I'll just add yet another thought to this trainwreck of a thread:
Just because Bethesda didn't do any game yet that had the depth in dialogue and open-endness of Fallout 1 and 2 doesn't mean they can't do it ever. When the Fallout creators made Fallout, they never made any Fallout game before, and yet they made Fallout.
I'll just add yet another thought to this trainwreck of a thread:
Just because Bethesda didn't do any game yet that had the depth in dialogue and open-endness of Fallout 1 and 2 doesn't mean they can't do it ever. When the Fallout creators made Fallout, they never made any Fallout game before, and yet they made Fallout.
Still with me?
They also didn't have a long history of making RPGs devoid of some of the main strengths of Fallout.
OremLK on
My zombie survival life simulator They Don't Sleep is out now on Steam if you want to check it out.
I'll just add yet another thought to this trainwreck of a thread:
Just because Bethesda didn't do any game yet that had the depth in dialogue and open-endness of Fallout 1 and 2 doesn't mean they can't do it ever. When the Fallout creators made Fallout, they never made any Fallout game before, and yet they made Fallout.
Still with me?
They also didn't have a long history of making RPGs devoid of some of the main strengths of Fallout.
Which still doesn't mean they CAN'T do it. When they were making said RPGs, they weren't trying to make a Fallout game. Now they are.
I'll just add yet another thought to this trainwreck of a thread:
Just because Bethesda didn't do any game yet that had the depth in dialogue and open-endness of Fallout 1 and 2 doesn't mean they can't do it ever. When the Fallout creators made Fallout, they never made any Fallout game before, and yet they made Fallout.
Still with me?
They also didn't have a long history of making RPGs devoid of some of the main strengths of Fallout.
We'll just have to see, won't we? I'm hopeful for but am not expecting great things. I don't think it'll be a bad game, and I'm definitely going to rent it and see for myself. I'm just not so sure it'll live up to the other Fallout games.
OremLK on
My zombie survival life simulator They Don't Sleep is out now on Steam if you want to check it out.
People always talk about how that the Fallout series was always about story and not combat, yea the stories are good. But never ever have I seen a good discussion about it. The only time I've seen anyone ask about it is if they need help in this thread.
It's always about runs, or pacifist playthroughs, or if letting the turrets kill Horrigin counts as killing someone, or "dude I hit that guy in the balls with the super sledge and he blew up lol".
Atmosphere? Fallout has great atmosphere. We don't know about FO3 yet because we haven't played it yet.
Fallout 1 and 2 were great games, and looking back on them, we all have some very, very fond memories.
However, I think some people are maybe remembering more of the Fallout that they remember as being awesome, then for exactly what the game was.
What I mean is, people are jumping up and down, tearing Oblivion a new one every other post, yet they conveniently ignore the fact that in both Fallout games, if you knew what you were doing, you could easily bypass the earlier stages, move right to were the "good stuff" was and equip yourself with high level weapons and armor that basically trivialized the rest of the game.
Don't get me wrong, they were both great games. But let's take a step back before we build up the original games to waaaaaay more than they were, while we simultaneously prepare the tar and feathers for Bethesda, based on very skewed opinions of Oblivion.
I think the reality of the situation is, Oblivion wasn't any more or less broken than either Fallout game. Both had their share of glitches, bugs, exploits, empty areas, meaningless quests and dry, hollow NPCs. It was just as easy to end up with a poorly designed "broken" character in Fallout as it was in Oblivion.
However, both games also had great character systems, open ended play, large (relative for the time) areas to explore, open ended questing, awesome story lines and some great NPC interactions.
The Fallout series has an awesome legacy, and Bethesda has shown in can make an excellent RPG.
And I truly expect and believe both will come together to provide an exceptional, exceptional game in Fallout 3.
ironzerg, Oblivion had neither awesome storylines nor great NPC interactions.
I disagree whole-heartedly.
Between the guild quests, the Dark Brotherhood, and the main quest line, I had some great, and dare I say, awesome experiences with the stories in Oblivion.
I'm sorry your copy shipped with such a lack of content.
I think I'll play fallout 1 and 2 after I play fallout 3. That way I can't be let down. It's the perfect plan!
What if it turns out to be way better than both Fallout 1 and 2?
You'll probably have a hard time getting anyone to admit it, even if it is better, because save for the people who might play Fallout 1/2 now, for the first time, most of us are going to have significant nostalgia/emotional attachment to the games that we likely won't have with Fallout 3.
Granted, I expect to enjoy it as much as I enjoyed the old games, as a fun post-apoc RPG with some humor and copious gore.
ironzerg, Oblivion had neither awesome storylines nor great NPC interactions.
I disagree whole-heartedly.
Between the guild quests, the Dark Brotherhood, and the main quest line, I had some great, and dare I say, awesome experiences with the stories in Oblivion.
I'm sorry your copy shipped with such a lack of content.
I really liked the Knights of the Nine quest, and I hear Shivering Isles is just awesome. I have the expansion, but I haven't ventured into that new content yet.
Dashui on
Xbox Live, PSN & Origin: Vacorsis 3DS: 2638-0037-166
ironzerg, Oblivion had neither awesome storylines nor great NPC interactions.
I disagree whole-heartedly.
Between the guild quests, the Dark Brotherhood, and the main quest line, I had some great, and dare I say, awesome experiences with the stories in Oblivion.
I'm sorry your copy shipped with such a lack of content.
Well, there were diamonds in that turd, but lets say the whole experience was not terribly... consistent.
ironzerg, Oblivion had neither awesome storylines nor great NPC interactions.
I disagree whole-heartedly.
Between the guild quests, the Dark Brotherhood, and the main quest line, I had some great, and dare I say, awesome experiences with the stories in Oblivion.
I'm sorry your copy shipped with such a lack of content.
Well, there were diamonds in that turd, but lets say the whole experience was not terribly... consistent.
You know what? If all I have to do is sift through a turd to get some fucking diamonds, that's a good exchange to me. I can wash my hands afterwards and I still have the diamonds.
Fallout 1 and 2 were great games, and looking back on them, we all have some very, very fond memories.
However, I think some people are maybe remembering more of the Fallout that they remember as being awesome, then for exactly what the game was.
What I mean is, people are jumping up and down, tearing Oblivion a new one every other post, yet they conveniently ignore the fact that in both Fallout games, if you knew what you were doing, you could easily bypass the earlier stages, move right to were the "good stuff" was and equip yourself with high level weapons and armor that basically trivialized the rest of the game.
Don't get me wrong, they were both great games. But let's take a step back before we build up the original games to waaaaaay more than they were, while we simultaneously prepare the tar and feathers for Bethesda, based on very skewed opinions of Oblivion.
I think the reality of the situation is, Oblivion wasn't any more or less broken than either Fallout game. Both had their share of glitches, bugs, exploits, empty areas, meaningless quests and dry, hollow NPCs. It was just as easy to end up with a poorly designed "broken" character in Fallout as it was in Oblivion.
However, both games also had great character systems, open ended play, large (relative for the time) areas to explore, open ended questing, awesome story lines and some great NPC interactions.
The Fallout series has an awesome legacy, and Bethesda has shown in can make an excellent RPG.
And I truly expect and believe both will come together to provide an exceptional, exceptional game in Fallout 3.
Did you just try to put Oblivion on the same level as Fallout 1 and 2?
And the way to get impossibly good armor in Fallout 1 and Fallout 2 required intimate details of the environment and exploits. Come on. I don't know a single person who pulled this off on accident.
Based on your post I don't even think you played F1 and F2 at release.
