Fallout 3 is trash!

[QUOTE="Insane00"]

I actually quite enjoy the game, which for me is what is most important if you are going to play.

I will say this:

The game is Oblivion with guns, really it is. That doesn't make it worse for me as I like Oblivion and thing they did a decent job, as well as enjoy the atmosphere, but it doesn't change the fact that unless you nit-pick, that is the best comparison. I mean for goodness sake the two games have the exact same background music. They at least could have created a different score for walking around the world.

I never played the original Fallout games, so I wasn't looking for the game to be anything in particular. Though I will say that if you wanted FO3 to be FO1 or FO2, then you probably shouldn't have bought the game. It was pretty clearly going to be different (heck, I figured that out from screenshots).

It isn't perfect, there are jaggies all over the place and the constant screentears make it look worse than Oblivion, but like I said, I enjoy playing it.

Any complaints about the level 20 level max should just stop, cause it is such old news it is rediculous. They were talking about this way back in the first preview presented in GI in like May 07. The idea is that you don't get to create a superhuman, you have to stratigically guide your characters growth. While I admit it takes away from the playability once you hit that level, no one should be surprised that it is how the game works.

Is it trash? No. Is it for everyone? Definitely not. Anyone that wants to play an FPS should walk away from this game as the targeting sucks and the movement is bulky. Anyone looking to play Elder Scrolls should also probably avoid this one as it is too much like an FPS. But I recomend this game to anyone that wants to explore a decent looking, engrossing, world with lots to do and an interesting premise. I have enjoyed the time I spent in ruined DC and like I said, that's all I really hope to get out of a game.

dthach614

why do people always say this in regards to a disapointed "sequals"???? I did NOT wants the same game, I wanted something better which i didnt get. Like i said earlier, Fallout 1 & 2 combat system was NOT the best, but it sure ass hell better than the Fallout 3's FPS with a targeting system.

Alright, fine, you are unhappy with it and it didn't do what you wanted it to. Again I'm not surprised having already played Bathesda games and had a good idea of what to expect. I'm sure they could have done it differently, but they didn't ask you, they did it there way and you didn't like it. Its your right, sure, but they bought the rights to Fallout, they can legaly have the right do whatever they want. You don't like it, start a company and buy the rights from Bethesda, then you can do what you want.

It doesn't change the fact that you vote with your dollar, and there were plenty of screenshots, previews, gameplay videos, and opinions on the game before it came out. Thus, you and anyone else unhappy with the game had the right to not buy it or at the very least rent it first. I'm not saying you shouldn't be disappointed, that is your prerogative, I'm not saying that you have to like what they did. I'm saying it is what it is, if you want change, don't buy it, write the developers, and/or support games that do the sort of things you want to see. That is all we can do. My post simply says that I wasn't disappointed and no one here has the excuse that they were dupped into buying something that was nothing like they expected.

[QUOTE="dthach614"][QUOTE="ZIMdoom"] I played both extensively back when they came out and fail to see how Fallout 3 is any different, aside from the obious change in player perspective.

I stand by my comment. Your opinion is wrong.

ZIMdoom

the combat system is trash. the combat system is the core of an rpg for me atleast. If the combat system is trash, then the game is trash.

It's annoying as hell when you use VATS and the game goes in slow motion and the camera goes nuts. Why does it go in slow motion?? You could not disrupt the flow of the combat any more than what bethesda did.

The fact that the game pause when you use VATS defeat the whole purpose of it a real time combat.

this game just suck what a disappointment

It has ZERO impact on the game to have slow motion. And vats in Fallout 3 is identical to vats in the othe games. The only difference being the "slow motion" and pause you speak of. If you don't like it and only want real time fighting, then play it as a FPS. Don't use vats. Problem solved.

It did have an impact. It's anoying to watch the same reoccurence a million times in slow motion over and over and over again. slow motion + pause + real time battle = being a michael vick's dog. the flow of the combat is terrible.

I dont want to play a fallout FPS. i want to play a fallout RPG.

[QUOTE="ZIMdoom"][QUOTE="dthach614"]

the combat system is trash. the combat system is the core of an rpg for me atleast. If the combat system is trash, then the game is trash.

It's annoying as hell when you use VATS and the game goes in slow motion and the camera goes nuts. Why does it go in slow motion?? You could not disrupt the flow of the combat any more than what bethesda did.

