It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
Fallout SeriesHow fallout changed.(92 posts)(92 posts)
(92 posts)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
This is my favourite topic
Posted July 04, 2009
Just wanted to add my grain of salt about some stuff I read:
Preference and excellence are two different beasts, though one might help the other. That's why it's possible to like Fallout 3 but see that it is a mediocre game. Just because one likes something doesn't mean this thing is good.
Nostalgia is a wish of return to the past, which isn't what the fans of the old Fallout want. Rather they wish that newer games would base themselves on the strenghts of older games like Fallout and improve on them while avoiding their shortcomings — Fallout is far from being perfect. If people, including myself, still play old games instead of newer ones, it isn't merely because they prefer what is old out of nostalgia but because some old things are simply better than the new ones and still have something to offer today. The nostalgia card was already used during the Fallout 3 hype campaign and was just as stale there as it is now.
The closest thing to a modern Fallout sequel is Age of Decadence. More of a spiritual sequel but it looks very impressive so far from the gameplay exemples that were given — exemples, not vague promises of a gimmicky feature that won't have much impact in the final game.
Post edited July 04, 2009 by Gragt
Posted July 06, 2009
avatar
Undeadbeat: As for isometric view, I cannot think of one single recent game using it. Starcraft 2 will most likely have a rotatable camera, like almost all modern RTS games do. If you could show me an example of an upcoming game employing isometric camera, I'd be much obliged. Keep in mind that portable console games do not count, since they are limited by what the hardware can handle (in other words, having isometric view on a DS game is rarely an artistic choice).

diablo 2. upcoming.
Posted July 06, 2009
Seriously, Fallout 1, 2 & 3 are all awesome in their own way. Fallout 3 is for sure the best contemporary RPG, just like Fallout 1 & 2 (and Arcanum) were in their day. So stop moaning.
Posted July 07, 2009
avatar
AntiPro: Seriously, Fallout 1 & 2 are awesome in their own way. Fallout 3 is for sure the best contemporary RPG of this crappy game industry of abominations and horrors.

fixed.
Posted July 07, 2009
lol
Posted July 07, 2009
avatar
AntiPro: So stop moaning.

Isn't the internet made for moaning?
Dunno what I would do with my life if I couldn't endlessly complain about the minutiae of life.
Posted July 07, 2009
avatar
Undeadbeat: And what is the topic at hand here, anyway? All I see in the first post is "Fallout 1 and 2 were great, here's a link to a video of the newest Fallout 3 DLC, SCREW YOU BETHE$DA". This is not a good way to start a discussion, and I have a hard time seeing what the OP wanted out of it except a flame war.
Anyway, here's my opinion on the subject: Fallout 1 and 2 were fantastic, albeit flawed (buggy, a lot of cut content leading to loose threads, slow combat, etc), games. Fallout 3 is also a very good game, although it also has several severe flaws (buggy, repetitive dialogue due to limited voice acting, bad voice acting, stiff animations, etc). That said, they're so different from one another that a direct comparison is by no means fair.
A lot of fans of the original Fallout games, the OP of this thread seemingly included, feel that Fallout 3 somehow ruined what already was. Personally, I can't really see how that makes sense to them. It's a separate game and does not directly affect the original games in any way, and without it the series would be dead and buried by now anyway - or, worse yet, there could have been another Brotherhood of Steel game in its place. Either way, being angry about Fallout 3 seems completely ridiculous to me.

I couldn't put it better myself. Each one, though flawed, is killer. Look at something like No More Heroes. Sure, it's not perfect, but it's something you must try due to it trying something different from the norm. I could say the same for all of the Fallout games.
PS: I know what you're going to say: "fallout 3 did nothing different! It's a shitty FPS! u suk!111!!!" My response: it's an RPG with shooter elements, not an all-out FPS. It's closer to the System Shock end of the spectrum than the Halo end. It requires the strategy needed from the original games due to the fact that going all-out like the aforementioned pile of mediocrity (guess which one?) causes you to become a bullet sammich. It's a different take on the same basic concepts.
Posted July 08, 2009
avatar
Undeadbeat: And what is the topic at hand here, anyway? All I see in the first post is "Fallout 1 and 2 were great, here's a link to a video of the newest Fallout 3 DLC, SCREW YOU BETHE$DA". This is not a good way to start a discussion, and I have a hard time seeing what the OP wanted out of it except a flame war.
Anyway, here's my opinion on the subject: Fallout 1 and 2 were fantastic, albeit flawed (buggy, a lot of cut content leading to loose threads, slow combat, etc), games. Fallout 3 is also a very good game, although it also has several severe flaws (buggy, repetitive dialogue due to limited voice acting, bad voice acting, stiff animations, etc). That said, they're so different from one another that a direct comparison is by no means fair.
A lot of fans of the original Fallout games, the OP of this thread seemingly included, feel that Fallout 3 somehow ruined what already was. Personally, I can't really see how that makes sense to them. It's a separate game and does not directly affect the original games in any way, and without it the series would be dead and buried by now anyway - or, worse yet, there could have been another Brotherhood of Steel game in its place. Either way, being angry about Fallout 3 seems completely ridiculous to me.
avatar
ihitterdal: I couldn't put it better myself. Each one, though flawed, is killer. Look at something like No More Heroes. Sure, it's not perfect, but it's something you must try due to it trying something different from the norm. I could say the same for all of the Fallout games.
PS: I know what you're going to say: "fallout 3 did nothing different! It's a shitty FPS! u suk!111!!!" My response: it's an RPG with shooter elements, not an all-out FPS. It's closer to the System Shock end of the spectrum than the Halo end. It requires the strategy needed from the original games due to the fact that going all-out like the aforementioned pile of mediocrity (guess which one?) causes you to become a bullet sammich. It's a different take on the same basic concepts.

