[Topgun]

There are a lot of people complaining about bugs and stability issues,

You mean like all Bethesda games?

[Lt.Cannonfodder]

Yeah that's it... simply good is not what I expect from a game nowadays. :\
And notice I didn't even go with the "what a sequel should be" argument. I'm trying to stay clear of that one for sanity's sake

I try not to get too picky when it comes to games. I buy and play the ones that I think will hold my interest and every now and then something really great comes along. Fallout 3 might be one of those, I just haven't seen enough to decide yet.

Seriously now, I have no problem whatsoever with the blend either. Like I said in a previous post, its the blandness and degradation of the setting that I have gripes with.
For instance, from what I've seen, Deus Ex was a much better game than this... and its what? 7 years old?
Vampires: Bloodlines was also, despite its inumerable bugs and horrid (in RPG terms) final chapter an excelent FPS\RPG... write me, or even show me via footage an example of comparable dialogue (both NPC's and character lines) in terms of quality and soul in Fallout 3... no in fact give me 10... just one isn't enough in a game that big.

Deus Ex was fantastic, but c'mon, can you really say Fallout 3 is worse without even playing it? Besides, the two games are completely different in so many ways the comparison is not very valid.

As for Bloodlines, my memory on that is a bit fuzzy. I do recall hating the combat system, I think I got stuck fighting some tentacled boss monster. I never found the dialogue or the quests particularly special, though the whole setting was very interesting.

Well, if we were discussing movies I'd agree with you. Staying clear of reviews (because well I don't consider most reviews the least professional in terms of journalism), and "online Joe's" opinions, Trailers don't say anything about movies. You do have to see the movie for yourself to judge.
I don't agree whan it comes to games for the simple fact that gameplay footage tells you all you need to know about a game: gameplay, visuals, writing\dialogue quality, voice acting quality, setting and atmosphere. Only thing you don't get on gameplay footage is you pressing the buttons, but really that's the least of my worries when it comes to an RPG.

I get the feeling that you started out with the preconceived idea that the game will suck, and picked every screenshots and video apart to reinforce that. And again, watching videos is never, ever the same as actually playing the game. Especially when you need to judge the quality of writing and how deep the decisions you have to make are.

- Gameplay: standard FPS\RPG hybrid, with the exception of VATS... VATS slo-mo sequences look boring as hell 90% of the time.
I hate it that the game gives you so many hints (both subtle and flat out slapped in your face) about the consequences, what to do, etc.

VATS makes the otherwise simple combat fun. And no, the slow-motion hasn't gotten boring, at least not yet. Ripping someone's leg off with a sniper rifle or melting them into a pile of ash with my laser pistol is always good fun.

- Visuals: good, but outdated. Not really a problem for me to be honest. The animations however... ugh.

Granted, the animations have always been a problem with Bethesda's games. It's not nearly as bad a with Oblivion or Morrowind though, and I dont really notice most of the time. As for the visuals looking outdated, I have to disagree. It may not stand up to games liky Crysis, but it doesn't have to. The post apocalyptic wasteland looks great.

- Writing quality: cliché, boring, bland... few actual deep choices.

Can't comment much on writing quality since I haven't played through the game yet. Have you?

As for deep choices, already ran into some interesting ones I was forced to make. Certain quest concerning a very old friend was especially good.

- Voice acting: mixed feelings: some NPC's sound like they came straight out of oblivion, others are good enough (not excellent), other's are downright awfull (I still have nightmares about Mr Burke's voice acting... in the worst sense)

Back in FO1 and FO2, you only had to voice act the important characters; no such luxury with FO3, just imagine the amount of complaining had Bethesda left a majority of their NPCs mute. With that in mind, I accept that the voice actors are of mixed quality, as you yourself said. I do dare you to call Liam Neeson and Malcolm McDowell bad though

- Setting and atmosphere: Well the setting is clearly very little Fallout: Orcs (I mean super mutants), Holy Knights (I mean BoS), etc. I'm really not one to complain about them being in the west coast, or that they have a visual evolution. However, when they start resembling medieval fantasy factions I must say we have a problem. Yes I know the BoS have the outcast faction which adheres to the original BoS code, but just the fact that the majority of West Coast's BoS folks turned over to Holy Knights is insulting to say the least. It simply shows that they wanted to have familiar names, but they didn't like the faction's themselves.
Also the fact that there's a S. Mutant breeding center that does exactly the same as FO1's one manages to break my suspension of disbelief.
Still on the setting there's some stuff that is indeed interesting (atleast the concepts of them) in the fallout setting, like Megaton, Rivet City, and others.
Visually, despite visual inconsistencies regarding the originals, the atmosphere isn't bad... However the horrid animations and poor writing completely ruin it for me.

The original Fallout characters were mostly sprites maybe 80 pixels tall. Turning those convincingly into 3D is very hard and I think Bethesda managed to do it fairly well. I especially love what they did to the Deathclaws, those things are scary as hell.

The whole world in general has a great atmosphere to it: everything really looks and feels like a nuclear wasteland should. I really dont understand what the game should look like to please you.

[Molybdenum]

Also the fact that there's a S. Mutant breeding center that does exactly the same as FO1's one manages to break my suspension of disbelief.

Thanks for the spoiler!

Although I agree from what I've read and seen that a lot of the style and atmosphere that was the fundament of the series has been removed.

I mean look at the colors. Everything is grayish brown, you can't see the bits of the real world peeking out of the debris.

There is a hand-held nuke launcher! I mean how corny is that? In the originals nuclear weapons where depicted as worse than the worse thing imaginable and where used only to resolve the grand finale, and here we are using them as pea shooters in common combat.

I hope this new game makes younger players want to try the originals. The graphics are ancient and the difficulty is hardcore for noobs but they should really give them a shot as they where the art/literature amongst games.

[spartan_0214]

I just got it and am enjoying it. I've only made it as far as Megaton, though. TF2 and college are taking up a lot of my time right now.

[BloodEagle]

Rather than read through some of the obscenely long posts on the first page, I'll simply state my reasons for not getting the game.

     #1. Oblivion

     #2. Oblivion

     #3. Oblivion

     #4. Oblivion

     #5. Oblivion


P.S. A cookie to the first person who gets a screencap of BoS soldiers talking about mudcrabs and how filthy they are.

[Raven2001]

I try not to get too picky when it comes to games.

Well I am, got fed up with wasting money on stuff that everyone and everything praised... and then turned out to be mediocre, or the same crap I had played 2 months ago.

Deus Ex was fantastic, but c'mon, can you really say Fallout 3 is worse without even playing it? Besides, the two games are completely different in so many ways the comparison is not very valid.

There comes "not even playing it" again... If you can't make up your mind about a game with plenty of non-playing samples, fine. I can, however.
Deus Ex was a better a game when it came to merging FPS with RPG because the mechanics made more sense. For example, in Deus Ex your skill with guns affects your crosshair accuracy. In FO3 it affects the damage you do with a weapon... except in VATS where it does indeed affect your chance to hit...
I'm not going into the "and I felt more engaged in Deus Ex" thing, because well, its subjective 100%.

As for Bloodlines, my memory on that is a bit fuzzy. I do recall hating the combat system, I think I got stuck fighting some tentacled boss monster. I never found the dialogue or the quests particularly special, though the whole setting was very interesting.

Why did you hate the combat system? I think I know the answer but I'll reserve my answer untill I know it for certain.
The dialogue wasn't special. Wasn't it miles better than FO3's? Just 1 Malkavian line could level any line I've heard in FO3. Please let's try to keep it fair. You may not apreciate subtle and well thought of dialogue, but really I can't conceive that anyone wouldnt find Bloodline's dialogue special. Same goes for FO1 and FO2
Other examples can be your persuasion and seduction lines. But Bloodlines is full of good lines, so its hard to pinpoint just one.

I get the feeling that you started out with the preconceived idea that the game will suck, and picked every screenshots and video apart to reinforce that. And again, watching videos is never, ever the same as actually playing the game. Especially when you need to judge the quality of writing and how deep the decisions you have to make are.

You get the feeling wrong, you should attune yourself better with the Force
Seriously now. I actually adopted a "wait and see" attitude, and have let some horrid stuff pass by me, untill I watched the first gameplay videos, and then some more.
You can say I'm biased, which I am (but then again, so are you and everyone else here ). I wasn't however, very patient and open minded.
And out of curiosity, how deep were the decisions you made so far? How unforeseen were they as well?

As for the visuals looking outdated, I have to disagree. It may not stand up to games liky Crysis, but it doesn't have to. The post apocalyptic wasteland looks great.

It doesn't stand up to Crysis, UT3, Unigine. At best the visuals can rival Source... so their outdated. Fact. I did say they were good though...
And the animations, albeit improved from Oblivion are extremely outdated.

