Fallout 3: Sluggish, soulless and forgettablet ?!!!

time for less words and phrases like 'patently false' 'conjecture' and 'perogative' (act. spelling = prerogative) and time for facts. we're not going to dance circles with you anymore. if you want to have a one-sided debate we want you to FULLY articulate it and back it up with REAL facts instead of pawning assumptions as FACT.you said ALL BAD REVIEWS.3picuri3

But as someone who took the time to understand the intricacies of the gameplay myself, I can recognize when a reviewer is telling the truth about gameplay mechanics. Vandalvideo

is it possible, just maybe, that if you think EVERYONE got it wrong in your head that.... gasp ....you might have gotten it wrong? you can't throw facts around when the world (according to you) is against you.

that's called delusion.

[QUOTE="3picuri3"]time for less words and phrases like 'patently false' 'conjecture' and 'perogative' (act. spelling = prerogative) and time for facts. we're not going to dance circles with you anymore. if you want to have a one-sided debate we want you to FULLY articulate it and back it up with REAL facts instead of pawning assumptions as FACT.you said ALL BAD REVIEWS.Vandalvideo

you can't call something a fact without substantiating it - your word is not enough. give us links, you know how this works here. you can't make wild claims like 'all bad reviews got it wrong' then just keep parroting you take on it in lieu of cold hard facts.

you can stop using the word fact if you want and present your opinion, then it wouldn't be necessary to validate or fact-check.

and you said ALL, not MAJORITY. no back-peddling unless you want to admit you were exaggerating.

[QUOTE="3picuri3"]prove to us that these are facts. show us how EVERY bad review for Too Human misunderstood the game.Vandalvideo

Wrong.

It is you who are making the wholesale accusations, we are merely objecting to those statements. The law states that it is YOU who should provide the evidence.

I know you know this Vandal, don't try to brush it off. Not guilty until proven otherwise, that is how things are, well where I come from anyway. And in this respect the review sites are not guilty of committing wholesale mistakes from all sites that gave Too Human below a 7, until you can provide wholesale counter evidence.

Meh coming from a hermit, I don't really give a crap what he says. My opinion is the only one that counts, I'm giving the game a shot.

ShaneBeck

Me too, it looks too damn good to miss out on, every preview I have seen or read is backing this 100%

but the first review slays it?.......strange......if it is crap, I'll just sell it and I won't preorder another game

is it possible, just maybe, that if you think EVERYONE got it wrong in your head that.... gasp ....you might have gotten it wrong? you can't throw facts around when the world (according to you) is against you.3picuri3

It is you who are making the wholesale accusations, we are merely objecting to those statements. The law states that it is YOU who should provide the evidence.Hoobinator

Not guilty until proven otherwise, that is how things are, well where I come from anyway. And in this respect the review sites are not guilty of committing wholesale mistakes from all sites that gave Too Human below a 7, until you can provide wholesale counter evidence.

[QUOTE="Hoobinator"]And since I know you're into Law, like a judge I will ask for one thing only. Bring me evidence from each of the major review sites that they showed mistakes in their reviews. From all major reviews please, since all are being dismissed wholesale.Vandalvideo

And bring me evidence that the game sites that took time to play the game (how you know how much time they put in is beyond me), chose to give this above average reviews. Also provide evidence for how much time they put into the game, since that is a statement much of your argument rests on

Bring me evidence from every review site that game Too Human a 5-6 then.

You can recognise when a reviewer is telling the truth... damn you must be a superjudge, Anyway provide evidence for this statement please.

And finally you keep saying IGN is the only 'real correct site' and most others were wrong, again, I'm repeating myself, but please Vandal show me the money, SHOW ME THE EVIDENCE.

If this was a court of law, you'd have been eaten alive by now, you know this.

Bring me evidence from every review site that game Too Human a 5-6 then.You can recognise when a reviewer is telling the truth... damn you must be a superjudge, Anyway provide evidence for this statement please.Hoobinator

And finally you keep saying IGN is the only 'real correct site' and most others were wrong, again, I'm repeating myself, but please Vandal show me the money,

[QUOTE="Hoobinator"] It is you who are making the wholesale accusations, we are merely objecting to those statements. The law states that it is YOU who should provide the evidence.Vandalvideo

Not guilty until proven otherwise, that is how things are, well where I come from anyway. And in this respect the review sites are not guilty of committing wholesale mistakes from all sites that gave Too Human below a 7, until you can provide wholesale counter evidence.

