7 days to Fallout3 info

I just looked at the link and I don't see what the problem is... He has a cowboy hat and a beard. That isn't even close to being Chuck Norris. I mean, the guy even looks black to me...

There are some things I don't necessarily agree with in this game, but it seems some people are just trying to troll it.

 

Maybe he got a sunburn when the nukes went off.

 

Chuck Norris doesn't get sunburn - he...oh, whatever.

 

Motivated by this thread, i downloaded fallout 1 & 2 and started playing it again (couldn't find the original discs). To my suprise the games are still playable, very much so, some gaming mechanisms feels dated (aside from the graphics), but overall its still great.

Now, if besethdsa would listen to the fans of the prior games, instead of making a Oblivion "after the nuclear war" mod, im sure we would be better of than what we are getting here.

I just fail to see how your going to achieve that sense of post-nuclear war anarchy feel to it. The orignials where super gory, and let you do everything (including, for those who haven't played the originals, have sex, do drugs,kill everybody you want, inlcuding children (killing children wasn't particularly fun, but when a child accidentially got hit by burst of bullets, it really did add to that, "hell on earth" feel).

Personally, i don't like that its going to be 3d and 3rd person, and realtime. I would LOVE to see what developers could do making a 2d remake of fallout, or semi 3d (but with the same overhead view).

I feel that besethsda is basically taking a good name, modding oblivion to make it fit, and selll it to make a quick buck. It will probably sell a million(s) or so, but it will not be remembered in the same way the other fallout games are.

 

Shame, shame on you

Some *autocensored* journalist doesn't agree with you Ostepop http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/editorials/1279-E3-2007-Fallout-3

 

Too many gameplay mechanisms have been changed for this charge to stick. Personally, while I was initially very skeptical of Bethsoft's ability to pull off a good Fallout game, the E3 previews have shifted my attitude toward that of being a bit more hopeful.

 

Don't be naive. Beth promised all sorts of amazing stuff for Morrowind and Oblivion and they didn't keep their promises.

For example branching quest lines in Morrowind - the one that was hyped in the previews remained the only one. And Oblivion? The vastly improved magic system apparently never materialzed. Neither was gameplay much deeper than Morrowind, as Beth promised. Or the faction system that tracks on an individual basis and allows to make friends with enemies? Nada. How about making reaching the top of a faction a more rewarding experience? LOL. An AI system that "no one has ever tried on this scale" turning NPC behaviour into meaningful gameplay? Please. And most importantly, they promised a larger number of choices that would make role-playing more meaningful. And what did we get? A game completely devoid of choice.

Beth PR is amongst the most deceitful in the business.

 

From what I can recall, they kept their promises pretty much exactly as stated. The problems with Morrowind and Oblivion seem to be pretty much orthogonal to the promises made.

It seems to me that with each new game out of Bethesda, they have spent a great deal of time zeroing in on the biggest criticisms of their previous games, and in doing so end up highlighting some significant new shortfalls. I think we can expect the same thing with Fallout 3. It'll be great at fixing the shortfalls of Oblivion. It'll likely be very good at doing what the Bethesda team wants it to do. But it will have some unforeseen shortcomings that will make some people quite upset.

 

Exactly. And L233's post has little to do with the accusation of Fallout 3 being nothing but a reskinned Oblivion.

Besides, Molyneux owns the title of "most deceitful PR in the business" hands-down.

 

QFT, he aimed for the sun but got only to the house roof!

 

What I find ridiculous is that even though most of the previews have been positive, you just ignore them and continue ranting about how Bethesda will ruin the greatest game series ever created. And you base this solely on the fact that Fallout 3 differs from the the previous Fallout-games.

A question for your: What do you think about the positive Fallout 3 previews you've read? Doesn't it make you feel good when the article says that "It's too early to give Fallout 3 the official Voodoo Extreme seal of approval, but don't be shocked if the game ends up being the best of the series." Or do you think that the writer just doesn't understand what made the first Fallout-games that great?

 

I was there with E-mpire during E3 and we got a chance to see the preview. It was approx. 40 minutes of non-stop entertainment. Everything was well redered and the attention to detail is very well done. I have some reservations on just how VATS looks to work but other than that the action seemed well done. Character interactions was impressive as well, there is a host of branching dialogue routes to be taken with each individual.


I really dont see how anyone could come away from the game not impressed.

 

In case you haven't read much previews, how many previews for big games are ever negative? I haven't read one negative preview. Not a single one, this is because gaming journalism makes money on building hype, the more hype, the more people are going to read their previews.

Quick example: KZ1 was prior to the release one of the most hyped up games ever, "Halo killer" etc, IGN had nothing but good things to say a month prior to its release, when the review finally came, they ripped the game to shreds, writing page up and down about how broken and bad the game was.

Further, Oblivion, which is one of the highest rated games of all times, in most RPG players opinion is a bad RPG game. This is mostly because reviewers played Oblivion for 5 hours and not 50, to get a feel for the game.

 

There is a vocal group of people on the forums who claim this. But I see no reason to believe that it's actually true.

