Heheh, well how do you think I feel after going through it all???? Slightly queesy, that's how

Aye I saw the point, and it was a good one. Sure I enjoy other games that depict you as the character, but Fallout was a very out of box affair. And for Fallout 3 to put you in the box, letting you grab any toy you liked with relative ease, it took away the core aspect of the attraction.

The claw factor...I like it We should make every attempt to coin it Soon it will have its own Wiki article ^_^ Where's Ausir....

I must say, the degree to which people are willing to endure what I perceive to be incredibly boring gameplay surprises me.

I mean, come on, how on earth could the developers of Fallout 1&2 have looked at how long time it takes to get back into the game every single time you die and thought "This'll never get old!"?

But then again, I'll probably never understand why someone would play PnP-games in the first place, let alone do it on a computer.

Here's what I suggest; those who want Fallout to be a PnP-game, make one yourself using whatever ruleset you prefer, and let those who actually enjoy computer games have fun with those without having to jump up on your high horses and speak the holy gospel of the True Fallout Game!

How can someone consider a recreational game to be so holy that they actually employ words such as "Hate" and "Painful" when explaining how they feel about a new take on a series? Stop taking yourselves and some simple computer game so darn seriously, and everyone will be better off!

Have you not seen? There are posts in the threads requesting the old style death scenes (not mine, but I should have, I miss them and am working my own mod to replace them).

I prefer the series rules as set down by the team that made the series. (After all, that's what drew me in to it). Bethesda (try as they might), can never claim to have made what they have acquired. Its their right to re-envision it however they so choose, but IMO its a shame they paid that sum for not but a tin suit and toon mascot.

everyone meaning you(?) and those that like as you like? Are not those that liked the series as it was also part of the "everyone"? How would they be better off for not getting a 'proper sequel' as they perceive it should be?

** Funny side note: I just bought Tactics for the first time (GoG had it an sale) after all these years. I had been given it years before but never played past the tutorial, and ultimately gave it away before playing the first mission. Its not an RPG, and disappoints if that's what you expect, but I can now say that really enjoy what it does offer, and that I've played Tactics more than I've played Fallout 3, despite having bought Fallout 3 before Tactics ~How many other here can say the same?:lol:

Seriously, it took you a long time to get into Fallout or Fallout 2 ? Odd, but your remark re: PnP games explains what type of gamer you are, I think. In any case, if the game were close to a PnP (heavy emphasis on PC stats and skills than anything, I guess), who says it wouldn't be fun ? You're confusing 'fun' with 'mass appeal'.

It is said that a thread can't see the pattern of the rug; and it seems often the case that some cannot perceive something that's not fun to them as being fun to anyone else.

I knew a guy in 5th grade (this guy was 6th), years after highschool I saw him on the bus and we talked; I mentioned that I'd seen Jurassic Park in the theater, and he asked me how it was. I told him it was fantastic, but I also said that it pales to the book. He was incredulous, and stammered, "How can any book be better than a movie!? ~ Books just sit there, and movies have sound and they move!". He could not perceive what a joy a good book can be (or why a person would just sit there, looking at one).

This pretty much sums up where you stand. You're surprised that there are people that don't percieve the same way as you. In which case how can anyone respect any opinion you have when you can't respect theirs. Holier than thou works both ways.

Agreed.
*perhaps I should say, "conceded"

Your anolyses are quite correct; I have problems understanding how someone can enjoy something that I detest.

So, how about you do something unique and explain why it is you are enjoying it?

What... and condense 2? years of posts into 1 ?

*Hmmm... Let me think about that...

~I can be done.

First tell me what it is that you don't about like F1 and why...

2nd, this might be better suited to its own thread.

First, let me say I've been in a similar situation.

Final Fantasy. I can never get into a Final Fantasy game. I can look at it and say its cutscenes have great visual quality, I can say that the games look nice, and I can say the soundtrack is amazing. But when it comes to gameplay, I think it's dull. Horribly so. And so, I don't play that series. I don't expect that series to someday conform to my tastes, and people will continue to be happy with it.

In that same vein, Fallout 3 should not be expected to go ahead and rewrite the entire franchise. Fallout the series has a fanbase, a built-in following. I'm sure you wouldn't like it if someone took your favorite game series, and then reworked the basics of how it played into something you find detestable gameplay-wise.