1UP's review has been dismissed. 1UP's evidence will be stricken from the record.

Now do this for each and every other review.

I agreed with you at the very start of this conversation that there were some bad reviews, but you insisted on dismissing on wholesale that the 'bad' scoring reviews were wrong.

It is your prerogative to back up your claims, which you have failed, with the exception of 1UP, which I already know of Giancarlo Varanini's mistakes.

I do not believe most of the bad reviews were misunderstanding the game, neither does 3picui3, nor does the majority of the gaming press. It is for you to provide counter evidence.

[QUOTE="Hoobinator"]Bring me evidence from every review site that game Too Human a 5-6 then.You can recognise when a reviewer is telling the truth... damn you must be a superjudge, Anyway provide evidence for this statement please.Vandalvideo

And finally you keep saying IGN is the only 'real correct site' and most others were wrong, again, I'm repeating myself, but please Vandal show me the money,

Actually you gave me one piece of evidence, i.e, 1UP, yet have wholesale dismissed all other low scoring reviews of Too Human.:| This is what bothers me.

Now dismiss this random review. What is wrong with this one?

And provide me with evidence that IGN took the time to play the game, 'propery'. Damn this conversation is becoming utterly tedious.

And yes I will be asking you to refute each and every low scoring review, even if it takes me a 1000 pages of asking you to refute each and every low scoring review.

1UP's review has been dismissed. 1UP's evidence will be stricken from the record.Now do this for each and every other review.I agreed with you at the very start of this conversation that there were some bad reviews, but you insisted on dismissing on wholesale that the 'bad' scoring reviews were wrong.It is your prerogative to back up your claims, which you have failed, with the exception of 1UP, which I already know of Giancarlo Varanini's mistakes.I do not believe most of the bad reviews were misunderstanding the game, neither does 3picui3, nor does the majority of the gaming press. It is for you to provide counter evidence.Hoobinator

Now dismiss this random review. What is wrong with this one?Hoobinator

[QUOTE="Hoobinator"]1UP's review has been dismissed. 1UP's evidence will be stricken from the record.Now do this for each and every other review.I agreed with you at the very start of this conversation that there were some bad reviews, but you insisted on dismissing on wholesale that the 'bad' scoring reviews were wrong.It is your prerogative to back up your claims, which you have failed, with the exception of 1UP, which I already know of Giancarlo Varanini's mistakes.I do not believe most of the bad reviews were misunderstanding the game, neither does 3picui3, nor does the majority of the gaming press. It is for you to provide counter evidence.Vandalvideo

I didn't get the GS one. Maybe it got lost in the vast wilderness of spam in this thread.

What exactly is the definition of variety, how many varied enemies are there in the game? Is his definition same as yours? Is 10 different enemies a varied amount or few in number? Is this potentially a completely opinion piece?

Fallout 3 is a sluggish device, soulless, not exactly terrible, actually almost enjoyable, but totally forgettable

Fawlcon_Pawnch

so basically like oblivion

What exactly is the definition of variety, how many varied enemies are there in the game? Is his definition same as yours? Is 10 different enemies a varied amount or few in number? Is this potentially a completely opinion piece?Hoobinator

[QUOTE="Hoobinator"]Now dismiss this random review. What is wrong with this one?Vandalvideo

You see there is an inherent mistake in your reasoning there and that is simply asking yourself what does he mean by 'change'?

I could easily back up his statement by saying the enemies even with palette changes, do not drastically alter the gameplay, which is what he is saying. The gameplay is by and large much the same and the way you tackle them is much the same.

To clarify Gamespy's review, here is what they meant by the enemy never really changes:

IGN: "Since every encounter is roughly the same difficulty level, none ever felt special or memorable. Nothing you do ever really feels like it makes a difference

No change really.

Thus opinion refuted.

[QUOTE="Vandalvideo"][QUOTE="Hoobinator"]Now dismiss this random review. What is wrong with this one?Hoobinator

You see there is an inherent mistake in your reasoning there and that is simply asking yourself what does he mean by 'change'?

I could easily back up his statement by saying the enemies even with palette changes, do not drastically alter the gameplay, which is what he is saying. The gameplay is by and large much the same and the way you tackle them is much the same.

Thus opinion refuted.

Too Human wasn't good at all.

Not a very good game.

[QUOTE="Hoobinator"]

[QUOTE="Vandalvideo"][QUOTE="Hoobinator"]Now dismiss this random review. What is wrong with this one?Vandalvideo

You see there is an inherent mistake in your reasoning there and that is simply asking yourself what does he mean by 'change'?

I could easily back up his statement by saying the enemies even with palette changes, do not drastically alter the gameplay, which is what he is saying. The gameplay is by and large much the same and the way you tackle them is much the same.

Thus opinion refuted.

To clarify Gamespys statement, by change it wasn't meant as variety but in gameplay effect, to quote the holy IGN review:

"Since every encounter is roughly the same difficulty level, none ever felt special or memorable. Nothing you do ever really feels like it makes a difference"

No change there then. Oops.

Gamespy is BTW owned by the same parent company as IGN, they're effectively one big company, just different parts.

To clarify Gamespys statement, by change it wasn't meant as variety but in gameplay effect, to quote the holy IGN review:"Since every encounter is roughly the same difficulty level, none ever felt special or memorable. Nothing you do ever really feels like it makes a difference"No change there then. Oops. Hoobinator

What bothers me about the article is this:

"VATS slow motion may be the worst crime against video gaming since the invention of the auto-aim and checkpoint based save system.
I don't know what the people of Bethesda had in mind... Maybe they feared that the game would be too short and imposed a twenty seconds on us at each targeted shot to extend the gameplay length, maybe they really desire that we notice their face modeling with independent eye globes, maybe they simply suffer from blaring bad taste, from a love for Brotherhood of Steel they want to share at any price?"

It's more like if you took VATS out, you'd basically be left with a 'twitch' game or a cross between Oblivion with guns or Mass-Effect. It's obvious (and I mean really obvious) that it was put in to get the real-time combat closer to the turn-based combat of the last games. He/She (doesn't say) does make some valid points like the random enounters etc. but this one kind of sticks out as ridiculous. I mean really what did he/she expect? a full blown FPS/TPS like some sort of post-apocalyptic Grand Theft Auto or them going back to turn-based combat and make it some sort of post-apocalyptic Final-Fantasy game?

[QUOTE="Hoobinator"]To clarify Gamespys statement, by change it wasn't meant as variety but in gameplay effect, to quote the holy IGN review:"Since every encounter is roughly the same difficulty level, none ever felt special or memorable. Nothing you do ever really feels like it makes a difference"No change there then. Oops. Vandalvideo

Nope, palette swap was only a choice to words to highlight that the enemies stay much the same, they don't ever feel special or memorable and nothing you do ever really makes a difference.

Nope, palette swap was only a choice to words to highlight that the enemies stay much the same, they don't ever feel special or memorable and nothing you do ever really makes a difference. Hoobinator

I like Eurogamer. 6/0 seems good.

Nothing wrong with this review.

Too Human wasn't good at all.

Not a very good game.

RuprechtMonkey

That's your opinion. But others would like you to believe that this opinion, the satisfaction that you derived from Too Human, which is wholly subjective, is false. So your experiences are now false.

I like Eurogamer. 6/0 seems good.

Nothing wrong with this review.

Hoobinator

230 replies from a thread based on a review from CanardPC?

you people can't be serious.

I don't trust any negative stuff about this game, what with all of the fanboys of the first two and Oblivion haters out there. What I've seen is amazing, so I'll buy it anyway.borgmaster

That's funny, I don't trust any of the positive stuff about this game because of all the Oblivion fanboys and people who have never played the first two. And from what I've seen, the game doesn't look very good at all, so I certainly won't buy it.

230 replies from a thread based on a review from CanardPC?

you people can't be serious.

