Support NeoGAF

[Darklord]

you jerks have almost talked me out of buying this :/

It's different from the other 2 in the series. People hate change. They also think it'll be Oblivion with guns even though it's clear it has been improved in every single way.

There have been lots of good previews and reviews(like I said PCPP have it a 9). Even Giantbomb on one of their E3 podcasts said they went from not caring about the game to really wanting it after only 30 minutes of playing.

It'll be good, people are overly fussy. Look at all the Blizzard hate recently. A single sentence from a Blizzard rep seems to override the last 17 years of awesome games they've released.

Bethesda make good games, just because Oblivion wasn't perfect doesn't damn them forever.

 

[Leonsito]

A bad review ! Must be true !

 

[beelzebozo]

A bad review ! Must be true !

a pleasant rhyme! just in time!

 

[Gelry]

Even Giantbomb on one of their E3 podcasts said they went from not caring about the game to really wanting it after only 30 minutes of playing.

They also said (If I recall correctly) they didn't play the first two Fallout games. -Or at least, Ryan said so

I think there's a difference in expectations if you played the first two games and loved them, which in turn makes the appreciation different imho.

 

[JayDubya]

"The French" doesn't make sense.

"A Frenchman," maybe.

 

[Crisco]

So, Oblivion dressed up in a post-apocalyptic skin. Did anyone not think this is exactly what was going to happen? Not saying it will be a bad game, but Fallout 3 it aint.

 

[beelzebozo]

They also said (If I recall correctly) they didn't play the first two Fallout games. -Or at least, Ryan said so

I think there's a difference in expectations if you played the first two games and loved them, which in turn makes the appreciation different imho.

i didn't really play them that much either. i'm golden!

 

[Jive Turkey]

"The French" doesn't make sense.

"A Frenchman," maybe.

No...The title is correct. All of France hates Fallout 3.

 

[Truant]

So, Oblivion dressed up in a post-apocalyptic skin. Did anyone not think this is exactly what was going to happen? Not saying it will be a bad game, but Fallout 3 it aint.

Actually, it is.

No matter how shitty it is.

 

[RobertM]

I want a review by someone that liked Oblivion, any out there?

 

[Crisco]

Actually, it is.

No matter how shitty it is.

:sadface:

 

[no angel]

Haven't nma hated fallout 3 since it was announced Bethesda were doing it? If so then you should really take this with a pinch of salt surely?

 

[beelzebozo]

I want a review by someone that liked Oblivion, any out there?

what i'm waiting on are reviews from people who were indifferent to oblivion and have no attachment to the franchise prior to fallout 3.

 

[asmodeal]

No...The title is correct. All of France hates fallout 3.

I'm French and I approve this message.

 

[JayDubya]

No...The title is correct. All of France hates Fallout 3.

+1 Sale!

 

[Google]

I want a review by someone that liked Oblivion, any out there?

Why dont you want a review thats able to give an unbiased opinion based upon the games merits or failings?

"ITS FUCKING AWESOME BECAUSE ITS OBLIVION, BUT IN THE FUTURE!!!!" isn't particularly hard to work out on your own.

 

[Beaulieu]

I couldnt get in Oblivion because I hate medieval fantasy bullshit

I love post-apocalyptic settings, so I think I will like that.

I still dont know If Ill buy this, fable 2, both or neither.

Damnit.

 

[p3tran]

I want a review by someone that liked Oblivion, any out there?

many improvements from oblivion to this. and better loading etc.

you will like it, dont worry

 

[Spirit of Jazz]

I think there's a difference in expectations if you played the first two games and loved them, which in turn makes the appreciation different imho.

That all depends on the writing though, the towns and freedom aspects were not made the Fallouts good. There was still lots of tedious dungeons/combat/random battles in the first games.

 

[Pureauthor]

Nice thread title change.

 

[Danne-Danger]

I couldnt get in Oblivion because I hate medieval fantasy bullshit

I love post-apocalyptic settings, so I think I will like that.

I still dont know If Ill buy this, fable 2, both or neither.

Damnit.

This does not make sense.

 

[Timber]

This does not make sense.

