Yes, of course they took longet to explore in FO3. An LOB Enterprises or Bethesda Ruins -- large, multi-storey buildings spread across several sections -- would take you an hour to pick over. Sure, it was a one-time visit, but then that was true for a Broc Flower Cave or Monte Carlo Suites -- the small, single-screen NV equivalents -- as well. The difference being, the latter'd take you ten minutes rather than an hour. Like I say, too many tiny interior maps. :shrug:



Well, yes.

Here's hoping that FO4 has something of the best of both games in it.

:foodndrink:

While doing some digging for dlc info I found this quote in an interview with Chris Avellone when asked about the future of Fallout that sums up this bloody chapter in messege board history pretty well. I know he was at Obsidian when he said this, but couldn t find an exact date

......I doubt the fanbase will ever think they re being done right, no matter who does them, Cain included. We re not the same people we were 5-10 years ago, and design methods change......

After seeing this arguing on a messege board about it feels worthless, because he s right. I ll still do it, but his quote is way better than any of ours. Everyone can t be happy all the time with it. Unless you r playing fo 1 or 2 for those people. And fo3 for those people. We ll just have to change with the game. Nv is a good mix of old and new I guess, so it s good enough.

MCA is one of the founders and owners of Obsidian so he's always been there.

And he is absolutely right in his statement. That, however, does not mean there can't be games that can be praised at being close (closer) to "being done right" -- even with todays methods of designing and market. And I think that's what's mostly being yearned and argued over than anything --- a game as close to what was as it can be without sacrificing too much of what is.

This. i replayed it 6 times and FINALLY got my character how i want. Do what i did ya cry babies get a weapon list and get the best unique weapon for each type OR get the Legendary creature locations and kill them. OR pull the [censored] side quest list up and do something!

Or, when all else fails: Role play. I know, what an absurd idea.

-Gunny out.

Role playing? In my role playing games? You sir, are speaking nonsense.

Well, if you're dyslexic, it would be: Plole Raying. Which IS neaking sponsense. Of course to a dyslexic, it's lysdexic anyways...... :facepalm:

-Gunny out.

There wouldn't be any if some people stopped say things like that.

We won't get over it, because the original Fallout was the foundation of the series, a series I assume you like seeing as you are on these forums, and respect is due to the classic Fallout, the Fallout that set the rules, the universe, the original Fallout is the highest echelon of legitimacy of all the games in the franchise, this is indisputable, because it is the one that started the franchise.

:blink:

*head explodes*

advlts fighting over fallout=:facepalm:

I do not see why age comes into the equation.

You must be new to the internet.

Meanwhile I agree with every that you post said I disagree with this, why?, by the logic of that words, I must change my point of views of games that dont deserve to be changed just for the company sake

Games like Mass Effect 2, COD latest games, Tiberian Twilight, Deus Ex: Human Revolution I will not change with those games, never,

The games like mass effect, fallout, COD that have all 'changed' are selling more copies with every new release. These games are moving with the times. if they didn't they would struggle to survive.

Yet theres massive complaints about many of the changes implemented with some of them.

Tiberian Twilight is the perfect example. It did away with many of the features that made the C&C series what it was and was probably the worst game in the entire series. Because EA decided that the base building and resource collecting aspects prevented fast paced multiplayer battles.


Mass Effect 2 was critisized from dropping a lot of features from the first game. At the same time, it was praised for being streamlined and more accessable.

COD has been critisized for focusing on the multiplayer modes and as a result the single player campaign is tiny compared to the first few games. Black Ops was also critisized for not actually bringing anything new or fresh to the series.

criticised by the minority. Thats the best a developer can hope for. no game is perfect. mass effect 3, FO4, and the new COD will all probably break selling records again. So there giving most of the people what they want.

Maybe the minority with COD and ME, but C&C4 was definite majority. Almost unanimous.

Yah but how long will that last cha?...

well bethesda making FO3 like ES was the reason why the game was so good, and i am totally expecting FO4 to be like skyrim, bethesda has the winning formula, and they're games are super fun to play for years, not just 2 or 3 months, they know how to put content in a game and make their games so they have longevity and replayability, and thats not easy to do.

this this this this (puts on Brotherhood Of Bethesda MKIV power-armour)

But Fallout games aren't supposed to be like Elder Scrolls games, they are supposed to be like Fallout games.

Apparently every franchise needs to be the same as the other. It's the winning formula and all.

Seems to me like they're just too incompetent to break that formula.
Sure, sticking to what you know is a good way to financially secure your games if that formula is a winning concept.
But in that case, why did they buy Fallout if they weren't interested in trying something new?
Why buy a completely different franchise with completely different design goals if all they're gonna do is copy their winning concept onto it?
Couldn't they just have started a brand new post apocalyptic franchise if they were interested in doing something like that?
So yeah, if FO4 is Skyrim With Guns then it's as clear as water to me that they are an incompetent studio too afraid to change their design goals.

Again, not asking for the franchise to turn back to what it was over the course of one game.
Just asking for that they try as much as possible to find a middle ground between the two.
And then slowly try to make the franchise move back to what it once was, with each game leaving a part of ES behind.

/opinion I guess.

chances are they started working of FO4 shortly after finishing the DLC for Fallout 3. (which is why Obsidian were only given a small deadline to release FNV in, they wouldn't want the two games to clash!). And if that is the case, it wouldn't be the same as Skyrim, it is either a) same old Fallout engine, revamped or B ) something completely new and different. It has to be b though, because time and tech have moved on. Imo