In that respective order? I cannot see that; or agree.

*But I can agree agree [perhaps you meant it this way], that NV had all the fixes FO3 needed; in the way that Fallout 2 had necessary fixes to Fallout.

Totally agree. The graphics are not a huge leap forward; Beth did some updating but nothing that just blows my mind from what I have seen so far. I still need to play the game though.

I don't think a game has ever endeared itself to me because of great graphics. If the graphics "just work" then I am fine with that if the gameplay and story get me into it. A beautiful game without gameplay and story is called a painting to me and I have plenty of those hanging on my walls to stare at.

I'm the same way. I absolutely loved Fallout 3, so if FO4 is just a rehash, I have no problem with it. But from what I saw on the E3 video it looks a lot different.

What? Those are great RPGs. Just a different style.

I think they forced you to use your imagination more, and because they weren't able to use visual story telling as much as F3 and NV you got a lot more scripted story vs the visual elements.

I'm not trying to agree with R00dy myself (I disagree with him actually) but having choices alone doesn't make an RPG.

Agreed. I don't think the game looks bad at all. It's not pushing the envelope in the graphics department, but the gameplay and content are what I'm eager to dip my toes into.

Are we having fun yet?

Of course not, but then I'd have to sit here for longer than I want to enumerating the RPG qualities of Fallout 1 and 2. I mean I could if you want me too..., but then I'll have to make a pot of coffee and make a very long list lol.

I would rank Planescape, Fallout, and Witcher as the best RPGs I've seen (let alone played) in 17 years. [Honestly with Dragon Age:Origins as 4th, but I've not gotten far enough into it to truly judge; this based on first impressions.]

**Ah, but I'm forgetting BG2... That would be 4th.

I haven't seen much widespread "oh, bad graphics" commenting, personally. But I will say that the same thing happened with Skyrim - the big trailer came out, and on the official forum you could find a good faction of folks lamenting how terrible the graphics were.

And part of the reason people need side-by-side shots is that they have awful memories. (Plus plenty of fuel from the "ugh, looks like a last-gen game"/"looks like it's from the 90's" silliness that's been getting thrown at every game in the last six years that didn't bust out all the latest shaders/appease the graphics snobs)

edit: I wonder what the "doesn't look like a clear graphical leap" crowd is going to do when we hit the point that there's no possible way to have a "clear leap" anymore.....

-----

re: the "big picture". Yes, the core experience will be very similar to other Bethesda games. But honestly? That's what I was looking for. That "core Bethesda experience" is the main thing that sets their stuff apart from other companies' games, and the primary reason that I've bought their games since I was introduced to them with Morrowind.

I mean like content wise. As in the idea of "Essentially an expansion pack".

Ye'h. The list of everything that you both need and are optional to have to make an RPG takes a long time to write up... Since the main thing about RPGs tends to be about defining the main character you play as in your own way.

~Edit~

Sadly, a lot of people don't necessary realize this list and puts too much "power" (so to say) on one or two specific things that is on the list.

Nope, no fun allowed.

http://i1.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/731/143/3e3.jpg

Stand-alone expansion pack; the kind that doesn't need the previous game installed. The kind of expansions that the Dawn of War series got several of.

Fallout 2 had a few new art assets; but they stood out like neon signs.

In that respect, we can't know if Bethesda literally converted FO3 assets to FO4. It would be very ironic if they did; and so long as it blended nicely with the new assets, I wouldn't have any issue with it.

Okay... what are we talking about again?

This thread is about to be closed so I'll be terse.

A lot of people complained about the graphics, to the extent that boogie had one of his typical tirades against the whole notion, there's a member on here with boogie's quote 'if you want good graphics watch a film and leave fallout 4 the [censored] alone' in their signature.

If Chrono Trigger, Ultima IV, Dungeons & Dragons, Fallout 4, and Kingdom Hearts can all be sold as RPGs, then yeah, you're pretty much on point. (for me, the most catch-all description I can think of is that the player has some degree of direction over the development of the characters and/or the story)

Ok, this kind of absurd comment makes you look ignorant....do you really understand what RPG means?

I still find it ironic that some are complaining that Bethesda is a "one trick pony" while I don't recall Black Isle ever making a game that wasn't a top down isometric rpg of some sort....how is that not essentially "one trick" as well? Not sure why it should be a horrific thing to be good at making one type of game (other than you don't LIKE the kinds of games they are making).

Specifically Fallout 1 & 2 are almost totally the self same game, with different stories; and improvements that could pass for Fallout (1) patches.
This makes Fallout 2 more of a stand alone expansion than an evolution on Fallout.

FO4 looks to be an evolution on FO3; in the way that FO3 should have been an evolution on Fallout 2, instead of FOBOS. FO3 was the Cuckoo's egg, and FO4 is its offspring.

Hmm, only played three of those (FO1, Witcher, DA:O). Didn't really enjoy the second two....

DA:O's combat just got to be a drag, I dropped it down to Easy so I could slog my way through it for the story (I've never replayed it to try other story approaches, couldn't bear to suffer through the gameplay again).

Witcher had the problem of an unlikable protagonist, along with a plot I just didn't enjoy. (The one part that really bugged me? That early quest where you stop monsters from bothering the merchant's weapon crates. Elves show up, say they have a deal with the merchant for the goods, and I had Geralt not get in their way. Later, a quest NPC is killed because of that, and Geralt says "This is why I stay out of politics"..... even though that's exactly what I did! I DIDN'T insert him into the merchant's deal! I just took care of the monsters like they claim an apolitical Witcher should. So that whole stupid "message" struck me as entirely wrong.)

Never did BG2.... I quite BG1, actually. Between the sidequests that were breeding faster than I could deal with them (my pile of notes was huuuuuuge), and the fact that I somehow got some persistant enemies on my back (every map I entered, a group of super-OP magic-arrow archers would be there to slaughter me. Reload after reload after reload.... bah), I just couldn't deal with it.

[quote name="Gizmo" post="24227216" timestamp="1438812682"]

Specifically Fallout 1 & 2 are almost totally the self same game, with different stories; and improvements that could pass for Fallout (1) patches.
This makes Fallout 2 more of a stand alone expansion than an evolution on Fallout.[/quote

I could live with that. I never played fallout but Fallout 2 was awesome.

The only times I can think of when Bethesda reused art assets in a new game are the melee animations for Fallout 3/Oblivion, and some magic sounds from Daggerfall/Morrowind (which were taken from a stock library anyway).

Oh gawd, Planescape lol. I just wish there was more to the game besides clicking on dialog trees. I'm not one of those low-brow players either, but I just like a bit more balance. Baldur's Gate 2 had this I think. Great dialog, great story, awesome character development. I can see Fallout and perhaps the Witcher...

Personally, I would rank Might and Magic 8, Baldur's Gate 2, and Morrowind up there. Maybe Arcanum..., but that game was badly gimped too.

Well that's the thing, defining the character you play as. There's just a lot of stuff that goes into it, but I think a lot of it is based on a rule-set. Paradoxically, the more rules you have, the more free you are to personalize your experience. At least, that's what I think.

You should play Fallout. I'm of the opinion that it was the best of the two. I thought it was a lot darker and more serious than the second one.

Ohh please, this is one of the most absurd memes to come out of this place.

Fallout 3 is no closer to BoS in tone or gameplay then NV is, which is to say, not at all.