Me too, brother, me too....

I appreciate your view, and you are certainly entitled to your own opinion, but in fairness, I'd like to say that I've seen people stating that they can make it through F1/F2 in no more than a couple of hours, if they wish to as well, and F3 can be made to last many hours without completing it. My brother in law has somewhere in the neighborhood of 30-40 hours in it, just by completing the quests available that are not core/plot required. The amount of dialog you encounter also depends on how many people you find and speak with, as do the amount of quests available. I'm not at all saying you're wrong in giving your assessment, or that mine or anyone elses opinion is any more important than yours at all, but I do think that there is a bit of relativism in stating that F3 is a short and shallow game, when F1 and F2 can both me made to be very short as well. It's all in how much time you choose to invest in the extra stuff available to do.
As far as it being only for those with a short attention span, several people like both the old and the new installments - myself included. I think F3 was very successful in bringing the world of Fallout back into mainstream interest, and introducing it to a new generation who just ENJOY the FP action and gameplay style for the way it makes you feel more like you are personally experiencing the game. Doesn't mean they're dumbed down for enjoying it - it's just their preference, and they have a right to enjoy it. If you basically made F1 or F2 again (as F3), only on a console and with better graphics, I think mainly only those who already played and enjoyed the first ones would probably even pick it up.

It's kind of funny in a sad way watching people try to defend Fallout 3 as a Fallout sequel.
The fact is, it's not. No amount of BSing will change that.
It's just as sad when people try to argue that simplifying and mainstreaming the game isn't dumbing it down. Yes it is. They're making the game require less thought, and reward thought less. That's dumbing it down.
Philkuu: If you want to get into someone's "right" to enjoy it, what about the "right" of actual Fallout fans to enjoy it? That "right" was taken from them when Bethesda decided to make a game targeted at mainstream console FPS gamers. I'm surprised I haven't heard of any attempts at an anti-trust lawsuit, not that one would work.
Actually, just talking about someone's "right" to enjoy Fallout 3 is quite absurd.

Shoelip, I'm not sure why you feel that Bethesda should have been obligated to consult you about what it really takes to make Fallout 3 "the right way". If you don't like the way it's done, don't buy it. If you already bought it and hated it, take it back. Simple as that.
Plenty of us who also enjoy the original genuinely do enjoy Fallout 3. No one who DOES enjoy Fallout 3 (whether they like the originals or not) is going to take their copy back simply because you feel it missed the mark. I think that most people who enjoyed Fallout 3 would happily and eagerly buy a sequel if the same group put it out there.
If a person likes Fallout 3, why can't others just let them enjoy it without having to try to tear down their posts for saying anything at all positive about it?
You don't like it - I realize that, and that's fine.
Don't tell me that I'm wrong for liking it or for giving my opinion on it though.

Just to clarify :
Philkuu - I hear you loud and clear, and I did try and pre-empt any major offense by stating clearly that my opinion will stink to those who disagree, just as theirs do to me :)
On point though, I take issue with you saying you can finish FO1 and FO2 within a couple of hours? Maybe when youve played it like I have...maybe about 30 or 4 times through..and you can get the power armour and the heavy weps within a few low levels by knowing the safe route...just maybe then it can be done in a coupla hours. But thats after playing it to death or reading a walkthru.
I know damn good gamers...dedicated hard core RPG`ers..who couldnt even get past the trials in Fo2. So the idea that someone can take it out of the box for the first time and finish it a few hours later like I did with Fo3, is frankly, disingenuous of you to say it could be done.
I loaded Fo3 straight out of my C.E. lunchbox, didnt even look at the pathetic manual, and completed it without even realising i`d completed it.
The Quest missions "led" me directly stage by stage to the "end"... I didnt want to fast track..I didnt avoid encounters... I just assumed (wrongly) that if it were true to the Fo traditions, it would be huge and engaging.
Admittedly, I am currently playing as an explorer with just under 50 hours gametime.
Its much more fun forgetting about the whole godawful perk and stat system, forgetting completely the main quest line, and just wandering the wastes blowing the crap out of things.
See? Im not knockingthe game as an FPS with quests thrown in...I`m calling to account the people who released this under false pretenses as Fallout 3.
Youre missing my point I think.
I`m not saying the game is crap in any way... its delicious to look at, and as an FPS it works very well.
But it is NOT, and never will be, a "fallout" game.
The stats system is usless... you can blast a super mutie`s head off with a 10mm handgun? C`mon...where`s the tilt towards realism there? why beef up your heavy weaps and strength if you can obliterate a glowing ghoul with nothing more than a toilet plunger?
If this had been Halo4, no real complaints... if it were Duke Nukem 2k9 or Doom 4, no real complaints.
Its just that Bethesda paid a huge wad of cash for the rights to deliver to the hard core Fo game fans a "righteous sequel...true to the original concepts"....
They lied..it isnt, wasnt, and never will be.
It actually reminds me of a really professional "Mod" for Morrowind, written by a dedicated, but with limited funding, fan.
Nothing wrong with that...mods I mean... but this game was passed around for soooo long..had soooo many false starts and promises...and had so much money and time thrown at it... you cant really blame the die-hards like me to just accept it as part of the Fo Universe.
And finally, I make no apology for saying that the game engine and levelling system is geared towards the casual gamer who cant or doesnt want to have to think. You really could train a chimpanzee to hold a gamepad on the PS3 and wipe out a hoarde of Muties in the GNR Plaza.
It HAS been dumbed down, it HAS been neutered, and it DOESNT require an intellect above that of a turnip to complete.

