Zero Punctuation: Fallout 3

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 NEXT
 

Oblivion sucked and fallout 3 is just a bit better than Oblivion. Do the math.

yuck relish XP... anyway good vid

EnglishMuffin:
Oblivion sucked and fallout 3 is just a bit better than Oblivion. Do the math.

Excuse me, I was told there wouldn't be math?

Then again, according to my calculations...that statement doesn't add up. Strange, no?

EnglishMuffin:
Oblivion sucked and fallout 3 is just a bit better than Oblivion. Do the math.

The math says your post needs more content to stop being redundant. No offence.

Yes because finding the Geck was really that hard. o_O

Anyways, its just all this unadulterous praise for a game with so many problems is not exactly healthy for the gaming industry, much less the rpg genre, a genre that(at one time) prided itself on it's complexity. Doing what you want is fine, but I still don't think that was the whole intent behind the creation of Fallout. Hell, even the creators themselves felt that it wasn't right that bethesda got to make this game, considering they made it, it just so happend that interplay owned it, changed hands, screwed up and had to sell the i.p.

To bethesda, a company not exactly famous for storytelling.

Even finding the waterchip wasn't really that hard.

Oh yeah, you must have never actually finished fallout 2, because well, the time limit, is 13 years.(Which in itself would require you to cover the entire map multiple times, giving you more than enough adequete time) Fail.

Again, can someone explain to me how a game gets so much praise for having horrible ai, a bad storyline that is just a rip off of fallout 1, illogical item placement, dumbed down mechanics and quit honestly a bad ending. Graphics are mediocore except for the great enviroment.

I still had fun with the game( I've invested over 65 hours into the game), but it doesn't deserve the amount of critical acclaim it has been getting.

ACtually Eternal Sonata tried turn-based combat with real-time crosses but it mostly just meant one character runs over, you repeatedly hit the attack button and get a special move done during their turn and then another character or an enemy gets their move and they run up and smack you while you just stand there watching the Northern Lights.

Valkyrie Profile also had it to some extent even though that was mostly getting muscle-memory to mash buttons in the right order so you get the most number of hits.

Oblivon bored me and I never got into it, so I haven't spent my time playing it making the comparison. I also didn't care much for Fallout 2.

So, Fallout 3 rocks as far as I'm concerned. The game does feel a little spread out, but I like it that way. It gives me more time to reflect on the wasteland and appreciate the potential horrors of nuclear apocalypse.

The last line had me laughing so hard, and I don't even know why.

Ok I didn't take the time to read all the pages of review so please forgive me.

First off I am glad that Yatzee was at least allowing himself to not be that guy. You know the 'I have to bash everything out of every game and get less and less funny and insightful about them when I review so you never know what I want from a game' guy he has kind of drifted into. Hes gone away from that a bit and for that I'm glad.

Now to the people who hate fallout 3, get over yourselves.

First Oblivion was a good game. If you really can't allow yourself to have fun in an expansive world where you go around doing quests and accept that maybe they don't want to hire a voice actor for every single sprite then you really are too uptight to play video games in the first place. But Fallout 3 was not Oblivion. It was massive, It borrowed on a couple of bits of the elder scrolls formula but the combat, the story, the level design, all of it felt different and made for a totally different game. Fallout 3 does a good job of mixing the Tabletop inspired mechanics of the past two games with a mostly real time combat and interaction engine. Yes its going to look similar to Oblivion because it uses alot of the same components and has alot of the same people making it but its still a vastly diffrent game.

Now on to those who have played the other Fallout games. What more do you want exactly? I still got the same gritty hopeless distopian feel from Fallout 3 that I got from 2. Sure the difficulty curve isn't the same but if it was most people would be complaining about that anyways. Yes they could have made it a third person point and click and skinned the items a bit closer to the older Fallout games but at that point your ignoring a well done Fallout story, faithful continuation of the setting and solid gameplay mechanics because your upset black Isle is gone. I'm upset too. It pains me to see what the Baulders gate games have become. That Diablo keeps going while the more complex and well designed over the shoulder games have fallen at the wayside simply because the designers want to put as little work as possible into a well rounded system. But your all holding Fallout 3 to an unrealistic Idealization of what the game should be. They could have used the same engine, the same sprites even pulled in Mister Dorn to play the end boss again so we could fix the boss fight by making it seem more 'in place' and It wouldn't change a thing. Try to go into the game objectively and see the game as a Fallout game in and of itself rather than demanding some imaginary fallout standard.