Back in FO1 and FO2, you only had to voice act the important characters; no such luxury with FO3, just imagine the amount of complaining had Bethesda left a majority of their NPCs mute. With that in mind, I accept that the voice actors are of mixed quality, as you yourself said. I do dare you to call Liam Neeson and Malcolm McDowell bad though Big grin

Back in FO1 and 2 they didn't spend 1\10th of the money Bethesda spent on FO3, so its no excuse really.
And no, Neeson and McDowel aren't bad, but then again, Patrick Stewart and Sean Bean aren't bad either, yet they sounded awfull in Oblivion...

The original Fallout characters were mostly sprites maybe 80 pixels tall. Turning those convincingly into 3D is very hard and I think Bethesda managed to do it fairly well. I especially love what they did to the Deathclaws, those things are scary as hell.

Erm... stay true to the original design perhaps? Its the same story as having a FS3 with yellow glowed Shivans... Would you accept it?!? You don't have to answer, I already know for sure.
If you need examples:
Super mutants resembling The Hulk in terms of anatomy, hunched pose, enormous chin (compared to forehead) and upper lips being held up by something (on the dumb ones, so most of them ). Cancerous growths and dry skin. There's 3 Super Mutant talking heads in FO 1 and 2 so there's plenty of reference for the faces. As for the body, even those "80px" are enough to show how they are supposed to look like...
http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/fallout/images//thumb/9/9b/Harry.jpg/250px-Harry.jpg
http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/fallout/images//thumb/c/c0/Marcus.jpg/200px-Marcus.jpg
http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/fallout/images//thumb/a/a3/Lieutenant.gif/120px-Lieutenant.gif
http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/fallout/images//0/0e/Supermutant.gif
Enough reference? I'm sure you can spot the diferences...

Deathclaws, all I have to say is this:
http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/fallout/images//thumb/a/a6/Deathclaw2.jpg/250px-Deathclaw2.jpg
On this one they actually almost got it right... they had to turn the horns around and make it look like a demon though...

Humans: oh wait they got it right... must've been hard though

everything really looks and feels like a nuclear wasteland should. I really dont understand what the game should look like to please you.

Again... stay true to the original?!?
Yeah it does look like a great generic nuclear wasteland... Yet fallout's wasteland wasn't generic in the least.

Molybdenium was spot on when it comes not being Fallout. He was also spot on on what Fallout was about (atleast on the small things he mentioned).

Again, yes I'm biased. I never said FO3 is a bad game... IMO its mediocre. Good at best. It has the same flaws Bethesda always had in their games (and I was never particularly interested in their games... I had the misfortune of playing Oblivion though...).
But it doesn't have any resemblance to Fallout, and that alone is enough for me not to play it.
If it was called something else, then maybe I could look at it with other eyes (but probably I wouldn't like it still for its blandness).
 

If that's so hard to understand, imagine FS3 with yellow Shivan pacifists and spiky Vasudans, and all should be clear to you

Thanks for the spoiler!

Ooops sorry Want some more? Oh wait I can't I haven't played the game

[Bob-san]

Now then--I'm really enjoying the game. It's the first game in perhaps years that bought at launch and have really enjoyed playing. I'm on my second real play-through as well... I finished the game once but barely paid attention to side-quests. It's also one of the few games that I feel I don't need a manual for: the objectives are clear and concise. They put it within knowledge--so instead of saying "put this observer pod in a mirelurk pod" and directing me to the very pod, they tell me here's the building and have designed the game such that you wander a bit and can find it easily. Those Mirelurks are real *****es to kill too--dangerous to say the least. I've not used the Fat Man or the Missile Launcher, though they're designed to be used against gigantic enemies where nothing else may be effective, such as Super Mutant Behemoths. Other than that, it's been a pretty good game. It's engaging for me... I can do what I want how I want when I want where I want and in whatever order I want. That being said, I was able to skip ahead in the main quest by skipping a part of it. I've not finished the game yet--I'll find out then if I made a mistake or not. Until then, I'll be simply doing side-quests, talking to people, and seeing what I missed the first time through. There's plenty I missed--and knowing Vault Dweller's history has become a major asset in manipulating more information out of NPCs.

[brandx0]

Fallout 3 looks like it sucks (although I've never played it) and is much worse than many other great games out there.  It's ripping off Deus Ex, but not as good (note: I've never played Deus Ex) but even though it's newer, it's got worse graphics than Crysis (which I've never played).  It's also destroying the original setting and story of Fallouts 1 and 2 (I watched a video of these, but never played them.)  In addition, the setting is a complete ripoff from Mad Max (a movie I've never seen) though I do hope they keep in the monty python references (I've read that Monty Python are pretty funny guys, but I've never seen anything they've done) from the original fallouts. 

