Silly Mac Users!

[Killzig]

<strong>[ -> N/A]</strong>

Apparently <a href="http://www.apple.com/switch/" target=_blank>Apple computer's campaign to appeal to the AOL demographic</a> (I promise that's not TubGirl, though really when speaking of Apple's marketing department it should be) is paying off. A game reviewer, who is apparently stricken with a debilitating case of ADHD, has sunk his claws into the MacPlay release of Fallout 2. Here are some choice cuts...

<blockquote><em>

Of course, you’ll have to pass a trial first.The trial is very basic, and helps acquaint you with the games setting and play. You have to enter a large stone temple, fight your way past a few minor enemies, and grab a few items along the way. At one point you’ll have to blow up a door with some plastic explosives. At the end, you must fight a guardian of a sacred room, which coincidentally houses the Dweller’s old uniform.</blockquote></em>

Your first hint that this is going to be a less than stellar review, he finds the temple of trials helpful. "ROFFLES!"

<blockquote><em>

My other beef with this game was that you can move the camera maybe one or two screens in diameter around your character. However, after those few screens, you can’t go further without moving your character. So, there is a lot of moving your character to a point just to see what is up there. <b>It’s unnecessary, as games have allowed you to see the entire map of a level for years. <u>Take for example</u> the WarCraft series, or the <u>Diablo</u> series.</b> Given, those games darken part of the map you haven’t visited yet. This might have been a better model. So, maybe it’s intentional, but in either case, it makes the game hard to play.

</blockquote></em>

So Diablo has better visibility than Fallout, does anyone else remember Diablo's camera being RIGIDLY fixed to center your character? That's what I seem to remember. And hey, dipstick, this isn't a tactical game, it's a RPG you don't need to see what kind of resources your enemy is piling up 5 screens ahead of you.

<blockquote><em>

I started to get past the looks, and started getting into the story. Really, that’s what this game is about at the core. You can tell the developers really cared about the story and atmosphere of the game. The interactions between the characters are meaningful and believable, and the story is engaging. <b>To be honest, I haven’t completed the whole game</b>, but I’m excited to find out what happens. Since the story is really what the game is about, I don’t want to give much away. You can expect around 30 to 40 hours of game play, depending on how much exploring you do.

</blockquote></em>

Uh huh, maybe he should go help those nice Breed folk make their mod.

<blockquote><em>

In all, this game is pretty fun, and plays a like a good book. However, if you’re looking for eye candy, you’ve come to the wrong place. Once you get past the looks, you’re in for hours of great, engaging game play, which is only mildly frustrating at times.

</blockquote></em>

All in all a good review but slightly silly to judge the graphics and engine on today's standards rather than when it was completed, don't you think? Read the full review <a href="http://www.gamehelper.com/common/defaul ... LES&ID=303" target=_blank>over yonder</a>. Thanks to Petr for pointing it out.

[Doyle]

Since this is the initial Mac release, I see no reason why they shouldn't judge the graphics on today's Mac standards.

[Zbyram]

Wow, i still can't see where the graphics of Fallout is bad. I still prefer it to those shitty 3d engines they make now. The part with Diablo was really funny. Maybe he meant the automap? But then there's also a map in Fallout as we all know so it doesn't make any sense... 8O

[Forty-six & Two]

The temple of trials isnt helpfull?

I think its cool. Even though its pissy to run through every damn time you start over for a new game. But for first time and story purposes its cool.

The rest of that guys points are lame. Even though its a new Mac release, the game was still made back then and not now. He shouldnt judge it by todays standards.

[Mad Max RW]

Too many kids today calling graphics of OLD GAMES crap when they have no idea what the hell they're talking about. It would be like giving Pong a 3 out of 10 because they're aren't enough pretty colors and Quake weapons.

I was talking to some jerks in another forum about the best games of all time, and I mentioned Doom. They reply with all this bullshit about how blocky and pixelated it is so it sucks. Stupid fucking kids shouldn't be allowed on the internet. It would eliminate all flame wars, crappy writers at websites, and we'd all be a lot better off.

[Doyle]

Even though its a new Mac release, the game was still made back then and not now. He shouldnt judge it by todays standards.

I fail to see any logic in that.

[Ap]

The game doesn’t display more than 256 colors at 640 x 480 resolution, so the game has a late 90’s feel to it. It’s pretty disappointing, since the original game out years ago, and they didn’t improve the graphics at all.
...

It’s as though this game was squirreled away in a vault somewhere for years, and it’s just now been uncovered for play.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!...

[Forty-six & Two]

Even though its a new Mac release, the game was still made back then and not now. He shouldnt judge it by todays standards.

I fail to see any logic in that.

Of course compared to other games, but he shouldnt do that. A rewiew shouldnt compare games like that. Just my opinion though.

[Doyle]

If you don't compare games to each other than the reader will have no standard against which to measure a game and the whole point of a review will be invalidated. Furthermore, these comparisons can help a reviewer better explain what's right and wrong with a game.

[Strap]

...I was talking to some jerks in another forum about the best games of all time, and I mentioned Doom. They reply with all this bullshit about how blocky and pixelated it is so it sucks. Stupid fucking kids shouldn't be allowed on the internet. It would eliminate all flame wars, crappy writers at websites, and we'd all be a lot better off...

That is SOO true. i am glad that those older games are that "crappy" because then i dont need to buy a friggin Uber-|33t maching to play them.
little pricks and their wads of cash...

fallout's graphics are good!
why the hell do you reall need to see over 5000 poly's of gibs fly from your enemy's head when you can see that classic oldschool pixilated splattter? heheh. i like old games

[Mad Max RW]

If you don't compare games to each other than the reader will have no standard against which to measure a game and the whole point of a review will be invalidated. Furthermore, these comparisons can help a reviewer better explain what's right and wrong with a game.