If you really have that much of a problem with it, well you know GURPS was going to be the mechanic system for the first game...

As for Mister Crowshaw, I am glad to see you finally break out of that little shell yovue put yourself in since.. I think it was about Mario Galaxy. After that you seemed to be acting more like a contrary indie reviewer and less like a designer giving a review. Its been hard to tell where on the radar you were in terms of games after shooting down Hidio Kajima's attempt to finish what we shall call his 'high budget Chzo series' for lack of a better term and your notes on the prince of Persia series didn't help too much.

Very good review and I would agree. I understand that you feel games like this should be the norm and as such make that known but you have to encourage the industry to make more games like it before you get better new ones.

I just want to cry cause I want to play Fallout 3, Far Cry 2, Spore and Call of Duty: World at War, all at the same time.

To think Total War: Empire is coming out in two months.

I'd like to point out that this game is going to recieve a mixed reaction no matter what it was actually like. Personally, I enjoyed it, although I agree with all Yahtzee's points.

Anyway, the fact is there are a fair number of Fallout 1/2 fan(*cough-fanboys-cough*) who've evalated those games to perfection in their minds. Frankly, I don't think either of those games where massively complex as they want everyone to believe. Not to say they weren't good (I enjoyed 2 more myself).

Anyway, the fanboys would only EVER like a 2D isometric view with purely turn-based combat in an apparently open world that was really more like a linear trip in terms of the main plot.

Schizzy:
I just want to cry cause I want to play Fallout 3, Far Cry 2, Spore and Call of Duty: World at War, all at the same time.

To think Total War: Empire is coming out in two months.

I hate to tell you, but I think its 3 months :( mid-February! :( Got it pre-ordered with Steam.

Doug:
I'd like to point out that this game is going to recieve a mixed reaction no matter what it was actually like. Personally, I enjoyed it, although I agree with all Yahtzee's points.

Anyway, the fact is there are a fair number of Fallout 1/2 fan(*cough-fanboys-cough*) who've evalated those games to perfection in their minds. Frankly, I don't think either of those games where massively complex as they want everyone to believe. Not to say they weren't good (I enjoyed 2 more myself).

Anyway, the fanboys would only EVER like a 2D isometric view with purely turn-based combat in an apparently open world that was really more like a linear trip in terms of the main plot.

Heres the thing, I love those kinds of games. The 2D Isometric ones. I adore them and I think they are way better than alot of what we have now. Thats not me being nostalgic because I have alot of them on my computer.But while I fit, for the most part, into that grouping you just mentioned I find it sad when people can't enjoy other games that are well done.

In the end none of it is the same as a night at the gaming table, Fallout 1 and 2 were close though. Fallout 3 was not AS close but its still an amazing game for what it is and people need to just broaden their horizons.

The beginning caught me off guard and I laughed so hard!

TerraMGP:

Doug:
I'd like to point out that this game is going to recieve a mixed reaction no matter what it was actually like. Personally, I enjoyed it, although I agree with all Yahtzee's points.

Anyway, the fact is there are a fair number of Fallout 1/2 fan(*cough-fanboys-cough*) who've evalated those games to perfection in their minds. Frankly, I don't think either of those games where massively complex as they want everyone to believe. Not to say they weren't good (I enjoyed 2 more myself).

Anyway, the fanboys would only EVER like a 2D isometric view with purely turn-based combat in an apparently open world that was really more like a linear trip in terms of the main plot.

Heres the thing, I love those kinds of games. The 2D Isometric ones. I adore them and I think they are way better than alot of what we have now. Thats not me being nostalgic because I have alot of them on my computer.But while I fit, for the most part, into that grouping you just mentioned I find it sad when people can't enjoy other games that are well done.