The fact that the game pause when you use VATS defeat the whole purpose of it a real time combat.

this game just suck what a disappointment

dthach614

It has ZERO impact on the game to have slow motion. And vats in Fallout 3 is identical to vats in the othe games. The only difference being the "slow motion" and pause you speak of. If you don't like it and only want real time fighting, then play it as a FPS. Don't use vats. Problem solved.

It did have an impact. It's anoying to watch the same reoccurence a million times in slow motion over and over and over again. slow motion + pause + real time battle = being a michael vick's dog. the flow of the combat is terrible.

I dont want to play a fallout FPS. i want to play a fallout RPG.

I love the flow of the game. It slows down the FPS aspects enough that I don't feel overwhelmed but keeps the pace going so I don't feel like I'm constantly being bogged down like in turn based games or even in the agregiously annoying battles of Oblivion. I like turn based games and I like Oblivion, but I think FO3's pace beats both of them.

I dont want to play a fallout FPS. i want to play a fallout RPG.

dthach614

[QUOTE="dthach614"]Enlighten me then. you mean like, you get a a character and have the option to choose his actions throughout the game? I get it. but for me, and rpg need more that. so please enlighten me.

Dont tell im not an "rpg gamer" everybody got their preference alright? dont give me that bs. Everybody is entitled to their own opinion.

DOF_power

.

.

.

You don't get a character, you make/are the character (role).

If you like/play/enjoy turned-based adventures (FF for example) then and you're turn based adventure fan/gamer, not an rpg gamer.

I dislike the fact that Bethesda (or any other company) didn't pushed the rpg genre and droped the whole leveling and main story non-sense altogether.

Just let the player make his story.

thats what i meant

Dont assume assume anything, I enjoy the hell out of KOTOR.

I like the level cap. It makes choosing your perks and stats a strategic move. So you never become too powerful, and the game will always stay a bit tricky.

smh

dthach614

Oooo, that was constructive.

I don't know why I bother sometimes. Ever heard of having a constructive discussion?

[QUOTE="dthach614"]

smh

Insane00

Oooo, that was constructive.

I don't know why I bother sometimes. Ever heard of having a constructive discussion?

you dont deserve it. im not going even going to bother with you. that should tell the quality of your previous post. oh im not alow to critcize a game or be disappointed with a game because i dont make games myself. what kind of logic is that?

once again smh @ u

It did have an impact. It's anoying to watch the same reoccurence a million times in slow motion over and over and over again. slow motion + pause + real time battle = being a michael vick's dog. the flow of the combat is terrible.

I dont want to play a fallout FPS. i want to play a fallout RPG.

dthach614

No it didn't. But you are confusing your opinion of the game for fact and that is the problem here.

Oh well, maye if you complain enough, one day all game developers will get your approval before releasing their games. Since you seem to have this idea that if something bugs you it must bug everyone and ruin the game for everyone. After all, how could anyone possible like something that dthach614 thinks is annoying!

[QUOTE="dthach614"]

It did have an impact. It's anoying to watch the same reoccurence a million times in slow motion over and over and over again. slow motion + pause + real time battle = being a michael vick's dog. the flow of the combat is terrible.

I dont want to play a fallout FPS. i want to play a fallout RPG.

ZIMdoom

No it didn't. But you are confusing your opinion of the game for fact and that is the problem here.

Oh well, maye if you complain enough, one day all game developers will get your approval before releasing their games. Since you seem to have this idea that if something bugs you it must bug everyone and ruin the game for everyone. After all, how could anyone possible like something that dthach614 thinks is annoying!

okay what did the slow motion and crazy camera add to the game? i never present anything i said as fact. all opinions.

1. i didnt say 1 and 2 is perfect. i said they are better

2. when did fallout 1 come out?

3. why isnt the combat role playing? explain that to me. and fallout 3's combat is?? lol

mods are not available on console.

i do not care about the people you know. why even bring them up? running out of arguements. lol "well umm so and so would agree with me" lol..

dthach614

.

.

.

1] They're quite similar, F1/2/3 in terms of quality. Neither one allowed me to take control of the supermutant army and/or enclave army and rule the wasteland as a god until I die of old age. They all forced this wasteland savior B* (that joing with Master's army ending in F1 was just b*).

2] 1997 F1, GTA 1997, 1998 F2.

3] Because it's turned based and overly depended on some uncessary stats.

Deus Ex did the best job with regards to combat, though it was not perfect. (there was a mod witch improved it's combat)

4] I'm sorry that they're not availvable on consoles. They (can) change a lot, and I knew if what I was getting with a Bethesda game.

5] Because they're true rpg players, who dislike(d) the turn based videgame rpgs.

