Red Dead Redemption or Fallout 3 ?

  • 54 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for RPG-explorer
RPG-explorer

349

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1 RPG-explorer
Member since 2010 • 349 Posts

Well let's hear it i personally love Fallout 3, it's one of my all time favorite games, but there saying Red Dead Redemption is going to be the biggest open world game ever and with a new innovative multiplayer and gun aiming system and much more.

So what do you guys think ?

Avatar image for deactivated-5c8e4e07d5510
deactivated-5c8e4e07d5510

17401

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2 deactivated-5c8e4e07d5510
Member since 2007 • 17401 Posts
No one's played RDR yet brah.
Avatar image for SaltyMeatballs
SaltyMeatballs

25165

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#3 SaltyMeatballs
Member since 2009 • 25165 Posts
Obviously RDR, but whatever "the game is not out yet", blah blah...
Avatar image for Arach666
Arach666

23285

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: -1

User Lists: 0

#4 Arach666
Member since 2009 • 23285 Posts

I don´t like westerns,so...... Fallout 3 ;)

Avatar image for djsifer01
djsifer01

7238

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#5 djsifer01
Member since 2005 • 7238 Posts
You have not played FO3 yet? One of the best RPG's this gen. Its hard to make a opinion on 2 games when one is not out yet.
Avatar image for RPG-explorer
RPG-explorer

349

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 RPG-explorer
Member since 2010 • 349 Posts

You have not played FO3 yet? One of the best RPG's this gen. Its hard to make a opinion on 2 games when one is not out yet.djsifer01

I've played and beaten Fallout 3, even with all the expansions, and i just started it over for like the 20th time, so i've definitely played my share of Fallout 3. As for Red Dead Redemption, obviously i haven't played it yet, but i did look at every behind the scenes video, every gameplay trailer, and read every preview article written for it, and i don't see the game getting less than a 9 rating across the board.

I've also already paid for the reserve in full, so on May 18th i just have to stroll into the store and pick it up....i can't wait i've been counting the days for months.

Avatar image for powerman91
powerman91

692

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#7 powerman91
Member since 2008 • 692 Posts

Youd prolly be better off just getting Halo.

Avatar image for BPoole96
BPoole96

22818

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#8 BPoole96
Member since 2008 • 22818 Posts

Youd prolly be better off just getting Halo.

powerman91

Yeah Halo Reach is coming out this year. That pretty much makes every other game for the rest of this gen obsolete

Avatar image for Grawse
Grawse

4342

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#9 Grawse
Member since 2010 • 4342 Posts

[QUOTE="powerman91"]

Youd prolly be better off just getting Halo.

BPoole96

Yeah Halo Reach is coming out this year. That pretty much makes every other game for the rest of this gen obsolete

lol

Avatar image for KristoffBrujah
KristoffBrujah

1860

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#10 KristoffBrujah
Member since 2005 • 1860 Posts

It's not out yet, how can there be a thread about this?

Fallout was my GOTY, hard to beat.

Avatar image for bobbleheadrogue
bobbleheadrogue

2203

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#11 bobbleheadrogue
Member since 2009 • 2203 Posts

Well let's hear it i personally love Fallout 3, it's one of my all time favorite games, but there saying Red Dead Redemption is going to be the biggest open world game ever and with a new innovative multiplayer and gun aiming system and much more.

So what do you guys think ?

RPG-explorer
this thread should be called 'GTA IV OR FALLOUT 3' or 'READ DEAD REDEMPTION OR FALLOUT: NEW VEGAS' ;) That would make it more fair :)
Avatar image for jg4xchamp
jg4xchamp

64054

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 14

User Lists: 0

#12 jg4xchamp
Member since 2006 • 64054 Posts

I don't even need RDR to be out to know that I will enjoy it more than I enjoyed Fallout 3(which I couldn't even bring myself to like for more than 5 hours) That game was so lifeless, devoid of a soul or personality.

It's my biggest beef with Bethesda ever since the first elder scrolls games. They know how to make a game world expansive and "deep" blah blah. But it all feels empty and lifeless to me. Bethesda has these games that are well crafted, polished for the most part(hitches here and there), well thought out, progressive in certain ways, but the games feel like it was made by a bunch of lifeless robots instead of people with a personality. That is why their games bore me to death.

Rockstar on the other hand? They make some of the most horrible games from a mechanics standpoint at times, they can royally screw up the polish end of things, and they can go as far as to be pretentious, but they know how to entertain. There games have some personality to them, some life to them. They know how to engage their consumer as much as they can piss you off with bad design choices. So I'll take RDR in this case.

Avatar image for Parasomniac
Parasomniac

2723

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#13 Parasomniac
Member since 2007 • 2723 Posts
RDR isn't out yet, and New Vegas will be superior to Fallout 3. That's the real battle.
Avatar image for Elutheria
Elutheria

286

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#14 Elutheria
Member since 2003 • 286 Posts
71% going for a game that's not even out yet, got to love the optimism.
Avatar image for The-Mosher
The-Mosher

1885

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#15 The-Mosher
Member since 2009 • 1885 Posts

I don´t like westerns,so...... Fallout 3 ;)

Arach666
Agreed. The only Western I actually played was Gun: Showdown, but it wasn't all that fun.
Avatar image for racing1750
racing1750

14567

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 20

User Lists: 0

#16 racing1750
Member since 2010 • 14567 Posts
I hated fallout 3...but i've not played RDR, so yeh.
Avatar image for SaltyMeatballs
SaltyMeatballs

25165

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#17 SaltyMeatballs
Member since 2009 • 25165 Posts
71% going for a game that's not even out yet, got to love the optimism.Elutheria
Could be that they didn't think F3 was as great as people make out (like me)
Avatar image for RPG-explorer
RPG-explorer

349

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#18 RPG-explorer
Member since 2010 • 349 Posts

I don't even need RDR to be out to know that I will enjoy it more than I enjoyed Fallout 3(which I couldn't even bring myself to like for more than 5 hours) That game was so lifeless, devoid of a soul or personality.

It's my biggest beef with Bethesda ever since the first elder scrolls games. They know how to make a game world expansive and "deep" blah blah. But it all feels empty and lifeless to me. Bethesda has these games that are well crafted, polished for the most part(hitches here and there), well thought out, progressive in certain ways, but the games feel like it was made by a bunch of lifeless robots instead of people with a personality. That is why their games bore me to death.

Rockstar on the other hand? They make some of the most horrible games from a mechanics standpoint at times, they can royally screw up the polish end of things, and they can go as far as to be pretentious, but they know how to entertain. There games have some personality to them, some life to them. They know how to engage their consumer as much as they can piss you off with bad design choices. So I'll take RDR in this case.

jg4xchamp

Bethesda is actually one of my favorite developers, and i believe there games are the exact opposite of what you think, if you watch the opening cutscene to Oblivion you get a real sense of a living breathing world with near infinite explorations and people to talk with that provide endless quests and multiple characters and guilds to be a part of.

Games like Fallout 3 and the Elder Scrolls series are more involved then most gamers ever discover, because they either don't put in the thought and time necessary to get the most out of them or, there just to complex for the average shooter, sports or platforming game lover to comprehend.

These games require skill, strategy and thought to be able to progress at a steady pace. So that could be the reason a lot of people don't like them, because those who do, absolutely love them.

Avatar image for racing1750
racing1750

14567

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 20

User Lists: 0

#19 racing1750
Member since 2010 • 14567 Posts

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"]

I don't even need RDR to be out to know that I will enjoy it more than I enjoyed Fallout 3(which I couldn't even bring myself to like for more than 5 hours) That game was so lifeless, devoid of a soul or personality.

It's my biggest beef with Bethesda ever since the first elder scrolls games. They know how to make a game world expansive and "deep" blah blah. But it all feels empty and lifeless to me. Bethesda has these games that are well crafted, polished for the most part(hitches here and there), well thought out, progressive in certain ways, but the games feel like it was made by a bunch of lifeless robots instead of people with a personality. That is why their games bore me to death.

Rockstar on the other hand? They make some of the most horrible games from a mechanics standpoint at times, they can royally screw up the polish end of things, and they can go as far as to be pretentious, but they know how to entertain. There games have some personality to them, some life to them. They know how to engage their consumer as much as they can piss you off with bad design choices. So I'll take RDR in this case.

RPG-explorer

Bethesda is actually one of my favorite developers, and i believe there games are the exact opposite of what you think, if you watch the opening cutscene to Oblivion you get a real sense of a living breathing world with near infinite explorations and people to talk with that provide endless quests and multiple characters and guilds to be a part of.

Games like Fallout 3 and the Elder Scrolls series are more involved then most gamers ever discover, because they either don't put in the thought and time necessary to get the most out of them or, there just to complex for the average shooter, sports or platforming game lover to comprehend.

