geoprudden
First time out of the vault
Just read through a few threads...
What is everyones beef with FO3 and FONV?
geoprudden
What is everyones beef with FO3 and FONV?
geoprudden
Fallout 3 and NV
- Thread starter geoprudden
- Start date
First time out of the vault
:::SILUS:::
Look, Ma! Two Heads!
They are not isometrical.
Azathoth
First time out of the vault
Fo3 is a genuinly stupid game full of vapid NPCs with uninteresting, shallow dialouge spoken by mediocre to downright bad voice actors.
Also: Bubbleheads, little lamplight etc...
The only way you could like it is when you have an:
"mmo, pokemon switch" in your brain, that makes you wanna have all the unique weapons and or a perfect character.
NV is alot better in my opinion, still not really good or something but a much more worthy successor to Fallout 2.
Also: Bubbleheads, little lamplight etc...
The only way you could like it is when you have an:
"mmo, pokemon switch" in your brain, that makes you wanna have all the unique weapons and or a perfect character.
NV is alot better in my opinion, still not really good or something but a much more worthy successor to Fallout 2.
If you have read those threads, you should already know the answer.
This has been discussed over and over and over. Read old threads and you'll find out.
This has been discussed over and over and over. Read old threads and you'll find out.
@geoprudden, welcome to NMA!
A lot of people on these forums started with the original Fallout games. The new games are in a different style and these people seem unable or unwilling to wrap their heads around the 3D game world.
I think the biggest problem is that the original game, Fallout 1, had such a great story behind it. That game and story have become a classic. The RPG style the dev's used was groundbreaking in it's day. It's like having a superior and really well received hit movie, and then having someone else making a sequel. Imagine Steven Spielberg coming along and trying to make a sequel to Titanic based on her sister ship, the Britannic, which also sank. Good or not, some people are going to throw popcorn.
One thing that many fail to appreciate if the fact that Bethesda revived a dead franchise. Even if it is in a different style, Fallout 3 was well received by current gamers and critics alike. If not for the new games, most of these newer gamers would never have heard of the older games. Now many of them are getting a chance to discover the old games and learning the great history of the Fallout world.
I started with the older games on my old Mac computer and became a Fallout junkie right out of the vault. I built my PC so I could load the Fallout 2 Restoration Project, and play the newer games as well. The best thing Bethesda did was release the GECK program which is a great tool that makes it possible for players to mod the new games. They can be tweaked to your liking to the point of adding new quests and more story to the games.
I like all four Fallout Games (I've never played "Tactics"). The naysayers can bite me.
A lot of people on these forums started with the original Fallout games. The new games are in a different style and these people seem unable or unwilling to wrap their heads around the 3D game world.
I think the biggest problem is that the original game, Fallout 1, had such a great story behind it. That game and story have become a classic. The RPG style the dev's used was groundbreaking in it's day. It's like having a superior and really well received hit movie, and then having someone else making a sequel. Imagine Steven Spielberg coming along and trying to make a sequel to Titanic based on her sister ship, the Britannic, which also sank. Good or not, some people are going to throw popcorn.
One thing that many fail to appreciate if the fact that Bethesda revived a dead franchise. Even if it is in a different style, Fallout 3 was well received by current gamers and critics alike. If not for the new games, most of these newer gamers would never have heard of the older games. Now many of them are getting a chance to discover the old games and learning the great history of the Fallout world.
I started with the older games on my old Mac computer and became a Fallout junkie right out of the vault. I built my PC so I could load the Fallout 2 Restoration Project, and play the newer games as well. The best thing Bethesda did was release the GECK program which is a great tool that makes it possible for players to mod the new games. They can be tweaked to your liking to the point of adding new quests and more story to the games.
I like all four Fallout Games (I've never played "Tactics"). The naysayers can bite me.
geoprudden said:
Because they feel it strays from the original's spirit. I started with fallout way back in 2005 when it was installed on my Brother's computer and I have been hooked since. And even I (a person who likes NV the most out of all the fallout games) think that the new fallout games are missing something from the old ones that made them unique.
geoprudden
First time out of the vault
Interesting to read! I recently finished Fallout 1 and I was very impressed. Coming from Fallout 3 and NV I was surprised to read about Bethesda ruining the Franchise!