Dreams-Visions

Not how I want to spend my night.:(

I like Eurogamer. 6/0 seems good.

Nothing wrong with this review.

Hoobinator

[QUOTE="Hoobinator"]

I like Eurogamer. 6/0 seems good.

Nothing wrong with this review.

Vandalvideo

So you feel the combat to be rewarding and above average then?

Again, I can't believe I'm having to state something so simple, but your experiences with the game and your standards of what defines depth doesn't correllate exactly to the reviewers, why you can't see this is beyond me?

The fact that many of these reviewers seem to state that the combat is below average and not particularly deep seems to show that there are some problems with it. You come along and state your opinion as fact. You see the games combat as deep, so why is your word better than theres?

There are people out there who will attest that Shadowrun is the greatest shooter on the 360, yes it is very good, I loved it, but at the same time every review I read I can easily understand why the game got below 7's all round, mostly. There just isn't enough game there and not enough online modes. The gameplay is deep, but it doesn't make up for the short falls. I could write an essay on how good Shadowrun is, doesn't mean the reviewers don't get he game, or misunderstand it. Their opinions, mostly, are as valid as mine. The only difference being they're not seeing the game in the same way I am.

[QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"]

230 replies from a thread based on a review from CanardPC?

you people can't be serious.

Hoobinator

Not how I want to spend my night.:(

*gasp*

not again... :cry:

[QUOTE="Hoobinator"]

I like Eurogamer. 6/0 seems good.

Nothing wrong with this review.

footfoe2

I actually do genuinely feel their reviews are pretty decent. They're harsher critics than most.

[QUOTE="Hoobinator"]

I like Eurogamer. 6/0 seems good.

Nothing wrong with this review.

footfoe2

Boo! Screw the numbers, read the reviews! Another mag gave MGS4 an 8, but had a very well written review to back it up. I was raging when I saw the score, but after reading it I just went, O well that's alright then.

So you feel the combat to be rewarding and above average then? Again, I can't believe I'm having to state something so simple, but your experiences with the game and your standards of what defines depth doesn't correllate exactly to the reviewers, why you can't see this is beyond me? Hoobinator

ICONOCLASM!

ICONOCLASM!

RuprechtMonkey

don't you dare, lol.

[QUOTE="footfoe2"][QUOTE="Hoobinator"]

I like Eurogamer. 6/0 seems good.

Nothing wrong with this review.

locopatho

Boo! Screw the numbers, read the reviews! Another mag gave MGS4 an 8, but had a very well written review to back it up. I was raging when I saw the score, but after reading it I just went, O well that's alright then.

deserved an 8 or 9, was nothing close to perfection imo. but we all know that already ;). i'm the guy that used to yell at the teacher for handing out A+ or A++ in highschool.

[QUOTE="Hoobinator"]So you feel the combat to be rewarding and above average then? Again, I can't believe I'm having to state something so simple, but your experiences with the game and your standards of what defines depth doesn't correllate exactly to the reviewers, why you can't see this is beyond me? Vandalvideo

You feel the game has a deep combat, other reviewers don't.

IGN: Gameplay
Deep customization options and heaven for loot drop fans. The forgiving death system and auto-scaling enemies make the combat feel unrewarding.

The unrewarding nature of the combat lies at the heart of many of the reviewers rants against it.

[QUOTE="Hoobinator"]

I like Eurogamer. 6/0 seems good.

Nothing wrong with this review.

Vandalvideo

This statement is easily false. Subrosian can attest to this, but me and Subrosian played the same player **** While we were playing I was able to perform all kinds of amazing aerial moves that he wasn't able to. I was able to practically stay in the air the entire time, and he kept asking me how I was able to do it. The melee mechanics in the game may not seem deep at first, but once you start to play witht hem and see how the systems interact they do provide for ag eneral degree of depth that allows the player to exercise control over the gameplay mechanics. The melee system is not inflexible or shallow.

Quote: Eurogamer.

