Very mature. No I see someone who's completely biased against a company in every comment they make about anything to do with Bethesda. Its just so obvious.

Maybe Fallout games shouldn't be made with average gamers in mind. The originals sure weren't. :shrug:

Everyone is biased, so I don't see what you're getting at.

and judging by your above post you are possibly the rudest person I have ever seen here, calling people cry babies and nerds just because they don't agree with your opinions?

Why is that? Well you have 3 games to play New Vegas and Fallout 1 and 2. Games are made for everybody to play them, its not an exclusive club despite how bad you want it to be. :dance:

If Fallout as it was intended or at least as close to it as possible is not good enough for the average gamer, why does the average gamer need a Fallout game?

The average gamer needs a Fallout game because when its done right like Fallout 3 its a fantastic game and everyone should get the chance to play it.

@ Tobar Funny because I have never called anyone who has like any of those games names or anything like that, I don't care what game you like. Doesn't mean I can't disagree.

and Fallout 3 wasn't done right, it was an average game at best. In my opinion it was poorly executed, it had a bad plot, poor writing, mostly mediocre voice acting, flat characters with little to no character, and worst of all Three Dog.

also you should to learn to read, I said everyone is biased, not you, you call me biased for not liking Bethesda, and guess what? you're biased for liking Bethesda.

its pointless to throw that word around.

...And?
In a series you are supposed to know what happened in the games before, its like complaining about those who didn't like Star Wars Episode 1 because of how different it was from the originals when you have not seen the originals yourself.



Wow that's just [censored] awesome for you.

I am stating that NV is not a bad Fallout game because it is like the others, you said it was the odd one out in the Fallout Series and I explained to you otherwise and all you do is tell me you don't care, how intelligent and mature of you.



Is that the whole damn game? Hunting somebody who shot you in the head? No, its the starting off point. And if that's cliche then every revenge story ever written is cliche, this one had twist after twist along with it.



Did you even read what I said? Bethesda Softworks demanded for them to use the exact same engine (a computer tool that is used to build videogames which sets the standards of graphics and art design) as Fallout 3 to make it have the same look.

It was not their choice it was Bethesda's and if you want to complain about it take it up with them.



I have a whole list full:
Marcus
Joshua Graham
Ulysses
Father Elijah
Craig Boone
House
Benny
Big Sal
Caesar
Legate Lanius
Yes Man
Victor

And many others that I don't even care to list.

And if you do not want to hear somebodies life story don't ask for it! That's why there are speech options in dialogue.



:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
Borrowing from the last part of your post how very ignorant of you to say I do not know what makes a great game.

What makes a great game for me is an open world with choices, sold writing, fun gameplay, and a good ending.

You are an ignorant hypocrit who dislikes a game for being good.

Right in what way? Good worldbuilding with a ton of random dungeons, but weak gameplay and lackluster overall writing with little to no meaning in anything you do?

Average gamer would be as satisfied with a similiar game of a different name, they don't really want "Fallout", they want an open world scifi hiking sim to roam in.

Fallout 3 did have some strengths that I would argue make it above average. From an artistic standpoint the world was nice and had a great atmosphere (let's avoid discussing whether or not it was logical because that's another topic entirely), it was fairly polished, and Bethesda introduced some great ideas to the series. I particularly liked how they made previously ignorable skills more useful, although the execution here could use some work.

Now I have my fair share of issues with Fallout 3, but it's definitely an above average game (especially compared to the rest of the stuff out there these days).



I agree here, Bethesda really needs to work on their writing... there's really no excuse for a AAA RPG developer to half-ass their writing anymore.



I agree and disagree, while the characters were flat they definitely had character... the problem with Fallout 3's characters is that they were, for the most part, one dimensional caricatures with exaggerated personalities and no real depth. Moira Brown is one of the most obvious examples, she was just the eccentric tinkerer down the street, there's nothing to her character beyond that; a few lulzy lines do not make a good character. Now I could live with a few minor characters with exaggerated personalities, but this level of writing carries over to the major characters of the game as well - for example Sarah Lyons is the tough female soldier, again there's nothing to this character beyond that exaggerated personality type.

Only character from Fallout 3 that I remember is Three Dog, due to him being an hypocritical idiot with an annoying voice.

His character was to piss me off every time his mouth opens.

Yes you did call plently of people names on this forum, you've done it time and again, I've been on the wrong end of it from you plenty of times. I wasn't biased when I played New Vegas, I tried the game with an open mind like a lot of people. And I don't dislike all things Obsidian I just disliked New Vegas. I was very excited for New Vegas to come out. I even pre ordered the collecter's edition of the game. Wheras as you give a very strong impression of being completely biased against anything Bethesda. I don't agree with your theory that everyone is biased there's plenty of people who liked Fallout 3 as much as New Vegas. And many people loved Three Dog along with all the other great voice acting in Fallout 3.

[quote name='Sebor13' timestamp='1321308120' post='19233587']
...And?
In a series you are supposed to know what happened in the games before, its like complaining about those who didn't like Star Wars Episode 1 because of how different it was from the originals when you have not seen the originals yourself.

So in order for me to play a Fallout game or have an opinion on one I have to have played every game in the series?



Wow that's just [censored] awesome for you.

I am stating that NV is not a bad Fallout game because it is like the others, you said it was the odd one out in the Fallout Series and I explained to you otherwise and all you do is tell me you don't care, how intelligent and mature of you.

I never said New Vegas was the odd one out in the series you said Fallout 3 was the odd one out in the series, remember?



Is that the whole damn game? Hunting somebody who shot you in the head? No, its the starting off point. And if that's cliche then every revenge story ever written is cliche, this one had twist after twist along with it.

