Support NeoGAF

[UncleSporky]

who the fuck cares about this "200 years" thing? It has zero impact on the actual game. There's basically no mention of it during gameplay. It could be 10 years, 50 years, 200 years. Tell yourself it was only 10 years if it helps you sleep at night. It doesn't matter in the least, just play the game and enjoy it.

 

[Caronte]

Nothing makes sense in F3, I've been saying that for years.

 

[UncleSporky]

Nothing makes sense in F3, I've been saying that for years.

Yes, but have you been saying it for 6 years or 5 years? This is crucial to the verisimilitude of your comment.

 

[Hektor]

I know this is a very unpopular opinion but... New Vagas isn't THAT MUCH better.

Still better than New Vegas.

The human brain cant comprehend the quality difference in writing anyways.

 

[aravuus]

who the fuck cares about this "200 years" thing? It has zero impact on the actual game. There's basically no mention of it during gameplay. It could be 10 years, 50 years, 200 years. Tell yourself it was only 10 years if it helps you sleep at night. It doesn't matter in the least, just play the game and enjoy it.

Well, people who care about the story, I'd imagine. People look for different things in games.

e: I love how this thread seems to be boiling down to FO3 vs NV discussion too which is exactly what the writer tried to avoid lol

 

[Caronte]

Yes, but have you been saying it for 6 years or 5 years? This is crucial to the verisimilitude of your comment.

Don't get mad if someone complains about your favorite game.

 

[Forkball]

Can I interest any of you in some super mutants?

 

[DrROBschiz]

Shit son Nice write up

I never really looked back on it and disected it. I still consider it a great "game" but the thematica contradictions stick out like a sore thumb

Probably because Hurr Hurr its just a game.

Shit.. Makes me wonder if the new direction Bethesda took the game cannot be changed


Fallout 4 is looking like it will mostly fit into the same mold of your criticisms minus the color pallette and visual upgrades of course.

Then again Fallout 3 and NV were more about isolated storytelling placed in chunks around the open world. In that sense the game certainly engaged me

But yeah have never really sat down and tried to connect all the dots to see if they make sense. Seems like they dont



This is gonna be like of those LOST situations where it "doesnt matter if the details are consistent and fit together becuase our storytelling is what matters most"

 

[Icyflamez96]

Fallout 4

Fallout 4

Fallout 4

 

[| Praxis |]

I haven't completed a Fallout game since Tactics back in the day. The modern ones just aren't as interesting to me.

 

[Ogimachi]

As the article stated, the 1950's imagery was a lot more understated in the original games. Fallout 2 actually had great worldbuilding which made sense in the timeline. It depicts a California which was moving on and rebuilding. The NCR was formed. Mining towns began to spring up, and bottle caps were phased out as actual money was once more being printed. New Vegas further iterated on the foundations of the Fallout 2 world which is one reason why people like it a lot more than Fallout 3.

Exactly. F3 looks closer to the Great War (in some ways) than any other Fallout, yet it's set several decades after F2.

 

[Yarbskoo]

I haven't really got much into Fallout 3, but I can say with some certainty that I do not like the green filter. At all.

Maybe I'll come back and read the article after I play the game and possibly the older ones too.

 

[Alebelly]

I just want to say, I disliked Fallout 3 before it was cool.

Just want to say I liked Fallout 3 before it was cool not to

 

[doofy102]

I don't see the big deal. 99% of videogames are blistering stupid. Fallout 1 and 2 were pretty mediocre examples of writing even if Fallout 3 set a new low for the series.

.

 

[aravuus]

I haven't really got much into Fallout 3, but I can say with some certainty that I do not like the green filter. At all.

Maybe I'll come back and read the article after I play the game and possibly the older ones too.

Remember to play on the PC, there are tons of mods to fix the little annoyances like this

 

[Yarbskoo]

Remember to play on the PC, there are tons of mods to fix the little annoyances like this

I don't think I'd ever play a Bethesda game on a console. I'm not mentally prepared for that kind of experience.

 

[Faabulous]

When I take a look at this thread, as a fan of both Fallout 1 and 2 (and NV of course), I'm just glad Wasteland 2 exists and we don't need Bethesda to get our post-apocalyptic fix anymore.

So many people fail to see the problems with FO3 and they are much more numerous than the original fans, that I think the franchise no longer has us (the original fans) as their audience. It's been taken away forever and its now for the way more profitable public that thinks FO3 is great.

This makes me really sad.

 

[Rafterman]

I just want to say, I disliked Fallout 3 before it was cool.