These games require skill, strategy and thought to be able to progress at a steady pace. So that could be the reason a lot of people don't like them, because those who do, absolutely love them.

I think thats my problem with RPG's in general. Oblivion and fallout 3 require the player to put hours and hours into them to get the best out of them. I find this tiresome, and not worth it. Maybe i'm lazy, but i can't spend that amount of time on videogame.

Avatar image for coltgames
coltgames

2120

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#20 coltgames
Member since 2009 • 2120 Posts

71% going for a game that's not even out yet, got to love the optimism.Elutheria

my thoughts exactly

Avatar image for brickdoctor
brickdoctor

9746

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 156

User Lists: 0

#21 brickdoctor
Member since 2008 • 9746 Posts

Nothing can beat FALLOUT 3!!! (Except maybe New Vegas.)

Avatar image for RPG-explorer
RPG-explorer

349

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#22 RPG-explorer
Member since 2010 • 349 Posts

racing1750:wrote

I think thats my problem with RPG's in general. Oblivion and fallout 3 require the player to put hours and hours into them to get the best out of them. I find this tiresome, and not worth it. Maybe i'm lazy, but i can't spend that amount of time on videogame.

It's very honest of you to admit that, most gamers will just say they hate games like Oblivion and Fallout 3 without admitting the real reasons why.

However if you think about those people like myself who do get obsessed with these games, you can literally give each of these games, especially Oblivion months of your life and never do the same thing twice.

So to me thats the real value of a game, i think open world games should be the future of most games, it's the only way you get the absolute most for your money as opposed to a game where the single player is over in a mere 12 to 20 hours. Yes a lot of games have an online multiplayer mode that increases the value and replay time you get but it's usually the same thing over and over like online shooters. Where as games like Fallout 3 and Oblivion have no online play and yet you can literally play them for months and do something different every time you turn it on, thats a true $65.00 value.

It's a shame that you consider yourself too lazy to really explore these games, because i believe if you forced yourself to maybe read through some of there strategy guides and just see the infinite possibilities of what you can do in the game it might peak your interest to fight and explore your way through to loving the game.

How many games out there let you be one of 10 different characters or 5 different species and become either a knight, warrior, mage, thief, vampire, or a member of the Dark Brotherhood assassins guild, and all while exploring underwater lairs, caves, forts and ancient ruins, gathering loot, killing dozens of different creatures and amassing a huge fortune that allows you to buy a house or castle in every city and acquire businesses.

While steadily leveling up your character to a near invincible state of being. I don't know about you but that sounds amazing to me... and that and more is possible in Oblivion...and a very similar experience is also possible in Fallout 3. So if there were ever 2 games that were worth practicing your patience on and investigating further it would be these two.

Avatar image for Wings_008
Wings_008

3813

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 173

User Lists: 0

#23 Wings_008
Member since 2008 • 3813 Posts
Fallout 3 all the way
Avatar image for cobrax25
cobrax25

9649

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#24 cobrax25
Member since 2006 • 9649 Posts

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"]

I don't even need RDR to be out to know that I will enjoy it more than I enjoyed Fallout 3(which I couldn't even bring myself to like for more than 5 hours) That game was so lifeless, devoid of a soul or personality.

It's my biggest beef with Bethesda ever since the first elder scrolls games. They know how to make a game world expansive and "deep" blah blah. But it all feels empty and lifeless to me. Bethesda has these games that are well crafted, polished for the most part(hitches here and there), well thought out, progressive in certain ways, but the games feel like it was made by a bunch of lifeless robots instead of people with a personality. That is why their games bore me to death.

Rockstar on the other hand? They make some of the most horrible games from a mechanics standpoint at times, they can royally screw up the polish end of things, and they can go as far as to be pretentious, but they know how to entertain. There games have some personality to them, some life to them. They know how to engage their consumer as much as they can piss you off with bad design choices. So I'll take RDR in this case.

RPG-explorer

Bethesda is actually one of my favorite developers, and i believe there games are the exact opposite of what you think, if you watch the opening cutscene to Oblivion you get a real sense of a living breathing world with near infinite explorations and people to talk with that provide endless quests and multiple characters and guilds to be a part of.

Games like Fallout 3 and the Elder Scrolls series are more involved then most gamers ever discover, because they either don't put in the thought and time necessary to get the most out of them or, there just to complex for the average shooter, sports or platforming game lover to comprehend.

These games require skill, strategy and thought to be able to progress at a steady pace. So that could be the reason a lot of people don't like them, because those who do, absolutely love them.

The problem with Fallout 3 is that it completly disregards everything that made Fallout 2 so good. Fallout 2 was so incredible because it let you play as any type of character you wanted. The stat system in Fallout 3 is incredibly flawed, and the entire game is far to heavily stacked towards combat and a few other skills. Not to mention the actual writing in the game is some of the worst I have ever seen in an RPG, even if it is a record best for Bethesda.

I just replayed Fallout 2 and realized just how much the RPG genre has fallen. RPG's are to combat focused now.

Avatar image for GhoX
GhoX

6267

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 26

User Lists: 0

#25 GhoX
Member since 2006 • 6267 Posts
Fallout 3 wins by default due to the absence of RDR.
Avatar image for LP4EVA2005
LP4EVA2005

8585

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#26 LP4EVA2005
Member since 2004 • 8585 Posts

i put many many MANY hours into Fallout 3 (i even used up one of my sick days at work to just stay home and play) so im going with F3

Avatar image for gmc2u_64
gmc2u_64

2402

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#27 gmc2u_64
Member since 2005 • 2402 Posts

I don't know. RDR looks awesome (Just like GTA IV), but I'm on my third game of Fallout 3, and I'm STILL loving it! So, I guess I'll find out on May 18.

Avatar image for gmc2u_64
gmc2u_64

2402

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#28 gmc2u_64
Member since 2005 • 2402 Posts

Nothing can beat FALLOUT 3!!! (Except maybe New Vegas.)

brickdoctor
Well, if Obsidian screws up again on NV (Either rushed (KOTOR 2) or extremely buggy (Never Winter Nights 2)), then Fallout 3 WILL be better.
Avatar image for Parasomniac
Parasomniac

2723

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#29 Parasomniac
Member since 2007 • 2723 Posts
[QUOTE="brickdoctor"]

Nothing can beat FALLOUT 3!!! (Except maybe New Vegas.)

gmc2u_64
Well, if Obsidian screws up again on NV (Either rushed (KOTOR 2) or extremely buggy (Never Winter Nights 2)), then Fallout 3 WILL be better.

Fallout 3 is already extremely buggy and you seem okay with it so the only thing that can go wrong is getting rushed.
Avatar image for Darth-Samus
Darth-Samus

3995

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#30 Darth-Samus
Member since 2006 • 3995 Posts

Falllllllllllouuuuuuuuuuuut!

Although really this should be "Red Ded Redemption or Fallout New Vegas" shouldn't it?

Avatar image for Phoenix534
Phoenix534

17774

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#31 Phoenix534
Member since 2008 • 17774 Posts

I don't get this. It's action-adventure vs RPG. Wouldn't RDR vs JC2 make more sense?

Avatar image for Ratchet_Fan8
Ratchet_Fan8

5574

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#32 Ratchet_Fan8
Member since 2008 • 5574 Posts
RDR isn't out yet, and New Vegas will be superior to Fallout 3. That's the real battle.Parasomniac
Yeah,Bethesda is NOT making F:NV right?
Avatar image for Mr_Cumberdale
Mr_Cumberdale

10189

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 0

#33 Mr_Cumberdale
Member since 2004 • 10189 Posts
RDR. I just got Fallout 3 earlier this week and it's great, but quite violent. F3 does many things better than Oblivion though.
Avatar image for mD-
mD-

4314

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#34 mD-
Member since 2005 • 4314 Posts

Why RDR is winning:

http://www.gametrailers.com/video/life-in-red-dead/63316

http://www.gametrailers.com/video/gameplay-series-red-dead/64784

Avatar image for gmc2u_64
gmc2u_64

2402

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#35 gmc2u_64
Member since 2005 • 2402 Posts

[QUOTE="gmc2u_64"][QUOTE="brickdoctor"]

Nothing can beat FALLOUT 3!!! (Except maybe New Vegas.)

Parasomniac

Well, if Obsidian screws up again on NV (Either rushed (KOTOR 2) or extremely buggy (Never Winter Nights 2)), then Fallout 3 WILL be better.

Fallout 3 is already extremely buggy and you seem okay with it so the only thing that can go wrong is getting rushed.

Not for me. I only experienced a few glitches, but I'm excusing Bethesda because the Capital Wasteland is HUGE, and I DID put in over 100 hours into it. Go ahead and call me biassed because I don't care.

Avatar image for RPG-explorer
RPG-explorer

349

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#36 RPG-explorer
Member since 2010 • 349 Posts

Why RDR is winning:

http://www.gametrailers.com/video/life-in-red-dead/63316

http://www.gametrailers.com/video/gameplay-series-red-dead/64784

mD-
I've seen these game trailers too, but i won't put Red Dead Redemption ahead of Fallout 3 until i play it. I already played through Fallout 3 and it's expansions a number of times, so i know how great it is, plus i've learned a long time ago not to get too hyped about gameplay videos or preview articles. When release day finally comes we'll see how good the gameplay actually is, as i recall Two Worlds also looked as if it was going to be the next Oblivion, maybe a little better, but as most of us found out, that wasn't the case at all. Now i did prepay for my copy of Red Dead Redemption, and i am excited about it, but i'll also knit pick the gameplay and look for any major or minor flaws it may have and come back with some honest opinions as to how good or bad it really is.
Avatar image for jg4xchamp
jg4xchamp

64054

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 14

User Lists: 0

#37 jg4xchamp
Member since 2006 • 64054 Posts

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"]

I don't even need RDR to be out to know that I will enjoy it more than I enjoyed Fallout 3(which I couldn't even bring myself to like for more than 5 hours) That game was so lifeless, devoid of a soul or personality.

It's my biggest beef with Bethesda ever since the first elder scrolls games. They know how to make a game world expansive and "deep" blah blah. But it all feels empty and lifeless to me. Bethesda has these games that are well crafted, polished for the most part(hitches here and there), well thought out, progressive in certain ways, but the games feel like it was made by a bunch of lifeless robots instead of people with a personality. That is why their games bore me to death.

Rockstar on the other hand? They make some of the most horrible games from a mechanics standpoint at times, they can royally screw up the polish end of things, and they can go as far as to be pretentious, but they know how to entertain. There games have some personality to them, some life to them. They know how to engage their consumer as much as they can piss you off with bad design choices. So I'll take RDR in this case.

RPG-explorer

Bethesda is actually one of my favorite developers, and i believe there games are the exact opposite of what you think, if you watch the opening cutscene to Oblivion you get a real sense of a living breathing world with near infinite explorations and people to talk with that provide endless quests and multiple characters and guilds to be a part of.

Games like Fallout 3 and the Elder Scrolls series are more involved then most gamers ever discover, because they either don't put in the thought and time necessary to get the most out of them or, there just to complex for the average shooter, sports or platforming game lover to comprehend.

These games require skill, strategy and thought to be able to progress at a steady pace. So that could be the reason a lot of people don't like them, because those who do, absolutely love them.

AS games job is to engage the player, not have the player force himself into finding ways to like the game. It's what makes FF13 boring, it's 20 hours of repetition before it finally opens up is NOT GOOD DESIGN. That's called bad pacing. That's the kind of stuff you put up with in Fallout 3 and Oblivion, and all that opening cutscene does is show you a beautiful world.

As far as really making it feel alive? Please the NPCs suck the life out of it, the gameplay/quest lines suck the life out of it. The actual game world itself sucks the very life out of it. Games like Fallout 1/2, Planescape Torment, The Witcher, Bioware RPGS(and I royally love to hate on them) etc know how to engage the player from the get go. That is something bethesda never could do for me.

As for skill? :lol: is that a joke? RPGs tend to be one of the easiest genres as far as progression is concerned(with ofcourse specific exceptions to this rule). I have no beef with the genre, Bethesda just lacks a soul to their games. It's more grind and micromanagement here and there, but that's really it. Not to mention Oblivion is like the dumb man's marrowind, and Fallout 3? pfft the originals were "complex" and required strategy. Fallout 3 is a joke in that department.

There games come off to me as lifeless and boring. You can't fix that by being "deep". Thats basically a waste of depth of you have to suffer so much tedium to get to the depth.

Avatar image for RPG-explorer
RPG-explorer

349

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#38 RPG-explorer
Member since 2010 • 349 Posts

[QUOTE="RPG-explorer"]

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"]

I don't even need RDR to be out to know that I will enjoy it more than I enjoyed Fallout 3(which I couldn't even bring myself to like for more than 5 hours) That game was so lifeless, devoid of a soul or personality.

It's my biggest beef with Bethesda ever since the first elder scrolls games. They know how to make a game world expansive and "deep" blah blah. But it all feels empty and lifeless to me. Bethesda has these games that are well crafted, polished for the most part(hitches here and there), well thought out, progressive in certain ways, but the games feel like it was made by a bunch of lifeless robots instead of people with a personality. That is why their games bore me to death.

Rockstar on the other hand? They make some of the most horrible games from a mechanics standpoint at times, they can royally screw up the polish end of things, and they can go as far as to be pretentious, but they know how to entertain. There games have some personality to them, some life to them. They know how to engage their consumer as much as they can piss you off with bad design choices. So I'll take RDR in this case.

jg4xchamp

Bethesda is actually one of my favorite developers, and i believe there games are the exact opposite of what you think, if you watch the opening cutscene to Oblivion you get a real sense of a living breathing world with near infinite explorations and people to talk with that provide endless quests and multiple characters and guilds to be a part of.

Games like Fallout 3 and the Elder Scrolls series are more involved then most gamers ever discover, because they either don't put in the thought and time necessary to get the most out of them or, there just to complex for the average shooter, sports or platforming game lover to comprehend.

These games require skill, strategy and thought to be able to progress at a steady pace. So that could be the reason a lot of people don't like them, because those who do, absolutely love them.

AS games job is to engage the player, not have the player force himself into finding ways to like the game. It's what makes FF13 boring, it's 20 hours of repetition before it finally opens up is NOT GOOD DESIGN. That's called bad pacing. That's the kind of stuff you put up with in Fallout 3 and Oblivion, and all that opening cutscene does is show you a beautiful world.

As far as really making it feel alive? Please the NPCs suck the life out of it, the gameplay/quest lines suck the life out of it. The actual game world itself sucks the very life out of it. Games like Fallout 1/2, Planescape Torment, The Witcher, Bioware RPGS(and I royally love to hate on them) etc know how to engage the player from the get go. That is something bethesda never could do for me.

As for skill? :lol: is that a joke? RPGs tend to be one of the easiest genres as far as progression is concerned(with ofcourse specific exceptions to this rule). I have no beef with the genre, Bethesda just lacks a soul to their games. It's more grind and micromanagement here and there, but that's really it. Not to mention Oblivion is like the dumb man's marrowind, and Fallout 3? pfft the originals were "complex" and required strategy. Fallout 3 is a joke in that department.

There games come off to me as lifeless and boring. You can't fix that by being "deep". Thats basically a waste of depth of you have to suffer so much tedium to get to the depth.

Ok well going by your sig pic, i'm going to guess your between the ages of 15 to 25 years old, and thats fine, but if you've always been an RPG hater then no game that even has RPG elements in it are going to interest you.

Especially Fallout 3 or Oblivion, it's not that the games or Bethesda are bad, it's because you just don't like RPG's, sorry but myself and the majority of online and magazine reviewers side with me on these 2 games, feel free to goto Gamerankings.com and look up Fallout 3 and Oblivion for yourself and you'll see.

If you prefer platformers or action-adventures, or even shooters thats fine but to come into a thread and mach games that you personally don't get or don't like because you hate RPG's is no kind of logical argument.

That would be like if i hated sport games and going into a thread about Madden or Tiger Woods and saying they suck just because there sport titles, thats no kind of argument, so if you don't like RPG's thats fine but unless you've made some attempt to play a few hours of the games you've commented on as an RPG fan then i'm afraid your not entitled to really give an honest opinion.

Avatar image for jg4xchamp
jg4xchamp

64054

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 14

User Lists: 0

#39 jg4xchamp
Member since 2006 • 64054 Posts

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"]

[QUOTE="RPG-explorer"]

Bethesda is actually one of my favorite developers, and i believe there games are the exact opposite of what you think, if you watch the opening cutscene to Oblivion you get a real sense of a living breathing world with near infinite explorations and people to talk with that provide endless quests and multiple characters and guilds to be a part of.

Games like Fallout 3 and the Elder Scrolls series are more involved then most gamers ever discover, because they either don't put in the thought and time necessary to get the most out of them or, there just to complex for the average shooter, sports or platforming game lover to comprehend.

These games require skill, strategy and thought to be able to progress at a steady pace. So that could be the reason a lot of people don't like them, because those who do, absolutely love them.

RPG-explorer

AS games job is to engage the player, not have the player force himself into finding ways to like the game. It's what makes FF13 boring, it's 20 hours of repetition before it finally opens up is NOT GOOD DESIGN. That's called bad pacing. That's the kind of stuff you put up with in Fallout 3 and Oblivion, and all that opening cutscene does is show you a beautiful world.

As far as really making it feel alive? Please the NPCs suck the life out of it, the gameplay/quest lines suck the life out of it. The actual game world itself sucks the very life out of it. Games like Fallout 1/2, Planescape Torment, The Witcher, Bioware RPGS(and I royally love to hate on them) etc know how to engage the player from the get go. That is something bethesda never could do for me.

As for skill? :lol: is that a joke? RPGs tend to be one of the easiest genres as far as progression is concerned(with ofcourse specific exceptions to this rule). I have no beef with the genre, Bethesda just lacks a soul to their games. It's more grind and micromanagement here and there, but that's really it. Not to mention Oblivion is like the dumb man's marrowind, and Fallout 3? pfft the originals were "complex" and required strategy. Fallout 3 is a joke in that department.

There games come off to me as lifeless and boring. You can't fix that by being "deep". Thats basically a waste of depth of you have to suffer so much tedium to get to the depth.

Ok well going by your sig pic, i'm going to guess your between the ages of 15 to 25 years old, and thats fine, but if you've always been an RPG hater then no game that even has RPG elements in it are going to interest you.

Especially Fallout 3 or Oblivion, it's not that the games or Bethesda are bad, it's because you just don't like RPG's, sorry but myself and the majority of online and magazine reviewers side with me on these 2 games, feel free to goto Gamerankings.com and look up Fallout 3 and Oblivion for yourself and you'll see.

If you prefer platformers or action-adventures, or even shooters thats fine but to come into a thread and mach games that you personally don't get or don't like because you hate RPG's is no kind of logical argument.

That would be like if i hated sport games and going into a thread about Madden or Tiger Woods and saying they suck just because there sport titles, thats no kind of argument, so if you don't like RPG's thats fine but unless you've made some attempt to play a few hours of the games you've commented on as an RPG fan then i'm afraid your not entitled to really give an honest opinion.

first and foremost, the high and might sense of bravada you got there in assuming what my likes and dislikes are is a tad bit annoying. As for my age 22 in may but what does my sig have to do with this?

I clearly don't hate the RPG genre considering I'm a fan of certain RPGS :|
-planescape
-the original fallout gmes
-masquarade: the vampire bloodlines
-Bioware RPGs(as in Baldurs Gate 2, Kotor, etc)
-JRPGs

Again I never discredited anyones opinion. I believe my exact wording was that they know how to make a well crafted game, but they don't know how to make a game that's fun to me. I have no beef with the genre. I just find that in the RPG genre Bethesda is one of the weaker developers in quality.

I don't think any of comments came off as hating for the sake of hating on the game. I did give the games a chance. I am not a fan or hater of genres(well light gun games suck). I prefer games I find to be good, fun, or at the least satisfying. That's what Oblivion/Fallout 3/Marrowind/Daggerfall/ don't cover for me. I don't like them as games. I'm not entitled to an honest opinion when I actually played the games?

You're the one making baseless assumptions like "you must hate RPGs" because I don't like a game you like or hold to a higher standard. That would be a case where someone isn't entitled to an honest opinion ;)

Also a poor arguing tactic is "clearly you must hate the genre, because I disagree with you". Again I find it lifeless and boring, you found it to be this "rich and rewarding" experience. Agree to disagree, but tone down the baseless assumptions because in a contest of pretention, high and might bravado, and ego boasting. You're not winning that one.

Avatar image for RPG-explorer
RPG-explorer

349

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#40 RPG-explorer
Member since 2010 • 349 Posts
To jg4xchamp i won't bother to quote again because it will take up an entire page, but i don't have a high and mighty bravado attitude, true i do love these titles we're discussing, and i do stand corrected if you don't hate the RPG genre. However what i was trying to say was certain RPG's even one''s made by Bioware have a bit of depth or learning curve that takes time to get into Bethesda games especially, but , hey if you don't like them, you don't like them what ever. My point was the majority of the gaming world disagrees with you according to reviews, so they must know something that you don't, maybe you should give these games 4 to 6 hours of gameplay and see if they don't grow on you. I harshly and hastily judged Dragon Age Origins the first time around, but after really trying a second and third time i finally got into it and it's now one of my favorite RPG's, so i would say the same to anyone, especially if most reviewers gave certain titles high accolades try to exercise some patience and give these high rated games some serious play time and you might have a change of heart. If not, well to each his own.
Avatar image for jg4xchamp
jg4xchamp

