Why do you people hate Fallout 3/Bethesda?

Post » Fri May 13, 2011 2:53 pm

http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1157628-why-do-you-people-hate-fallout-3bethesda/

Original Post:
It like every time a person prefers fallout 3 over new Vegas, all new Vegas fans bash and talk abouta how horrible his opinion is. Seriously just face the facts that there alot of people out there including me who liked fallout 3 better than new Vegas. I could name a bunch of reason why but rather not waist my time if I'm only going to get bashed at for my opinions. I'll admit one thing I never played the original games and personaly, I never heard of them either but aleast be a little grateful to Bethesda for bringing this great series back to light and making more people including me know about.


Last 5 posts:
You can never please all of the people, ever - no matter what you do as a game developer.

That said, I think it's fair to say that while both Fallout 3 and New Vegas lived on the same engine, they were very different games that appealed to different kinds of folks. The strong polarization we see here in this one threads speaks to it, and reasonable people can disagree about things like historical accuracy, content re-use and game features. However I think anyone that feels ill-will towards Bethesda has gone too far, and is not being reasonable.

I loved both games for very different reasons, some features in game A more than game B and visa-versa, but negative emotions like "hate" never enter the equation. There is so much Good about both games, and yet they both imparted a very different style - if nothing else they succeeded in making the two games quite different despite the fact that they are on the same engine.

Folks will spout technical details all day long as to why game A wasn't Fallout or why Game B is a copy of previous work, but I think as Fallout games go both were excellent.

Miax



It dared to be Fallout. :fallout:



This pretty much sums up how I feel about the whole Fallout 3 vs. New Vegas subject. I agree that Fallout 3 was less of a Fallout game in the classical sense, but it had it's moments, enough of them that I don't have a problem considering it canon, and Fallout. I was 10,000 times more Fallout than POS (curse it to hell and back) ever was. Lest we forget just how bad a Fallout game can be.

If we're lucky, we'll see some of Caesar's Hegelian Dialectic at work in the Fallout universe. Fallout 3 (Thesis), Fallout New Vegas (Antithesis), Fallout 4, (Synthesis).



What you are ranting (your word) about mainly in your post are comparisons that could be said to be of similarity between about any two games. Controls, graphics, core structure, UI, menus, design goal, mechanics, dialog screen. In other words, just game structures common to most games.

Completely ignoring how far so worlds apart the actual game-plays of TES4 and Fallout3 are. THAT is what makes the difference between the two games. THAT is why making the comparison and saying that Fallout3 is "Oblivion with guns" is so ludicrous.

When I last argued the case, it was actually claimed that there was magic in Fallout3, yeah right, that a metal bazooka rocket was interpreted as being casting magic. I didn't bother asking how much MANA was used to "cast that rocket" as it seemed that intelligence had left the forum.

Need I go on to take apart the other ludicrous inconsistencies of saying that Fallout3 is "Oblivion with guns".

Yes, Fallout3 has more in common with Fallout2 than TES4.

Immersing oneself in Fallout3 there is absolutely no feeling of being in anything other than a FALLOUT game.

I do accept though that some may have different degrees of depths-of-immersion when they play their games, with the possibility of different views,'cough'.


Maybe for you but not for me.
Super mutants made no sense for me, Vault-Tec shouldn't have access to the Pan Immunity Virus/Forced Evolutionary Virus and super mutants should not be orcs that just rampage through the world with no goal other than to "kill puny huumanz."
Ghouls looks like burned victims, and they run, and they can wear power armor and all of the sudden they can go "feral" as well.
The worlds houses and buildings look nothing like the architecture of the previous games' buildings.
Radiation is now found everywhere.
People don't have any agriculture going on.
Electricity still works throughout the land with no power source to be found.
Factions were underdeveloped.
Towns were like populated by two to four dozen people and had no production going on either. (It's been 200 [censored] years!!)
Jet, a creation by sweet young Myron who died before his prime, magically appears a continent away.
Vault doors open inwards.
No weapons from the old games can be found.
BOS are white knights while Outcasts are petty last minute additions added as a minor reference to the original BOS.
Enclave which got blown to Narnia are all of the sudden back with crap weapons and power armor and try to do THE SAME BLOODY THING THEY DID LAST TIME! (Did they learn nothing!? Don't control [censored] deathclaws and don't try to use a virus to wipe out all life on earth!)
And much much muuuuuuch more.

If you could play the game and feel "this is Fallout", then good for you I guess, but I played it and I was like "What kind of half-assed attempt at Fallout is this?".
So no, I did not feel like I was in a Fallout game, I felt like I was in a post-apocalyptic game "loosely inspired" by Fallout.

User avatar
Solina971
 
Posts: 3421
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 6:40 am

Post » Fri May 13, 2011 4:06 pm

snip


The point, though, is that the shared components (which are small alone, but when combined, form the body of the gameplay) are deliberately and unnecessarily similiar when considering both franchises and their strengths and weaknesses - and more so when considering from where the other title comes from (to what it is a sequel of) - and even more so considering that both games come from the same developer. The gameplay, in it's core, is identical. The only real substantial difference comes from visual and thematical differences (the setting and imprved graphics and art style) - the way sequels (or rival games in the same category - like with CoD and BF:BC) work - and Fallout 3 shouldn't have been the sequel that improves over what Oblivion did. Not in a manner which uses Oblivion as a base, adopting all of it's core elements and tweaks them to "fit" in the new, it should've been a sequel that looks at what the previous Fallout games did right and wrong and improved from that using them as a base.

I remember the argument (wasn't mine). But it was not, that Fallout 3 had magic. It was that the missiles performed and behaved exactly like your basic AoE fireballs from Oblivion and not like missiles.

And no. Fallout 3 and 2 have nothing in common except the setting and some themes. I couldn't help the feeling that I've done this same thing in this same way just recently when I played Fallout 3 (with the games huge emphasis on random exploring, RPG mechanics feeling next to nothing, using the UI and fast travel, moving around, involving combat, etc). So, immersing myself to Fallout 3 feels weird. Visually it looks something that could be interpreted as a Fallout game and even shares some similiar themes, but the gameplay as a whole just feels foreing and reminicent of something else (and that's not even considering the writing and consistency of the setting, which I won't be touching). I don't know whether you deliberately blind yourself from the similiarities, or if you geneuinely believe they aren't there, but... oh well, I'm not the one to say what you should see or like. :shrug:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And to repeat myself from the previous thread (for the topic): I don't hate Bethesda or even Fallout 3 (other than as a Fallout game), I just strongly disagree with the design decicions and goals made by the former to the latter; and wish they gather some guts for Fallout 4 to improve - not anymore from Fallout 2, expecting that would be as much ludicrous as Sitruc thinks calling Fallout 3 "Oblivion with guns" is - from Fallout: New Vegas and pushing forward its line of thinking to find the best middle way between the two franchises, and dare to take similiar steps in defining the series as they did with the move from Fallout 2 to 3 (though, not towards and action game but an RPG this time).

TL;DR --- Your loss (or gain, which ever way you prefer)...
User avatar
pinar
 
Posts: 3453
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 1:35 pm

Post » Fri May 13, 2011 8:11 am

People cant be please no matter what the devs do
User avatar
Mariaa EM.
 
Posts: 3347
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2007 3:28 am

Post » Fri May 13, 2011 7:45 pm

Alright, I know some of you that read my posts know I'm heavily against fallout 3 and probably think I hate the game as a whole but I do not...

I hate the 'fallout' aspect as it is very bad for the series, and I do not hate 'the game' as it is a good one... It's just a horrible 'fallout' game.

The series would've been fine without it, and I dislike the fact of it being called 'Fallout 3'.
User avatar
Genocidal Cry
 
Posts: 3357
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 10:02 pm

Post » Fri May 13, 2011 9:08 pm

The series would've been fine without it, and I dislike the fact of it being called 'Fallout 3'.

