Becuase the world is ending!

Hey YouTube. It's 2012 again. (This was posted a couple of days ago)

This argument and ME3 ending discussion transitioned me from lurking to posting on the Escapist. Thought I'd trot it out over here and see how people thought.
I think the arguments here are as overblown as hbomerguy and Joseph Anderson Fallout videos (exaggerate NV to debunk F3.) Tone all of them down a bit and you'd find some truth. Personally I don't see F3 that far behind NV but I like each for different reasons. Also, his analysis of mutants in F3 seems cool but on a Dark Souls level of knitting broken lore together (and I don't think it works there, just like it doesn't here.)

IS there a summary of the two hour video somewhere?

I mean, I remember Fallout 3 being a memory leaking constantly crashing mess. Muddy and distorted to look at (and I'm not a hi-fi graphics snob or anything), horrifically dull in actual art design and pallette. Overly repetitive from a gameplay perspective (and actually awful if you tried real time combat). With a storyline completely unsuited for a custom character in a sandbox game.

Some or all of that carried into the sequels of course. New Vegas had better writing, but all the same gameplay mess and not particularly improved visual style. 4 got a little less grey/brown mudwashed on its graphics, and sort of half got to being an *Adequate* FPS (though also dumped off half the RPG gameplay in the process), but had the same general story issues that plagued 3.

He was specifically speaking about complaints he's found on the Internet.

So this guy thinks that the writing isn't as bad as what people make out and some characters are way better than NV. He uses an example of end bosses (interaction maybe?) - Autumn and Linus - as how F3 does some character better. Mutants may be more complex in F3 than you would think.

Branching paths to fulfill a quest goal, another complaint about F3, is invalid and provide a variety of scenarios about them.

Bethsheda carefully laid out signposts to get to Megaton instead of the forced path to NV. But if you don't go to Megton, it cool too.

Another complaint he rebuked was not being able to kill everyone. Megaton as a clear example.

He provides a theme for many of the character actions from the overseer to Autumn that are connected.

Megaton being around a bomb makes sense as it bomb created a large hole in the ground. This is great for collecting ground water. And it doesn't matter that it's irradiated becuase everywhere is.

Another complaint is quests not leading to new location. He provided a bunch of examples, obviously including survival guide. He also provided many examples of info you can gleam that lead to quests. These DON'T provide markers. If you search, you will be guided to new locations. Also, if you aid Tenpenny, you won't miraculously find a way to achieve your goal. You'll have to randomly search.. In NV, if you shoot main quest characters, you can just find their journal which tells you everything. He says the latter seems.. Rather fortuitous.

I'd probably have to rewatch to provide further points. These also sound... Not fleshed out as I say it. Unfortunately, you'd have to watch it to get all of it. I was watching in 20min bites. I don't think I give him his due but I'm also a person that doesn't think F3 is crap becuase it's worse than NV. So I might be biased.

Fallout 3 wasn't meant for fans of Fallout 1 & 2; but unlike Mass Effect 3, it isn't such level of a mess that contradicts even itself. It still holds well on its own (even if it was pretty buggy and the original ending was pretty meh!).

CaitSeith:
Fallout 3 wasn't meant for fans of Fallout 1 & 2; but unlike Mass Effect 3, it isn't such level of a mess that contradicts even itself. It still holds well on its own (even if it was pretty buggy and the original ending was pretty meh!).

Fallout 3 is equally as contridictary to the first 2 games as Mass Effect 3 was.

At least ME 3 had consistant gameplay and played better than Fallout 3.

Samtemdo8:

CaitSeith:
Fallout 3 wasn't meant for fans of Fallout 1 & 2; but unlike Mass Effect 3, it isn't such level of a mess that contradicts even itself. It still holds well on its own (even if it was pretty buggy and the original ending was pretty meh!).

Fallout 3 is equally as contridictary to the first 2 games as Mass Effect 3 was.

At least ME 3 had consistant gameplay and played better than Fallout 3.

Fallout 3 plot wasn't the continuation of the first 2 games though. ME3 was mainly about being the story payoff of the previous 2 games, and it didn't even managed to be a passable payoff of itself.

FE3 didn't have consistant gameplay? What do you mean with that? Did the gameplay changed from shooting to talking to quick-time events randomly or what?

ME3 gameplay was pretty fun, though; but I call it different, not better.

I love the new Fallouts, I really do, second or 3rd favourite games of all time, but I'm not going to watch a whole 2 hours on it in one chunk.

I liked 3, sure NV was an improvement, but it fucking well should be.

I would have liked it if 3 had had the fleshed out characters and stories to go with them to make me want to keep on playing after I'd explored the whole of the wasteland.

I would have liked it if NV had had a wasteland that I wanted to explore to begin with.

Fallout 3 had a Wasteland filled with lots of stuff to explore and scavenge for the loot, and that's about what it does better than New Vegas in my book. (Well, that and better "dungeon" system.)

trunkage:

Megaton being around a bomb makes sense as it bomb created a large hole in the ground. This is great for collecting ground water. And it doesn't matter that it's irradiated becuase everywhere is.

I don't buy this explanation. If everything's irridiated, surely it would be wiser to settle closer to a nearby river?
And if that wasn't the case, atleast trying to somewhat shelter the bomb, bury it, anything except letting it lie there in a puddle, should be expect from a community of wastelanders that know what this object is.

Seth Carter:
(...)horrifically dull in actual art design and pallette.

Honestly, i liked some aspects of the art direction. I don't hate the new, sleek power armor, and preffer jumpsuit Vault-suits, over the old spandex ones(and new ones, that were brought back in F4... why?).
The drab palette comes with the genre, to a degree, and the history of the franchise. The engine still managed to generate some nice views, despite its showing age. The only real offenders for me, are Oblivion Potato Faces.

OT: Why do i find better about NV overall, besides frequently mentioned things, like gameplay and plot improvements, is worldbuilding. Or rather building-upon-the(established)-world.
Fallout 3 was a succesful reboot, a modern re-imagining of old isometric games. And it was fun, until a point atleast. Nothing really above that.
New Vegas felt like a proper sequel to me, though.

 

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