In the end none of it is the same as a night at the gaming table, Fallout 1 and 2 were close though. Fallout 3 was not AS close but its still an amazing game for what it is and people need to just broaden their horizons.

I more meant people who would call Fallout 3 an awful game no matter what because it is in 3d, not 2d iso. I don't think you fit into that group. I use the definition:

Fan: Someone who enjoys a game or series of games without being blinded to their faults and/or competition.

Fanboy: Someone who thinks there game of choice is 'the best game EVAR!' no matter what. Any sequel that isn't the exact same thing is automatically 'moving away from its roots'.

TerraMGP:

Now to the people who hate fallout 3, get over yourselves.

First Oblivion was a good game.

This is your opinion only. After having played arena, daggerfall and looked at morrowind, all I can say is, wow, same game, slightly better graphics, more bugs, less stability. Oblivion had really no story to speak of, what was there was exceedingly derivative and unoriginal. Bethesda should never have been given the rights to fallout 3, they're just not up to the task.

Back on topic, F3 is a good game, quad-core memory leaks aside, it's just not fallout. It's far more like an upgraded stalker, or an oblivion total conversion than a proper addition to the fallout universe.

Since I don't really want the banhammer to slap down on me for not mentioning yahtzee, he was spot on with his criticisms. Just a damn shame he didn't give bethesda a bit more of a serve for their tonka-toy/duplo handling of what should have been the gaming equivalent of a lego technic big rig.

I absolutely loved FO3. GOTY for me. I'm a massive fan of the originals and found this new step up graphics/gameplay wise fantastic. FO4 will be mind blowing!

World At War next please Yahtzee. Does Yahtzee ever read these forums?

When I first saw the link to Fallout 3 I thought to myself "uh oh, this could be bad." Glad to see our favorite overzealous critic actually didn't despise it. Also nice to see the only real qualms he had were the same few as me that I can easily ignore for the rest of a great ride in the game.

Let's just hope this time around Bethesda tools on thier models/animations and interaction scenes including said models/animations and actually uses animation on the scenes.

Yahtzee must be losing his touch, because after watching that review I now sort of want to buy Fallout 3...

First bit made me laugh harder than I have since the Big Daddy bit all the way back in Bioshock. Subverting expectations. Clever Yahtzee.

Considering it would be impossible to lambast Fallout 3 as much as it deserves in a 12 volume leather-bound set of books as big as tables, I wasn't surprised to hear it get only a mild jabbing in 5 minutes.

Back to no adverts = happy me.

that's because the makers of the game said it was a fallout sequel in terms of story, not gameplay. i read somewhere that they said it wasnt anything like the others, so it was on purpose.

i really want to play this game now! :)

Rossmallo:
I'm surprised...Knowing how similar it is to Oblivion, I had a horrible feeling of impending doom, but...he said it isnt bad, which was utterly shocking o_o But i gotta agree with him, it gets a BIT monotonous, but i didnt mind that. However, i gotta say, im surprised he didnt complain about the retarded point-of-no-return ending...THAT pissed me off. ><

Well FO3 improved a lot of what Oblivion had. I think Yahtzee main criticism of Obliovion was the lack of immersion. FO3 corrected it quite a bit.

BTW: Darkman Rulez

It strikes me as odd that there is no mention of the game's lack of an animation for diagonal movement.
I like the game, a lot, but that detail is so very annoying.

EnglishMuffin:
Oblivion sucked and fallout 3 is just a bit better than Oblivion. Do the math.

Sucked isn't a number lol.

Not Good:

BlueInkAlchemist:
First 20 seconds are worth the price of admission.

Also, if you haven't tried Branston pickle yet, what's wrong with you?

I'm not from Austrailia. So give me (and everyone else not from Austrailia) a break.

Pertaining to the review, I'm assuming that he liked it enough to give it a seal of approval.