Well not every quest is going to be a ruby when there's so many of them in there - hundreds of NPCs and all that. I still had an absolute blast playing the game and exploring the game world. I probably just went off the beaten path more than I did any kind of quest. My big complaints were the level scaling, which was quickly modded, and the fairly uniform look of the land. The land, while big and beautiful, was pretty much the same everywhere, including dungeons. It was still fun to explore, but I felt it lacked some diversity. The Unique Landscape mod package seems to fix that issue.
In regards to Fallout 3, these issues seem to have been addressed fairly early after it's unveiling. They mentioned the boring quests and NPCs quite a long time ago, so I'm surprised people keep bringing it up so much. They admitted they weren't interesting, saying that because they had so many of them, they couldn't focus on making them all interesting. Fallout 3, on the other hand, has a significant amount less of NPCs, which they've said they were able to give a lot more attention to. A lot of the quests mentioned in previews sound quite good, too.
The level scaling is no more, as you wander off and get into areas you really shouldn't be quite yet. And from what we've seen of the land, it looks like there will be plenty of interesting places to explore this time around. It's not cave dungeons anymore, it's schools and subways and houses and Washington monuments, etc. So I'm excited, and I could care less whether or not it may or may not be as good as Fallout 1 or 2. I'm confident it'll be a good game worth exploring, and that's all that matters to me.
Dashui on
Xbox Live, PSN & Origin: Vacorsis 3DS: 2638-0037-166
Did you just try to put Oblivion on the same level as Fallout 1 and 2?
I played all three games when the were released. I played them all for what they were, and thoroughly enjoyed all three games.
I thought all three were excellent games (although the reviews of Fallout 2 are definitely mixed).
My point was, that looking back, I think people are really overdoing it, holding Fallout as the shining example of the most perfect game ever, while, as one poster just remarked, Oblivion was a smoking heap of turd. I think that's absolutely untrue and unfair.
Sure people, can make that argument based on what they personally liked/didn't like about the games, but I feel strongly that people are getting carried away with the gushing admiration/harsh criticisms of each respective game.
Based on your post I don't even think you played F1 and F2 at release.
And for the record, I don't understand how you can draw such a conclusion from anything I've posted, other than the fact that you're wounded by the opinion that maybe, just maybe Fallout wasn't as glorious as you want to remember it was, and Oblivion isn't as worthless as you want to believe it is.
And for the record, I don't understand how you can draw such a conclusion from anything I've posted, other than the fact that you're wounded by the opinion that maybe, just maybe Fallout wasn't as glorious as you want to remember it was, and Oblivion isn't as worthless as you want to believe it is.
I made it based on the fact that you thought people could just run around getting the best gear in the game on accident. Anyone who played the games knows how difficult early game combat can be if you aren't using any sort of exploit.
And no, I'm not overdoing how good the early Fallout series was. And no, I'm not overdoing how bad Oblivion was. I didn't necessarily call it bad, but it was nowhere near as good as Fallout. Hell, I played Two Worlds about as much as I played Oblivion. And Gothic 3 was better than both. And I wouldn't put Gothic 3 anywhere near Fallout either.
Did you just try to put Oblivion on the same level as Fallout 1 and 2?
I played all three games when the were released. I played them all for what they were, and thoroughly enjoyed all three games.
I thought all three were excellent games (although the reviews of Fallout 2 are definitely mixed).
My point was, that looking back, I think people are really overdoing it, holding Fallout as the shining example of the most perfect game ever, while, as one poster just remarked, Oblivion was a smoking heap of turd. I think that's absolutely untrue and unfair.
Sure people, can make that argument based on what they personally liked/didn't like about the games, but I feel strongly that people are getting carried away with the gushing admiration/harsh criticisms of each respective game.
Based on your post I don't even think you played F1 and F2 at release.
And for the record, I don't understand how you can draw such a conclusion from anything I've posted, other than the fact that you're wounded by the opinion that maybe, just maybe Fallout wasn't as glorious as you want to remember it was, and Oblivion isn't as worthless as you want to believe it is.
I think part of it is also that the way games are promoted, previewed, etc has changed a lot since Fallout 1.