64054

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 14

User Lists: 0

#41 jg4xchamp
Member since 2006 • 64054 Posts

To jg4xchamp i won't bother to quote again because it will take up an entire page, but i don't have a high and mighty bravado attitude, true i do love these titles we're discussing, and i do stand corrected if you don't hate the RPG genre. However what i was trying to say was certain RPG's even one''s made by Bioware have a bit of depth or learning curve that takes time to get into Bethesda games especially, but , hey if you don't like them, you don't like them what ever. My point was the majority of the gaming world disagrees with you according to reviews, so they must know something that you don't, maybe you should give these games 4 to 6 hours of gameplay and see if they don't grow on you. I harshly and hastily judged Dragon Age Origins the first time around, but after really trying a second and third time i finally got into it and it's now one of my favorite RPG's, so i would say the same to anyone, especially if most reviewers gave certain titles high accolades try to exercise some patience and give these high rated games some serious play time and you might have a change of heart. If not, well to each his own.RPG-explorer
which is why I'm more than willing to call it a well crafted game. Just because I don't like something I won't go and say a game clearly must suck.

It's got critical acclaim, commercial success, award victories, and a fan following. Clearly the game is doing something right, and I just don't like it. I am more than willing to accept that. I just was saying how to me I found their games boring(to me specifically). Again it's a matter of just agree to disagree here.

Avatar image for mgkennedy5
mgkennedy5

1501

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

#42 mgkennedy5
Member since 2005 • 1501 Posts
I really didn't like Fallout 3 so I'm definitely going with RDR
Avatar image for donalbane
donalbane

16383

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

#43 donalbane
Member since 2003 • 16383 Posts
Depends on your favorite genre.... though both are sandbox, Fallout is an RPG. Read Dead is more action adventure. Both sound solid. Hell, buy Fallout because it's cheaper now.
Avatar image for RPG-explorer
RPG-explorer

349

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#44 RPG-explorer
Member since 2010 • 349 Posts
Depends on your favorite genre.... though both are sandbox, Fallout is an RPG. Read Dead is more action adventure. Both sound solid. Hell, buy Fallout because it's cheaper now.donalbane
Well i personally got the G.O.T.Y. Edition of Fallout 3 on PS3 so mine wasn't the cheaper choice, but it was cheaper considering the total cost it would've been to download each expansion separately. Yeah i believe they are two different genres though, luckily for me i like every genre of game.
Avatar image for cobrax25
cobrax25

9649

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#45 cobrax25
Member since 2006 • 9649 Posts

The poor writing and storytelling killed fallout 3 for me.

The character design is poorly structured. The design of your character has very little to do with the actual way the game progresses. And your actions ultimatly have virtually no impact unto the game as a whole. The balance is just totally off, the game has a very heavy bias towards combat. The wonderful thing about Fallout 2 is that you can beat the game with any kind of character you make. You can make an incredibly smart character that sucks at combat and the game accomidates that. It simply isnt the case in Fallout 3.

The quests and NPC's werent very engaging either. Just look at something like this from Fallout 2. The interaction you had their was far deeper.

http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Angela_Bishop

Avatar image for santoron
santoron

8584

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#46 santoron
Member since 2006 • 8584 Posts

[QUOTE="Parasomniac"]RDR isn't out yet, and New Vegas will be superior to Fallout 3. That's the real battle.Ratchet_Fan8
Yeah,Bethesda is NOT making F:NV right?

iirc, Obsidian is making New Vegas. And they were formed from the ashes of Black Isle, so there's always hope!

Avatar image for Ratchet_Fan8
Ratchet_Fan8

5574

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#47 Ratchet_Fan8
Member since 2008 • 5574 Posts

[QUOTE="Ratchet_Fan8"][QUOTE="Parasomniac"]RDR isn't out yet, and New Vegas will be superior to Fallout 3. That's the real battle.santoron

Yeah,Bethesda is NOT making F:NV right?

iirc, Obsidian is making New Vegas. And they were formed from the ashes of Black Isle, so there's always hope!

thank GOD!1 betheseda didnt even care a SLIGHTEST about Fallout fans,at all! seriously,i cant even finish POINT LOOKout!
Avatar image for iBear-
iBear-

1092

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#48 iBear-
Member since 2010 • 1092 Posts

Fallout 3 was pretty lame. RDR better be better

Avatar image for NielsNL
NielsNL

4346

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#49 NielsNL
Member since 2005 • 4346 Posts

Aside from the fact that one of them is nout out yet, they're also very different games...

Avatar image for dakan45
dakan45

18819

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#50 dakan45
Member since 2009 • 18819 Posts
[QUOTE="RPG-explorer"]