[Harinder Ghag]

I have noticed an increase of people "educated" in Fallout outside of Fallout 3 and New Vegas. Maybe it is because there are people around to help guide and educate :angel:

Yep. New Vegas was my first Fallout, but since then I've played FO3 and FO1. I'm gonna play through FO1 a few more times before trying FO2.

[RAww DInsaww]

My take on these fourms is that people that are dead serious about old fo will bash fo3 anytime they get a chance. Threads that have nothing to do with fo3 jabs are thrown at it.

At the same time I don t blame them for doing what they do. I myself may have been the same way if I played the old fo. I ll play them one day.

The one thing they will force you to do is learn fo history. To understand why they are like they are you have to look into matters yourself, have some idea of what you are talking about then they really don t bash you.

Fo3 is not the fo they are used to, so its understandable that they will voice their opinions.

I m on here a lot now because fo nv isn t the fo I m used to. lol

The difference is I won t beat nv into the dirt. I ve said plenty of good things about nv. Old fo fans never say any thing good about fo3.

So the battle wages on. Both sides have merit to their arguments IMO.

[dell]

Main thing is if you come on these forms and think Enclave and Lyons bos are what fo is about you may get bashed a bit.

Since there was a 3 after fallout I figured there must have been 2 more fo games, so I wanted to know what happened in them while I was playing fo3.

Many people that come on here don t do that, and actually do have no idea, and maybe those people need to get bashed a bit.

To even argue with old dinosaur club you need to spend several hrs looking over old fo. It still doesn t equal playing the games, but at least you ll have a leg to stand on.

I like arguing, debating and looking stuff up so these fourms are fine by me.

I wouldn t expect them to stop bashing fo3, but I also wouldn t expect Bethesda to change thier plans based on their complaints.

No one really knows what Bethesda has planned. Fo3 had to be a huge epic blockbuster to grab ahold of millions of new fans. Their plan worked.

The question is........ What will they do now?

[Theodore Walling]

I think the Fallout Forums are hostile and flammed. I think it's mostly from Dinosaurs bashing people who don't know anything about the originals (I came here thinking the BoS and the Enclave are the only tough factions on the planet) along with people getting offended because people hate not knowing things and you get a catastrophe. The mods do s good job but they can't change peoples's attitudes or opinions.

I hope people stop being too stuborn to listen.

[Monika]

Yep. New Vegas was my first Fallout, but since then I've played FO3 and FO1. I'm gonna play through FO1 a few more times before trying FO2.

FO2 is a big darn game it was my first and i dont think ive come near to doing all you can do only played through a couple times though. your name makes me wanna go watch resevoir dogs again lol

[Amy Siebenhaar]

*Sigh*, people claim we bash the Fallout 3 at any chance and never say anything good about Fallout 3, and that all Dinosaurs are mean and arrogant... All i have ever seen is harshly worded criticism, explanation of why, even though they like Fallout 3, they dont like it as a Fallout game, and are willing to pursue logical debate. But of course, i am just a horribly biased arrogant dinosaur. I take my leave of this nonsense.

[james reed]

FO2 is a big darn game it was my first and i dont think ive come near to doing all you can do only played through a couple times though. your name makes me wanna go watch resevoir dogs again lol

and just so you dont Crap Bricks when you find out, the guy who voices Boone also Voices Myron

*Sigh*, people claim we bash the Fallout 3 at any chance and never say anything good about Fallout 3, and that all Dinosaurs are mean and arrogant... All i have ever seen is harshly worded criticism, explanation of why, even though they like Fallout 3, they dont like it as a Fallout game, and are willing to pursue logical debate. But of course, i am just a horribly biased arrogant dinosaur. I take my leave of this nonsense.

Im sorry dude. I feel your pain. take a break. I'll see you in another post later

[Sarah Unwin]

There are a fair amount of people who flame on both sides. I think the "dinosaurs" (I'd rather just refer to myself as a Fallout fan, but whatever) are often very outspoken and active in this community because we are very passionate about our beloved series. Our criticisms about Fallout 3 have reasoning behind them, and are only stated when something comes up about Fallout 3 and its status within the series. This happens often not because we look for any opportunity we can to spit those opinions out, but because the subject of Fallout 3, be it comparing to other games or otherwise, comes up often. Threads often derail into arguments about it because such is the nature of having a very split viewpoint in a community.

[Bek Rideout]

Old fo fans never say any thing good about fo3.

This isn't true. I saw several people on this very thread who have said that they like FO3 a lot, just not as much as the originals or New Vegas.
It's generalizations like these that lead to the creation of useless threads like this.

[Chloe :)]

Yeah, I've only skimmed this thread, but just want to add:

- New Vegas is definitely an RPG.
- And Alpha Protocol was really quite poor.

Carry on!

[Sarah Kim]

...FO3 was a brilliant game, There was nothing wrong with the story if I am honest. I was not reading a best selling book so I was not expecting absolutely amazing writing. I was expecting a great game and that is what I got.

All true; except that the game was more than a tad off in areas that count in the Fallout series...[IMO].
Its like Duke Nukem voiced by Jay Leno :shocking: ~doesn't matter how good of a game it is ~Sumthins' not right.

I do find it hard to understand why you rate obsidian so highly above every other dev team. You only have to look at their previous games to see what kind of developers they are........

IMO their past games don't factor into it ~at all... Its simply that they have past experience in their ranks with this specific series.

I'm not going to knock obsidian though for their story's. They did crate the fallout universe and a damn good one it is.

Actually they didn't... Its just that two or three of them worked on the 2nd one (and one or two did some work on the original).

[Nina Mccormick]

Why are people trying to divide fans into 2 different groups? There are people out there like me who like all the fallout games... I'm a fallout1/2 fan and also a 3/NV fan, they're all great games.

My biggest beef with 3/NV as fallout1/2 fan is the weapons. For example I didn't want a combat shotgun that looks like a Thompson sub machine gun, I wanted the city killer Oh how I could go on about this. As for the Elder Lyons not being BOS enough, they did throw in the outcast who despise him they at least tried to stick with the lore. As for the enclave, I think its logical they would go to washing D.C. after all it is the former capital of the united states.

I agree with gizmo something isn't right when going from fallout1/2 over to 3/NV but I still like these game and took it for what it was.

I would have been happier as a fallout1/2 fan if they would have stayed in California continue the canon of each town and had the weapons look the same.z

Don't call me a fallout1/2 really devoted fan fallout 3 basher hater because I'm a fan of fallout1/2, I liked every fallout game produced with the exception of brotherhood of steel. Now that's a game that truly deserves to bashed ridiculed and burned at the stake.

[Connor Wing]

You know I love the SERIES in general, not just the original or the newer ones.

:sadvaultboy: Why cant we all just get along?

This! A million times this. I have played all the FO games (even the burned game and the tabletop rpg) and this is my oppinion too. With the exception of the burned game, EVERY game in the series has been fantastic, some are better than others in their own way, but none so bad that I couldn't play them. Also, NONE of them are perfect.

FO1: Great game. Innovative for it's time. Great, gritty storyline with plenty of moral greyness. Introduced us to super mutants. Had the master in it :thumbsup:. But it had that bloody time limit, which always made me feel like I was rushing through the game and that I was being railroaded away from exploring the way I wanted to.

FO2: Again, great game. Expanded on all the good points of 1. Bought in the Enclave. Great characters, great fun. But, then tried to convince us that the Enclave (the remnants of a super power government) were so stupid that they would put everything, all their resources and all their manpower in one place. In the ocean, with no real means of escape. :facepalm:

FO Tactics: Different from the others as this game was just a straight up fight with no emphasis on speach/negotiation. Still in it's own way, a great game. The squad based gameplay actually gave the turn based system of the previous games a point. (I didn't like the turn based in the older games as there was only one vault dweller/chosen one. In tactics there was an element of "my turn - your turn - my turn." While I felt 1&2 were more "My turn - your turn - your turn - your turn - your turn......)

The burned game: No comment.

FO3: Great game. Introduced a new genaration to the FO series. Blended RPG and FPS elements in order to make a pretty unique game. Really expanded on the feel of the wasteland with some stunning visuals and music. But it did recycle a lot from the older games and it does railroad you into working with the brotherhood.

FO:NV: Once more a great game, built on almost all the strengths of FO3 whilst fixing a few of the weaknesses. The story is great as is the reputation system. But there wasn't enough combat, once you claer a location of enemies, you will never encounter another enemy there ever again. Plus it is almost impossible to be an "evil" character unless you avoid fiends and ferals like the plague, because killing them grants positive karma.

As to your question OP, the forums are in a similar state to that which you have described. Most threads still degenerate into flame wars between "The Dinosaurs" and "The 13 year old COD players" (as the two sides tend to refer to each other). Neither side can make a comment about the good points of their preferred game without it being torn down by someone from the other side. Bad times.

But there is always Apex Predator or myself, if you want the oppinion of a "Fallout fan" :fallout:

[Spaceman]

Its all the same to me but im of the mindset that everything is being dumbed down these days, which makes me sound much older then i am but its true lol, in the 70s you had intellectual humor and TV shows like all in the family, and good times, now you got snooki, where you once had bill hicks and george carlin you now have larry the cable guy, star wars original vs star wars prequels... And yes fallout 1 and 2 vs fallout 3 and NV, and what i dug about the originals is they did not hold your hand you talked to a person you would need to listen and actually go and explore you didnt have a little marker telling you where to go....

I've previously played other Bethesda games, Morrowind and Oblivion (something that got me into Fallout 3) and on the Elder Scrolls forums there's been a debate between Morrowind and Oblivion fans about this exact same thing, that Oblivion dumbs everything down while Morrowind is the pure RPG. Maybe just a sign of the times, like you said, that for any games company, complexity is harder to sell than "you have a big gun and blow stuff up".

[adam holden]

This! A million times this. I have played all the FO games (even the burned game and the tabletop rpg) and this is my oppinion too. With the exception of the burned game, EVERY game in the series has been fantastic, some are better than others in their own way, but none so bad that I couldn't play them. Also, NONE of them are perfect.

FO1: Great game. Innovative for it's time. Great, gritty storyline with plenty of moral greyness. Introduced us to super mutants. Had the master in it :thumbsup:. But it had that bloody time limit, which always made me feel like I was rushing through the game and that I was being railroaded away from exploring the way I wanted to.

FO2: Again, great game. Expanded on all the good points of 1. Bought in the Enclave. Great characters, great fun. But, then tried to convince us that the Enclave (the remnants of a super power government) were so stupid that they would put everything, all their resources and all their manpower in one place. In the ocean, with no real means of escape. :facepalm:

FO Tactics: Different from the others as this game was just a straight up fight with no emphasis on speach/negotiation. Still in it's own way, a great game. The squad based gameplay actually gave the turn based system of the previous games a point. (I didn't like the turn based in the older games as there was only one vault dweller/chosen one. In tactics there was an element of "my turn - your turn - my turn." While I felt 1&2 were more "My turn - your turn - your turn - your turn - your turn......)

The burned game: No comment.

FO3: Great game. Introduced a new genaration to the FO series. Blended RPG and FPS elements in order to make a pretty unique game. Really expanded on the feel of the wasteland with some stunning visuals and music. But it did recycle a lot from the older games and it does railroad you into working with the brotherhood.

FO:NV: Once more a great game, built on almost all the strengths of FO3 whilst fixing a few of the weaknesses. The story is great as is the reputation system. But there wasn't enough combat, once you claer a location of enemies, you will never encounter another enemy there ever again. Plus it is almost impossible to be an "evil" character unless you avoid fiends and ferals like the plague, because killing them grants positive karma.

As to your question OP, the forums are in a similar state to that which you have described. Most threads still degenerate into flame wars between "The Dinosaurs" and "The 13 year old COD players" (as the two sides tend to refer to each other). Neither side can make a comment about the good points of their preferred game without it being torn down by someone from the other side. Bad times.

But there is always Apex Predator or myself, if you want the oppinion of a "Fallout fan" :fallout:

High 5 :foodndrink: now can the eggs and the dinosaurs play nice now?

[Trey Johnson]

I'm different, being both a dinosaur and on the Fallout 3 side :hubbahubba:

I have nothing against FO1/2/Tactics/Fallout: Pig in the City or anything else. Just I haven't played them, and am not really interested in doing so. So for ME (personally, my own opinion, me) Fallout 3 was the FIRST game, and what I base everything else on. So I guess (from what the "dinosaurs" say) Fallout New Vegas is to Fallout 3 what Fallout 2 was to Fallout 1 : more of the same, but not (necessarily) better. I don't compare FO3/NV to Fallout1/2 because they are old, and frankly irrelevant. GAME-wise. Obviously relevant story wise.

So ... yeah.. anyway..

[Margarita Diaz]

Am i the only one who goes on any other forums ever? EVERY forum ive been on flame fallout new vegas so much its crazy, and think fallout 3 is the best game in existance!

[Pat RiMsey]

Am i the only one who goes on any other forums ever? EVERY forum ive been on flame fallout new vegas so much its crazy, and think fallout 3 is the best game in existance!

Depends on where you go, I've seen plenty of forums where it's the exact opposite. Fallout 3 was not universally loved, especially not by RPG enthusiasts. Visit the RPG Codex, say that Fallout 3 is the best game ever, and then see what happens.

There's plenty of forums out there where the vast majority of the community despised Fallout 3, and found New Vegas to be at least satisfactory.

[Laura Cartwright]

Depends on where you go, I've seen plenty of forums where it's the exact opposite. Fallout 3 was not universally loved, especially not by RPG enthusiasts. Visit the RPG Codex, say that Fallout 3 is the best game ever, and then see what happens.

There's plenty of forums out there where the vast majority of the community despised Fallout 3, and found New Vegas to be at least satisfactory.

the Problem I have with anyone who trys to marginalize the original fallouts and its "outdated" play mechanics for any reason is, your insulting those who prefer those "outdated" mechanics. theres a world of PnP RPG players that Love Stats, Modifiers, and Skills. who enjoy the chance of a "dice roll". theres none of that in FO3 (save speech checks) or NV (even speech checks were taken out for straight speech requirements)

I liked FO3 (and NV) as an Adventure / Explore game. but dont call it an rpg. (and if you need my reasons to WHY its not an RPG look http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1188111-so-what-are-the-fallout-forums-like-now/page__st__60__p__17653581#entry17653581)

i have to get food for the wife now,
but if you need clarifications on some of the points I've made, I will be back

[Sakura Haruno]

I've previously played other Bethesda games, Morrowind and Oblivion (something that got me into Fallout 3) and on the Elder Scrolls forums there's been a debate between Morrowind and Oblivion fans about this exact same thing, that Oblivion dumbs everything down while Morrowind is the pure RPG. Maybe just a sign of the times, like you said, that for any games company, complexity is harder to sell than "you have a big gun and blow stuff up".

Yeah I noticed that about Oblivion and especially Fallout 3, but to each their own ya know, I can enjoy those games for what they are sure, but i prefer personally more challenging complex games, like Morrowind and the original Fallouts. Not to say I dont like F3 just personal preference.

[Rowena]

I am self-educated.
I dont give any leaway to Fo1 and 2 for being "better"..... they are flawed, too.
Some people realize that, but rarely do people seem to point things out about those games..
Mostly because this a gamesas forum and squeaky wheels get grease., but i dont buy into fallout3 being as bad as some make it out.
just another game in the series.

[Chris Duncan]

:P I am self-educated.
I dont give any leaway to Fo1 and 2 for being "better"..... they are flawed, too.
Some people realize that, but rarely do people seem to point things out about those games..
Mostly because this a gamesas forum and squeaky wheels get grease., but i dont buy into fallout3 being as bad as some make it out.
just another game in the series.

Mostly everyone who likes or prefers Fallout 1/2 acknowledge that they have flaws. The reason we don't talk about them is because they don't matter, pointing out Fallout 1/2's flaws won't make Fallout 4 a better game. Being critical towards Fallout 3 on the other hand actually increases the chances of a better Fallout 4.

[Lil'.KiiDD]

Mostly everyone who likes or prefers Fallout 1/2 acknowledge that they have flaws. The reason we don't talk about them is because they don't matter, pointing out Fallout 1/2's flaws won't make Fallout 4 a better game. Being critical towards Fallout 3 on the other hand actually increases the chances of a better Fallout 4.

or... "the squeaky wheel gets the grease"

At the same time, it sort of speaks of holding future games up to a false standard set by FO1 and 2 nostalgia.
In some ways i think it does matter, at least on the forums, to talk about F1 and 2 flaws specifically for the reason the OP layed out... That when new fans come in some olde fans have in the past come of as condescending towards newer fans. I myself remember when I originally joined this site in 2008 that new Fallout fans were called out as dumb, which is hardly contructive and unwarranted if its really the Beth devs that people are trying to reach.
I dont really see it so much now. which is why I post.

Everyone wants a good game of course, and one that ties in and makes sense with the other games.
FO has a rich tapestry, so I definately agree that dev's should make a game that enriches existing content, as opposed to confusing it.

[Emma Copeland]

:P I am self-educated.
I dont give any leaway to Fo1 and 2 for being "better"..... they are flawed, too.
Some people realize that, but rarely do people seem to point things out about those games..
Mostly because this a gamesas forum and squeaky wheels get grease., but i dont buy into fallout3 being as bad as some make it out.
just another game in the series.

Well the thing is, if the conversation isn't about Fallout or Fallout 2 then why would it be mentioned if you see what I mean; ie, when commenting on F3 I'm not going to say, "Enclave in F3 are absolutely stupid, oh yeah like they were in Fallout 2." See what I mean, if it's not really relavant then why would it be mentioned; like a lot of topics on here these days might be F3 vs Fallout: New Vegas, why would the need to balance every opinion with something about the earlier titles in the series be necessary? Depends on the situation I suppose.

[Dale Johnson]

Well the thing is, if the conversation isn't about Fallout or Fallout 2 then why would it be mentioned if you see what I mean; ie, when commenting on F3 I'm not going to say, "Enclave in F3 are absolutely stupid, oh yeah like they were in Fallout 2." See what I mean, if it's not really relavant then why would it be mentioned; like a lot of topics on here these days might be F3 vs Fallout: New Vegas, why would the need to balance every opinion with something about the earlier titles in the series be necessary? Depends on the situation I suppose.

I definately get that its not as relevant, bringing up F1 and 2 stuff.- depending on the situation.. There are things that we spectulate on that i wouldnt mind some more info on relating to older games, which in turn could make for a better future game not only as content added to address those things driectly, but to build upon as well. You are one of the people that i have noticed exlporing that, so dont get me wrong, i know its discussed here and you are pretty constructive in your sicussions as well. I dig that and wish others were as constructive with it as opposed to throwing out cheap jabs at Beths expense. its sort of like your parents getting upset at you for not getting good grades when they had a C average when they were in school.. They want the best, so they push for it, but its still a bit hypcritical, even if by omission.

I guess its a mattter of perspective