I like the style of gameplay emulated by the Fallout games because it involves strategy. It's like playing Risk or a less abstract chess, but with a story. Why not just pick up a pen and paper game? Well, that's fairly obvious, to me.

-My schedule doesn't always line up with people who would want to play a pen and paper game
-Computer graphics
-Automatic dice rolls
-A more "immersive" feel
-A large world that is well-built and hasn't been crafted by myself and/or friends
-No set-up
-I can quit whenever I want, and come back whenever I want.
-It's about ME, and nobody else. Fun times.

I may like Fallout 3, and enjoy it. But that's because I also enjoyed Morrowind and Oblivion, so I have an appreciation of this kind of RPG. But those who outright hate Fallout 3, I can definitely understand. I have a lot of issues with Fallout 3, and I consider it as an inferior game than the first two(but better than any of the other spin-offs). As far as gameplay goes, Fallout 3 did not live up to any hopes or expectations by the people that had played and loved the original games. We've gone so many years without a "proper" Fallout game. When one comes along and it's not what you wanted, it's saddening.

And furthermore, now you can't say you like "Fallout" without the disclaimer that you don't mean the new one. That's annoying.

Good post, I can't agree with you more...

~There are two caveats though... *more "immersive" feel* has mutually exclusive definitions for two groups here. (not counting those that can appreciate both).

Calling something Immersive when it is counter (even destructive) to their understanding interpretation, causes much bewilderment I have found.

Very annoying, and very expected.

And it's those who appreciate both whose opinions get kicked to the side and who just don't matter to anyone. Because they are happy with the old and the new and enjoy both for what they are, and don't spend much time in debate on either side they are treated as if they don't exist.

Us who were fans of the first two and a fan of this one consistently are not included in the "old skool" or "FO fan" group and are ignored despite my belief (no I can't prove it) that there are more of us than there are of the fans of old who are insulted by the name and just don't think it a Fallout game.

In addition, I am amazed how folks continue to use the devs words and quotes from the first two games to "prove" their points of why FO3 is not a Fallout game when every single dev of the first two that have been asked have said they enjoyed FO3 a lot and are happy with the way Bethesda treated the game. Doesn't really make sense to quote them and not include that small little fact.

It's Bob Dylan all over again.

For those who aren't ancient enough to remember those times, like me, Bob Dylan was known as a radical musician who played with guitar in hand and had a go at all manner of things in society, and that was it.

But then, old Bob started playing with a band and making more mainstream music.

And it made the old fans furious; they couldn't cope with that Mr Dylan had "sold out", as it were. His fanbase grew, he made what many consider to be better music, and yet, those old fans thought they knew better, they thought their opinion of Bob was the eternal one, and whenever Bob himself changed, those fans were outraged.

Come to think of it, the similarities are striking!

The thing is...there's not much to discuss there. "I'm perfectly fine with everything" doesn't lend itself well to discussion or debate.

I'm a fan of Fallout 1, 2, and 3. Not so much the DLC for 3, but that's a well-known fact. Fallout 3 is flawed, as a game and as a Fallout sequel. I think there's a lot that can be improved. But overall, Fallout 3 is a great game that gets a lot of the atmosphere "right", in my eyes. And it's fun to play. But it needs a lot of tweaking before I think it really lives up to 1 or 2, and I don't think that's just romanticizing the old games through nostalgia.

Except that Bob Dylan is the developer. The music is the product, the game.

They're not really comparable. Only a flavoursome metaphore. The music can be different, but that at least is symbolised by a new album. Fallout 3 is apparently still Fallout. Therein lies the problem.

Ever hear of being political ? Heh. Not necessarily the case, but bear it in mind.

Not a good anology since I happen to have been a Bob Dylan fan from day one. Most of us old hippies that were still to this day at our old age still love Dylan regardless of what he does. He never had a need to go mainstream...he started mainstream of the day. His old fans were mainstream in that day. A bunch of long haired, anti-establishment free thinking hippies. We were mainstream despite thinking we weren't.

Bob Dylan grew up when we did and became part of the establishment when we did.

This anology would work only if FO3 had been made by the same people that made the previous games. It wasn't.

