Demonracer999 said:It's like 200 overall variations from 5 completely different endings... to my understanding.
Tons of minor story points will differ.
Spoit said:Even if it does, it'd need to start within the womb to top it
Foxtastical said:Funny and informative, a double threat kinda team.
Foxtastical said:This is a fantastic way of doing lengthier articles. Funny and informative, a double threat kinda team.
Opus Angelorum said:Double Dragon?
Bidermaier said:I find 1up format a pain to read The text is not dark enough to me. This firefox extension may come handy. It allows to change the text format.
The other big decision that I guess you'll constantly be making is how to approach combat. Do you just play it shooter-style, guns blazing? Or do you take the time to pause and use V.A.T.S (Vault-tec Assisted Targeting System), which approximates, sort of, the turn-based combat of the original Fallout games by letting you spend action points to target specific body parts. The latter will provide more precision, and will assist those who are shooter- or twitch-challenged. And thank god for V.A.T.S., because without it, well, the game really is just a shooter. Which is another thing -- or maybe the biggest thing -- that is pissing off the angrier of the nerdcore fans. We asked if you could just play the game and win without ever going into V.A.T.S, and the answer was "yes". You can run and gun your way through this game if that's how you want to do it. And I don't know how I feel about that yet either. Maybe I'm an angry nerdcore guy too.
indie85 said:Question? Do you have to have played the first two installments to enjoy the third
YES! I loved this write up. Shawn and Jeff really bring the article to life instead of someone who just drones on and on about it.1ivewire said:Pray this is the first of many GFW online preview dialogs. It's like play-by-play Brodeo. :lol
Doc Evils said:peter molyneux am cry.
sad, but ultimately probably trueMinsc said:No, it's probably better that you don't play them to enjoy the third.
Spoit said:sad, but ultimately probably true
indie85 said:Question? Do you have to have played the first two installments to enjoy the third
Of coursegregor7777 said:I'm hoping you mean because you doubt FO3 will live up to their greatness? Right? RIGHT?
Do you recall any of the Oblivion previews?andydumi said:Thats what I was thinking. He talks the talk but often fails to walk the walk. These guys on the other hand are always spot on. Except for Horse Armor.
Chairman Yang said:Ugh, I hope this isn't the case. VATS, at least for tough encounters, should be mandatory. Otherwise, what's the point? Fallout 3 will be reduced to a Bioware-style RPG where you have tons of options but few that are worth a damn. Most players aren't going to bother digging into the mechanics if you don't reward them for it. And making it a bit easier or more efficient to kill enemies definitely isn't enough of a reward.
Right now Fallout 3 is my most anticipated game, but if I'm convinced that the combat will be the usual action-RPG dumbed-down shallowness, I may have to revise my opinion.
Nardonicus said:really? I thought that was the best news I read from the whole article. Maybe because I am more of a shooter fan and never played the old fallout's, but if I was forced to pause the game everytime I wanted to aim at a dude, then to hell with that shit.
Minsc said:No, it's probably better that you don't play them to enjoy the third.
You know... You don't HAVE to run n' gun. BioWare's RPGs are very rewarding (combat-wise) if you bother putting in the time to dig into the many options they throw at you. I'm sure this'll be the same.Chairman Yang said:Right now Fallout 3 is my most anticipated game, but if I'm convinced that the combat will be the usual action-RPG dumbed-down shallowness, I may have to revise my opinion.
TheOneGuy said:You know... You don't HAVE to run n' gun. BioWare's RPGs are very rewarding (combat-wise) if you bother putting in the time to dig into the many options they throw at you. I'm sure this'll be the same.
TheOneGuy said:You can either choose to play it like an FPS or go hardcore and take full advantage of what they throw at you. I'm willing to bet it's easier if you take advantage. Mass Effect certainly is. (Not that it's a particularly challenging game in the first place, but I wouldn't blame that on it being... "dumbed down".)
TheOneGuy said:And by "easier", I mean you have more options and can thus approach different situations in different ways, rather than just shoot and take cover, shoot and take cover.
You said it, Fallout 3's combat looks brilliant. Sort of like a bisexual bridal shower.ZombieSupaStar said:wtf is this video at the end?
Well, it's clear we simply have a difference of opinion here, so I won't bother arguing with you for too long!Chairman Yang said:The thing is, approaching situations in different ways feels pointless if I can beat the encounter in a straightforward run-and-gun approach. Giving the player lots of options is pointless if they don't have a strong incentive to use those options. That's my concern with VATS.