yeah, fallout 3 is easily completed, not because of "if you know where to go" but simply because the main quest is levelled while the alternate places are not.
also, fallout can be completed in about nine minutes.
fallout speed run.

legrande - No, not at all - no offense taken. I hope my reply did not come off as offensive either - certainly none was meant.
I may not have clarified my comment well enough regarding the speed runs on F1 and F2. I certainly didn't mean to imply that you could do that straight out of the box, without a guide or help, etc... Only that, by the account of others who claim they have done it, it can be done.
I was just meaning to point out that each game could be made any variation of length and depth, depending on how many areas a person chose to invest their time in.
Right - the "wanderer" method of playing is what I meant by stating that you could stretch out Fallout 3 quite a while if you chose to, and to me, it provides the most fun as well. Buying a house to keep all the stuff you've accumulated, fixing all your weapons up to perfect condition, stockpiling them all for a rainy day when you feel like taking on everyone and everything in sight, just for the heck of it, etc. is great fun to me.
I do understand your point, but half of the FO titles so far before this one tried going in a new direction as well. They were not as well received as the first 2, or even as much as the new F3, but my point is - I think many games use and keep in place as much as possible the core elements of a title for a foundation, and then attempt to build something totally new on them so they can keep it from becoming basically just the same thing with a new coat of paint.
Having started both F1 and F3 within a week or so from each other, I personally feel like they did include a lot of the things I liked about F1 in there, and to be honest, I have more fun playing F3 than I have playing F1. It isn't a strike against F1, it's just that it's somewhat dated, and therefore a bit less invigorating to play.
I think there is thought to playing F3 though as well. You may be able to get by with wrong choices, etc., but in order to have things happen as you want them to, a bit of strategy is required, and some planning as well for facing certain quests you want to take on. It may be somewhat different in gameplay than the old ones, but I don't see it as mindless at all. There are still consequences for hasty mistakes, and rewards for thinking things out.
Thanks a lot for your reply - I really enjoyed it, and appreciate the friendly discussion very much. :)

Exactly so!
Ha ha! Okay, fair enough then - I concede that Fallout 2 is the greatest FO game ever... (as long as you don't include Fallout 3 in the running! ;) lol)
You know - aside for Resident Evil 4 (which almost doesn't qualify due to the FPS-TPS blended view) I normally don't even like FPS all that much. When you throw in the world of FO, or drop the player in the middle of a million zombies/infected/undead/etc. though, it's a win in my book. :)

You know legrande, I think you've just been trolled.

Yes, Shoelip, because I am apparently the one here attacking someone for my own gratification, and not you... Right.

//flame
glad you admit it :)
//endflame

Really? **gasp**
Me?? Trolled?
here`s me thinking its was Philkuu you were trying to provoke...not me ;)

Well he's clearly imagining arguements that aren't there and making completely nonsensical comments like:
This is blatant passive hostility. First he says 'OK you're right. As long as the thing you're arguing against isn't part of the argument at all I agree with you.' Then he goes on to say. 'Except that a game from a completely different series and genre is actually the best in this series.'
Not only that but in response to my post he just made up a bunch of nonsense that I didn't say. Then argued against that, while completely ignoring my actual words or meaning.

Good lord, shoelip - that was very clearly a sarcastic JOKE. That's why I put ";) lol" after saying it!! Obviously I was kidding around with legrande because of what he said in his summary, which was humorous to me to begin with. You need to read more carefully.
Also, I never said anything about any game from another series being the best in the Fallout series at all. You really don't read what people say obviously. I said I generally don't enjoy FPS, with the exception of FO3 and Resident Evil 4.
What are you even TALKING about "in response to my post he just made up a bunch of nonsense that I didn't say."? I QUOTED your very own words to anything I replied to of yours!
I hope and even now suspect you're joking with all of this because you've got me laughing for sure.
legrande - Yes, I believe shoelip's comment was directed at me, and I hope and think you realized that I was clearly making a joke by my comment about conceding Fallout 2 to be the best, etc., rather than taking it as shoelip claims he did - to be inflammatory...