Okay, so one guy decides to prove how correct the anology is, and the other doesn't understand it at all.

Anyone who got the point care to comment? *grins wickedly*

It's not that it should or could make for interesting discussion that I am bothered by. It is that when the fans who are not happy try to explain they don't like where it has gone with this new one they seem to think they are the only "old skool" fans alive and the only ones in a position to make such judgements. That them and those they have hung out with since the first ones came out are the "deciding factors" that should determine if it is a good addition to the series or not. It's that they exclude all us "old skool" (god I hate that spelling attached by the old school hats) folks who are "perfectly fine not with everything but with the direction Bethesda took Fallout to in making it their own now. They kept the best of the old, added some of the best of the new, kept the feel, the choices, the nuts and bolts other than view/rt and made it a Fallout in Bethesda fashion as a shining example of how to make an older game into their own successfully.

What bothers me is that as you just did, we who enjoyed all three and love each for what they are, flaws and all (yes they were all flawed in one way or other) are swept aside and not included in any equations or messages or polls. It's as if we don't exist and it's insulting in some odd sort of way because we are here and we matter just as much. But you are correct, we rarely get involved in the debates because we are too busy enjoying.

Nuh-uh, it was my anology, not yours!

Bob Dylan is the series; when Bob Dylan tried something new, people came to his concerts just to boo him out. Same thing with the series, when the series takes a new turn, people buy the game just so they can be angry at how different it is from how the series used to be.

The games are the albums; the offspring of the series, and what the legacy of the games actually is based on.

When people are saying that Fallout 3 isn't a "proper" Fallout game just because it's different, it is the same thing as saying that the latest album by good old Bob isn't really a "proper" Bob Dylan album just because it's different.

As the old saying goes; if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, shoot it!

I cannot speak for the others, but I am not insulted by a game that was not made for me, but it does seem to me that many of the new Fallout fans are seemingly insulted that I prefer the series as intended and view their preferred game as the odd man out.

Imagine if you will the feeling fans would get if it was decided to make "Sweeny Todd 2", and the director was more comfortable with making it a "Pirates of the Caribbean" style / slasher film than anything resembling the original, and adamantly against making it a musical (not something he does, and he's "OK" with it).

I am disappointed though (most highly) ~Its bad form to cater to a separate crowd when handling a sequel that carries that kind of expectation from a built in fanbase (that like it or not, was part of the purchase).

It's as though I'd camped out at Best Buy for a first shot at getting their new Laptop top deal, and after a week, they let 50 guys off a buss go in first as preferred customers. Bethesda clearly has their preferred customers.

I think you missed the part where I get into debates all the time. =p

I enjoy all the games. But when I want to get into a discussion about the games, I like to see others opinions and debate my own. I think Fallout 2 and its humor are the epitome of the Fallout franchise, this is not an opinion shared by everybody by any means. I think the DLC stinks, and so I argue that point as well....

The games are good. All the games have flaws, I think the third moreso than the rest of the series. I don't think they kept the "best of the old", for example. They kept a nice spread of the old, but the rules and stats need a lot of reworking. I'm fine with the idea of real-time combat and VATS, it's actually pretty neat and fun. But it requires some reworking to really provide a tight and visceral experience throughout. A lot of my issues with Fallout 3 are more in EXECUTION than in the actual ideas behind them. The only thing I hate from the get-go, idea and all, is the new Brotherhood. I wish they would just go back to Tamriel.

Still, it's overall a great game and hopefully the next in Bethesda's series will take a step in the right direction. That's how I see it. I have fun when I play Fallout 3. It's new, it feels "Fallout-y", it's a great experience. But when I want to get into a discussion...I generally don't find it intriguing to say "I enjoy this. Oh, you enjoy that? I enjoy it too. We enjoy things." I never felt like I "don't matter", really. Just that, sometimes, I don't really fit into a debate. Ambivalence and universal approval just don't lend themselves well to conversation.

He was booed at one concert because he went electric. Those who booed to this day still love his music, new and old. And some say they were booing due to poor acoustics and not at him for going electric.

*edit: Yas, oh Yas...where are you?

Oh? I seem to recall the drummer saying they got booed out night after night.

No matter, it is entirely inconsequential, I'll just make sure to make up some anology using pan-galactic gurgleblasters the next time!