It's still not cool. It's an opinion, not a popularity contest.

I really don't think we need another year of "Bethesda ruined Fallout" comments. That's so 2008.

Yeah, I can't wait for 4 to be released so we can go though all this shit again.


Anyway, I tried to read this article, but after getting through 7 paragraphs of him complaining about things he isn't going to complain about I stopped. I'm not 16 anymore and I just can't deal with this gamer angst shtick. Act like an adult, write like an adult and maybe I'll read whatever it is you have to complain about. It shouldn't surprise me, though, this is a Fallout 3 rant, and anyone still bitching and moaning about that game after all this time is bound to be of the angry, teenage angst sort. We get it, F3 had it's problems, but many of us loved it anyway.

 

[NoblesseOblige]

who the fuck cares about this "200 years" thing? It has zero impact on the actual game. There's basically no mention of it during gameplay. It could be 10 years, 50 years, 200 years. Tell yourself it was only 10 years if it helps you sleep at night. It doesn't matter in the least, just play the game and enjoy it.

I'm a bit confused by this too. The author acts like the wasteland should have been rebuilt and new cultures formed. But it seems he's ignoring the larger Fallout universe. The vaults act like time capsules, releasing new denizens into the wasteland at different times. The vast majority of these vaults aren't equipped with the means to build new tech or forge new music. They're basically the same as they were when they were built, preserving the time. So it makes sense that a lot of the world is still 1950's retro-futurism. And despite all that, there actually are groups of tribals in Fallout 3 that have formed new cultures. The Treeminders for example, and several settlements have their own character.

 

[BriGuy]

I sunk about 30 hours into F3 before I got bored of it and I never even met the dog. I did run across a small child who was afraid his dad got killed by giant ants though. I brought the head back and threw it at him, but the kid didn't seem to give a shit.

 

[Tal Shiar Agent]

Fallout 3's gameworld is nonsensical. The settlements make no sense. The motivations make no sense. The dialog is idiotic. Choices don't matter.


I used to love Fallout 3, then I played New Vegas.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvwlt4FqmS0
Here is a great video on why the gameworld of Fallout 3 made no sense. I don't expect anything better from Fallout 4.

 

[7DollarHagane]

I think that a lot of these things are true but I also had a lot of fun with the game.

I do wish Bethesda would allow a pillars of eternity style classic fallout sequel after seeing how well that game did.

 

[Phat Michael]

i find the fallout games very boring and they fall victim to the failings of a lot of western open world RPGs: Way too much focus on length, padding and sidequests rather than a story and narrative i want to follow. I assume the new fallout will boast another 100+ hours of open world RPG excellence with 500 sidequests, to me, these arent positives.

 

[Ogimachi]

Well, people who care about the story, I'd imagine. People look for different things in games.

e: I love how this thread seems to be boiling down to FO3 vs NV discussion too which is exactly what the writer tried to avoid lol

Pretty much.

When I take a look at this thread, as a fan of both Fallout 1 and 2 (and NV of course), I'm just glad Wasteland 2 exists and we don't need Bethesda to get our post-apocalyptic fix anymore.

So many people fail to see the problems with FO3 and they are much more numerous than the original fans, that I think the franchise no longer has us (the original fans) as their audience. It's been taken away forever and its now for the way more profitable public that thinks FO3 is great.

This makes me really sad.

Not just Wasteland 2, Brian Fargo said he trademarked Van Buren and talked to MCA about it a few times.
With him no longer at Obsidian, we might even get a spritual successor (or replacement, I guess?) to the original Fallout 3 with MCA as director. I'm surprised Fargo seems willing to invest in two post-apocalyptic RPG franchises at the same time, but with this kind of potential, the more the merrier.

 

[BigTnaples]

Why do you feel the need to post this in every Fallout thread? I mean, It's okay to like the dumber one of the two games more, I'm just confused as to why you want to make your preference heard all the time without adding nothing to the conversation

e: unless it's some elaborate joke due to your tag or something lol

Oh I can add plenty to the conversation, but there are those here that regularly do it better than I. Not to mention 90% of my posting is done from my phone whilst doing other things.

Odd that you notice my voice out of the thousands of "Save us Obsidian" "lol Bethesda" "Don't Believe his Lies" "Gamebryo haha" etc etc comments that litter every single Fallout 3/4/NV thread. (This thread not excluded)

The world of Fallout 3 just felt better than NV in every way. Made much better use of the FP perspective. The DC wasteland was more exciting to explore than the Mojave. The quests, while not always has complex, were more memorable. The storyline, while admittedly full of plotholes, felt more cohesive. The towns and characters were more iconic.

