself ironically I actually find classic Fallout more intuitive than most modern cRPGs like Pillars of Eternity or Baldur's Gate 3.
Yeah, i also have played some modern cRPGs that took a little while to get used to stuff like the UI and inventory (Atom RPG for example). But that's one of the things that is pretty easy to get used to.

One must take into account that younger people tend to equate newness with quality—because they themselves are new, and so anything old tends to equate with poor quality. It's inaccurate sure, but that's been my experience.
Unfortunately, yes. But i can actually make an argument on how Fallout 3's gameplay was already dated in 2008. Specially the gunplay, since even Half Life 1 back in 1998 had much better combat feel than Fallout 3. Fallout 3's overall gunplay is really clunky, floaty and lacking of any impact, which makes the Operation Anchorage DLC even more disgusting because that's the main focus.

And it's actual an insult to even attempt to claim Fallout 3 feels like a Call of Duty game. Because as much as i don't care for Call of Duty, at least the gunplay there is at the very least servicable and functional.
 
One must take into account that younger people tend to equate newness with quality—because they themselves are new, and so anything old tends to equate with poor quality. It's inaccurate sure, but that's been my experience.

The real trick to appreciation (if there needs be one), is to appreciate the work in the context of the required limitations; to be amazed that an artist could not just illustrate a great sprite, but to do it in 16 colors (or less); generally 229 colors in Fallout's case.

Mechanics-wise they have to fit the code in RAM, and in those days, RAM was incredibly expensive, and so players quite often had 4 megabytes or less of RAM —not gigabytes, megabytes; shared with the OS & its drivers no less. They had to build the game to suit the market, or few home users could run it.

Fallout runs in 16MB on a Pentium 90Mhz SVGA system.

The general lack of respect for old stuff is very rampant. I myself love repairing old computers. I recently built a Pentium 3 933MHZ with an ISA sound card. I set it up with Dos 6.22 and Windows 98 on separate partitions. I also purchased a Roland soundcanvas for MIDI playback in games like Doom. Very impressive for it's time in my opinion.

How many 18 year olds like mucking about with floppies and PNP resource conflicts? Not F- many. I freely admit that I am probably the most... weird... person in a 200 mile radius. I hounded the shit out of somebody for a friggen CRT and practically had a love affair with it at home that night.

My magnum opus was the purchase of the new partially hand assembled Orpheus sound card for $370 something dollars (?). I am satisfied and do not regret the purchase at all, but a part of my brain questions my sanity as I write this.

I am repairing two backup legacy systems for driving radio repeaters in my area though. So that knowledge is not totally useless.
 
Yeah, i also have played some modern cRPGs that took a little while to get used to stuff like the UI and inventory (Atom RPG for example). But that's one of the things that is pretty easy to get used to.


Unfortunately, yes. But i can actually make an argument on how Fallout 3's gameplay was already dated in 2008. Specially the gunplay, since even Half Life 1 back in 1998 had much better combat feel than Fallout 3. Fallout 3's overall gunplay is really clunky, floaty and lacking of any impact, which makes the Operation Anchorage DLC even more disgusting because that's the main focus.

And it's actual an insult to even attempt to claim Fallout 3 feels like a Call of Duty game. Because as much as i don't care for Call of Duty, at least the gunplay there is at the very least servicable and functional.


Yeah the outdated argument just flat out doesn't stick. It's a genre difference nothing to do with age. As you say at the time Fallout 3 was outdated but now? It's archaic compared to the mountain of open world shooters like Far Cry. Fallout 3 is more outdated in it's genre than classic Fallout is to cRPGS
 
Back
Top