What do you guys think about the future of Fallout?
geoprudden
What do you guys think about the future of Fallout?
geoprudden
geoprudden said:
I think it will continue being in the same region of the world as NV and the originals, maybe even going further south into Mexico. [spoiler:671c31a5b9]Still secretly hoping for India to show up, but I'm just homesick[/spoiler:671c31a5b9]
And it will probably have that engine from skyrim
Bethesda has already announced that Fallout 4 will use the Skyrim engine. I understand that Skyrim supports a larger game world with much more photorealistic detail. It also allows for more complex character behavior. As for where it will be set, only the Bethesda devs know. There are many regional options that can be interesting with good writing. As players, all we can do is wait and hope. Expressing our ideas in these forums could inspire them, if the devs read them. I don't know if they do or not.
Edit: Something just occured to me. The devs of the original games were good writers and great at creating the illusion of complex character behavior. That may be what people think is missing from the new games. The Bethesda devs aren't as good at that aspect of game design.
Edit: Something just occured to me. The devs of the original games were good writers and great at creating the illusion of complex character behavior. That may be what people think is missing from the new games. The Bethesda devs aren't as good at that aspect of game design.
Stanislao Moulinsky
Vault Fossil
Richwizard said:
I know I shouldn't, but... *sigh*
Ok, what kind of argument is that?
First, Bethesda isn't the savior of a dead franchise, there were other bidders for it, they were just the fastest ones.
Second, it's debatable (to say the least) if giving a chanche to the new generation to know the franchise was worth the bastardization of the franchise itself.
The Enclave 86
Look, Ma! Two Heads!
I was hardly a dead franchise anyway, Van Buren was cancelled in 2003 and - IIRC - Bethesda bought and began developing Fallout 3 only two years later at the most - I always thought they started in 2004.
Surf Solar
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
Also Bethesda wasn't the only one interested in the Fallout IP, they outbid Troika games, who know how to make a good RPG instead of a hiking simulation like Bethesda do. I don't see a single reason why I should be "thankful" to Bethesda for ruining a franchise that I like. Even though New Vegas is decent and I could even find a thing or two that I liked in Fallout 3, I would've always prefered Troika doing the game. Maybe, they would even be still around if they were allowed to do Fallout 3.
valcik
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
It will be a nightmare, due to Steam.geoprudden said:
Thanks to feedback gathered through the online stats, Fallout will be adjusted to satisfy the majority of players.
geoprudden
First time out of the vault
Wait a minute guys, can you not accept how successful the new fallout games have been? With Fallout 3 winning numerous awards and both achieving high ratings.
Can I ask do any of you guys like new games? Or are you reminiscent gamers?
geoprudden
Can I ask do any of you guys like new games? Or are you reminiscent gamers?
geoprudden
Surf Solar
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
geoprudden said:
So just because a game receives superfluous awards and "many people like it" it automatically is good, let alone a true succesor to the older games?
Azathoth
First time out of the vault
geoprudden said:
Millions of people seem to like Songs like that crazy frog thingy, that really does not keep me from saying that its tasteless shit...
I wont hate on NV, but 3 is a vapid POS...
DevilTakeMe
Where'd That 6th Toe Come From?
Regardless of whether or not you played Fallout 1 or 2, we, as the consumers, should be allowed to think about the product we're using and be able to criticize and analyze what we're watching. It's like movies, books, etc. We're supposed to be able to say "Well, why didn't Frodo and Bilbo just fly on the eagles to Mt. Doom and throw the Ring into the fire?"
The Fallout series is one of the most outstanding examples of an RPG series that basically thought out the scenarios and said, "hey, if you kill this guy or take this action, it's going to radically change the outcome of the story." It has the decency to try and give players an answer instead of "Just because."
"Why doesn't Mr. House side with the NCR?" or "Why can't the Brotherhood of Steel help us against the Enclave in Fallout 2?" The answer is usually found within the game you are asking those questions. House answers you straight-up if you ask him about it. Through the events of Fallout 2, you find out why the Brotherhood is suspiciously silent.