Everything NV did well was an iteration of what was established in FO3. So much so that most of the biggest improvements of NV already existed as mods for FO3.

Also, this articles biggest issue with FO3, the timeline and stagnation of tech/progress, is also a problem in NV. (And LoTR, and just about any other fantasy world)


If Fallout 4 is released and is somehow still considered inferior to NV then we can talk, but as of now, Obsidian stood on the shoulders of Bethsda's work to make New Vegas. Nothing is to say the improvements of NV wouldn't have been made by further Besthda iteration on the franchise.

 

[Blargonaut]

I don't see the big deal. 99% of videogames are blistering stupid. Fallout 1 and 2 were pretty mediocre examples of writing even if Fallout 3 set a new low for the series.

 

[drotahorror]

Kind of offtopic but I always wondered where this pic was from, all I ever seen it in was someone's avatar here on gaf -

I thought it was Doom Troopers hah

 

[NoblesseOblige]

i find the fallout games very boring and they fall victim to the failings of a lot of western open world RPGs: Way too much focus on length, padding and sidequests rather than a story and narrative i want to follow. I assume the new fallout will boast another 100+ hours of open world RPG excellence with 500 sidequests, to me, these arent positives.

That's not a failing. That's just counter to your preference. Fallout's side quests and 'padding' are the more interesting elements, and the parts many (such as myself) love. Actual role-playing and exploring the wasteland as a denizen opposed to a savior is what I enjoy most about the games. I actually completely ignore the main questline (after the first play) because I don't always like to play as some hero, but instead a survivor. I like a narrative on occasion, but the Fallout series is born more out of the tabletop RPG scene that allows more freedom for me to create my own.

 

[The Cartographer]

The only thing that I really like about the Fallout franchise is the Point Lookout DLC.

 

[akidnamededdy]

I don't know why the author felt they needed to write 7,000 words about a game that came out seven years ago and has subsequently already been torn to shreds by anyone who cared but uhhhhhh gotta get those clicks I guess?

 

[derwalde]

Fallout 1 and especially 2 were incredible. Didn't like oblivion with guns.

 

[aravuus]

Odd that you notice my voice out of the thousands of "Save us Obsidian" "lol Bethesda" "Don't Believe his Lies" "Gamebryo haha" etc etc comments that litter every single Fallout 3/4/NV thread. (This thread not excluded)

Well that's simply because it's always you and it's always the same super defensive sounding "yeah, well, NV is still worse than FO3" post. Easy to notice.

Everything NV did well was an iteration of what was established in FO3. So much so that most of the biggest improvements of NV already existed as mods for FO3.

Everything else you said is just a bunch of opinions, some which I agree with, some disagree, but this is just stupid. NV's strengths lie in its writing, characters, quests. The only thing NV got from FO3 was the terrible gameplay and engine.

 

[Faabulous]

Not just Wasteland 2, Brian Fargo said he trademarked Van Buren and talked to MCA about it a few times.
With him no longer at Obsidian, we might even get a spritual successor (or replacement, I guess?) to the original Fallout 3 with MCA as director. I'm surprised Fargo seems willing to invest in two post-apocalyptic RPG franchises at the same time, but with this kind of potential, the more the merrier.

That's a thing, huh? When did he say that?
Get's me a little excited actually.

 

[Alebelly]

The world of Fallout 3 just felt better than NV in every way. Made much better use of the FP perspective. The DC wasteland was more exciting to explore than the Mojave. The quests, while not always has complex, were more memorable. The storyline, while admittedly full of plotholes, felt more cohesive. The towns and characters were more iconic.

Everything NV did well was an iteration of what was established in FO3. So much so that most of the biggest improvements of NV already existed as mods for FO3.

Also, this articles biggest issue with FO3, the timeline and stagnation of tech/progress, is also a problem in NV. (And LoTR, and just about any other fantasy world)


If Fallout 4 is released and is somehow still considered inferior to NV then we can talk, but as of now, Obsidian stood on the shoulders of Bethsda's work to make New Vegas. Nothing is to say the improvements of NV wouldn't have been made by further Besthda iteration on the franchise.

And as much as I appreciate some clever writing, NV is an empty world. And as an open world game, the player is largely gatewayed into a predetermined path. Factions are meaningless. The branching narrative paths, while interesting, do not make up for what is a second-rate Fallout 3 game relying on nostalgia to make it relevant.

