Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker on our website.
I haven't yet played the original Fallout games (cue irritating "you don't know what you're talking about then" comments).
But I can safely say that Fallout 3 is one of the best games I've ever played. It totally engages me, looks great and has lots of variables which makes me want to play it several times in different styles.
I think that some people just want to slate it in order to sound "cool", going against the general majority vote. That being a vast amount of 5/5 reviews and wholehearted acceptance of the game as a worthy sequel.
Not that any opinion matters (even my own) as the sales figures reflect global success...
It's easy to let your personal experience of the original games colour your judgement of a new take on the Fallout experience. But you should be thankful and respectful of the amount of time and skill which has gone into making Fallout 3, as it keeps the original game (and it's creators) alive, and puts the original versions back in the limelight again, earning (once more) the respect and acclaim that it enjoyed in the past.
I speak from personal experience. I have recently payed for official downloads of the original Fallout games from Black Isle (Interplay) which I would never have done if it wasn't for having such a good time playing Fallout 3...
Voltergeist wrote:
It totally engages me, looks great and has lots of variables which makes me want to play it several times in different styles.
It pales in comparison to the original games when it comes to the elements you like. I bought Fallout 1 and 2 when they were released, and have always preferred Fallout 2. My latest playthrough of it was this last summer, and after playing this game for nigh on 10 years, I found dialogue and quest options I didn't previously know existed. I'm fairly certain the same will happen the next time I play, too.
If the isometric 2D view and ungainly combat system (yeah, I said it) of the originals aren't deterrents for you, you'll find that comparing the depth of Fallout 3 to it's predecessors is like comparing a kiddie pool to an Olympic length one.
"You're going to have a tough time doing that without your head, palooka."
- the Vault Dweller
Not that any opinion matters (even my own) as the sales figures reflect global success.
Sales aren't everything. If you are a student of music, then I'm sure you have read about composers who were wildly popular in their day but forgotten by history.
I think that some people just want to slate it in order to sound "cool", going against the general majority vote.
Some people (fans) are better informed than the majority of people who will play Fallout 3 and forget it as soon as the next 'next gen game' comes out.
That being a vast amount of 5/5 reviews and wholehearted acceptance of the game as a worthy sequel
The review process for computer games is broken. If the mags don't give the games a good review, they don't get the adds from the game manufacturers. If they don't review cutting edge FPS style games, the hardware manufacturers don't place adds with them either. They either sell out, or they are out of business.
As for me I played F3 for about 15 hours and couldn't go on, because I found the areas boring and the NPCs empty and annoying. At the moment I am playing FarCry 2 and even though its a mindless FPS, I am enjoying it because they understand the genre, paid attention to the little details and maintained high production values in every area. Can anyone say the same about F3?
Voltergeist wrote:I think that some people just want to slate it in order to sound "cool", going against the general majority vote. That being a vast amount of 5/5 reviews and wholehearted acceptance of the game as a worthy sequel.
It's easy to let your personal experience of the original games colour your judgement of a new take on the Fallout experience. But you should be thankful and respectful of the amount of time and skill which has gone into making Fallout 3, as it keeps the original game (and it's creators) alive, and puts the original versions back in the limelight again, earning (once more) the respect and acclaim that it enjoyed in the past.
I gave the game an honest attempt, I had no expectations and left my prejedice of Bethsoft at the door. I found it pretty entertaining for maybe the first hour or two, and the 14-odd hours after that were simply time wasting instances of mind numbing gameplay. Secretly hoping there'd be something interest, but even as enjoyable Tranquility Lane was, as well as the Vertibirds, nothing could fix the results of me killing a lone BoS soldier and aggroing the entire faction/base of invincible unkillable members.
The game is rigid, and very inflexable for the games its based on. Dumbing down of components like removal of traits, etc instead of actually balancing them is just more icing on the cake. Worst of all, it's simply boring. Like flight paths in WoW boring.
>Well, now I'm absolutely desperate to get my teeth into Fallout and Fallout 2!
In my opinion the best of the series by far is Fallout. Fallout 2 wasn't made by the same team and as some people have said elsewhere, it is a bit of a theme park. So you might get the most enjoyment out of the series if you work your way up to the best.
Welcome to the weird world of going back to basics.
I like Led Zeppelin.. ergo, i like Ledbelly. More people should trace game-ancestry or music ancestry to find out why they actually like what they like.
Well, I was a Fallout fan way back in the good ol' days, and since the game was an integral part of my adolescence At twelve or thirteen, ( can't remember, since that was almost ten years ago) I even wrote a sourcebook for Jason Mical's PnP adaptation of the games. Well, when I heard about Fallout 3 actually being made (for what the second or third time? and this after being crushed and then spat upon with tactical combat CRAP, even ex-girlfriends don't dick me around this much!) I was flabbergasted to actually see the game actually being played at one of my old fallout/gaming buddy's house. After awhile he let me borrow the game and his Xbox, and I've got to say, this game is actually quite good. (Sorry about the long exposition to this post, but it seems prudent to give somewhat of an explanation as to why my random opinion is valid.)
This game is definitely a different style of gameplay than the originals, but that's not necessarily a bad thing; don't get me wrong, I liked the turn based system because it was like chess, but a first/third person realtime/semi-realtime system isn't bad either. I've read plenty of people lambasting this as "a half-assed first person shooter", but so what, isn't this closer to "really being there", dodging gunfire and desperately trying to overtake enemies, instead of getting a plasma rifle and power armor and doing one shot crits every combat? I liked the turn-based isometric style and I like the total immersion real time style just the same. As far as gameplay goes this game is a little quirky sometimes but overall very solid, very good.
I think the atmosphere of this game is great, but not as ingenious or special as the first, but is definitely much more coherent and solid than the second, which seemed to very quickly become a string of endless pop-culture references and nerds telling dirty jokes about prostitutes. Don't get me wrong, pop culture jokes can be a great thing, and F1 did have some pop-culture in it, but they were very obscure and veiled, like Mentats, "Nuka" Cola, the Maltese Falcon, the "Ed is dead baby!" line, "I'm here to kick ass and chew bubblegum", etc. but not to the point of cartoonishness like #2, with nearly half of the characters in the game being a character from some 80's/90's show or movie, and then the absolutely absurd amount of "special" random encounters, which go absolutely overboard, like the crashed whale/flower pot bit, the "federation shuttle" crash site, ALL the Monty Python stuff, there was a criticism of this new game having too much "junk" being thrown in just because it's cool, but compare it to Fallout 2, and you'll quickly see which game keeps a better atmosphere. Hell, even #1 had this type of stuff, but it was possible to never even think to go into the flying saucer and discover the Alien Blaster. Now, to get back to #3, they did throw in some great bits, like "Deputy" Weld, the G.O.A.T., the Robco facility, the inclusion/conclusion of Harold (my absolute favorite character from the games), the pompadours and light happy Jazz from the 30's and 40's, and the weird "Leave it to Beaver" simulation, all pay great tribute to the same era that the first game drew so much of it's atmosphere and humor from. Nothing feels like it's just there for the hell of it, and I commend Bethesda for making everything so tight and streamlined. Anybody's who's complaint that this game is bland or too simplistic or it had too much "cool junk" probably didn't even want to play it or give it a chance, and just sort of coasted through before writing a scathing review on some website.
One of my main qualms with the game though, is the overarching story, which is really rather weak, from the time you're "born" till your death I get tired of the character having a family history and a past, which I think detracts from the original, Man who has no name-like quality that the first two had. I also thought that the inclusion of the Enclave and Super-Mutants as villains was a bit of a short-cut, as was the BOS, considering that since they were starting the game in a completely different area of the country, they could have created completely different heroes and villains as well. Also the big guns in the game feel totally weak compared to the previous games. I hit a deathclaw in the head with a direct hit from a missile launcher and it continued to charge at me, nearly unharmed. The flamethrower rarely gives you an instant kill, and personally, I think that they should have programmed the AI to run around in terror if they're caught on fire, rather than continue to kneel down and shoot assault rifles while completely engulfed in flames. The minigun seems to only miss everything, even when hitting the head of an enemy head-on in VATS, it only does a few points of damage rather than blowing their whole fucking head right off!, and yeah the Fat Man is a pretty cute idea, but it seems to be the only reason I built up my Big Guns skill points. And where is the ability to target the eyes and groin? And to single out parts of the body with fists/melee weapons?! This is a staggering omission, considering how much work they probably put in. Also there's not near the variety of guns that you can find in either of the other games, which I found really disappointing. Also the voice acting does get very repetitive, since every old man and old woman seem to have the same two voices and faces no matter where you go. Also, I guess because of the fact this is a game in 2008 and not 1998, the designers took away quite a bit of the text based aspect that the first two had, which in my opinion was the wellspring from which their humor flowed, if you get my drift.
