We did it!

At the end of the last thread there was an depressing amount of flame, lets try and keep that away from this one.

http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1168164-the-anti-flame-fallout-series-pro-and-con-discussion/page__st__180 is here if you want to see it.

Same rules as last time, no flaming, bashing, or anything that could get a thread locked. Thanks!

I wouldn't argue if some people would return the favor.

bah. apoligies, it was a cheap shot.

i suppose i resent being told i'm "not a true fan" just because i like Fallout 3.

and i was just pointing out (in an admittedly childish way) that the dude was right, you dinosaurs can argue about what fallout "was all about" all you want, but it really is a matter of opinion.

I haven't played the first two enough (keep on starting and just not being able to get past how un-fun it is to play) to really be able to say, but what i take from the games and what sticks out more than anything else to me is the setting and the basic ideas - the post-apocalyptic wasteland, in this weird retro 50's sci-fi futuristic world, where you get that bizarre juxtaposition of optimistic american values with this nuked-out, desolate wasteland.

to me, THAT'S what Fallout IS - not the gameplay, the level of difficulty, the importance of character builds, etc. etc. ...and i know i'll probably be destroyed for this, but not even the lore. don't get me wrong, the lore adds depth to the world and staying true to that going forward is a good thing in my eyes, but it's not what Fallout IS. lore is fiction, it's imagination, and as such, is subject to constant and inevitable change and re-interpretation. look at how many different versions of Star-Trek there have been. or Star Wars for gods sake. or ANY major comic-book title. or any fiction that crosses from one medium to another.

anwyay this is my opinion, and everybody else is certainly entitled to thier own.

So this is to be part two of the Fallout 3 Vs New Vegas topic? The title of this thread is Fallout Series Discussion. This would mean talking about all the Fallout games: Fallout, Fallout 2, Tactics, Fallout 3 and New Vegas.

Yet OP your original post in the first topic is your opinion about Fallout 3 and New Vegas.

So in the end this is just a Fallout 3 vs New Vegas thread, and you wonder why the last couple of pages of part one was just "flaming." Which makes me wonder why there needs to be Part 2.

How to say this, but no, what the Fallout series is about is not a matter of popular opinion, it is a matter of continuity from what was set forth in the original Fallout, you wouldnt say that the point of tag is to eat fruit if you happen to find a fruit tree while chasing someone to tag them, even though it was really fun to climb up to get the fruit. Bad anology, i know.

so basically i'm not allowed to post here if i haven't played the original games and thus can't have much of an opinion on them?

last time i checked 3 and NV were part of the series.

it's the anti-flame fallout series discussion, but you're basically saying it's cool to flame people if they haven't played the first two games.

Actually its a good anology, you just need to continue it. I actually do think that what Fallout is about is a matter of opinion, its just that special respect and attention should be reserved to admiring the originals for what they did. Continuing with your tag example, if the act of climbing up that tree catches on (people start to do it in the course of playing the game) and for many people it becomes a beloved part of the game, who is to say that tag isn't about the act of climbing up that tree? And who is also to say that what the original act of "playing tag" was about (getting people out) is not what the game should be about?

Its a matter of opinion and what you would get would be people on different sides. With one side saying that they love climbing up the tree and therefore "climbing up the tree" should be considered what "tag" is mainly about, and thats what they want it focused on. On the other hand then, you will get people who played tag orginally for what it was and believe that tag should be about the act of chasing people, and not the climbing of the tree (even if the climbing is what alot of people associate with tag now). Whose correct then? Technically no one is correct because what the game of tag is about, in each individuals mind, is what they most associate with the game and its name. Both groups then should be able to voice their opinions without fear of reprisals, and both should have an equal say in this question of what the game "is about".

This then, is essentially what the debate amongst the Fallout community reflects.

read that again, i dont think you realize how ridiculous that is, but it does show the mindset of a lot of people.

You are completely missing the point

I am not saying you can't post. I just find it odd its called "Fallout Series Discussion" and most if not all the post are "Fallout 3 vs New Vegas."

I also find it annoying when people that have played the originals and understand fallout better by having played them often get bashed for when they say that New Vegas is more like the Originals. Therefore more of a Fallout game then Fallout 3. When people try to bing up the Originals in this so called "Fallout Series Discussion" and ones like it oftern get bashed. Called Elites or told to get over the past, bethesda can do what ever the hell they want and so on.

Point is Part one was not a Fallout Series Debate it was just another Fallout 3 vs New Vegas thread. Thats why it became nothing but spam and bashing.

Seriously, we dont need those trheads, at the end of the day, someone new will create another vs thread and everything "here we go again"

I guess I don't, cause I really don't see how it is.

If many people start to associate the act of playing tag with the inclusion of climbing up the tree and have alot of fun climbing that tree, is it wrong for someone to assume that they think that a large part of tag is the climbing of that tree? Is their opinion anything less even if thats not what "tag" was orginally focused on?

What I also meant to say with the quote that you posted is that the people who advocate the playing of tag "the way it was originally" have no less of a say than the "new guys".

