And again from Fallout 2 to 3 was NOT evolutionary, and Fallout 3 was a poor sequel to Fallout 2.

Gameplay wise it was a step to the side. (From one genre to another)
RPG mechanics wise it was 3 steps backwards. (Dumbed down like crazy)
While in graphics and detail of game world it was 4 steps forward. (But it wasn't a very coherent world with no agriculture and raiders and mutants every 50 feet.)

Problem for me is; I don't care about the graphics when it comes to RPG's.

This.

I think I'm rather inline with gabriel77dan on this. Personally, I've really enjoyed all of the Fallout games. (Except for Brotherhood of Steel, which not only wasn't terribly faithful to the franchise, but also was a fundamentally flawed game, where both The Bard's Tale (the newest one, with Cary Elwes doing the voice acting,) and Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance did a much better job with that manner of gameplay on the same engine.) They all have their flaws, but I've liked them all so far (even if to varying degrees.)

I don't think Fallout 3, however, is a direct-line evolution of Fallout 2, however. I see Fallout 3 more as Bethesda saying "hey, you know what would be really interesting to translate into the sort of gameplay we do - Fallout!" I don't think there's anything wrong with that. I don't even think it was a bad decision. But I don't see as how Fallout 3 isn't very much a "Bethesda" sort of game, done in their style, and playing to that company's specific strengths and weaknesses. There were a number of improvements to the series, sure. (Frankly, I absolutely loved the art direction in #3 - and thought it better envisioned "Fallout" than even the original games, oddly enough.) But the gameplay (and not even going into TB/RT, as we're all taking a break from that,) is - like gabriel77dan said - a step to the side, and not a direct improvement. I don't honestly see that Fallout 3 is exactly what Interplay would have made had they been able to continue developing the series this past decade, and been making incremental improvements and keeping up with developing technology and sensibilities.

I thought Fallout 3 was pretty darned cool. I still have a number of reservations concerning my connection to my character, the characterizations of NPCs, the game mechanics and their manifestations within the game, and how well the rule set meshes with the sort of RPG they're trying to make. I feel we really need a Fallout 4 before I see a game where Bethesda has really grown into the franchise, with a clear concept of what they want to do with the game, and the proper comfort level to pull it off. (And that's pretty standard - many game series don't really hit their stride until after a sequel or two.) I think it did some things better than Fallout 1.

But I also think there's some lessons to have been learned from the original titles, that did not fully translate into this new gameplay genre. And that's okay, too.

I don't like this concept of a "true fan," either. Personally, I think it's splitting hairs. There are only fans. They come in all flavors. They all like (and dislike) various aspects of these games, and have their own tastes. I don't believe there's any sort of membership criteria for being a fan of the Fallout series. I've looked all through our Forum Rules, and I certainly didn't see anything in there about having to like or hate specific Fallout games in order to be considered a fan.

Bethesda don't even need to call this game fallout IMO I would of like it more if they just bought the rights from interplay and called it a different name with elements inspired from it than I wouldn't be bashing on the game so much.

Or even better, make their own post-apocalyptic game and let Fallout stay as isometric and turn-based RPG. Most Fallout 3 fans haven't even played the originals so I don't see what was the point of buying the franchise. :shrug:

Name recognition, pure and simple. "Fallout 3" sells better than "The Post-Apocalyptic Holotapes: Capital wasteland" :hehe:

That and so they could use the storyline, elements, and themes from the series in Fallout 3.

Please don't post things like this, it may start an arguement... I would've argued with you if it weren't that I'd be a hypocrit, this is an anti-flame thread, and I'm trying to set a decent example for what people sgould say on this thread, you don't need to remove your comments (Although it'd be greatly apretiated (spelling fail)) but please keep from doing this in the future.

But wouldn't name recognition only work on people who have played Fallouts before 3 rather than Bethesda fans and/or people who never heard of Fallout? I think the new fans bought it only because Bethesda made it rather than its name, or just the setting.

I bought it because of Bethesda and the setting. Somehow or other I'd never heard of Fallout, and I'm a HUGE post-apocalypse fan.

I forgot, what should we be discussing in this thread?

Um, I think we're discussing this thread in this thread.

Waitaminit... This thread doesn't have aguing in it yet?

And that was joke, not a commentary on Fallout 3



I think "Fallout" is a pretty known name, and before Fallout 3 was announced a sequel was very wanted by many people. As such making a game titled "Fallout 3" gains a lot of attention in the gaming press, more so than "just" a new franchise by Bethesda, i'd imagine.

Just dicussing the Fallout series as a whole without flaming, bashing, or argueing...

Yeah, I know. Just kidding.

Ok sorry...

Let's try and get some discussion into this thread, who do you think will be the most pwoerful faction in the near future of Fallout? I think the NCR will crumble soon so they're off my list.

I think the NCR has a manifest destiny. They've been present and growing strong for too long to kill them off as a faction.

I stay if they become the new USA there'd need to be a revolution or civil war to bring them to their best, possibly about all of the wasted money on New Veags (if the NCR ending is not canon).

Yeah, there's nothing in New Vegas leading me to believe that the NCR is going to die any time soon... outside of the Mojave campaign they're doing perfectly fine.

With Kimball in command

They are doomed

We need more people like Hsu or Crocket

And Sebor, so, Fallout is popular thanks to Bethesda?

Why?

Bethesda had their own games at that time

Fallout was popular at the same time as the first TES

Exactly why a revolution/civil war could break out, they feel like their leader isn't doing good enough of a job.

Kimball probably won't be President much longer, it's implied that the people of the NCR are getting sick of his obsession with the Mojave campaign and his general tendency of wasting resources and soldiers on expansion that the country isn't ready for. Regardless of what happens at Hoover Dam he will probably be voted out of office. That's what I think anyway.

Agreed, he probably won't last much longer but there still should be a revolution/civil war.

Thank you.

Fallout 3.

How many hours to explore every single square of the world map.

People have explored 200 hours and got nowhere near ...........

Laughter ......