I was saying "Fallout 3 is not a good Fallout game" as determined by its predecessors and the design principles of the people who created the series. Buuuuut, if we're going to have that conversation, I guess I'll approach that gate. Fallout 3 is not, in fact, a Fallout game in anything other than name and the inclusion of previously-established (and woefully misinterpreted) factions, characters or tropes. Take away these things and you are left with something which has absolutely nothing to do with Fallout, in the sense that "Fallout" as a concept is determined by the game which created the series.



I think you guys are taking my posts far too personally. We are, after all, talking about a video-game here. And while I have invested 13 years of my life in following the franchise, I have to admit we all spend quite a bit more time talking about it than we maybe should, or taking it so seriously (I guess that's what 13 years of obsession can do to a person). Having said that - I had a bit of an eventful night last night and obviously didn't proof-read my post which bothered you. I don't mean "take FO3 fans seriously" as a people, that's silly. I simply mean as a Fallout fan (again, in regards to what I described above).

I have just simply left the franchise. I'm not going to be arrogant enough to believe that my vision of CastleVania is the only "correct" vision of CastleVania. That franchise has become something else now

You seem to be accusing me of things which I'm not doing. I'm not claming that MY vision of Fallout is correct. I'm claiming that the vision of the people who created it is correct. Furthermore, I'm not even saying Bethesda are incorrect. I'm saying that their interpretation is not "Fallout" in the sense that the games which defined the series are "Fallout". Their interpretation sort of missed the dart board. As for your second point in "leaving the franchise", why would I? A great new game just came out which does follow the principles of the original creators (and contains some of them as developers!) and is, in turn, a great "Fallout" game! The whole reason I ended up roped into this Fallout Series forum was because I was attempting to explain to newcomers that the FO:NV is not based on FO3's principles, so comparing it to that game isn't the same as comparing it to "Fallout" as a whole. Trust me, you won't find me in the FO3 forum, nor will you find me in a FO4 forum when that time comes (unless by some miraculous turn we find out that MCA is a lead designer or some such) because as far as Bethesda is concerned, I have left their corner of the franchise behind.

Unfortunately, you do have that arrogant attitude about yourself.

Yes, you mentioned this already. Thankfully my skin is pretty thick or I might start to think you were insulting me and in turn become "offended".

due to your attitude and the attitude of many other OG Fallout fans, I am beginning to resent Fallout, Fallout 2, and their fans, and I'm even beginning to resent Fallout: New Vegas to a certain extent as well.

That seems a bit maudlin and excessive to me, but whatever floats your boat I guess. I'm not here to rally any troops, just state a viewpoint. I'm not trying to belittle anybody, but I'm not going to back down from my viewpoint either.

But I won't apologize for becoming a fan of the series through Fallout 3, I will not apologize for supporting Bethesda's take on the series, as well as RPG gaming in general,

And you shouldn't. Why would you?

and I will not tolerate someone implying that I am somehow less of a gamer, less of an RPG gamer, or that somehow my opinion means less simply because I had never even -heard of- the Fallout series before Bethesda's installment.

I never said you were less of a gamer. Now you're interpreting my posts the way you want to and putting words in my mouth which I not only did not intend, but was not the direction of my argument at all. I have not tried making any of this personal.

We're at an impasse if you believe that all standards of quality are subjective. I do not, and I don't think you really do either. I'm not claiming to be the sole standard of an objectively good or bad story, either. It doesn't take a literary critic to point out how weak the story in Fallout 3 is. I don't see how you can claim I'm trying to make my case seem inarguable as what I've done is actually make a case, unlike the people on the opposing side who... well, haven't made a case. I didn't just say "Fallout 3's story is objectively bad, the end." If you've actually read my posts (and if you're going to reply that you didn't, you haven't got any real right to reply), you'll see that I've put forth my reasons and logic behind the claim that Fallout 3 has a weak story. Calling me an elitist doesn't offend me, I am a little guilty on that count. That doesn't mean I'm wrong about anything I've said, by the way.

Whiskey Rose is a fine, well-spoken individual. If you can't find wisdom and insight in his (her?) posts regarding the history of the Fallout series, even if you (somehow) disagree with it, then I really don't know what to say.

I'd like to back him/her up in the fact that this individual is clearly not trying to start any fights, but rather share knowledge in order to better educate people. This is a good thing.

I would hope it's better, I mean they did use FO3 as a template, took fan feed back and added their own twist. If it's not better than FO3 then I would feel real bad for Obsidian.

@Neil2ThaIzzay: you don't like Symphony Of The NIght? Wow, it takes all sorts I suppose. :laugh:

I actually do like Symphony of the Night, but to me, it's just not CastleVania.

Post limit.