 

[peanutbutterlatte]

Fallout 3 was excellent and I'd be perfectly fine if FO4 maintained it's quality.

Fallout 1/2 are dated as hell, and we most likely won't get another Fallout game like them. And that's fine by me.

 

[SougoXIII]

I don't know why the author felt they needed to write 7,000 words about a game that came out seven years ago and has subsequently already been torn to shreds by anyone who cared but uhhhhhh gotta get those clicks I guess?

But... you already said it yourself, if he wanted clicks he would be writing about any other game than a 7 year old game who everyone have already torn to shred.

You're also underestimating how long 7,000 words are. If he wanted clicks, there are way faster and less effort subject to rage about.

 

[lazygecko]

Fallout 1/2 are dated as hell, and we most likely won't get another Fallout game like them. And that's fine by me.

I would not be surprised if in the long term, Fallout 3 is going to end up feeling even more dated than they ever will.

 

[IISANDERII]

Even more stupidity: Thinking that they'll get many hits after slagging such a great and beloved game. Certainly won't from me.

 

[peanutbutterlatte]

I would not be surprised if in the long term, Fallout 3 is going to end up feeling even more dated than they ever will.

I mean it's clunky for sure but nothing can ever compete with the bitter taste of 20 year old turn-based combat.

 

[aravuus]

Even more stupidity: Thinking that they'll get many hits after slagging such a great and beloved game. Certainly won't from me.

They'll get those clicks from the people who feel Bethesda has ruined the franchise, no worries

 

[UncleSporky]

Don't get mad if someone complains about your favorite game.

I never do.

 

[SoCoRoBo]

Even more stupidity: Thinking that they'll get many hits after slagging such a great and beloved game. Certainly won't from me.

It is an outrage that they have insulted this game that is also my friend.

 

[peanutbutterlatte]

They'll get those clicks from the people who feel Bethesda has ruined the franchise, no worries

Would you rather the franchise died? Because it totally would have died. We had a Brotherhood of Steel spin-off that would have made the fans cry even harder. And nothing.

 

[Agremont]

The world of Fallout 3 just felt better than NV in every way. Made much better use of the FP perspective. The DC wasteland was more exciting to explore than the Mojave. The quests, while not always has complex, were more memorable. The storyline, while admittedly full of plotholes, felt more cohesive. The towns and characters were more iconic.

Well sure, if you don't care about coherensy and consistensy. The capital wasteland is basically designed like a theme park.

 

[aravuus]

Would you rather the franchise died? Because it totally would have died. We had a Brotherhood of Steel spin-off that would have made the fans cry even harder. And nothing.

I'm not one of those people

I love Fallout 3

 

[Mugatu]

I don't know why the author felt they needed to write 7,000 words about a game that came out seven years ago and has subsequently already been torn to shreds by anyone who cared but uhhhhhh gotta get those clicks I guess?

That's my guess as well - you can analyze just about anything to the point of absurdity and that's all this is.

Personally, I am of the opinion that referring to video game stories as sophomoric is sophomoric in itself as well as quite pretentious.

 

[Alebelly]

Yes, they are blistering stupid. The medium allows for that. It embraces it. It's only when people argue it literally does it become truly stupid.

 

[peanutbutterlatte]

I'm not one of those people

I love Fallout 3

Oh okay, my Nukapology. I misread your point.

 

[Ogimachi]

That's a thing, huh? When did he say that?
Get's me a little excited actually.

Yeah.

I mean it's clunky for sure but nothing can ever compete with the bitter taste of 20 year old turn-based combat.

I don't see any bitter taste there, it's still alright and I still have a great time playing them.

Also, keep in mind that the graphics and combat are definitely dated, but at least it's something a lot of people are willing to overlook (not the right word for everyone, as I don't mind) in order to enjoy the game's quests and writing.

Do you really think F3 will do any better in 2028? It's not like there's great writing or quest design behind the mechanics.
Despite being mediocre, Skyrim was already much better than Oblivion, and that was 5 years later. By the time we have the 6th Bethesda Fallout, their first will probably look and play much worse than the original Fallouts do now.

Would you rather the franchise died? Because it totally would have died. We had a Brotherhood of Steel spin-off that would have made the fans cry even harder. And nothing.

Not true. Troika was outbid by Bethesda for the Fallout franchise, for instance. It would've been in much better hands.

 

[aravuus]

Oh okay, my Nukapology. I misread your point.

No worries, I can see how my post could be misunderstood, especially since I may seem very anti-FO3/pro-NV in this thread. The fact is, I love both games, just for different reasons.