I might be wrong if people consider climbing the tree cheating. Can't have cheating become the norm. Or lets say they start tagging people with a punch in the face. Then it starts becoming something else entirely.

perhaps the issue is that there are more people who have played the newer games vs. the old, so much of the debate is of course going to be centered around them. i don't think anyone cares if you want to post your thoughts on the old games.

i honestly find this whole "more fallout" thing a really wierd way of thinking. Fallout is a fictional game. It's all based on imagination, and as such is subject to interpretation by anyone... what Fallout IS is millions of different things in the minds of millions of different people, none of them being more right than any of the others. What Fallout IS isn't even the same thing for all the fans of the original games, because we're all just PEOPLE... DIFFERENT PEOPLE. With different experiences in life that lead us to think about things in different ways.

Alot of New people to Fallout have played the Originals. There are alot of people on here that have played Fallout 3 first and then played the Originals. Point is if you are going to call the topic "Fallout Series Discussion" it would be great is people played the Fallout series, OP for one. If you're just going to talk about Fallout 3 vs New Vegas which is getting really old. Then just call it Fallout 3 vs New Vegas.

I don't get how having knowledge of Fallout beyond Fallout 3 and New Vegas makes one "elitist." Also when its a Fallout Series Discussion those that bring up the Originals should not be bashed..

Styles speaks the most holy truths.

Yeah. Not real thrilled with this thread. I'll mark it as one to watch and if I or another moderator has to come back in and edit posts, or delete posts - both of which I did, then it gets locked.

Don't avoid the auto-censor
Don't argue using personal attacks

its not about HAVING the knowledge, its about saying that your way of thinking about those games is the only way that thought can be had about them.

and i would agree that bashing people who bring up the originals isnt cool...

but when they're bringing up the originals to basically say "anybody that likes fallout 3 is stupid and not a TRUE fan of fallout" and when they hijack every damn thread to tell people that basically the only way fallout should ever be in a game is with map nodes, TBC, and so on, and that if anyone wants to express a different opinion, they're written off once again as "not a true fan".

I dont think ive ever seen anyone do that. You are exaggerating to make your argument hold water. We only say that people who have never played Fallout (Fallout 2 is negligable) dont REALLY know what the Fallout series is about since everything that the Fallout series is about is characterized by Fallout.

i give up. fallout IS the original games. you win.

True people should not bash those that like Fallout 3 just like those that like Fallout 3 should not bash people that like the Originals. Problem is those that often bash the Originals and New Vegas have never played the Originals. They only have Fallout 3 to go by, so when those that know about the other fallouts point out problems with Fallout 3 we get bashed. We get called Elities and some have even gone as far as saying the Originals don't count or are no longer relevant. Simply by pointing out issues with Fallout 3 can cause big problems.

This is a Fallout Series Debate and how can one debate the Series if they have not played the games? Its like reviewing movies that you have not seen. Like only watching The Godfather Part III and declaring it the best of the three movies.

Please tell me you're not being sarcastic.

*Sigh* Dude, quit being so dramatic, it is depressing, I'm not saying you cant enjoy FO3, it is a great game, great post-apocolyptic sandbox game, but it does not accurately represent what the Fallout series, characterized by Fallout 1 (numero uno, the big one, the original, singular), is about, and that future Fallout games should try to represent what the Fallout series is about, i have no trouble with FPS, Real Time, or Sanbox, i just dont think they are the best mechanics for a Fallout game, when Isometric, Turn Based (or Continuous Turn Based), and Map Nodes, are much better, and i dont believe that all will be brought back, but the most important one for a Fallout world would be Map Nodes, and i can imagine how a good compromise could be made, keeping everything we have currently but substituting a single large sandbox for a node-based map with sandbox-based nodes, while keeping FPS and Real Time, but i dont like people saying that old=bad when the series itself is characterized by a rather old game.

The truth, and nothing but it.

all i'm saying is that you operate from a standpoint that you've got the higher truth. i feel i understand what "Fallout" is about just as well as you do. i definitely don't know the first two games anywhere near as well, but basically what i'm saying is that what "Fallout" is is a thing that continues to grow and evolve... i agree it should not neglect its roots, but it also shouldn't be held back by them. AND regardless of your feelings, what "the Fallout series is all about" is completely subjective.

also if any dino's actually read my post on the first thread, i'm a huge fan of NV for the same reasons yall are.

and if we want to really be honest about it, the first two games had thier problems too... any objective anolysis of the Fallout series would produce a loooooooong pros AND cons list. i did DL the first two and have genuinely attempted to play them, but just couldn't get into it.... it's the TBC man, its so slow and un-engaging. even if it was isometric and real-time, like a Diablo game, i would probably have played them through just to check out the story (which i've read about extensively) but i just can't. if that doesn't speak to not the greatest game design, i don't know what does. i'm not a guy that needs great graphics or super fast paced action, but i don't want to feel like my gaming experience is primarily about patience either.