How about "Post-Apocalyptic Scavenging Simulator"? :laugh:
User avatar
Chloe Yarnall
 
Posts: 3461
Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 3:26 am

Post » Fri May 13, 2011 7:38 am

How about "Post-Apocalyptic Scavenging Simulator"? :laugh:


"Post-Apocalyptic Simulator: Finding Daddy" would have been the more appropiate title. :P
User avatar
Richard Dixon
 
Posts: 3461
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2007 1:29 pm

Post » Fri May 13, 2011 4:14 pm

"Post-Apocalyptic Simulator: Finding Daddy" would have been the more appropiate title. :P

"Post-Apocalyptic Simulator: Finding Daddy & Battling The Green Behemoths!!" (Needs two exclamation marks.)
User avatar
Anna Beattie
 
Posts: 3512
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 4:59 am

Post » Fri May 13, 2011 8:56 am

"Post-Apocolyptic Simulator: Finding daddy, and hurting big steel kidnappers"

That sums up that game!
User avatar
Naomi Lastname
 
Posts: 3390
Joined: Mon Sep 25, 2006 9:21 am

Post » Fri May 13, 2011 6:01 am

Wasteland 2
User avatar
Josh Trembly
 
Posts: 3381
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 9:25 am

Post » Fri May 13, 2011 7:28 pm

"The Bethesdian Way - A Post Apocalyptic Journey Of and Beyond Human Comprehension: or, How to find Daddy and S(h)ave the World from Evildoers"
User avatar
Lyd
 
Posts: 3335
Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 2:56 pm

Post » Fri May 13, 2011 7:37 pm

and Shave the World from Evildoers[/i]"

Either I'm too tired or I'm too childish but I found this part extremely funny. xD
User avatar
Dezzeh
 
Posts: 3414
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2007 2:49 am

Post » Fri May 13, 2011 6:26 pm

Either I'm too tired or I'm too childish but I found this part extremely funny. xD


You're probably just tired, my posts aren't funny, they're dead serious. :P
User avatar
BethanyRhain
 
Posts: 3434
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2006 9:50 am

Post » Fri May 13, 2011 7:33 pm

"Fallout 3: You Could Do Worse"

You know, like Fallen Earth.
User avatar
Charleigh Anderson
 
Posts: 3398
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 5:17 am

Post » Fri May 13, 2011 6:18 pm

Fallen Earth.

oh lord
User avatar
Elisabete Gaspar
 
Posts: 3558
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 1:15 pm

Post » Fri May 13, 2011 6:19 pm

"Fallout 3: You Could Do Worse"

You know, like Fallen Earth.

Just checked out some screenshots and it actually don't look that bad, what's the problem with it?
User avatar
Kelly John
 
Posts: 3413
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 6:40 am

Post » Fri May 13, 2011 2:54 pm

Fallen Earth, it's decisively average.
User avatar
Nathan Risch
 
Posts: 3313
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2007 10:15 pm

Post » Fri May 13, 2011 11:44 am

I don't see why people say there is no reason for the people of the capital wasteland to be less developed and not have Agriculture.
The reason is that the Supermutants make it hard enough to scavenge nevermind farm in a huge stretch of open land which would practically be a death sentence because either raiders or supermutants would raid the farms. Also the reason that there are so many raiders compared to Fallout's 1&2 is that in fallout's 1&2 there was nothing left to raid really so people formed communities where they would trade what little they scavenged until Vault's 8 and 15 opened and helped the people of the wasteland rediscover agriculture and then civilization so raiding wasn't needed and raiders like the Vipers and Jackals were run off. In D.C. though the people didn't bother to farm because there was an abundance of things to scavenge but since everyone wanted to be sure they had enough they started raiding other people and eventually formed the giant raider gangs in the Capital Wasteland that we see today.
User avatar
Melis Hristina
 
Posts: 3509
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 10:36 pm

Post » Fri May 13, 2011 8:46 pm

I don't see why people say there is no reason for the people of the capital wasteland to be less developed and not have Agriculture.
The reason is that the Supermutants make it hard enough to scavenge nevermind farm in a huge stretch of open land which would practically be a death sentence because either raiders or supermutants would raid the farms.


Which I think is also why the population levels have stayed so low in the CW. They do herd brahmin however so that at least is something.

Just as a little side note, I think what should also be said is that from the standpoint of the "1950s, World of Tommorow!" atmosphere of Fallout the eating of 200 year old canned beans and frozen dinners is not illogical. Remember, Fallout is all about exagerating what the 1950s believed and during that time period, "tv dinners" and other such preserved and frozen foods were relatively new to America. A stigma grew around them that these fancy smancy "food in a stasis-like box" could literally last and be good forever (or at least a really long time).
User avatar
Cartoon
 