Yes the starting point of a game is pretty important and effects the rest of the game experience and story. You just justified my own point by saying how often that cliche is used. :rofl:


Did you even read what I said? Bethesda Softworks demanded for them to use the exact same engine (a computer tool that is used to build videogames which sets the standards of graphics and art design) as Fallout 3 to make it have the same look.

It was Obsidians choice to make the game with the same graphics, thats not a customers problems. They could have negotiated a better deal to give them more freedom. They didn't have to make the game under these conditions.

It was not their choice it was Bethesda's and if you want to complain about it take it up with them.



I have a whole list full:
Marcus
Joshua Graham
Ulysses
Father Elijah
Craig Boone
House
Benny
Big Sal
Caesar
Legate Lanius
Yes Man
Victor

Are you seriously listing these as interesting characters? Boone? Victor? Oh dear. :rolleyes:


And if you do not want to hear somebodies life story don't ask for it! That's why there are speech options in dialogue.

Thats the only difference in writing in the two games, more dialogue. So whats great about extra dialogue for the sake of it?



:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
Borrowing from the last part of your post how very ignorant of you to say I do not know what makes a great game.

What makes a great game for me is an open world with choices, sold writing, fun gameplay, and a good ending.

Choices? Big deal serously, so many of you think that makes New Vegas the better game. It doesn't its not that important. Fun gameplay? What part was fun? Good ending? :shakehead: Open world? Bethesda are the kings at that.

I don't dislike a game for being good I dislike New Vegas because its bad, that is all.

I am good until Fallout 4.
Well, i could do with another fallout, but i dont want it to be rushed.

I would like to see what Bethesda can do to satisfy older fans of the series and not just rush it.
Now that they have their feet wet in the FO universe, and maybe even the chance to pick the brains of Obsidian folks, i think they could put out a game that doesnt leave lore hounds in the cold.
I also dont think that just because Obsidian has OG Fallout devs that they should rush ouout another fallout game just ofr the sake of it.

As far as creation being mentioned in this thread.
When i first saw skyrim videos, it really did remind me of an updated gamebryo.
But, since the word is pretty immense, i cant say as it is a surprize that the graphics dont look as good as some would want.

1) No, for you to truely understand what a Fallout game is you have to play a majority of them. I have played all of them.

2) I did say that but you were making NV out to be the one that was different when it was not.

3) Not exactly. Most stories require the beginning to be important but in some cases, like NV, it doesn't even matter by the time the plot ends. If you ask anybody on these forums that really got into the game you would find that almost everybody didn't even care about Benny or his involvement in the game by the Second Battle for Hoover Dam.

4) Are you serious? I just explained to you it was Bethesda's unmovable demand, if they wanted to make a Fallout game it would have to be on the same engine as Fallout 3. Besides Obsidian has one of the worst negotiating teams I have ever heard of.

5) Boone is one of the greatest characters in the entire game once you know all about his past and if you like having a sniper watching your back. Victor is far more creative and interesting than anybody in the Capital Wasteland. How about you list a dozen interesting characters from the CW.

6) Its not for the sake of it. A lot of the dialogue is referencing the originals or giving you very unclear hints in the game. Others are just for those who want to tally up every character in the game's opinion about the factions of NV.

7) A game is made for if me if its enjoyable and has choices, Fallout 3 had choice and almost every game over on my shelf has choices in it. Choices make your mark on the game, what fun is it to just be railroaded? I liked how we got extreme choices n F3 like nuking Megaton, I liked looking at the town and thinking "I caused this."

The fun part of the gameplay was things such as iron sights, different types of ammo, and the different fighting styles (the fighting styles was in F3 too but its still feels refreshed).

And the ending was great. I loved F3 but its ending was only decent. Until Broken Steel came around and just completely ruined it, basically making the last mission worthless. In NV you desided the rulers of a powerful region. Whatever you chose would affect all of the southwestern quarter of the US throughout all of history.

I do love Bethesda's open worlds, they are the best at it.

8) I was that way when i first came on these forums, angry about how Fallout: New Vegas ended up, ignorant about the originals, and losing sleep because of Fallout 3.

Then I was convinced to try the originals and after putting several hours into them I came to respect NV for what it was and I eventually got into liking it even more than that.

I even still play the originals, if you can keep in mind they were made in the late 1990s and you can deal with the turn based fights I think you might actually enjoy them.

Think of that as mission accomplished, fhe goal was for you to remember his annoying self forever.

Why does your sig say your a dinosaur if your not?

Anyhow, Fallout 3 was a MUCH better game in terms of enviroment, music(radio and sountrack), and DLC, however, FNV takes the cake in RPG elements, FPS elements, Story, dialogue.

If Obsidian and Bethesda did a collab of Fallout 4 it'd be even better for the series.

Well a Dinosaur is just somebody who likes the old games and I like the old games.



I agree with all except DLC. F:NV's were all really good while F3 just had the Pitt and PL.



This.

You don't need to have been playing Fallout since it came out to be a Dinosaur. Many of the Dinosaurs are people that came to the Fallout series with Fallout 3. They then managed to get past the "dated graphics" and played Fallout and Fallout 2 and realised that Fallout 3 isn't the best Fallout out there. They came to see how Fallout 3 got many things wrong.

Edit: Keep in mind we don't hate Fallout 3. We just recognize its problems. As Sebor13 said we are people that enjoy the Originals and want Future Fallouts to be more like them and be true to the series.

Aye, I stand up for that statement.

Wouldn't most people be dinosaurs really? I always thought it was if you played the orginals when they came out, hence the name dinosaur.

You'd be suprised how few people have played the originals.

But this is pretty off topic.

I guess it is misleading. Mostly we are seen as Fallou 3/ Bethesda haters :tongue: