Do not feed the Troll folks.

PedroSteckecilo:

NezumiiroKitsune:

Symp4thy:
I just wish I could still target the eyes with VATS

Blinding an enemy! Good times, that would have been 10 times as epic in Fallout 3... /sigh

You also can't target the groin, why for can't you target the groin?

Shooting the balls off Metzger in Fallout 2 was one of my favorite moments in that game (I was playing a female character and I slept with Metzger to get a price break on Vic)

On the one hand, the inability to target those oddball places is a bit disappointing. On the other hand, the time I was stuck in a heavy firefight after having my head "incapacitated" and had to deal with the effects of concussion/decapitation was annoying enough. I can't imagine I would have survived if I had been blinded.

As a side note, am I the only one who liked Fallout Tactics?

there was this teacher who wrote an article about the gap between fallout 1,2 and 3. he let his students play through fallout 2 as their homework assignments then come to class and discuss them. they weren't too fond of the game in the beginning, but after a while they got immersed and started having lively discussions about the different choices in the game.

at some point, they were asked if fallout 3 could be as good as the first two. pretty much every student said no. why? they never said that fallout 3 couldn't be a good game (this was shortly before the release of fallout 3), but it would be impossible for bethesda to encapsulate the immersion and general feeling of the first two games.

also i liked fallout tactics, i played it before i played fallout 1 and 2.

Wouldukindly:
Personally I enjoyed the gameplay and setup of the original Fallout...but I've never finished it due to that damn timer. I really didn't like it, I never like being timed in games. I was very glad when the second one didn't really do that, and had a great time playing through at my own pace. The only problem with that one was the easter eggs. Although hilarious, I felt they broke the flow of the game simply because there were too many. Fallout 3 I greatly enjoyed for just the wonderfully fun exploration. But it too had problems, specifically the 'frozen eyes' look of the NPCs and the bugs that had me saving like mad.

I have a "nasty" suprise for you =P Fallout 2 did have a timer, it was just very long, most people didnt reach or indeed need that much time. It was 13 in game years then the game ended and wouldnt let you play any futher. However simply altering the .cfg file can alter this and prevent the game ending.

Grampy_bone:

Voltano:
*Eye twitch.* Your saying a sequel is better because it has better graphics/oh-so-pretty-death-animation-but-no-point-for-gameplay over a game that didn't have access to that technology at the time it was released, but instead focused on other things to bring in a fan base(i.e. good story-telling, original setting for RPG, finding the tardus in the wilderness)?

I just think this post is hilarious because here we have someone complaining about a feature in Fallout 3 which was present in the original games (ridiculous, over-the-top death animations). I remember reading one of the original Fallout design docs and "Extreme Violence" was near the top of the feature list. The grumpy grognards who complained just want to bitch and moan about everything. They don't care about facts or the truth, they just want to gloss over the past with a pretty, nostalgic varnish while they sandblast and scour the future until nothing remains. Thankfully, the rest of us can move on without them.

As a longtime fallout fan (avatar pic, dur) I loved Fallout 3 and didn't have the complaints the topic starter claims I should. The VATS system was terrific; did anybody notice how it dynamically calculates hit percentages based off range, line of sight, facing, cover, etc? How cool is that? The original games featured a "Targeted Shot" ability which is essentially VATS, so it's awesome. My hope is that they will find a way to better integrate companions into the system, letting you command allies to attack while in VATS mode. We'll see I guess.

Erh...Yes, your right. I'm an old school fallout fan myself and forgot about the gory-yet-pointless-death feature in the first two. My bad.

Though I never played Fallout 3 because I don't have any next-gen console to run it or a good computer that can actually play it, I can't really say it's a good or bad game. However, this is stepping a bit into fan-base territory and there will be a lot of nay-sayers on the game. Maybe not a good analogy, but a similar situation would be if Nintendo decided to make a sequel to Final Fantasy 7 on their Wii, with better graphics and the same characters, but not being done at all by Square-Enix, just as an unusual example.

harhol:
Old games are better than new games because they are old.

What.

The.

Fuck.

No seriously I dont get it. New games are just as good (or arguably better) than old games. The only difference is that some of the older games founded some of the games we play today.

Onyxblackwolf:
Fallout 1+2 and Fallout 3 are entirely different animals.
The first person was fine, the graphics were fine, but the heart and sole of the world were suspiciously absent.

Regardless, Fallout 3 is still a damn fun game, and it had it's excellent Fallouty moments, it was just missing that overall witty spark that F1 and 2 had.

Bingo. Fallout 3 could of still been like the originals if they did it like Van Buren. /Nostalgia.

MercurySteam:

harhol:
Old games are better than new games because they are old.

What.

The.

Fuck.

No seriously I dont get it. New games are just as good (or arguably better) than old games. The only difference is that some of the older games founded some of the games we play today.

He could been joking or be a victim of nostalgia you realize, Mr Serious.

Voltano:
Maybe not a good analogy, but a similar situation would be if Nintendo decided to make a sequel to Final Fantasy 7 on their Wii, with better graphics and the same characters, but not being done at all by Square-Enix, just as an unusual example.

The main complaint is that it's more like a sequel to FF7 (to use you're example) which is made by a different company, with different themes, different gameplay, the characters acting unlike they did previously, and with the whole game structured differently.

Amarok:
I got Fallout 1, 2 and Tactics for Christmas, so I can judge without the shadow of nostalgia hanging over me.

awesome you fot the "Fallout collection" as well for christmas. but i still have nostalgia since i played it back a long time ago.

i have to say fallout 3 was MUCH easier then the two originals, but still contained a complex storyline, love-able characters and wonderful diolog. 3D made fallout a lot more fun, not that i didnt have a lot of fun with the original fallouts, but sometimes they could get annoying and hair-rippingly difficult. the whole new exprince should be appreciated since it still contained the core which made fallout great, oh and an awesome soundtrack, which is nice to see since fallout 1,2 didnt have music

harhol:
Old games are better than new games because they are old.

really, is that a fact? daikatana is an old game, so does that also make it a good game? and what about superman 64? is that a good game as well? after all its 12 years old at this point.

these old games are good because they are good games. half-life is a great old game because half life did everything right. unreal tournament was fast paced and addictive as hell and required a good bit of actual skill to play. perfect dark was just a lot of fun and the fallout games follow the same suit, they did so much right, deep intriguing story and deep gameplay mechanics and a good bit of character customization. good games and good games, whether they are old or new. i think older games are better then newer ones (name a better game then deus ex, go on i dare ya), i believe thats because today most game developers are content with copying good games of the past to the letter but with better graphics.

For many Fallout 1 & 2 fans, Fallout 3 is seen as ploy by Bethsoft to cash in on the classic Interplay roleplaying game franchise. A generic 1st person shooter video game with a few post apocalyptic elements tacked on. Oblivion with guns.

You can review the Duck and Cover forum for details
http://www.duckandcover.cx

Fallout 3 was released before quality testing was complete. PS3, Xbox 360, and PC users are still waiting for a patch to resolve a myriad of game play and graphics issues.

FO3 wasn't well received by fans because it was trying too hard to be "Fallout". You have all the Fallout elements all jammed into a tiny little patch of dirt, all shouting "See, we're Fallout". Except those "Fallout elements" are really little steaming piles of shit with a bunch of labels tacked on them by marketroids.

Intelligent dialogue, GURPS based gameplay, multiple ways of finishing missions (and no, I don't mean "Stealth or combat", I mean being able to bluff your way through or fix their problem with repair or science as well as "kill everything that moves"), retro-futuristic (NOT ART DECO) world design.

Fallout was already being driven into the ground by Interplay, attempting to cash in on the same things Bethesda did.

