Well, that applies to pretty much the entire game, though, doesn't it? Sure, I'd like more interactivity with the NPCs, and more consequences to my actions (which is pretty darned hard to program - considering that since the very dawn of roleplaying games, players have been notorious for coming up with ways to blindside the GM.) But for what it is, it's still something that I thought brought something new to the table for the franchise. Before Fallout 3, it was always up to the players' own interpretation exactly what it was like to have grown up in a Vault. Now it's something that you're able to experience - at least to the extent that the game itself is capable of conveying.

Sure, I went in during my first playthrough being very careful of every single thing I did, thinking that at some point it might have further impact on how things would play out. And it didn't take long for that illusion to fall apart. But that's not really the point, either. I'm not talking about faililng to show the repurcusions of what you're doing as a character, or NPCs reacting to you in a believable manner. But just in terms of illustrating life in a Vault, I think that's something beneficial that F3 brought to the table.

Hmmm....and how long did you play the first 2? Did you beat them both?

Here we go with this again. Please tell me you're not gonna try to start another argument about length.

@nu_clear_day: I totally agree. Though with how many playthroughs I did it would have been nice to have a little more variation in how you could get through that part >_>

I did my best to do complete every sidequest. I beat the first, got to Frank on the 2nd but never beat him. Got bored of leveling my character just to get strong enough to beat one single guy. Played through Fallout 2 twice though with different builds.

Why do you ask?

Made a few changes.

Conclusion: FO3 = awesome for the graphix. There you have it!

Sure they did, but it was mostly randomly generated or generated once and kept the same. Arena and Daggerfall respectively.

Hey I have an idea. Why don't you make a list of things that Fallout 1 and 2 did better so I can take a huge dirty dump all over it with ignorant comments? I'll go make the thread right now.

The topic... is not very flattering [IMO] seeing as what is being asked is for Fallout 1 & 2 players to scrutinize Fallout 3 for anything that might surpass the originals; ( Where were any of us in a dev's place, we'd surely like to think we'd surpassed them in every way).

Most would seem to assume that graphics was a given (but not me). I am a commercial artist by trade, and I consider the graphics of Fallout 1 as being better :shrug: (not more complex, but just better); and I think a serious facial comparison between FO3 and FO1 dialog heads proves this.

What I don't understand is that with the benefit of the Gamebryo engine, they could have quite literally had the regular character art on the level of the high poly 3d scans of the clay original heads in the firs two games.

Compare the face of Harold (the only NPC to appear in all three games); With each game, Harold became simpler looking and less expressive (as did the rest of the heads). Now I really like the Ghouls in Fallout 3, and I would say they are indeed one of the best looking game monsters from among all of the 3d games I've ever owned from any company ~but they don't really look like Fallout's Ghouls do they...

I would say that Fallout 3 greatly surpassed Fallout 1 in the FPP shooter aspect; It really does put you behind the pistol, and lets you experience the setting first hand, and if you played Fallout 1 and/or 2 through to the end, you can actually visualize your past games through the eye of the new Vault Dweller, and its fun. Fallout 3 did an incredible job on the wasteland areas, and I really like them a lot. They are my favorite areas of the game, and they really hit the mark for me as what I'd envision them to be like (aside from a slight overcrowding);. But the actual wasteland in Fallout 1 & 2 was just that Wasted land ~deliberately.... It played little role in the game, and what role it did play has been removed in Fallout 3 ~deliberately. It just doesn't suit their design, and in that respect it makes a lot of sense; but it doesn't change that I'd have rather it been designed to closer resemble the series intents. (Specifically that the wasteland served as a significant time drain to a person on a tight schedule, and was a risky and largely unprofitable obstacle ~but when it was, it was really neat).

Fallout 3 (as Oblivion before it, but more so... suffers from "everything's over the next hill"), and kool loot in every other stack of crates; And while every location is interesting, I was never able to feel the same desolate ISOlation or sense of humanity on the brink, in the remains of that 50's paradise lost. I found that could not take any PC seriously in Fallout 3... I took Set seriously, I took the Lieutenant serious (and Decker, and Killian, and the Overseer, and Aradesh ~even Harold... and still do when I play Fallout 1). The closest in Fallout 3 is Lucas Sims (great character), but the town and the sub-plot is too much for even him keep a serious tone.

Fallout has lost its underlying severity (IMO) ~replaced now with "Violence is ~~ funny"... but that loss started with Fallout 2. I guess it really does come down to who makes it. :shrug:

I (also being into visual/digital arts by trade) completely agree.

I'd happily pay double the full price for a game with decent claymation throughout... (even if the effect was partly faked with 'common' 3d)
Unfortunately people don't have the guts to do something like that (there's only http://www.justadventure.com/reviews/Dark_Eye_HOF/Dark_Eye_review.shtm that I know of and I already have it )

Wow, that looks amazing! Sounds interesting too, but I think it's rather old, so would you have any idea where one could still purchase this game?

This really winds you up, doesn't it?

I was going to reply to your other topic but I could only make it about three lines in before I gave up. Please, for all of us, learn to write more coherently.
Yeah, it's insulting for me to say it, but it's a serious concern and it's preventing me from interacting with you properly.