All in all though I'd say that if this is the start of a revival of Fallout's former glory, I'd say it's a pretty damn good start.
To each their own i suppose. Personally, I don't need to be looking through the exact eyes of my character to get immersed, or play mini games, etc. Having pop-up's that slap you with "THIS IS A GAME LOL LEVEL UR SKILLZ" also doesn't bode well for the level of immersion that this game makes me feel.
I found the story telling and characterisation in say... Bioshock far more interesting, but that too was kind of a let down for different reasons. Both games ultimately though set out to be immersive believable worlds. One fails dismally one multiple fronts and the other falls down from other factors.
Superhaze wrote:Welcome to the weird world of going back to basics.
I like Led Zeppelin.. ergo, i like Ledbelly. More people should trace game-ancestry or music ancestry to find out why they actually like what they like.
Stainless wrote:To each their own i suppose. Personally, I don't need to be looking through the exact eyes of my character to get immersed, or play mini games, etc. Having pop-up's that slap you with "THIS IS A GAME LOL LEVEL UR SKILLZ" also doesn't bode well for the level of immersion that this game makes me feel.
I found the story telling and characterisation in say... Bioshock far more interesting, but that too was kind of a let down for different reasons. Both games ultimately though set out to be immersive believable worlds. One fails dismally one multiple fronts and the other falls down from other factors.
I've never played Bioshock, or Oblivion for that matter, I think the last PC game I purchased was Tactics, (or maybe Half-Life 1), so I'm not much of a gamer, but usually I can play a game for about 10 minutes and go "This is stupid!", but this one has consistently kept my interest. Honestly I don't think the Fallout community is being very fair to this game. The criticisms that are being leveled against it could very well have been leveled against Fallout 2, since that game had a very weak rehash of story/plot events of the first game, but nobody seems to talk about how "Black Isle ruined Fallout", in fact wouldn't it be fair to point the finger at Interplay since they pushed that god-awful spin-off Tactics, which pretty much sank the franchise for about 10 good years?
None of the criticisms I've had of this game have kept me from enjoying it, it's still just a game...
Barneyfife wrote:I've never played Bioshock, or Oblivion for that matter, I think the last PC game I purchased was Tactics, (or maybe Half-Life 1), so I'm not much of a gamer, but usually I can play a game for about 10 minutes and go "This is stupid!", but this one has consistently kept my interest. Honestly I don't think the Fallout community is being very fair to this game. The criticisms that are being leveled against it could very well have been leveled against Fallout 2, since that game had a very weak rehash of story/plot events of the first game, but nobody seems to talk about how "Black Isle ruined Fallout", in fact wouldn't it be fair to point the finger at Interplay since they pushed that god-awful spin-off Tactics, which pretty much sank the franchise for about 10 good years?
None of the criticisms I've had of this game have kept me from enjoying it, it's still just a game...
Interplay has copped its fair share of abuse and blame for what happened to the series; from both Tactics and that console travesty. Fallout 2 also gets paid out quite a bit because of little things like excessive pop-culture references, etc. But be that as it may, it still has so much variation, excellent quest design and interesting npcs and charm that it can get away with it's failings. I personally love Fallout 1 to bits 10 times more then the sequal, but doesn't mean I don't wish Fallout 1 had more quests, better UI, etc. They each have their flaws, but Fallout 3's are just so glaring in departments that it's predecessors excelled in.
At the end of the day, I try to enjoy a game for the game, and there's been some absolute gems out there that have given me a few hours of interesting playtime before turning to crap. Fallout 3 felt like it leading me along with a carrot and expectation, as opposed to a game that made me want to load it up to continue that quest that absorbed me, etc. It set a stage for a Broadway musical and all I got was the kindergarten kids doing a performance.