Man Fable 2 isn't just fantasy. It's like... Tim Burton meets Charles Dickens meets Brothers Grimm... meets medieval fantasy. Meets Zelda.
I'm not particularly into orcs and elves either but damn if Fable don't look great.

 

[Quazar]

+1 Sale!

:lol :lol

 

[Wario64]

I didn't like Oblivion either, and I think I'm just hurting my wallet for no reason since I'm leaning towards buying the CE. Only cause it's part of the TRU sale...it would effectively make the CE come out to $57. I can't pass up on that.

 

[Sushen]

Well Oblivion was hyped to high heaven and got amazing scores out of the press. I think I'm gonna wait until the clamor dies down and people really assess the game.

I hope one day, game reviewers get off the hype train and give us objective reviews. Is it really too much to ask? I hate it when they review a game like a perfect one and a year later talk about all the flaws of the game like they knew all along.

 

[Google]

I hope one day, game reviewers get off the hype train and give us objective reviews. Is it really too much to ask? I hate it when they review a game like a perfect one and a year later talk about all the flaws of the game like they knew all along.

This seems to happen more often at certain publications and sites.

 

[GameGamer]

I hope one day, game reviewers get off the hype train and give us objective reviews.

You don't make money with objective reviews.

That's why so much money is spent on demo's, flights, events, parties, freebies, etc.

 

[tahrikmili]

what i'm waiting on are reviews from people who were indifferent to oblivion and have no attachment to the franchise prior to fallout 3.

Basically, you're looking for soccermoms..

 

[Ramenman]

Apparently this person has never actually reviewed a game early or something. If he doesn't like the idea of sitting in a room and playing through things early, then he can wait until the final retail copy comes out and play it in whatever setting he wants, but the self-righteous bitching just confuses me.

The process of "checking out" screens is done to a) avoid spoilers or parts of the game that Bethesda doesn't want out there yet (as recently as just a few weeks ago, we still weren't allowed to touch the main story quest or talk details about it) and b) avoid someone parking the camera inside the character model or some other random weirdness.

Maybe it's because I spent time on the other side of the fence doing PR or something, but nothing about what he describes is in any way "dishonest" or irregular. It's an unfinished version of the game, and in exchange for getting an early crack at the review, one must be willing to do it on Bethesda's terms or wait until the game hits stores, plain and simple.

The setting of things there makes even more sense given that Euro journos regularly and brazenly break embargoes and leak code to the public -- particularly French ones -- and with the game already leaked, I can understand Bethesda wanting to keep a tight lid on things to avoid more headaches.

Well, the guy has been around in the french videogame press for quite a long time now, so I guess there has to be something "more" than what is usually done by game devs for him to react like that.
That or he had a really really bad day.

 

[RobertM]

Why dont you want a review thats able to give an unbiased opinion based upon the games merits or failings?

"ITS FUCKING AWESOME BECAUSE ITS OBLIVION, BUT IN THE FUTURE!!!!" isn't particularly hard to work out on your own.

Because like Oblivion, Fallout 3 will be critisized probably for the same reasons (characters, voice acting, story, quests, etc.) which didn't stop me from enjoying the game. I just wanted to hear how similar and different it is.

 

[Google]

Because like Oblivion, Fallout 3 will be critisized probably for the same reasons (characters, voice acting, story, quests, etc.)

Surely these are all legitimate aspects of a game to criticize?

 

[SamBishop]

Well, the guy has been around in the french videogame press for quite a long time now, so I guess there has to be something "more" than what is usually done by game devs for him to react like that.
That or he had a really really bad day.

It's certainly possible, I suppose, and of course not everyone is going to like all games, and differing opinions are part of the norm in a process like this. The only thing I can think of that would cause a reaction like this was that something verbal actually transpired. Otherwise, none of this is out of the ordinary in my experience, nor is any of it in any way shady or underhanded -- at least not on the surface.

 

[No Means Nomad]

French review? I think you mean Freedom review.

 

[HiResDes]

Well, it wasn't my cup of tea, it just seemed too Mad Max to me, and the story didn't entertain me. The quest/mission system was nice, it was really similar to Oblivion, with a somewhat different fighting system.

It was fun to kill (blow up) the 2-headed cows from those nomad vendors.

He was right GTFO, thats simply not possible, and does not register in my brain.

 

[Zeliard]

Surely these are all legitimate aspects of a game to criticize?

No, apparently if you criticize those aspects of the game, it makes you an elitist, NMA forum-dwelling curmudgeon. It's only natural for Fallout fans to be annoyed, considering Fallout 3 seems to bear no resemblance to those games beyond the superficial, and it's handing over a series known for its sharp writing to a team that can't write themselves out of a paper bag. The Eurogamer hands-on preview from a while back pretty much confirmed many of the fears people have had about Fallout 3.

http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=201105&page=1

Visually, Fallout 3 is unremittingly bleak. So it should be, although you have to wonder if there will be enough variation in this vast wasteland to sustain interest. But let's give Bethesda's artists the benefit of the doubt on that count, because unfortunately the game has much more tangible shortcomings to take them to task on: the flat, sterile lighting, the excessive contrast, the feeble effects (excepting the mini-nuke explosions of wrecked cars' power units) and, worst by far, the hilariously, embarrassingly wooden animation.

This was a weakness of Oblivion's, too, but it's even more jarring in Fallout 3. The game presents itself in the first-person perspective, but you can pull the camera out to quite a distant third-person viewpoint and move it in full 3D. This means you can examine your character's Gerry Anderson jerking and flailing from any angle; we'd recommend you don't. Unfortunately, you can't help but observe the erratic path-finding, motionless trances and limp movements of the few enemies you encounter this early in the game. You simply can't invoke the visual style of an action game and get away with this stuff.

The problem with VATS, however, is the fact you will be compelled to use it all the time, because the real-time combat is so terrible. As Kieron noted, what worked okay in Oblivion's melee combat is not necessarily going to wash when you have a gun in your hand, and the lack of precision, sense of connection or tactile feedback is startling.

It's the only strong flash of character and style we get from the game in our brief hands-on, although it does sound one bum note: Lady Killer gives you extra damage against female enemies, and "unique dialogue options" when talking to female NPCs. Sorry, Bethesda, that's not satirical, it's just crass and misogynistic.

But beyond that, there are simple questions of quality that it's impossible to avoid: characterless art, cold visuals, wonky animation, weak real-time combat, off-kilter writing. As it stands, Fallout 3 just doesn't feel right, and it will leave many players shivering for warmth in its nuclear winter.

Clearly, Oli Welsh is an NMA troll.

 

[Zzoram]

Pre-order still not cancelled.... yet.

 

[beelzebozo]

how was the real-time combat in fallout & fallout 2?

 

[MrHicks]

yikes @ eurogamer comments
NMA vindicated?

 

[Timber]

how was the real-time combat in fallout & fallout 2?

non-existant

 

[beelzebozo]

non-existant

oh, no kidding

 

[sammy]

post+apocalyptic + exploration = day 1 for me no matter what

it's a shame about all the negatives i hear about F3, the same way it was for Oblivion. but Oblivion was(is) still a great world to explore, so i can only hope that F3 is at least half as fun.

 

[Prine]

I always thought this game looked kind of bad. Bethesda put me off all their games after Oblivion.

Enemies level up as you go up, worst game design ever, whats the point in playing?

 

[Zeliard]

how was the real-time combat in fallout & fallout 2?

Is this really supposed to be a shot at those games, as if real-time combat is an automatic positive? It was turn-based in Fallout 1 and 2. That's the whole point. If you're going to change the way the entire gameplay works, pulling it back from isometric turn-based into a first-person/third-person perspective in real-time, then you had better make sure everything else is up to snuff (the general graphics, character/weapon animations, hit-detection, look/feel of the weapons, "tacticle feedback" as Eurogamer put it). Apparently, it isn't, and this can be seen in the videos as well.

There have been a number of complaints about Bethesda unnecessarily taking Fallout from turn-based to real-time, and it's because of reasons like this. People have tried to do that with the likes of Diablo and what did we get? Hellgate. Why do you think Diablo 3, a likely late 2009/early 2010 game, is going with a fixed isometric perspective identical to the first two? It has a huge impact on both gameplay and visuals, and Blizzard understands this well. Bethesda had the "brilliant" idea of making Fallout in real-time and 3D, but apparently didn't bother to follow through on any other aspect of that, and didn't bring the gunplay up to the standards we're accustomed to these days.