Branston is not Australian (note correct spelling), it's British. And it's available in most major supermarket chains, such as Wegman's and Genuardi's/Safeway and Giant Foods I believe. Full disclosure: I was unaware of it's wide availability as well, which caused some raised eyebrows when I returned from my first UK jaunt this summer with a "vegetable product" in my baggage.

derpa:

Ryuzaki:

derpa:

Yea none of the fans would have liked it *eye roll*

Stop moaning. Why don't you back up your claims with some actual reasoning. Your opinion is not the law, you may be entitled to it, but that also means people are allowed to disagree with you.

Wait where did I say it was law? Oh thats right now where, you took it to be saying it was law.

Also don't even know how you quoted that and even got anything from moaning? You happen to have a source where all the fans didn't like it? hmmmm

You may not have said that your opinion is law, but judging on some of your comments, you certainly implied it.

And no I have no such source, but I was not trying to say that all the fans didn't like it.

All I was trying to say was that you need to back up your opinions with examples, or you are just raving. Spinning of one liners from a persons judgements (my quote was an example of one), without any attempt at reasoning as to why they are wrong, or why you are right, is moaning. It does not matter wether you are right or wrong in your views, if you just do that then you are simply complaining that their opinion is different from yours.

X-COM Apocalypse featured both real-time and turn-based combat, although most fans of the earlier X-COMs seem to hate it like fans of Fallout 1/2 hate 3... (Oh, topical!)

anti_strunt:
X-COM Apocalypse featured both real-time and turn-based combat, although most fans of the earlier X-COMs seem to hate it like fans of Fallout 1/2 hate 3... (Oh, topical!)

I beg to differ (And I think I have precedence :) ), the reason Apocalypse got so much stick is because the game was unfinished and those damn poppers.

As a fan of the original Fallout games I have to say that Bethesda did a very good job with the franchise. They brought this game to a new generation (and consoles) while capturing the atmosphere of the first two games and adding their own flavor. I'm having a blast with this game, and I don't remember being as addicted to the originals as I am with this one (which makes me conclude the F.O. 3 is a better game), and it's so cool to see the fallout universe come to life in 3D with such a vast waistland to explore and interesting characters to meet. I LOVE the sidequests here, they are VERY REWARDING, as is exploring and scavaging the waistland because whatever junk you find can be used for something eventually. I also like the fact that there are TONS of locations to visit, keeping you're curiosity stimulated throughout the game.

Ok to thsoe who still dislike Oblivion and Fallout 3 may I ask just what DID you want? It seems like you guys are basing this negative opinion on the standard of some imaginary game where everything is just like real life only five thousand times better and the story is like an epic one year long D&D game your best friend has been cooking up for years, yet not too long. A game where things are open ended, but not too open ended and are that way for absolutely everyone who would play it.

I played Fallout 2, Recently, and while I love it to death Its not this uber god game that people keep saying it is. I also played Fallout 3 and its a pretty good game overall. Sure I can accept the 'main story needs work' complaint a bit, but honestly when you get down to things like 'improper skins' and 'lack of movement when talking to you'. I would like to see anyone on here try to keep up when designing with the Bathesda team.

Let me ask you guys something. If they made a System shock 3... No I don't mean Bioshock but a real System shock 3 with the same team and the same mechancis and everything, how many of you think that you would judge it fairly? Please people Stop transferring your strange hate of Oblivion onto Fallout 3 and stop comparing it to your fond youth of over the shoulder tabletop inspired bliss. No game is ever going to hit that mystical 'sweet spot for everyone' and if you spend your whole life ripping apart every video game you come across because its not like the ones you grew up with your never going to have any fun with the good new games that come out.

I only wish you people understood the Irony of me being the one to say this.

request postal 2 review as it has been made into a movie.
also, its about a Psychopath :)

"Yeah, it's pretty good."

hahaha

I'm level 25 now (cap was too small so I raised it to 55) and I've just realised that my character looks fucking identical to Yahtzee. Or is it just me?

http://i103.photobucket.com/albums/m142/gafin666/ScreenShot9.jpg

What I like doing is finding a group of raiders, going into V.A.T.S. with the fatman, and aiming at the head of the one closest to the center of the group. Parts fly everywhere, especialy with the "bloody mess" perk.

