The MODERN GAMER is the person who will never play a game without a walkthrough? :huh:




(why does the modern gamer even bother then?)

Figure it out, genius.

Fallout 1=Old game.

Fallout 1=Old style RPG

Fallout 1=Old game design style.

Fallout 1=Requires Thinking

Modern Gamers=Wanting straightforward good stuff, not having to wait for it.

Moder Gamers=Wanting action, not thinking.

If you think about it, only the people with patience ever want to think. And the number of Gamers that want to think is not a very large number. The thinking gamers are usually off doing something constructive anyway. Explains why the Puzzle game market is so tiny, unless you count that crappy free stuff.

(Thinking gamers are usually reaching their Golden Years anyway, unless you live in Japan)

Irradiation would not completely vanish within 200 years, but a substantial amount would have. Also, do realize that within a shorter amount of time, the West Coast has developed a fully fledged nation essentially in the New California Republic, while D.C.'s greatest achievement is..... Megaton? Rivet City? Really? In a city that supposedly is filled with advanced technologies?


Plant life is fully sustainable by tribals in Fallout 2, yet no one can sustain plant life in Fallout 3. Explain that.

Ok then modern gamer I'll agree with you.
But don't you be insulted the next time us 'old veterans' claim that FO3 is a game designed for inpatient action gamers who don't like thinking.



(oh btw, I understand that the puzzle game market is actually quite large & profitable)

So you agree that Fallout 3 is a straight forward game with little to no thinking, easy, holds your hand quests, and pure action with little to no plot at all to it. Thank you.

Tbh, I get supremely angry whenever someone bashes any fallout game. Nothing wrong with a little change, ya know.

I can't be classified a Veteran since I only played all the games in the past 3 Years, back when I was 19.

Also, I apologize If my post seemed rude and attacking. I meant the line "Figure it out, Genius" in a comical way, not insulting.



Get away from me, please.

Answer this question, do you agree or not that Fallout 3 was made with the modern gamer in mind? If you answer yes (and you know the only logical answer is yes) than you in fact just agreed to the things that I just posted.




I could care less about change, if it's done right. Bethesda did not even come close.

Right. Nothing wrong with a little change. Which is why if Halo 4 were announced and it was going to be isometric and turn based people would accept it with open arms.

We don't have to accept Fallout 3 as a true Fallout game just because Bethesda owns the license.

heh... why should I be insulted?
Your post was obviously insulting the 'modern gamers' and I can hardly count myself as one.

I don't think that in the mid90s the RPG audience was really 'niche' quite yet. In that aspect there's not so much change.


Edit: Wow! time slip! I replied to a post before it was even posted! (or a bunch of posts just disappeared)

How did Fallout 1 and 2 hold your hand? Did they have a little map marker telling you where everything was? Did they have an "alert sign" when a grenade was at your feet? Did they have an incredibly overpowered mechanic named VATs? In fact, Oblivion and Fallout 3 both hold your hand more than any other "RPG" there is on the market. An eight year old could beat this game without a guide.



"Most efficient character build?" Really? Fallout 3 has the most ridiculous character building ever. It doesn't matter which skills you tag, especially if you have Broken Steel. Tagging skills and development of skills is FAR more important in Fallout 1 and 2, because you specialize in one field. For example, you can be a huge brute in Fallout 2 that can wield any big gun in the world, while decimating everything in your path. However, you're going to be so stupid and ugly that no one is going to want to even talk to you.



Can't say the same for Fallout 3, where it doesn't matter where you distribute your skill points at all.

I think the target audience was a "niche" audience IMO.

I haven't played Oblivion, so I can't say it's Oblivion with guns.

Comparing 1 & 2 to 3 is an apples and oranges situation, though. F3 is great in its own right, but lacks the tacticality of the originals, as well as the desperate, gritty feel of the original games.

I would say it was a pretty niche series from the start. F3 can likely be credited with the recent boom in post-apocalyptic video games and movies.

