Bethesda allegedly pulls negative Fallout: New Vegas review

Discussion in 'NMA News and Information' started by WorstUsernameEver, Oct 21, 2010.

  1. OakTable

    OakTable Vault Senior Citizen

    Nov 26, 2009
    Dear God, that RPS review hurt me. I feel let down by them. I liked them a lot, and then they get the retarded reviewer who likes LOL SO RANDUMB shit.
  2. Brother None

    Brother None This ghoul has seen it all
    Staff Member Admin Orderite

    Apr 3, 2003
    Also their review is still there. And yeah, as far as I know they were the only site to break the embargo.

    So no valid excuse from that angle, no matter how much shills might like it.
  3. Texas Renegade

    Texas Renegade Look, Ma! Two Heads!

    Aug 21, 2008
    I don't blame beth one bit for this. I blame the company that let them be pushed around and the industry itself.

    If I could smother a poor review of something I was trying to sale just by complaining to the publisher I would go for it.

    Its the publisher that needs to grow a spine and stand up for itself.
  4. zkylon

    zkylon It Wandered In From the Wastes

    Mar 1, 2010
    I felt the same way.
  5. Crni Vuk

    Crni Vuk M4A3 Oldfag oTO Orderite

    Nov 25, 2008
    Beth is a publisher. From what I know.

    Depends what we see as fail. I mean it goes without saying that when it comes to a Fallout sequel for me it falls somewhat short, yes ~ I assume for you as well. That has been discussed to death already. But from a marketing point of view I think Fallout 3 was a huge success. And I now start to doubt that its a "one hit wonder" (vanilla ice anyone ?). Because Oblivion proved already to be a huge success despite having flaws as RPG game so big that you can hide a whole terrorist faction inside without a chance to find them. Granted Oblivoin was even more bland then F3 but it was clearly possible to see the similarities so Oblivion with guns is somewhat accurate for F3. Now thing is both games seem to have sold extremly well (if you believe Bethesda). So either they have extrem luck or the consumers really buy everything when the hype is big enough ~ which is much more likely.

    So well ... as sad as it sounds it might be possible that we see a Fallout 4 that is just like Fallout 3. All we can really hope for is that the Enclave THIS time died for once and all >_< ... or does anyone think for a President Eden MK II ? Yaay ... : /
  6. Kyuu

    Kyuu Insert Awesome Title Here

    Jul 19, 2007
    I believe he was referring specifically to the publishers of the magazines (doing the reviews), though it was poor wording since Bethesda is a publisher (of games).
  7. sea

    sea Vault Senior Citizen

    Oct 5, 2009
    Oblivion sold because of the technical appeal it had. Since it debuted early in the console life cycle, and it was one of the first really nice-looking open world games, it was able to really bank on that. The scale of the game is huge, and still impressive even today; it was that "wow factor" that sold it on a lot of people. However, upon questioning players, I think you'll find that a good deal of them spent a lot more time aimlessly wandering and hacking at the city guards with a broadsword than dealing with the quests or story... and I also think you'll find most players didn't even touch 10% of that game's content.

    Fallout 3 sold because it appealed to the people who liked Oblivion, to the original Fallout fans (come on, most of us bought it), and to shooter fans who were drawn to its sci-fi universe. Combine that with a genuinely huge marketing campaign that wasn't much behind a Halo game, and you have a recipe for success. I think the more direct and compelling story helped draw people in, but I still think that completion statistics are quite low and most players were still drawn in by the surface elements of the game, or by the "my first RPG" experience it offered.

    New Vegas, meanwhile, is going to sell solely on the basis of Fallout 3's success. I don't think there's too many people who wanted Fallout 3 that held out two years. Chances are this won't be a Mass Effect 2 situation (sold more than the first game despite being a direct sequel almost requiring knowledge of the first game to fully enjoy), and New Vegas will sell roughly on par with or slightly below what Fallout 3 did. Considering its relatively low budget, I think it will be a huge financial success even if it doesn't shift quite as many copies, but it'll be because, at least on the surface, it gives Fallout 3 fans more of what they want, and not because it's a genuinely well-designed game.
  8. Nalano

    Nalano Still Mildly Glowing

    Jan 20, 2009
    To be honest, I see the opposite.

    I see people who, having been introduced to the franchise by Fallout 3, being somewhat bored and disillusioned by New Vegas. Conversely, those who were clamoring over each other to cast the first stone at Bethesda for squandering their license of Fallout would end up loving New Vegas.