Everyone should try Branston Pickle, on a slice of cheddar, on top of a cracker
Tis Gorgeous

Liked the review, i want Yahtzee to post in some kind of flame war though, and to review Valkyrie Profile 2
Do it BOY!! Do It Now!!

well i havent read all the posts here so maybe this was addressed...
but someone had asked why fallout 3 is not equal to the originals.
so i thought id clarify that a bit.

to start. i enjoyed fallout 3. i was very dissapointed... but i did think it a good game... if i pretended it wasnt named fallout 3. i recall the review on escapist saying you cant compare fallout 3 to fallout 1 and 2. however. as it it named fallout 3... you can indeed compare it. just like you can compare star wars 1-3 with 4-6...

now then.
fallout 3 though entertaining is far less thought out than the originals. despite being 200 years after the nuclear war... the communities seem to be in the "holy shit the world just ended" stage and are barely holding together, and you wouldnt expect any of the settlements to still exsist within a year of fallout 3 taking place. im pretty sure there 20 raiders 10 super mutants 5 feral ghouls 5 robots 5 talon company mercs and about 50 various hostile animals... to every 1 decent person living in a settlement. and seeing as the settlements are almost all poorly defended and have no sustainable food sources... id expect them to be gone very soon.

so thats one thing. the game is less thought out. it feel likes the bombs dropped a couple days ago not 200 years.
the character creation has far less baring on the game now. you can make a character with 1 inteligence and you arent punished for it what-so-ever.
you get 11 skill points instead of 20 for having 10 inteligence. and you miss out on a couple of perks and dialogue options...
in the originals... if you made a character with below 3 inteligence... youd have very few skill points and you would indeed be mentally challenged. with dialogue options such as "urgh huk?"
so overall... the game is far more forgiving and simplistic.

the combat on the other hand... i didnt mind vats. i do think it would be improved with not going slow motion every single time however. and it does kinda feel like cheating. on the other hand. the real time combat is just bad. the enemies usually move in such jerky fashion that its difficult to hit them unless they are standing still.

as for the overall tone of the wasteland... the detail in fallout 3 is amazing. but after exploring your 10th random building with nothing but enemies and a bit of loot... it loses some appeal. same with the subways.

a big difference between the originals and fallout 3 is the humour. the originals managed to have a gritty serious game, with awesome humour. it was hilarious. and yet grim... very impressive.
fallout 3 focuses almost entirely on the gritty and grim, and has just a bit of humour here and there, most of which isnt all the funny. i do understand their thought process on this, since the originals might be considered a bit cheesey with their pop culture references and such... but i thought that was a big part of the charm.
i was also suprised that they took almost all the sex out of the game.
oh and the main quest... is very frusterating. it was possible to fail in fallout 1 and 2 by killing off some of the main npcs in your start location... but you could at least kill them.
fallout 3 you just spend all your time knocking people out... and then they act like you didnt just shoot them in the face. very odd. and invincible children... that offended me a lot. i generally avioded the "child killer" karma title in fallout 2... but at least it was there if i ever wanted to be that evil.

i guess the main thing is... fallout 1 and 2 focused on plot and letting you tell your own story. the graphics sure arent impressive compared to nowadays. but the awesome dialogue, freedom, setting, comedy, and character creation make it an amazing game.

fallout 3 looks extremely impressive (well the models are kinda bland and lifeless... but maybe thats my medium settings...?) it focuses more on action (which it does so-so) and just rips off points from the originals for a plot... (getting water is your first objective in fallout 1... and a GECK is the first objective in fallout 2). and executes said plot poorly. the ending was extremely dissapointing... i heard they had 500ish variations of the ending... i just cant believe that... if they did it like the originals then it would make sense... the originals endings would tell you about the places youve been and some of the people youve met. basically it reflect your actions and show you just how much of an impact you had on the wastes.

if you compare fallout 3 to oblivion it comes out favourably indeed.
but sinces its named fallout 3... you have to compare it with its predessors... which it falls way short of...

id give it a nice 70% rating... but it would need 90% to be a worthy sequel.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here