You know another thing I liked (and we could get into debates about proper game balancing and whatnot, but this is one end-result I was happy with,) was that I didn't feel forced into wearing Power Armor. PA is really cool, and iconic to the series, and all that. But it hasn't always meshed with some of the characters I've run through the Fallout games. If I'm trying to play as a rather charming and intelligent character who's not really looking for a fight, then it doesn't always make sense for them to be walking into town wearing a mobile tank as a suit. (Oh sure, I can switch to a different armor set - but some of these character builds had a low enough STR that I had to be wearing the Power Armor just to have the weight capacity to hold it in my inventory... )

In Fallout 3 I felt confident enough for the most part in something more like Combat Armor, and really I could get through most of the game wearing whatever looked cool. In the older games, you were pretty well going to die if you weren't playing the endgame with that stuff - or at least you were asking for a world of hurt; and it was almost a challenge in and of itself to see if you could make it through with lesser armor. And sure, it's not ideal - there's some other issues you could go into.

You see, I've always prefer rulesets where the benefits and costs of your three basic types of armor (light, medium, heavy) sort of equaled each other out. Obviously, this isn't the case in well, any of the Fallout games (which use more of a tiered system) but it's always been something I'd like to see in it one day. I much prefer it when I can select the equipment that would be most useful to the sort of character I'm playing - and as a consequence it would naturally "fit" with the sort of character I'm playing.

(ie, the cause isn't what I'd call ideal, but the nice side effect is that I can choose for each character whether or not Power Armor really meshes with the sort of character I'm roleplaying...)

Dark Eye looks great! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4aDh_O3FQWY is the only other game that I know of that uses that technique. (It's style doesn't call for that kind of realism though). There is a long "Lets Play" for Neverhood, but the guy has surprising amount of cursing in that one :facepalm:

I agree, Fallout 3 did do that pretty well.

Ain't it wonderful to see? I admire Verisco's passion, I really do! He's so obsessed, he even started a new thread to prove it. Now that's true luv for a game, isn't it?
No offence btw... He is as crazy as me only we have different perspectives. That's all!

I'm passionate about the old series and IMO if combined FO3 would kick major butt!

Enough about that anyway, FO3 has its moments too coz I like some parts of it also. It's not the greatest game IMO, but it's not so bad either.
In its own way a bit different as before because of another developer, but I acknowledge the fact that it's part of the family.

I'm not going to comment on what is better or whatnot anymore. Kind of a lame conversation anyway without an end, which I also contributed too to be honest.

Let us all chill and enjoy whatever the hell we want!

I prefer light armor over power armor in FO3. I didn't feel particularly forced wearing power armor in FO1&2 the first time, finished it with combat armor. Power armor raised a lot of stats, the only armor that raised strength by 4 or 5 points, instead of AC points only and thus there for it was a desired item IMO. I must admid it was almost a must to have in the end battles. However in my first run I didn't know it excisted anyway. The second time was a different story.

And in my first go at FO3 my goal was to get power armor as soon as possible. But getting the PA-perk soooo late in the game (Vanilla) I never really bothered.
Hmmm, well maybe you're right... I was more satisfied with my light armor in FO3 and too focused on PA from the beginning.

Power Armor -> FO1&2 :goodjob:

Light Armor -> FO3 :goodjob:

I reckon some armor raising stats in FO3 are neat. Some people are against it and calling it magical stat raising armor and whatnot, but I find the lucky sunglasses kinda cool for example.

I don't know, I both like and dislike those stats. Some of them don't make a lot of sense, others do. The jackets that improve your melee skill are strange to me to say the least, but for instance the baseball caps that add +1 to Perception are nice (though I still found it better if they only added that bonus during daytime, where your character might actually benefit from those things blocking the sun from shining in your eyes).

Hey genius, I practically copied pasted Ancamilon so your insult to me is actually just an insult to him. You've obviously never read any of my posts if you think I write incoherently.

His writing is terrible, but that doesn't change the fact that you could have reworded it. My statement stands.

Take your hyperbole elsewhere.

I'll admit I'm a bit crazy, but I was really looking forward to you making a list on my thread. I don't care if people like FO 1 or 2 more, the only thing I didn't like is when reasons why I like Fallout 3 are brushed off or ridiculously misinterpreted even after I already explained why each reason is valid in a reply to someone else. Other than that, yeah they're just games what does it really matter?

God I wanted to ruin that list... :sadvaultboy:

I love F1, F2, and F3, but both topics are painfully worded.

I was reading through and thinking - "Uhh, I think I see what you're saying, wait, I'm not supposed to reply regarding which things? Ach, forget it.."

I was poking fun at him, my decision stands.


How is that hyperbole? I wasn't exaggerating anything. It's just a fact that my grammar and spelling is quite good in all my posts. Actually don't answer that. Ai juz doesn't no rite how tu cpel. :bonk:

It was hyperbole because you stated I'd never read any of your posts. I've read plenty of them and they vary, but they can be rambling and difficult to read. There was one earlier in this thread in which you had a bizarrely large number of quotes and responses, for example.

That post was only as difficult to read as Dokumon's since I replied in the exact same style to keep things simple, and he had no numbering. I don't see how wide spacing is any harder to read than one big condensed paragraph.

Just to stay on topic: something I liked about Fallout 3.

-Armor. In FO 1+2 once you got your power armor that was it, no turning back. In F3 you still have other gear which has it's uses because of boosts to skills or your SPECIAL.

Somethings i liked:

Exploring a 3D world.

New creatures like Mirelurks and Behemoths.Though i don't think there were enough original enemies in the new game.

Repair.To a point.I like that you have to repair weapons and armor but it was overdone making many unique items and some commonplace gear useless as either there are few if any replacement gear or they wear down too fast.

I'm of two minds regarding the combat.Its better in some aspects but it also suffers from the engine that it uses and doesn't have range modifiers for weapons.

All in all I think the exploration aspect is the strongest point of 3.

You are a cruel guy :flamethrower: :foodndrink: