:laugh:



Thank you! You know, it's not easy stalking people. Look at all the steps I have go through!

1. Go to http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/user/634781-killian-darkwater/
2. Go to http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?app=core&module=search&do=user_posts&mid=634781
3. Read

Ugh, so much work...

Not worth it.

Killian, man... what you might think of as being a fact... is to the rest of the world, offensive.
In fact, most people will probably state that they find such comments to be outrightly inflammatory.


You know how I feel about all this sort of thing, so I won't lecture you or anything like that... but... just keep it in mind.

It tends to make them ignore the 'old school' point of view, far more frequently than they listen to it. Try talking to them with a bit of respect, and I bet you'll have much more rewarding conversations. You don't have to agree. Just, respect them. Even when they're being stupid. (not that I'm accusing anyone, right now.)

It's hard to give respect when no respect is ever given to people like me.

I suggest we all get this topic back on track, or it will end up closed.

Ask people about ancient Egypt and they'll tell you that they built pyramids, sphinxes and tombs. There was a rich and vibrant culture behind those monuments, with more incredible achievements that are buried by sand and lost through time.



I know that.

Big open world with nothing in it save for telegraph poles and such.

Edit: Bloody hell, there's like a dozen posts that popped up while i was typing this, the conversation has moved somewhere else.

Yeah, I get your side too... but if we want to be respected, and we're not being respected, then sometimes we just have to take the step and show it first.


You're right, though, we've gotten far off track here, and we should probably bring things back into focus.

___________________________


I think we all know how -we- feel about Fallout: New Vegas as individuals. Where the difficulty comes in is trying to see how our opinions -relate- to the larger group of people who are 'Fallout' fans. We seem to be obsessed with labeling ourselves and putting ourselves into these groups, when really the question should be this.

Were you satisfied or dissatisfied with FNV.

Poll done. Mission accomplished!


Instead, what we have are an endless stream of justifications, as if we aren't allowed to like something unless a certain number of brave, vocal backers supports us with polls and such stating that we're "On the right side, no worries."

It's frustrating. Will we ever learn that sometimes, all we need is an educated opinion and a short yes or no answer?

The gap seems hard to bridge. It might be a generational thing. Not necessarily age, but when and where you came into gaming, specifically with RPGs. Some people hopped on the train that we see now, where action-based games with RPG elements have become accepted as "true RPGs." Some of us hopped on long before, when RPGs were RPGs, and nothing else.

I don't feel like action-based games with RPG elements are deserving of being classified as "true RPGs," but apparently, that's not a popular view to hold anymore.

It might not be a question of "how can we bridge the gap?" It might be more "Is the gap even capable of supporting a bridge?"

On topic please, try to keep this a civil discussion without flamebaiting and attacking other members. Thank you guys.

"Huge open world with great story, characters and depth."

The way things were going, i thought i would never read those words as a TRUE DESCRIPTION ever again.

Oh, I see what you're trying to say. And believe it or not, I do agree with you. I think Morrowind was the Bethesda game that best mixed depth with exploration. Daggerfall had depth, but lacked exciting exploration. Fallout 3 had exciting exploration, but lacked a lot of depth. But I am a devoted Bethesda fan and even though I may have certain problems with each of their games, I still look forward to their future games and hope that they'll have more of what I want to see.

But I think you'll find that this is the most I'll be agreeing with you on the subject.

Fallout and TES games aren't just a few hours of gameplay, they're new worlds that have been created. Things can be as contentious as politics when it come to discussing them.

I've been watching in utter despair as people post about about graphics and combat in the TES section, and completely avoiding the FNV section the past year because all i saw were requests for guns. Anyone posting that FNV and beyond should focus on things other than shooting and empty world exploration got completely ignored unless they attacked FO3 fans themselves (FO3 fans have this weird defensiveness, they seem to think that they are a minority here).

Now FNV has come out, and it has nearly everything i was hoping to get back in these games. Apart from bugs, i can't think of one major downside to this game, it has 90% of what FO3 had and 200% (if not more) more of what FO3 was lacking.

Got a lot of new members that have enthusiasm for FNV, and i'm giving them my support. A lot of them will be gone in a few months, and those who stay will have calmed down.

If fans of the original FOS have created FNV through our elitist whingeing, then why should we stop?

Imagine what we could do for TES!

to me the most unsatisfied are the pc users that don't have high speed net connection, the ones who Steam seemingly laughs at & those that pretty much will have to wait for the GOTY & hope it'll be more forgiving on a slow connection

People with high speed internet are laughing at you as well.

People like me who don't have Xbox live (usb modem), we don't have access to any patches until GOTY.

thank you, I should have said "Anyone that doesn't have high speed net connection."

Mistake

Fallout was an RPG before it was a sandbox. The original games had very little sandbox elements. Bethesda is an okay rpg developer with a craptastic leader, The Todd, but they can make really good open world sandboxes. Obsidian is a great(yes great) RPG developer that can make an okay sandbox world. This was Obsidian's first open world game, I'd say they did a pretty good job. Bethesda cannot into RPG, and Obsidian cannot into very good sandbox. I love RPGs. I like Sandboxes. F:NV>F3.

I think this is a very interesting point, and may go some way to explaining the "divide" that seems to be extant in the fanbase. FWIW, my own perspective is that of a videogamer, as opposed to a roleplayer, and although I have been playing games that are generally classified as roleplaying games for twenty-plus years the more I play the less sure I become about the definition. In a broad sense, the term to me describes anything from Final Fantasy to Deus Ex, Dungeon Master to Pokemon, and yet I have heard many detailed and compelling arguments as to why this or that game or even sub-genre is not an RPG, or even more not a "true" RPG. I'm not sure I could succesfully define what a "true" RPG anymore. So now, when assessing a game my yardstick, my reference point is simply "other videogames", so with Fallout 3 and New Vegas I'm not just comparing them with other roleplaying games, but with shooters, adventure games, sandbox games, stealth games and anything else that treads on remotely similar ground. However, I can fully understand that if you have a stricter definition of what an RPG -- and a Fallout game -- is and should be, then you would be unhappy to see a game that failed to fulfill this criteria be labelled as such.



Having waffled on, I choose this quote not only for its wisdom but also to highlight my own ridiculousness.