"The melee attacks are easier to master, but it's not a system with much flexibility or depth. The difficulty in lining up two sticks in the same direction means that the "advanced moves" can be unreliable, and the game sometimes has weird ideas as to when enemies are far away or nearby. You have three weapon options to choose from - sword, staff or hammer - but apart from variations in speed, the results are almost always the same. Mindless stick-twizzling (it's the new button-mashing!) won't get you to the end of the game very quickly, but nor will you find yourself being stunned by the tactical scope of this new control system. It pales alongside the precision offered by the likes of Ninja Gaiden, or even Samurai Warriors."

Depth in terms of gameplay, the choices on offer do not drastically alter gameplay. In the context of the full paragraph makes perfect sense.

Backed up by the holy IGN review:

"Since every encounter is roughly the same difficulty level, none ever felt special or memorable. Nothing you do ever really feels like it makes a difference"

"Gameplay
Deep customization options and heaven for loot drop fans. The forgiving death system and auto-scaling enemies make the combat feel unrewarding."

The unrewarding nature of the combat lies at the heart of many of the reviewers rants against it.Hoobinator

Meh, my favourite game of all time has this huge cult of haters (Diablo 2).

So maybe someone thinks the game is bad but I've seen gameplay videos and read alot about it and I think it's going to be a great game based on what I like in video games. :)

Backed up by the holy IGN review:"Since every encounter is roughly the same difficulty level, none ever felt special or memorable. Nothing you do ever really feels like it makes a difference""GameplaDeep customization options and heaven for loot drop fans. The forgiving death system and auto-scaling enemies make the combat feel unrewarding.Hoobinator

[QUOTE="Hoobinator"]Backed up by the holy IGN review:"Since every encounter is roughly the same difficulty level, none ever felt special or memorable. Nothing you do ever really feels like it makes a difference""GameplaDeep customization options and heaven for loot drop fans. The forgiving death system and auto-scaling enemies make the combat feel unrewarding.Vandalvideo

anyone reading this thread (that has the patience) can see that this is what your argument has mutated in to. your original claim was that all reviewers who didn't give Too Human a positive review were mistaken - and that they all had the same misconception about the game. you said this was fact. then you tried to pull something from a single review that you could use to shift focus to in an attempt to claim some small victory without conceding how ridiculous your original claim was.

TeamXbox. 6.5. Low score, great review. He clarifies throughout the whole review that he did not enjoy it, but it's still an OK game, and you may love it. This review is bang on the money.

"I did my best. I entered in to Too Human with an entirely open mind, and only one real expectation: that it live up to its preordained status as a AAA-quality Xbox 360 exclusive."

"But to put it simply, playing Too Human was a highly unenjoyable experience for m"

"What about people who do play it and like it. I know there will be someone out there will, and I never begrudge someone their own personal joy. But I'm just not seeing it."

"Let's start with the story. Again, a highly subjective subject... But again, if that's your thing, fine. One man's Hamlet is another man's TekWar."

"But again, highly subjective, and if you dig it, you dig it. I didn't. But it's harder to defend some of the other design choices, especially when it comes to gameplay"

"Yes, there is something fun about Too Human, something that will weigh more heavily in the eyes of those who do enjoy the game."

"Yes, the melee combat can be enjoyable; but after fourteen hours of the same maneuvers delivered against hordes of samey enemies, even the best thing about Too Human gets old."

"For all my frustration with Too Human, I often see really good ideas sneak through."

"I hope I made it clear how much I disliked it. I hope I also made it clear that you may like it. In fact, it's a guarantee that someone will. Just not me. I don't need games that make me this mad for so little payoff."

Review was bang on the money, scored low, no real mistakes or other subjective factors you may disagree with him on, because he qualifies his position as being completely subjective constantly.

The last sentance sum's it all up for me.

It's clear this "reviewer" is a hardcore fallout 1/2 fan that was completly against this game from the start saying "this mucky heresy" "I could destroy it, dip it into a vat of hatred just to clear the insult, but it wouldn't make it better, IT WOULDN'T BRING BLACK ISLE BACK(original fallout developer)"

This was a gamer who was ready to hate it from the begining, a PC gamer that hates the fact one of his beloved PC franchises has been changed to accomodate console gamers.

Im still betting fallout 3 reviews very well all round and is an excellent game.

I would not let this biased hater deter you from checking this game out or at least waiting for more reviews.