 

[Darklord]

No, apparently if you criticize those aspects of the game, it makes you an elitist, NMA forum-dwelling curmudgeon. It's only natural for Fallout fans to be annoyed, considering Fallout 3 seems to bear no resemblance to those games beyond the superficial, and it's handing over a series known for its sharp writing to a team that can't write themselves out of a paper bag. The Eurogamer hands-on preview from a while back pretty much confirmed many of the fears people have had about Fallout 3.

http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=201105&page=1

Why is 1 review from some unknown French guy and a Eurogamer review, a site we all know is all over the place with their scores over rules all the dozens of positive previews and reviews?

Some people WANT this game to suck because it was made by Bethesda(only a company who has made one of the best RPG series around) so they ignore the good and when one bad comes up they latch on to it claiming they were right all along.

IGN: Positive
1up: Positive
GiantBomb: Positive
Gamespy: Positive
Gamespot: Positive
PC Powerplay(Aus mag): 9/10
Hyper(Aus mag): Positive
PC JEUX Magazine: 95%
Shacknews: Positive
Destructoid(or however you spell it): Positive

 

[andymcc]

I still am leery of anything related to Oblivion, which I hated. Now this reinforces my fear, gonna play before I buy...

 

[beelzebozo]

Is this really supposed to be a shot at those games, as if real-time combat is an automatic positive? It was turn-based in Fallout 1 and 2. That's the whole point. If you're going to change the way the entire gameplay works, pulling it back from isometric turn-based into a first-person/third-person perspective in real-time, then you had better make sure everything else is up to snuff (the general graphics, character/weapon animations, hit-detection, look/feel of the weapons, "tacticle feedback" as Eurogamer put it). Apparently, it isn't, and this can be seen in the videos as well.

There have been a number of complaints about Bethesda unnecessarily taking Fallout from turn-based to real-time, and it's because of reasons like this. People have tried to do that with the likes of Diablo and what did we get? Hellgate. Why do you think Diablo 3, a likely late 2009/early 2010 game, is going with a fixed isometric perspective identical to the first two? It has a huge impact on both gameplay and visuals, and Blizzard understands this well. Bethesda had the "brilliant" idea of making Fallout in real-time and 3D, but apparently didn't bother to follow through on any other aspect of that, and didn't bring the gunplay up to the standards we're accustomed to these days.

you really think turn-based movement and combat in a fully 3d space would really have worked for this game? i'm not saying any element of what's here is necessarily as polished as it needs to be, but the direction they took it is, in my opinion, certainly better than having ten action points to walk six steps in a 3d world and then four to swing your oaken club. that game would have sold a grand total of maybe ten copies.

and i don't think fallout has the fan backing blizzard & diablo 3 have to justify sticking to that isometric point of view. hell, if fallout 3 were isometric, i'd have little to no interest, as it would be completely evident they're shooting squarely for the fans of the old games and no one else.

 

[Timber]

Is this really supposed to be a shot at those games, as if real-time combat is an automatic positive? It was turn-based in Fallout 1 and 2. That's the whole point.

i am so fucking OFFENDED ARGH

 

[Mimir]

Why is 1 review from some unknown French guy and a Eurogamer review, a site we all know is all over the place with their scores over rules all the dozens of positive previews and reviews?

Some people WANT this game to suck because it was made by Bethesda(only a company who has made one of the best RPG series around) so they ignore the good and when one bad comes up they latch on to it claiming they were right all along.

Some people really did not like the last couple of installments in the Elder Scrolls series, so they tend to ignore the reviewers that were slobbering all over them.

 

[verio]

Ugh, I have the game pre-ordered... but the more I read, the more I want to cancel my pre-order.

 

[Mimir]

you really think turn-based movement and combat in a fully 3d space would really have worked for this game? i'm not saying any element of what's here is necessarily as polished as it needs to be, but the direction they took it is, in my opinion, certainly better than having ten action points to walk six steps in a 3d world and then four to swing your oaken club. that game would have sold a grand total of maybe ten copies.

Silent Storm did an amazing job with turn-based combat in a fully 3D world. It's certainly not an impossible task. It'd be even easier and quicker when you only have to control one character.