The problem with Fallout 3 is that it doesn't have that quality of being well-thought out. The game is pretty, but the story is not very well written. Along the way, there are so many unanswered questions (or questions that aren't even allowed to be asked).
"If the Enclave has the Brotherhood of Steel's main base targeted by their big fancy missile-shooting kill sat, why don't they use it?" Questions like this have no answers. And there's a lot of these kind of questions in Fallout 3.
The original ending for Fallout 3 is a big one that they had to fix with DLC. "I have Fawkes/Charon/RL-3 with me, why can't they go in? Why does it have to be one of the 'squishy' humans who goes in to their irradiated death?"
In truth, Fallout 3, like Oblivion before it, was created with the Lowest Common Denominator in mind. Gameplay is generally too easy and imbalanced, and a setting and story that really doesn't challenge the mind. But for many of those who prefer Fallout 3, none of that matters because it's a good looking game.
To go back to the movie analogy, Fallout 3 is more like a Michael Bay movie - lots of explosions, nice music, entertaining action sequences (plus there's a giant robot thrown in for good measure). On the other hand, there's no substance to the poorly conceived and executed plot. It relies on superficial emotion of being "AWESOME" rather than a genuine understanding of the situation at hand.
It's not a bad game, but it doesn't reflect what makes the series unique and different among RPG franchises. It's more or less a Bethesda product, and feels like a Bethesda product. One criticism of Fallout 3 is that it feels a lot like "Oblivion with Guns". It has the same strengths (being very pretty) and the same weaknesses (everything else).
The Fallout series is one of the most outstanding examples of an RPG series that basically thought out the scenarios and said, "hey, if you kill this guy or take this action, it's going to radically change the outcome of the story." It has the decency to try and give players an answer instead of "Just because."
"Why doesn't Mr. House side with the NCR?" or "Why can't the Brotherhood of Steel help us against the Enclave in Fallout 2?" The answer is usually found within the game you are asking those questions. House answers you straight-up if you ask him about it. Through the events of Fallout 2, you find out why the Brotherhood is suspiciously silent.
The problem with Fallout 3 is that it doesn't have that quality of being well-thought out. The game is pretty, but the story is not very well written. Along the way, there are so many unanswered questions (or questions that aren't even allowed to be asked).
"If the Enclave has the Brotherhood of Steel's main base targeted by their big fancy missile-shooting kill sat, why don't they use it?" Questions like this have no answers. And there's a lot of these kind of questions in Fallout 3.
The original ending for Fallout 3 is a big one that they had to fix with DLC. "I have Fawkes/Charon/RL-3 with me, why can't they go in? Why does it have to be one of the 'squishy' humans who goes in to their irradiated death?"
In truth, Fallout 3, like Oblivion before it, was created with the Lowest Common Denominator in mind. Gameplay is generally too easy and imbalanced, and a setting and story that really doesn't challenge the mind. But for many of those who prefer Fallout 3, none of that matters because it's a good looking game.
To go back to the movie analogy, Fallout 3 is more like a Michael Bay movie - lots of explosions, nice music, entertaining action sequences (plus there's a giant robot thrown in for good measure). On the other hand, there's no substance to the poorly conceived and executed plot. It relies on superficial emotion of being "AWESOME" rather than a genuine understanding of the situation at hand.
It's not a bad game, but it doesn't reflect what makes the series unique and different among RPG franchises. It's more or less a Bethesda product, and feels like a Bethesda product. One criticism of Fallout 3 is that it feels a lot like "Oblivion with Guns". It has the same strengths (being very pretty) and the same weaknesses (everything else).
Interesting what Richwizard says, If it wasnt for fallout 3 and NV, you would'nt see Fallout 1 and 2 combo packs on the shelves of stores like bestbuy and walmart today. How awesome is that?
Fallout 3 is shit though, but all the same I'm glad it brought the IP to a new era and audience, who hopefully pick up the classic games, which still hold up excellently today.
Fallout 3 is shit though, but all the same I'm glad it brought the IP to a new era and audience, who hopefully pick up the classic games, which still hold up excellently today.
Surf Solar
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
mobucks said:
Those bestbuy and whatnot packages where always on the shelves, even before Fallout 3.