The people who have a problem with "Fallout 3" wouldn't have nearly the same amount of anger if Bethesda had called it "Fallout: Capital Wasteland", the 3 on the end means it's a direct sequel. Now that it's there, us fans have no hope of there being a true sequel, made in the same GURPS inspired, intelligent dialogue, complex gameplay way.

You got your fucking post-apocalyptic FPS with ARPG elements. You only had to kill one of the greatest RPG's ever.

ratix2, Vampire: The Masquerade: Bloodlines. I rate it better than Deus Ex.

MercurySteam:

harhol:
Old games are better than new games because they are old.

...I dont get it. New games are just as good (or arguably better) than old games. The only difference is that some of the older games founded some of the games we play today.

I was being sarcastic / mocking unjustified nostalgia.

"Super Mario is the best game ever!"

^^ that kind of thing.

Fallout 1 touched very element of tragety and irony.

You spend all your time, and risk your life, to save your vault.
And then, because you did, you have to go.
You're a hero, and you have to leave.

Neither Fallout 2 or 3 had that same level of drama in it. It remains my favorite out of the series, but I don't hate F3 at all. I played it, beat it, enjoyed it, and shelved it, like its two predecessors.

Trist66:

No, I'm basically saying that turned based games suck, and should be forgotten.

Civilization would like to have a word with you. Sid Meiers is poised with an axe right outside your door.

Personally I can't wait for Bethesda to improve the formula for Fallout 4, I think that'll REALLY show the oomph of the new Fallout.

I know I've said this before but my biggest issue for Fallout 3 in comparisson to the previous 2 is that it's not funny. Fallouts 1 and 2 were hilarious.

I actually enjoyed Fallout 3 a lot more than the old ones, probably because you don't kill your own father on this one. Even though I did knock him unconcious with a BB Gun.

I think the V.A.T.S was a great take-on to the game, even though when you got the Grim Reaper perk at 20, it was overpowered.

PedroSteckecilo:
Personally I can't wait for Bethesda to improve the formula for Fallout 4, I think that'll REALLY show the oomph of the new Fallout.

I know I've said this before but my biggest issue for Fallout 3 in comparisson to the previous 2 is that it's not funny. Fallouts 1 and 2 were hilarious.

ditto.

I miss the jinxed trait.

joystickjunki3:
I dunno, I'm an old-time Fallout fan and I thought Fallout 3 was a worthy successor. Everyone else is a victim of what I like to call Emo-itis. It's where you stop liking something because it became popular.

Except the Fallout series is insanely popular.

Credge:

joystickjunki3:
I dunno, I'm an old-time Fallout fan and I thought Fallout 3 was a worthy successor. Everyone else is a victim of what I like to call Emo-itis. It's where you stop liking something because it became popular.

Except the Fallout series is insanely popular.

Yeah, among old school hardcores. It's kinda like the sleeper hit.

Trist66:
I've seen countless oldtime fallout players whine about it "not being a true fallout game", arguieng with statements such as "it's in 3d" or "The V.A.T.S system is dumb". Now, I've never played the original two fallouts, so I don't know how good it really was. Really though, you honestly have more fun watching a 2d picture hitting another with pre-animated sequence, then watching a 3d physics engine take control when you watch a super mutants head bounce of a building in downtown D.C?

Can someone explain to me why?

For the record I liked Fallout 3 a lot - but I loved Fallout 1 & 2.

First of all, I loved the original turn based system and I thought it was the best game mechanic of almost any roleplaying game I have ever seen.

Secondly, the player development was infinitely better and deeper than the one set up in Fallout 3.

While playing Fallout 3 I felt as if it was impossible to build a character that would be able to fail in any quest in the entire game without actively not adding points to certain stats/skills. Even then using real time combat was so easy I doubt it would be possible to fail in any fire fight.

In Fallout 1 & 2 you actually had to think about the way you made your character and in what situations would he or she be at an advantage/disadvantage. If you were no good at using guns then you'd be up shit creek without a paddle during a fire fight. There were also companions who if you were no good at a certain function of the game would be there to offset the problem and help with a desired goal (opening doors, repairing things, winning gunfights, etc.) The additional characters also created some good comic relief as well as making the story more believable (i.e. It's not one man vs. the world, but a group of people struggling together to survive - each with their own talents.)

By contrast in Fallout 3 my main character by level 3 knew how to disarm a nuclear bomb, could repair guns/armor he would certainly never have seen before, hack into computers, and pick locks without any experience in almost all of these fields of work.

Not to mention, being able to use pistols, lasers, miniguns, rocket launchers, knifes, sledgehammers, fists, and generally any other weapon in the entire game without any combat experience.

Thirdly, Radiation.

In Fallout 1 & 2 if you got seriously irradiated, with no medicine to take care of it you had a big fucking problem and very possibly a fatal one.

While playing Fallout 3, you could get as radiated as you wanted with no ill effects at any time EVER during the entire goddamn game. Hell, I never even used any of the preventative drugs when I was playing and walked through areas I had just hit with miniature nukes without worrying one bit.

Fourthly, Travelling, or lack thereof.

As far as I know in the entire time you never leave Washington, and it barely takes any time at all to do any travelling. This gave the feel of a game where you didn't really accomplish very much. It's how in Fallout 3 you save/destroy Washington, versus how in Fallout 1 & 2 you can either save/destroy all known life on the planet.

As I have not yet won the game I will reserve my judgement on the endings for the time being.

Lastly, mature content.

They cut the balls off of the mature content in this game, to my knowledge there were no cities with prostitutes and junkies or prostitute junkies hanging around on the corners trying to make a living or get some drugs.

All that being said, people who say "Fallout 3 is not a true Fallout game" are the people who wanted something more akin the turn-based system, with the ability to get their character incredibly drunk, stumble over to a prostitute and go get laid if they felt like it.

P.S. - Fallout 3 is not an RPG to me, it is a first person shooter with role playing elements.

joystickjunki3:
I dunno, I'm an old-time Fallout fan and I thought Fallout 3 was a worthy successor. Everyone else is a victim of what I like to call Emo-itis. It's where you stop liking something because it became popular.

It's like your pretty (not supermodel hot) girlfriend who's intelligent, patient and with a great sense of humour goes missing. Ten years later, she returns. She's a gutter slut who looks hot, with a mouth that would make sailors blush and none of that intelligent vocabulary you used to know and love and who simply can't wait for more than 30 seconds.

Everything you loved about her is gone and has been replaced by stuff that gets people's attention but is quickly forgotten.

Aardvark:
Why do people do that?

Here's an idea, jerkwads. Type out everything you want to say in notepad. Then read it. Aloud. Record yourself reading it. Then play it back to yourself.

Then decide if you really want to open yourself up to ridicule.

wow

Eclectic Dreck:

As a side note, am I the only one who liked Fallout Tactics?

Nope, i liked Fallout Tactics too. I don't get what's all the hate for it.

Similiarly i don't get all the hate towards Fallout 3 either. Sure it's not as mindblowing as Interplay could have done but it's a very nice attempt at a Fallout-based Elder Scrolls game. I'm not trying to say it's 'oblivion with guns', what i'm trying to say is Bethesda does not equal Interplay. Neither is 2008 the same as 1997 and whoever didn't keep that in mind while waiting for Fallout 3 only have themselves to blame if they were disappointed.

I expected very little from Bethesda, but they ended up releasing an amazing videogame by today's standards which i believe is a worthy successor to the old Fallout games, if you can forgive the 'simplification' that is required a lot more than it was back in the day. Other than that they really captured that retro-futuristic 1950's post-apocalyptic atmosphere and the tutorial stage is brilliant.

I'm one of the people who liked the original Fallouts more than the third.

First the graphics argument is such a non-issue to me and I'm sure to anyone on these boards who is 18 or up. Hell I'm only 20 and I can comprehend having your imagination fill the gaps on what the technology cannot.

However I don't think Fallout 3 is an abomination by any means and have respect just for attempting to reinvigorate the series. I'm just simply not compatible with the raid/loot/raid/loot system Bethesda has you going through. It just all feels kinda disjointed to me. Also the story and humor was sorely lacking in some of the more essential parts (ENDING!!!) and in that sense the very heart and soul of what was established was hurt.

If my answer is unsatisfactory I can elaborate.

Trist66:

No, I'm basically saying that turned based games suck, and should be forgotten.

Yes, that must be why Go has been so popular for over 2000 years.

Eclectic Dreck:
Fallout 3 is unquestionably the best game in the fallout series thus far but you have to remember what you're dealing with. When you fondly remember the games from yesteryear, you remember them in an idealized fashion (i.e. you forget that there was even 20 minutes of fun to be had in State of Emergency but seem to recall Super Mario Brothers being nothing but shining moments of divine revelation).

The previous fallout games were so ahead of their time, from the complexity and scope of the world to the subtle black humor throughout. In an age where most RPGs were about saving princesses using swords and magic, fallout presented a grim future apocalypse. No matter how valiantly you fought against the denizens of the wastes, no matter how powerful your character there was no restoring the balance or saving the day. At the end of it all, you save your ungrateful people and are cast out into the wastes to fend for yourself, accomplishing little more than ensuring the rest of humanity can scrape out it's meager and pitiful existence in a ruined hellscape.

I have no love for the mechanics of the game - turn based gameplay has it's place and it worked well in an age where fallout's interface was almost cutting edge. Fallout 3 is an improvement because today's hardware let's designers actually bring the wasteland to life; in the previous games they could only hint at the detestation and left it to the player to interpret the crude graphics. Letting the player proceed in first person inherently allows for greater immersiveness than any third person game can hope for. And a true turn based first person system has never been attempted to my knowledge, but I can only assume the results would be cumbersome at best. VATS is an excellent compromise, and though far from perfect at least keeps the spirit of the previous system in place.

Fallout 3 is decried because it is often closer to a shooter than a Role Playing Game in it's mechanics. There can be no denying that Fallout 3 plays differently and looks different than it's predecissors but the themes that drive the game are there. Bethesda did no disservice to Interplay with their implementation of the game: instead they honored them. They took the grand ideas that Interplay created in their magic boxes into a new setting and gave us a whole new way to play the game. In all fairness to Bethesda - they did the best they could - besides, it's better than any Fallout 3 Interplay is going to make.

Oh Christ, I jut refreshed the page and lost a good five paragraphs. Doh. Let me summarize.

Simply put, F3 is far too much a shooter, make the concept of AP pointless as you can ignore VATS and play Call Of Duty: Capital Wasteland. The game lacks the atmosphere of the other games, never mind the brilliant writing. The turn-based interface is not terrible at all, stop hating on turn based combat, it's quite fine, everybody loved KotOR and it was completely turned based. Bethesda was not the best person to do this game, it would have been better to hire J.E. Sawyer and al the other guys who made the old Fallouts and let them make F3. Van Buren, Black Isle studio's cancelled F3, was going to have a system where AP was need for everything except movement; AP regenerated except when moving. That would have much a better game than the current F3, and yes, BLS handed over all the design docs for Van Buren to Bethesda. Also, you can't call a video game the unquestionable best because due to the fact that there is no means for measuring the greatness of a game, you can't objectively say X is better than Y, saying that is an opinion.

Sorry for the quick abruptness of this, but I'm too tired to re-write the super long epic that I'd written.

meatloaf231:

harhol:
Old games are better than new games because they are old.

I think you've hit the nail on the head. I think that statement goes for far more than just games, though. Nostalgia is a cruel illusion.