    It's really just which side of the fence you're on: Do you love Interplay/Black Isle/Obsidian or do you love Bethesda?
  9. Brother None

    Brother None This ghoul has seen it all
    Staff Member Admin Orderite

    Apr 3, 2003
    Heh. Maybe online. I doubt joe average gamer cares.
  10. lmao

    lmao It Wandered In From the Wastes

    Apr 29, 2005
    A lot of the books that were in both Morrowind and Oblivion came from Daggerfall. The team that worked on Daggerfall is long gone, and more's the pity, because the main quest in that game was very well done. It's a bit challenging to give a character personality when they only get 4 or 5 paragraphs of text total, but they managed it. Akorithi was a snobby bitch, Morgiah was a whore, Gothryd was a power-lusting weasel, the King of Worms was unscrupulous (he makes a return in Oblivion, fully neutered by that writing team), Brisienna was purposeful, etc etc. All of this was obvious from the VERY limited text you get as you move through the quests.

    Morrowind had an interesting main quest and interesting setting. I don't think it was even as good as Daggerfall, but it was at least somewhat unique in geography, architecture, and mood. The culture of the Dunmer was very well done. People owned slaves. People worshiped their ancestors. Etc etc.

    Oblivion ended up being single player World of Warcraft. Yawn. The Thieves Guild and Brotherhood quests were interesting, even though the Brotherhood of Oblivion was the start of Bethesda's "let's stick dead bodies all over the place, we're so h4rdcor3!!" spree. The main quest was ridiculous. No one in the entire game had a personality, and the game world had no personality either.

    So, in summary...Bethesda IS getting worse. They've tried to mask it by replacing some of the Wikipedia-style dialogue with actual sentences, but refuse is always going to smell like refuse no matter how much you try to perfume it up.
  11. Anarchosyn

    Anarchosyn Still Mildly Glowing

    Sep 26, 2008
    Yeah, I can get behind that. There has been a noticeable decline in detail as the technology has grown. 'Course, I've always felt Bethesda was kind of a basement, cottage job that fell ass backwards into being an industry big wig against the odds. Hell, they can't even code ladder integration into their games.

    Anyhoo, I missed out on Arena, Daggerfall, Battlespire and Redguard. I was mainly rocking SSR Gold Box games, adventure titles and old school first person RPGs like Bard's Tale and Wizardry. I kind of wish I had gotten to rock Daggerfall in the heyday but I believe I was turned off by the bugs (or doing too much acid, one of the two :)) .. I knew some of the books hailed from that era but I didn't realize a vast majority were imported into Morrowind (makes sense -- I thought it odd that none of the other writing in the game was up to those standards).
  12. terebikun

    terebikun Still Mildly Glowing

    May 16, 2008
    So to clarify, this Dan Hsu stuff is NOT related to the attack of the fanboy review?

    (I actually dig all the anonymous mudslinging going on right now, like with the Mythic and EA blogs. Drama is fun!)

    Tell me you don't really believe this. Or maybe I'm wrong, and Daikatana was the best selling game of all time. And APB. And Too Human. And MadWorld. And soon the new Final Fantasy.

    As I recall he didn't say it was an issue of ability, and also: who cares?
  13. Crni Vuk

    Crni Vuk M4A3 Oldfag oTO Orderite

    Nov 25, 2008
    so you think hype does not sell games ? Did I said its true for every game ? Com on if anything can sell even crap games then it IS hype. See the Call of Duty series.

    *Edit since when did Daikatana had a great "marketing" behind it ? TV comercials even ? Interesting is that Bethesda took their time to even make a comercial for the German TV ! Now I dont see many games doing that over here. Anno 1404 was the last I remember. And Halo maybe. I dont want to imagine what that kind of marketing even costs ...
  14. terebikun

    terebikun Still Mildly Glowing

    May 16, 2008
    Maybe I'm misunderstanding your English, but uh, right here:

    Hype helps sells some games, but I certainly wouldn't call the Call of Duty series "crap". Maybe you're not into FPSs, but they're very solid (save for hackers).

    As for Daikatana, it may not have had commercials (that I know of), but you can't say it didn't have a ton of marketing buzz behind it, even (especially) before the "bitch" ads.
  15. Crni Vuk

    Crni Vuk M4A3 Oldfag oTO Orderite

    Nov 25, 2008
    solid ? Call of duty is the incarnation of "make it mainstream" or "boring". The time when CoD was interesting is long gone and yes I am in to shooters. I just think there are no good ones out there anymore. Not in the sense of like with the first Mohaa, Cod and a few more. Actualy I ve been a shooter nut playing the sh** out of games like Blood, Blood 2, Duke 3D, Quacke 3, Unreal99 and a lot more. But at some point you just have enough of storming the Pacific, killing the axis at some beach or that. I am not sure right now if CoD has auto healing ? But a lot of shooters and other games as well have that now ... which I find one of the worst inventions ever.