Its an FPS under the guise of a rpg. Why? If the game elements that made an rpg and rpg in fallout 3 were not broken, then I would agree with you. Its very open world and the quests are long and non-plot related (generally) however, when you can make a character with 1 intelligence and then pump his science skill to 100, you should NOT be able to go spew all your scientific knowledge to other people throughout the game. (I am referring to when they put the skills in parentheses next to the speech options.)
Oh, and the games combat requires nothing but having a lot of ammo, no strategy. And theres plenty of ammo, after all, you DO still trip over ammo boxes sitting in forgotten subway tunnels some 200 years after the nuclear war.
Post edited July 08, 2009 by sk8ing667
Posted July 09, 2009
[Intelligence] I see that you know the rules of the game.
Posted July 15, 2009
avatar
Smoofer: In Fallout 3, ghouls are zombies. Besides that one dude Gob, in Megatown, ghouls are stupid zombies that immediately attack you on sight.
I realize RPG's need random enemies to kill. Sure. But why did Bethesda have to make them ghouls? Why not anything else? They had the whole wasteland of creativity at their disposal. They could have made you fight anything. Like L. Ron Hubologist cultists. Or mutated raccoons.
Every time I shoot a ghoul I want to cry. I think to myself: "Damn! That ghoul could have been innocent!"

These are feral ghouls, who hate humans.
You obviously haven't been to the Underworld, home to the real ghouls of Fallout 3. Or met Charon, one of the best followers (Who is also a ghoul).
You may wanna save your rant until you actually know what you are talking about.
Here's a video of it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g2kSQTOD0Go
Btw, you also do meet regular ghouls in the capital wasteland, the usual ones you run into are feral and hate any living person.
avatar
ihitterdal: I couldn't put it better myself. Each one, though flawed, is killer. Look at something like No More Heroes. Sure, it's not perfect, but it's something you must try due to it trying something different from the norm. I could say the same for all of the Fallout games.
PS: I know what you're going to say: "fallout 3 did nothing different! It's a shitty FPS! u suk!111!!!" My response: it's an RPG with shooter elements, not an all-out FPS. It's closer to the System Shock end of the spectrum than the Halo end. It requires the strategy needed from the original games due to the fact that going all-out like the aforementioned pile of mediocrity (guess which one?) causes you to become a bullet sammich. It's a different take on the same basic concepts.
avatar
sk8ing667: Its an FPS under the guise of a rpg. Why? If the game elements that made an rpg and rpg in fallout 3 were not broken, then I would agree with you. Its very open world and the quests are long and non-plot related (generally) however, when you can make a character with 1 intelligence and then pump his science skill to 100, you should NOT be able to go spew all your scientific knowledge to other people throughout the game. (I am referring to when they put the skills in parentheses next to the speech options.)
Oh, and the games combat requires nothing but having a lot of ammo, no strategy. And theres plenty of ammo, after all, you DO still trip over ammo boxes sitting in forgotten subway tunnels some 200 years after the nuclear war.

If your science skill is 100, then don't you know alot of knowledge?
Intelligence isn't knowledge, knowledge is simply what you know. Intelligent people can choose to not learn, and non intelligent people can choose to learn.
All this post is is a bitch fest from Fallout fanboys who are nitpicking at the dumbest things possible, and were largely in Fallout to begin with! (Such as ammo left in caves from 150 years ago?)
Post edited July 15, 2009 by Zellio2009
Posted July 15, 2009
Did you play the original fallouts? Never did I just "find" ammo. Never.
Now onto your intelligence isn't knowledge. Stupid people should not be able to hook up a circuit board to to an electronic computer made 200 years ago that controls every robot in the capitol wasteland. Even if they know how to use a computer. End of story. Intelligence should have been directly related to the science skill and multiple others. It wasn't. Again, end of story.
Posted July 17, 2009
avatar
AntiPro: Seriously, Fallout 1, 2 & 3 are all awesome in their own way. Fallout 3 is for sure the best contemporary RPG, just like Fallout 1 & 2 (and Arcanum) were in their day. So stop moaning.

You obviously haven't played an RPG game in your life. You should try sometimes. It's fun
My response: it's an RPG with shooter elements

No it's not. The game in which you can finish all the quests, max all the stats and become "god of the wastes" with a character with inteligence 3 is not an RPG
Inteligence that high means you are a retard.Period
Fallout 3 is just a shooter trying very hard to be an RPG.
It will never succeed
Post edited July 17, 2009 by Summit
Posted July 17, 2009
Fallout 3 is still a much better RPG than Oblivion, if you have to compare the two, and is a huge leap forward for (New) Bethesda when you look at their previous products. The thing is that they implemented RPG elements in a basic way that had been done long before and better, so when you pit Fallout 3 against another recent and better designed game, like Mask of the Betrayer, it appears very simple.
Posted July 17, 2009
<shiver> Oblivion </shiver>
I played oblivion for all of 10 minutes before turning it off.
Again as summit and I said, the game's broken.
Posted July 17, 2009
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v636/OverrideB1/Mudcrab.jpg
http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c247/jimbob11/realf3dialogue-1.gif
http://members.cox.net/hanoverf/fullvoiceacting.jpg
http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/2108/chinaaxeev2.jpg
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
This is my favourite topic
Community
Fallout SeriesHow fallout changed.(92 posts)(92 posts)
(92 posts)