Yes it is... People that think is is not are usually comparing the wrong aspects; So "no", its not a fantasy magic game set in Cyrodil, and "no" its not a game where you can be master of all [guilds], and see all outcomes on the same character, but "yes" it is still the same basic gameplay in essence (except that now most weapons are ranged like the bow and fireball spells were), and "yes", the NPC's are mostly Oblivious, and still have the "All hell/Alls Well" abrupt shift between states and random pvssyring, and "yes" the quests are all sandboxed and quickly forgotten by them once completed; You can save their life and they might insult you ten minutes after, or you can shoot them in the face and (if they live), they might greet you as you pass by a few days later.
Its the same game.

I do have to agree with the fact that modern games hold your hand too much, to be honest. Think back to all those old PS2-gen games.
Take for example Judge Dredd: Dredd vs Death, you were just told that you had to do this, that and then some, but you had to figure out exactly how you were to go about that. Now the vast majority of games give you markers as to where you need to go etc. Not that there's nothing wrong with that, in some cases it can be helpful.

If they were hand holding in an action game, fine. I could care less. However, a RPG game should never, ever, ever, hold your hand. Ever.

The reason why there are quest markers is because of the view.
The reason why there are grenade indicators is because of the view.
If it is real life is it easier to tell what is going on than in the perspective of a video game... this balances that out.
However I think instead of having a marker there should just be more info in your pip boy about quests and notes that have to be taken.

Which is why Bethesda could use some change from the same gameplay style they've been applying to their RPGs since Arena.

I found Fallout 1 insultingly easy. I could just as easily walk out of the Vault in FO1 and butcher the starting town, as I could in FO3. And when you get Power Armor you can literally kill everything with a pistol, and take next too no damage. FO2, was horrid. It was, as mentioned before, full of asinine and ridiculous pop culture references, and I never even felt like I was playing a post-apocalyptic game. I don't consider "prosttutes and Drugs on every single [censored] street corner!" very useful for the setting. Oh look its the Mob! OH noes! I didn't realize I was playing the post-apocalyptic version of "The Godfather". As for everything else, well, I'm tired of moronic diehard fans that insist their constantly right and more intelligent then anyone who enjoys games by Bethesda. So, as mentioned before in this thread, you can shove it up your ass.

I find it curious that they haven't tried that yet. Surely they must realize that in the larger RPG Community they're not very popular. Almost every other RPG community I've visited has an on average particularly low opinion of Bethesda; especially after Oblivion and Fallout 3.

Change is good ~mutation is bad...
I do like Fallout 3 (but for none of the reasons... NONE of the reasons that I like the Fallout series prior to FO3 ~I like FO1 better than FO3). I find that upsetting, because FO3 at least had the potential to be excellent were the engine used differently, and the writing better (and given more opportunities).

I find the game to be a myriad choice of closets instead of a labyrinth,,, if you get my meaning. Every door (choice) has something behind it, but you rarely find another door [and never find two]. You just pick a door, get your prize, and then pick another door.

Good for those communities. Most of them haven't even played or even payed attention to any of their games besides those two, despite the fact they're previous games (Morrowind & Daggerfall) are deeper, more political, more lore/backstory, and overall deeper than their games. Especially if their JRPG's, in which most of them fall into the traditional pit of being a standard cliche RPG.



Actually I agree with you on that point. I also love your sig.

IMMURSHUN buzz word sheep detected. Your argument has been proven invalid. Seriously, we long ago concluded that that word holds no actual meaning, it's like when left-wing politicians are talking about 'tolerance' and things like that. It means nothing.

It's over a year ago now. Forget that word already.

Seriously, I'm surprised we didn't learn sooner you're a pretentious arrogant [censored].

Black Isle was pretty much dead when Bethesda bought the rights too the game. Forget the old games already.

:foodndrink:

Minus the loss of the GURPS license... It is as they intended the series, no?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dc6gvAzuipU

It is indeed, but (:rolleyes: and I have to ask this...), is it as the series was intended ~Graphics aside, and with only gameplay as merit?

In fact, watching these old previews... I really wish they could have kept the GURPS license for the first Fallout...
It looks like they had 14 targets instead of eight.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kd9SiAIhss&NR=1