When Fallout 1 came out, I remember being absolutely amazed at this game which had just come out of nowhere and was a whole lot of awesome. I was all of 15 or so, and still jobless, so one kickass game generally had to tide me over for a long time...generally about 6 months or so. Something like Fallout was a rare gem (especially since I never cared for the Ultima/M&M games, PC RPGs were largely uninteresting to me).
Nowadays, with a game like Oblivion, we had screens and video and preview after preview after preview for months leading up to release, we had in-depth interviews with developers telling us about things they were trying to do, getting us excited about things that ultimately didn't make it into the game (even though they in no way hurt them game by being absent). Nowadays (at least for me), I buy games when I want them...if a new game comes out and I want to play it, I do, and if something else comes the week after that I want, I play that too...and games tend to get lost in the shuffle, rather than being a single title I can (and indeed must, if I'm playing at all) focus on.
I believe both Fallout 1/2 and Oblivion are legitimately fantastic games that had their share of problems, but I would say Oblivion is perhaps less *significant* in the minds of most modern gamers, because for most of us who've been playing for a long time, it was just another fun (or not, if you didn't care for it) game in an endless stream of quality titles.
...in both Fallout games, if you knew what you were doing, you could easily bypass the earlier stages, move right to were the "good stuff" was and equip yourself with high level weapons and armor that basically trivialized the rest of the game.
I made it based on the fact that you thought people could just run around getting the best gear in the game on accident.
I rest my case. Don't make shit up and then attribute it to me.
And yes, when I look at both games objectively, I would put Fallout and Oblivion on the same level.
And personally, I think Fallout 3 is going to blow them both away.
My last question for you, out of respect for not turning this thread into my own personal flame war, is, if Oblivion was such a terrible game, why does your Xfire profile list 98 hours for you under playtime for Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivon?
Consider that a rhetorical question. If you want to personally attack or flame me more, you know how to private message me.
As for myself, I stand by my comments concerning Fallout, Oblivion and Bethesda.
I've posted it before, and I'll post again.
Oblivion was an excellent game. I thoroughly enjoyed it.
Fallout 3 will be an excellent game. I will thoroughly enjoy it.
Hell, I played Two Worlds about as much as I played Oblivion. And Gothic 3 was better than both. And I wouldn't put Gothic 3 anywhere near Fallout either.
You just nullified all your credibility right there.
I couldn't play Two Worlds because I couldn't stop laughing at the game long enough to concentrate on actually playing the game.
I'd also like to add that anyone saying that Fallout and Oblivion are on the same level is actually giving a massive compliment to Fallout, not insulting it.
Saying that Fallout, a 2D isometric CRPG from 1997, stacks right up against Oblivion, a 3D first-person open-world RPG from 2006, is saying that Fallout has held up pretty god damn well over the years. That's like saying the original Doom is just as good as Halo 3.
I'd also like to add that anyone saying that Fallout and Oblivion are on the same level is actually giving a massive compliment to Fallout, not insulting it.
Saying that Fallout, a 2D isometric CRPG from 1997, stacks right up against Oblivion, a 3D first-person open-world RPG from 2006, is saying that Fallout has held up pretty god damn well over the years. That's like saying the original Doom is just as good as Halo 3.
That's a good point, but it also explains why people have high expectations out of a FO3.
ironzerg, Oblivion had neither awesome storylines nor great NPC interactions.
I disagree whole-heartedly.
Between the guild quests, the Dark Brotherhood, and the main quest line, I had some great, and dare I say, awesome experiences with the stories in Oblivion.
I'm sorry your copy shipped with such a lack of content.
I've done all of that, yes, including the Dark Brotherhood stuff. The NPC interaction is pretty much universally bland and formulaic and I wasn't particularly impressed by any of the storylines, large or small.
OremLK on
My zombie survival life simulator They Don't Sleep is out now on Steam if you want to check it out.
ironzerg, Oblivion had neither awesome storylines nor great NPC interactions.