 

Bad rpg, but I think it's a pretty good dungeon crawler/single player mmorpg.

 

single player 'massive multiplayer online rpg'? . Oblivion's biggest flaw is it's level scaling mechanism. Another is that choices you make never really impact the world you play in. While the second flaw is only really important when you want to be an rpg, the first and biggest flaw makes the whole game flawed. Even as a dungeon crawler.

 

The actual information that can be extracted from these previews doesn't do much to convince me that Fallout 3 will be a good Fallout game. It doesn't even convince me it will be a good CRPG. Maybe you should learn to read past the hype.

Sorry if I'm not getting a hard-on when reading about

• handheld nuke capapults
• trash cannons that shoot Barbie doll heads and scissors at mutants
• the crummy "find your daddy" plot that involves the vault overseer sending "his thugs" after you
• nuclear powered car wrecks that explode when shooting at them
• fucking minigames to hax terminals
• delicate "moral choices" that involve either blowing up a whole town for no good reason or not doing it
• "humor" like "Let us in, motherfuckers" signs at vault entrances
• drinking water out of toilet bowls
• collecting bobble heads to boost your stats
• unkillable NPCs
• the inability to ruin the main plot by pissing off daddy
• reputation titles like "Noob Vault Dweller" and "HaXXor - Nuker of Cities".

I don't give a shit that the previews are positive because I'm simply unimpressed by Bethesda's hype-babble. When I read these so-called previews, I'm interested in specific examples and descriptions of content and game mechanics and nothing I've read so far has convinced me that FO3 will turn out to be anything other than a fucked-up travesty.

Yes, I think that the writers are idiots, most of them at least. This can easily be seen when looking at the rave reviews Oblivion has received. Even if you liked that idiotic little game, can we at least agree that it certainly does not deserve to be one of the highest rated games in PC gaming history, considering it's severe gameplay shortcomings, shoddy writing, recycled lore, horrendous mini-games, retarded AI, complete lack of choice and consequence, and the fact that it was sold as an CRPG when it was, at best, a quest-based action adventure?

In addition to writers being idiots who wouldn't know a good CRPG if it sodomized them with a spiked 15 inch dildo, there's also this:
In addition to an hour-long demo and chats with the game's designers, the trip included a two-night stay in downtown's swank Helix Hotel, dinner at Logan Tavern and a private party at a nightclub in Adams Morgan. Airfare, hotel, food, drinks and shuttle bus were provided, courtesy of Bethesda Softworks. Although a few attendees paid their own way, most did not.

Basically, I don't care what these people have to say because they're full of shit.

For example the Escapist article asserts that "a new Fallout made like the originals would be largely unplayable" and cheers the fact that FO3 will be "Oblivion meets Fallout". I wonder what level of ignorance and incompetence makes someone come up with stuff like this:

Can you believe this shit? Supposedly, one couldn't make much of a difference in Fallout, while Bethesda and their "unparralleled world-building expertise" (lol) and Retard A.I. system can achieve this?

But hands-down my favourite parts of these previews are the assorted Bethesda Dev quotes, offering gems of game designer wisdom like:

• "Fallout is a game where we’ve found you can just go crazy weapons"
• "Hey, violence is funny – lets all just own up to it! Violence done well is f---ing hilarious. It’s like Itchy and Scratchy or Jackass – now that’s funny!
• "Your dad is like this warm, inviting guy. He's Liam Neeson! Who wouldn't want Liam Neeson as their dad, right?"

 

Yeah. The game sucks as a RPG. It sucks as an action game. It's utterly worthless as a dungeon crawler thanks to auto-scaled monsters and loot. All there's left are maybe 4 or 5 well done quests and tons of graphical bling, which is apparently enough to be hailed as the Jesus of CRPGs by game reviewers and console kiddies.

 

L233, I can't argue with you too much since you have a Torment quote in your sig, and that was perhaps the best CRPG ever made (up there with Betrayal at Krondor).

Oblivion is a great design for appealing to a very large potential audience and selling a lot of copies of a game. But, yeah, when I'm in the mood for a truly good RPG I'll take a Gothic or a NWN module or a heavily modded Baldur's Gate game any day.

 

You spend so much time and effort digging up ammunition for your vitriol against Bethesda, L233, that I have to wonder, what in the world did Bethesda ever do to you?

But really, you're focusing on entirely the wrong thing here. Bethesda can fuck up a lot with Fallout 3, but if they get the story and the impact of player choices right, then it'll still be a great addition to the series. So, as usual, you're missing the important parts of the previews that are promising:

1. Good, neutral, and evil moral choices (with a couple of examples provided in the previews).
2. Large number of game endings.

I will admit that since Bethesda has not yet tried to do this sort of RPG before, they may utterly fail. That is entirely possible. But what the previews do show, beyond a shadow of a doubt, is that Bethesda at least is pointed in the right direction in making this a great Fallout RPG. They may miss, and I'm sure that no matter what happens you will believe they have, but for the rest of us that don't believe we've been anally raped by the company, well, there's a fair chance we'll be pleased.