    I think without a high marketing games like CoD would not even sell half of the numbers it does usualy. But thast my oppinion. Its just interesting to see that maybe 10% of the costs are actualy spend on the programming and making of the game while the rest goes purely just in to the advertising. I wish it would be a bit more even. You know 40 - 60 maybe. Or something like that.

    Yeah I might have sound a bit strange when saying the part about people buying everything. But you know the exception proves the rule. And there are a lot of crapy games which sold very well cause of marketing alone ~ almost. Even I got tricked by Bethesda believing their game Oblivion was the best the RPG world could offer. Luckily I never bought the game after I watched some youtube videos.
  16. Stanislao Moulinsky

    Stanislao Moulinsky Vault Fossil

    Jul 16, 2009
    Mortal Kombat and Toshinden are proof that hype and marketing CAN sell even the worst crap.
  17. HyperionOmega

    HyperionOmega First time out of the vault

    Nov 3, 2010
    Probably one of the most poignant remarks on this board.

    I agree that a lot of this anger seems to be based on a pure "Black Isle is better than Bethesda" mentality. Complaints about how maybe the Enclave will finally die and how the story was crap seem to have a nostalgia line in them all. FO3 was my first introduction to Fallout ...I was blown away.. the sheer amount of info and seeming back story put around that was not quest related but was just there for fun was addicting. In fact one of the most chilling moments in any game I've played was standing in the House chambers in the Capitol building as 50's music plays and Talon and Super mutants fought in the next hallway.

    Now in New Vegas there is none of that (or at least very little) haunting back story that tells of essentially what is our way of life's death. I feel a a snag of disappointment as I wonder where is the Enclave where is the tidbits of how the people of the Mojave faced the end where are the brave and noble BoS. The answer I found (at first) is not here this is not there story. What I was doing was judging a game based on the feeling of discovery and novelty that the first game gave me while some how expecting this game to up the ante somehow. This was bad on my part so I took another look at NV and found some of that background I had missed even the Enclave made an appearance and the BoS was there to. This seems to be the main point of totally disliking or even hating FO3 and NV is that the old Fallouts had a feeling of nostalgia that you expect the new games to repeat. Im sorry but that is unrealistic.
  18. Tagaziel

    Tagaziel Panzerkatze Staff Member Admin Orderite

    Dec 10, 2003
    We don't want nostalgia, we want a well designed Fallout game that continues the story and setting of Fallout 1/2.

    Really, your defining moment pretty much sums up what's wrong about Fallout 3. The definition of Fallout for you is a giant supermutant fighting unambiguously evil mooks in an old landmark with 50s music in the background?
  19. HyperionOmega

    HyperionOmega First time out of the vault

    Nov 3, 2010
    All the post I have read act to the contrary Fallout 1& 2 are hailed as the epitome of gaming while new incarnations that are able to walk past the technical hold backs of BlackIsle are for the most part demonized or just looked down on.

    The sense of nostalgia that you got from playing fallout 1/2 is in retrospect what you want. But some years later your palate has expanded you have even entered the 21st century but to expect that genre defining, self fulfilling, feeling of awesomeness you first had with a black Isle fallout when you were younger is impossible so you blame the new guy. Now I am not saying Bethesda is innocent but come on they resurrected Fallout from obscurity, and then you rant about how you want to go back to a isometric turn based, Japanese rpg like monster with crappy graphics (compared to nowadays) at least they are trying to progress the series and not trying to rehash the old games.

    How is the Talon super mutant battle in the Capitol building wrong. The scene was of haunting familiarity punctuated by bouts of violence all underscored by a humor conveyed by a 50's ish ode to anti-globalization. Fallout3 has its bugs and an apparently simple story line :roll: but in my opinion handles better , plays better and conveys its message better than the original fallout games.

    So tell me how i am wrong ohh great elder.
  20. Sicblades

    Sicblades Antediluvian as Feck

    Aug 28, 2008
    That's because they (1&2) were the epitome of RPGs. It has nothing to do with the new technology, most of us don't even care whether it's isometric or FPS, we just want a well designed Fallout game, like Tagaziel said.

    You're grasping at air, and very thin air at that.
    So what? Better dead than that abomination they called Fallout 3. If it was presented as a non-sequel, a spin off, most of us wouldn't have cared.
    A yes, shitty game design is good because it's progressing from previous technologies. Great point.
    An lulzy fight conveys better the spirit of Fallout? This is why we have problems with Fallout 3 fans. You don't even understand Fallout, and yet you come here telling people what Fallout is all about. Fallout was never about humour-ish violence. It was a by-product of the setting.
    Why? So you can tell us how we're wrong and all we want is nostalgia, even though it has nothing to do with that?