It's not an illusion if I think it's true...

PedroSteckecilo:

Trist66:

Can someone explain to me why?

A'ight fine, I'll tell you. But first let me say that I did LIKE it, all of the reasons you mentioned above have little to do with my issues.

My main problems were with the somewhat poor writing of the main story, the creepy stare ahead Oblivion engine graphics, the level cap and most of all...

The lack of Roleplaying that was really apparent in the original 2. They took out the coolest aspect of the dialogue, the fact that your Stat choices REALLY effected what you could say, in Fallout 3 the "Special Stat" conversation options RARELY come up whereas in Fallouts 1 and 2 they were omnipresent.

Also Fallout 3 IS NOT REMOTELY as funny as Fallouts 1 and 2 were.

All of this.

Also, I do like the new combat in real time. However, I also enjoy the combat in F1 and F2. They are just completely different gameplay mechanics. The combat in the original Fallouts wasn't just "click until they die", it had more tactics. Saying it is is like saying that chess is just "land on all the other pieces", somewhat true, but misses the whole tactical bit. Maybe it's just me, but I felt that fallout 2 gave a better sense of scale and and mostly empty wasteland. Travelling in the car and very rarely meeting people between towns really added to the atmosphere. Fallout 3 feels more crowded.

Bullfrog1983:

They cut the balls off of the mature content in this game, to my knowledge there were no cities with prostitutes and junkies or prostitute junkies hanging around on the corners trying to make a living or get some drugs.

As much as I find myself agreeing with most of your other points, you're wrong on this one. There are an awful lot of junkies and (implied) prostitutes in Fallout 3, although they are entirely passive (if you choose not to feed their habit it has no effect on anything at all) but do add characterisation to the wasteland if nothing else.

Eclectic Dreck:
Fallout 3 is unquestionably the best game in the fallout series thus far

PLEASE tell me why you think that.

DirkGently:

Oh Christ, I jut refreshed the page and lost a good five paragraphs. Doh. Let me summarize.

Simply put, F3 is far too much a shooter, make the concept of AP pointless as you can ignore VATS and play Call Of Duty: Capital Wasteland. The game lacks the atmosphere of the other games, never mind the brilliant writing. The turn-based interface is not terrible at all, stop hating on turn based combat, it's quite fine, everybody loved KotOR and it was completely turned based. Bethesda was not the best person to do this game, it would have been better to hire J.E. Sawyer and al the other guys who made the old Fallouts and let them make F3. Van Buren, Black Isle studio's cancelled F3, was going to have a system where AP was need for everything except movement; AP regenerated except when moving. That would have much a better game than the current F3, and yes, BLS handed over all the design docs for Van Buren to Bethesda. Also, you can't call a video game the unquestionable best because due to the fact that there is no means for measuring the greatness of a game, you can't objectively say X is better than Y, saying that is an opinion.

Sorry for the quick abruptness of this, but I'm too tired to re-write the super long epic that I'd written.

I don't really disagree with your sentiments. I think the turn based gameplay was brilliant in fallout 1 and 2 - in fact I don't really see how the game could be played without that convention. The shooter mechanic is of course a major deviation from the previous games and indeed the game is often more shooter with RPG elements than an RPG played from first person but I don't dislike that mechanic. First Person games allow for greater immersion.

In my view, fallout 3 IS the best of the series and that's from as an objective of a standpoint as an opinion can possibly be. Yes, Fallout 2 had more to do, yes played fallout 2 more and yes, it remains my favorite RPG of all time. But that doesn't mean I'm blind to progress and change. When fallout 3 was released I played Fallout 3 rather than running through 2 again - and even when I noted things that disappointed me I didn't run back to the pixelated comfort of games of yesteryear. Perhaps if interplay had not axed Black Isle we would have been given a better Fallout 3. But such as it is, fallout 3 is the best possible fallout 3 that could have been made. (Yes, I completely stole that circular logic from Candide).