Posts: 3350
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 4:31 pm

Post » Fri May 13, 2011 12:19 pm

Wasteland 2


This

I don't see why people say there is no reason for the people of the capital wasteland to be less developed and not have Agriculture.
The reason is that the Supermutants make it hard enough to scavenge nevermind farm in a huge stretch of open land which would practically be a death sentence because either raiders or supermutants would raid the farms. Also the reason that there are so many raiders compared to Fallout's 1&2 is that in fallout's 1&2 there was nothing left to raid really so people formed communities where they would trade what little they scavenged until Vault's 8 and 15 opened and helped the people of the wasteland rediscover agriculture and then civilization so raiding wasn't needed and raiders like the Vipers and Jackals were run off. In D.C. though the people didn't bother to farm because there was an abundance of things to scavenge but since everyone wanted to be sure they had enough they started raiding other people and eventually formed the giant raider gangs in the Capital Wasteland that we see today.


You forgot to include Talon Company Mercs. Many say "They shouldn't be hostile to everybody, they're mercs. they need jobs," Well they were actually hired by somebody outside of the Capital Wasteland to make as much chaos in the Capital Wasteland as possible.
User avatar
roxanna matoorah
 
Posts: 3368
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 6:01 am

Post » Fri May 13, 2011 3:02 pm

You forgot to include Talon Company Mercs. Many say "They shouldn't be hostile to everybody, they're mercs. they need jobs," Well they were actually hired by somebody outside of the Capital Wasteland to make as much chaos in the Capital Wasteland as possible.


That leaves a question of: "For what possible purpose or outcome?" as the place is a mess already.
User avatar
dean Cutler
 
Posts: 3411
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 7:29 am

Post » Fri May 13, 2011 3:53 pm

Exactly, and that can be built into a future Fallout game (the answer that is).

I was thinking somebody in a small country that didn't want D.C. to unite ao they can become powerful.
User avatar
Minako
 
Posts: 3379
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2007 9:50 pm

Post » Fri May 13, 2011 10:12 am

That leaves a question of: "For what possible purpose or outcome?" as the place is a mess already.


And also the question of:"Why wasn't this put in the game somewhere?"

It's a lazy excuse for a horribly written faction that only exists to serve as another enemy variant for the player to kill.

Which also describes East Coast Super Mutants now that I think about it.
User avatar
Daniel Holgate
 
Posts: 3538
Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 1:02 am

Post » Fri May 13, 2011 6:18 pm

Yeah, I don't get that either. Every reason people can come up with just seem like fan fiction.
User avatar
Je suis
 
Posts: 3350
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 7:44 pm

Post » Fri May 13, 2011 6:48 pm

And also the question of:"Why wasn't this put in the game somewhere?"

It's a lazy excuse for a horribly written faction that only exists to serve as another enemy variant for the player to kill.

Which also describes East Coast Super Mutants now that I think about it.


Most of Fallout 3's factions can be described like that. At it's heart Fallout 3 is a single player MMORPG; just one giant illogical playground of enemies to grind against and dungeons to crawl through. There's nothing inherently wrong with this design philosophy, but it's not one that I want to see in the Fallout series which has a history of its games having developed worlds and developed factions.
User avatar
Ells
 
Posts: 3430
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 9:03 pm

Post » Fri May 13, 2011 3:22 pm

Exactly, and that can be built into a future Fallout game (the answer that is).

I was thinking somebody in a small country that didn't want D.C. to unite ao they can become powerful.


A tie in to the next game? I can't really figure out a plausible explanation for anyone to send an army of mercs in a disjointed mess of a place to create a mess. The Talons were there before the LW emerged and there was no hint of anyone uniting with anyone, nor was there too much connections to ouside regions which could've been interpreted as a threat to someone. I dunno...

And also the question of:"Why wasn't this put in the game somewhere?"

It's a lazy excuse for a horribly written faction that only exists to serve as another enemy variant for the player to kill.

Which also describes East Coast Super Mutants now that I think about it.


And the generic raiders.

Most of Fallout 3's factions can be described like that. At it's heart Fallout 3 is a single player MMORPG; just one giant illogical playground of enemies to grind against and dungeons to crawl through. There's nothing inherently wrong with this design philosophy, but it's not one that I want to see in a Fallout game which has a history of its games having developed worlds and developed factions.


:thumbsup:
User avatar
Gemma Woods Illustration
 
Posts: 3356
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2006 8:48 pm

Next

Return to Fallout Series Discussion