All in all, Fallout 3 sucks, and the whole post apocalyptic distopia thing was old when 1984 (By George Orwell, never read it) and Brave New World (By Aldous Huxley, also haven't read it, though I did see the cover of the book once) came out.  They need to come up with something new to make games about, maybe Hop on Pop (by Dr. Seuss, Whose works I've never read)

(Note, this post is a complete fallacy)

[Topgun]

interestingly, this reminds me of the election...

[Bob-san]

Bandx--what are you smoking tonight? Blech--whatever. Anyways--I really like how they designed Capital Wasteland and the depth they gave it. The radio station did add to the atmosphere--especially as you get a reputation for good/evil and Three Dog talks about it. The Enclave station is pure propaganda, the People's Republic of America station is just a short clip looping but also propaganda.

[Topgun]

real propaganda or game propaganda?

[brandx0]

Bob, I was poking fun at the whole "I've never played the game, but I read about it, so therefore, I don't like it." thing that's going on in this thread

[Bob-san]

real propaganda or game propaganda?

Game propaganda, and an annoying loop too. That station is communist propaganda--again, seemingly 200 years old. Then again, we have no clue about the situation in China or anywhere other than the USA is. For all we know, China could have their own version of the Enclave. Reasons like this make me want a Fallout 4--I want to know more about this post-apocalyptic world, which requires volumes upon volumes. It's the world that draws me in. Anyways--some of these radio stations seem to lead you to a particular spot on the map, where you can find interesting stuff (a UFO, for example).

[Rick James]

I just completed the main quest an I must say that

Spoiler:

I am absolutely freaking PISSED at Bethesda. Oblivion allowed the character to continue exploring the world after the main quest had been completed. An in Fallout 3, the choice is to either a. die or b. send someone else to their death inside a radiation-filled control room, and the second option still doesn't allow you to continue playing after the game has ended. This is made yet more irksome by the fact that as part of the main quest, I had saved a benign Super Mutant who was allegedly immune to radiation. He tagged along and helped me out in combat with an awesome lazer chaingun. Why wasn't I given the choice of sending him inside instead? That way, nobody needs to die and the PC could still retain hope of going home to Vault 101 someday.

/nerdrage

[Bob-san]

I just completed the main quest an I must say that

Spoiler:

I am absolutely freaking PISSED at Bethesda. Oblivion allowed the character to continue exploring the world after the main quest had been completed. An in Fallout 3, the choice is to either a. die or b. send someone else to their death inside a radiation-filled control room, and the second option still doesn't allow you to continue playing after the game has ended. This is made yet more irksome by the fact that as part of the main quest, I had saved a benign Super Mutant who was allegedly immune to radiation. He tagged along and helped me out in combat with an awesome lazer chaingun. Why wasn't I given the choice of sending him inside instead? That way, nobody needs to die and the PC could still retain hope of going home to Vault 101 someday.

/nerdrage

Spoiler:

Or at least finishing all the quests and enjoying your Power Armor (both BoS and Enclave), Tesla Armor, and possibly even T-51b Power Armor, Medic Power Armor, or Outcast Power Armor. You finally get access to everything--and you effectively can't use it all. Anyways--that gattling laser was awesome--I'd have been happy to use it. Other than that, how do you cheat? :-P

[Lt.Cannonfodder]

I think I'll just leave this thread shaking my head. Talk about fanboyism.

[Colonol Dekker]

I'm not a major fallout Fanboy. I never finished the first one in fact i just enjoy FO3 :bah:

[Lt.Cannonfodder]

I really wasn't referring to you.

[Colonol Dekker]

Yeah i know, i was just putting it out there

[TrashMan]

Well I am, got fed up with wasting money on stuff that everyone and everything praised... and then turned out to be mediocre, or the same crap I had played 2 months ago.

I'm probably the last person that will jump on the popularity band wagon, and I'm very critical of everything.
If it means anything to you, I consider Fallout 3 a rather good product. Could have been even better, but it is good, no question about it.

But it doesn't have any resemblance to Fallout, and that alone is enough for me not to play it.

Rubbish. I'm a big Fallout fan, and in fact, I re-played both FO1 and FO2 just 2-3 months ago. It has FO's atmosphere. It's done right.

Seems to me like you're caught in some sort of hate loop - probably because you hated Oblivion or cause the game isn't made by the original company or because it might eclipse/get more attention that another game you want or the original. I know the feeling. Ashamed to say, I've been that way myself (yup. I hated Freespace with a passion and I never wanted to play it. boy, was I wrong...)