It's good to compare games, but comparing an older one to something brand new is pointless. The developers can't go back in time and change the way things were done then. That's the problem here. Kids don't understand why things were done the way they were. The technology wasn't as advanced. Computers weren't as powerful. People who don't understand this shouldn't be allowed to have an opinion.

[Doyle]

The developers can't go back in time and change the way things were done then.

Right, but that's not really relevant, because this is a new Mac game. Hell, if Daikatana had been released on time it might have been warmly received, but that didn't stop people from mocking John Romero into submission. The only difference here is that Fallout 2 has been out on a different platform for years.

[4too]

Mac had a Fallout version way back, and a recent re-release for OS 10.

Fallout 2 came out in 1997 or 1998? Is that pre Steve Jobs return? Ancient history for the ego centric "i"Mac generation. Remember, looks matter more than functionality for that group "i"think. All that damned DESIGNER clear plastic......., and that DESIGNER hockey puck mouse for the first G4 machines....., and it took the second coming of 'Jobs' for Mac to give up BIEGE..........

How hard would it be; what level of writing skills would it take, to be able to compare different games from diverse time periods? How could one accurately emote the history, if one has no sense that the time context matters when we judge by comparisons? How many extra words would it take to set the scene and arrange the players?

At this point we could gesture that the reviewer was somewhere in the clueless continuum, and yet the boy managed to spin out a review of Fallout 2, that might influence sales. He had the instinct to gasp the timeless, THE STORY, mattered in Fallout 2! He got that right. We may expect more as experience matures his taste.

AND, too bad that the boy's wanna be this or that was NOT realized via current graphic standards. Too bad it was ONLY a patched and ported re-release. Too bad it's the independants that are tooling the bug fixers
and mods, and not BIS or Iply. Too bad BIS/Iply are waiting for the right "time" to kick start Fallout 3. Too bad they will miss the event horizon because they are watching and waiting, speculating on the next Mad Max Movie, and analyzing and spread sheeting
today's trend with yesterday's gross. Too bad they may miss the moment to MAKE the Time, MAKE FALLOUT 3,.... happen.

By the way, I am replaying Fallout and Fallout 2 on my Mac's. A third party scrolling mouse helps. 32 and 64 megs of video ram does too.

4too

[Spazmo]

I'm wondering: are there any bugs or other broken things from the original versions of FO 1 & 2 that have bee fixed in the mac releases?

[Mr Carrot]

You shouldnt flame him for comparing it to Diablo and Warcarft, these after all are the only other games out on the mac

[Mad Max RW]

Haha so true.

[Zetura Dracos]

HOO! Oh. Was that supposed to be a serious reveiw? It was? HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA! Oh thats a good one. Honestly now though, this guy couldnt be serious about some of the stuff he said. Really, what was he thinking with the camera? Thats the usual veiw you get with an RPG and what was he doing saying that the cameras were better in Diablo and Warcraft? In Diablo the camera was stuck dead center on your character and even with the mini map you still couldnt see the whole map. And in Warcraft you could see the whole map mostly because it was a fuckin RTS and youre supposed to be able to see the whole map on an RTS. And he actually thought that the Temple of Trials was a tutorial of some sort? I must have missed that helpfull part in the ten or so times Ive gone through it. And what was this bit about this bloke griping about them not spiffin up the graphics for Mac? It is to my understanding that if you port something you port the actual game and graphics as is or have I again missed something. Yeah silly Mac users is right. They want to play the games but theyre too damn stupid to buy a machine that can run them because they were distracted by shiny colored cases and crappy looking shapes. Dumb shits.

[Doyle]

The Temple of Trials was indeed intended as a tutorial. Marketing demanded it, so it happened.

[Ghetto Goose]

I ripped that guy a new asshole yesterday, but I guess I was just too right for him, since they haven't posted it.
"Take for example the WarCraft series, or the Diablo series."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I seem to remember from both diablo games, the view was tightly fixed on your every step. And obviously they're not going to show you everything like in Tactical games, since it ISN'T A TACTICAL GAME. It's an RPG, try to make your comparisons a little less vague.

"Typically, you’ll get two attacks per round, since you start with 10 action points"

*Buzz* WRONG. How many action points you get depends on:
A. How you configured your char at the beginning of the game.
B. Any perks you've earned that modify AP's.
C. If you've broken either leg or not, that effects how many steps you can take.
Also, "Two Attacks" doesn't apply at all. Different Weapons, Perks, Injury, Illness, Skill and other such things effect how many "attacks" you can have. You make it sound as if you can only use your turn for attacking, not for say, using a stimpack(2 AP's usually) or going into your inventory(4 AP's usually). Perks can also effect those as well.

"However, if you’re looking for eye candy, you’ve come to the wrong place."

As previously stated, its a 5 year old game. Also, if people are buying 5 year old games and getting dissappointed by their graphics, theres problem somewhere.

Verdict of Review:

Usefullness: 4-
You get about as much information on the game as you would reading the back of the box.
Thoroughness: 5-
The Reviewer seems to have played the game a bit, and that may work for some other games, but with RPGs like this you can't just buzz through the game and talk about how bad the graphics were.
Information: 4.5-
Fairly accurate, but not at all detailed. Then again, it's easy to be accurate when you talk about the bare basics of a game.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[BlackDog]

All in all a good review but slightly silly to judge the graphics and engine on today's standards rather than when it was completed, don't you think?

Article read. I see a typical mac user. All mouth and no brains.