[QUOTE="dthach614"]

1. i didnt say 1 and 2 is perfect. i said they are better

2. when did fallout 1 come out?

3. why isnt the combat role playing? explain that to me. and fallout 3's combat is?? lol

mods are not available on console.

i do not care about the people you know. why even bring them up? running out of arguements. lol "well umm so and so would agree with me" lol..

DOF_power

.

.

.

1] They're quite similar, F1/2/3 in terms of quality. Neither one allowed me to take control of the supermutant army and/or enclave army and rule the wasteland as a god I die of old age. They all forced this wasteland savior B* (that joing with Master's army ending in F1 was just b*).

2] 1997 F1, GTA 1997, 1998 F2.

3] Because it's turned based and overly depended on some uncessary stats.

Deus Ex did the best job with regards to combat, though it was not perfect. (there was a mod witch improved it's combat)

4] I'm sorry that they're not availvable on consoles. They (can) change a lot, and I knew if what I was getting with a Bethesda game.

5] Because they're true rpg players, who dislike(d) the turn based videgame rpgs.

me and you have different opinion of what an rpg is. lets just leave it at that. you're not going convince me otherwise and im sure not going to convice you.

i do not believe that interplay copy gta. i believe it was coincidence

5. stop talking. i dont care.

[QUOTE="ZIMdoom"]

[QUOTE="dthach614"]I guess nobody here ever played Fallout 1 & 2 before..dthach614

I stand by my comment. Your opinion is wrong.

the combat system is trash. the combat system is the core of an rpg for me atleast. If the combat system is trash, then the game is trash.

It's annoying as hell when you use VATS and the game goes in slow motion and the camera goes nuts. Why does it go in slow motion?? You could not disrupt the flow of the combat any more than what bethesda did.

The fact that the game pause when you use VATS defeat the whole purpose of it a real time combat.

this game just suck what a disappointment

VATS was actually a fan-service to give the game a quasi-turnbased feel to it. And if you have the PC version and don't like VATS, there is a mod that removes it

It just oblivion with guns. dthach614

The game is trash because it got a 8.5 on PS3 :lol:Synthetic_NinJI

That was because it had more bugs than the other versions. I love fallout 3, it's fantastic, but i recommend the PC version.

And, OP, if you don't like something in fallout 3, just mod it out

[QUOTE="dthach614"]It just oblivion with guns. lowe0

It's not Oblivion with guns though. It's dev system differs a great deal, variation in quest and environments differs a lot as well. Tack on VATS and it plays much differently. To be perfectly honest people who say "it's oblivion with guns" sound like the same exact people who say "all the FF titles are the same", both of which are false statements.

Fallout 3 was easily my favorite game last year (followed closely by Persona 4).

I guess nobody here ever played Fallout 1 & 2 before..dthach614

Nope, what makes an rpg is the role playing, and while F3 ain't perfect it's got more role playing then any other so called rpg out there right now.DOF_power

It certainly gives you multiple choices to solving quests (no more so than the earlier Fallout games, or Vampire bloodlines, or similar RPGs), but that's about it. You don't affect the storyline in any meaningful way, there are no meaningful consequences to any of your actions, etc.

Sure, that does mean it has more role playing than most recent RPGs (with the exception of The Witcher and Mask of the Betrayer, obviously), but that's mainly because most RPGs this gen have been terrible.

Anyway, I finished Fallout 3 last night, and while I thought it was definitely a step in the right direction for Bethesda, it's also a massive leap backwards for the series. It's more enjoyable than Oblivion, and a good game, but certainly not a great one.

I guess you can tack on an automated targeting system and a leveling up system(which btw, your character will cap off at level 2o, wtf??) and call it a RPG.

This game is trash. It just oblivion with guns. dthach614

[QUOTE="dthach614"]I guess you can tack on an automated targeting system and a leveling up system(which btw, your character will cap off at level 2o, wtf??) and call it a RPG.

This game is trash. It just oblivion with guns. MasterC5

Yeah, TC is pretty funny, he said it's oblivion with guns and oblivion is considered an RPG. He just contradicted himself in a few sentences.

Yeah, TC is pretty funny, he said it's oblivion with guns and oblivion is considered an RPG. He just contradicted himself in a few sentences.

tmntPunchout

It's supposed to be an insult - there's a fairly strong argument for Oblivion being a terrible RPG, due to its lack of actual role-playing.

Still, the TC is wrong. Fallout 3 actually has some role-playing. It's more like Morrowind with guns.