I disagree whole-heartedly.
Between the guild quests, the Dark Brotherhood, and the main quest line, I had some great, and dare I say, awesome experiences with the stories in Oblivion.
I'm sorry your copy shipped with such a lack of content.
I've done all of that, yes, including the Dark Brotherhood stuff. The NPC interaction is pretty much universally bland and formulaic and I wasn't particularly impressed by any of the storylines, large or small.
Then you might as well just stop being excited about Fallout 3 and never post in this thread again, because it sounds like it's not something you'd care for.
Posts
it was drawn by those fine serious folks at no genetically different peoples allowed
one of pipboy holding his head in his hands
BRAVO!!
I refuse to believe that image is anything other than a parody of those people, because it's hilarious and brilliant when viewed in that context.
If viewed as a serious piece of commentary, it's frightening and disturbing and makes me not want to be near people.
check it out it's on the front page
a few news posts down
They must be posted here for posteritatimationmentarianism.
The Division, Warframe (XB1)
GT: Tanith 6227
Rebuttal:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dUkAYf_o-r4&
Just because Bethesda didn't do any game yet that had the depth in dialogue and open-endness of Fallout 1 and 2 doesn't mean they can't do it ever. When the Fallout creators made Fallout, they never made any Fallout game before, and yet they made Fallout.
Still with me?
Wow, did you just make my day?
You did! You made it!
They also didn't have a long history of making RPGs devoid of some of the main strengths of Fallout.
Which still doesn't mean they CAN'T do it. When they were making said RPGs, they weren't trying to make a Fallout game. Now they are.
Handmade Jewelry by me on EtsyGames for sale
Me on Twitch!
It's always about runs, or pacifist playthroughs, or if letting the turrets kill Horrigin counts as killing someone, or "dude I hit that guy in the balls with the super sledge and he blew up lol".
Atmosphere? Fallout has great atmosphere. We don't know about FO3 yet because we haven't played it yet.
I wholly expect great things from Fallout 3.
Handmade Jewelry by me on EtsyGames for sale
Me on Twitch!
They were that good.
What if it turns out to be way better than both Fallout 1 and 2?
Well I... um... erm... It's perfect I tell you!
Fallout 1 and 2 were great games, and looking back on them, we all have some very, very fond memories.
However, I think some people are maybe remembering more of the Fallout that they remember as being awesome, then for exactly what the game was.
What I mean is, people are jumping up and down, tearing Oblivion a new one every other post, yet they conveniently ignore the fact that in both Fallout games, if you knew what you were doing, you could easily bypass the earlier stages, move right to were the "good stuff" was and equip yourself with high level weapons and armor that basically trivialized the rest of the game.
Don't get me wrong, they were both great games. But let's take a step back before we build up the original games to waaaaaay more than they were, while we simultaneously prepare the tar and feathers for Bethesda, based on very skewed opinions of Oblivion.
I think the reality of the situation is, Oblivion wasn't any more or less broken than either Fallout game. Both had their share of glitches, bugs, exploits, empty areas, meaningless quests and dry, hollow NPCs. It was just as easy to end up with a poorly designed "broken" character in Fallout as it was in Oblivion.
However, both games also had great character systems, open ended play, large (relative for the time) areas to explore, open ended questing, awesome story lines and some great NPC interactions.
The Fallout series has an awesome legacy, and Bethesda has shown in can make an excellent RPG.
And I truly expect and believe both will come together to provide an exceptional, exceptional game in Fallout 3.
I never asked for this!
I never asked for this!
I disagree whole-heartedly.
Between the guild quests, the Dark Brotherhood, and the main quest line, I had some great, and dare I say, awesome experiences with the stories in Oblivion.
I'm sorry your copy shipped with such a lack of content.
You'll probably have a hard time getting anyone to admit it, even if it is better, because save for the people who might play Fallout 1/2 now, for the first time, most of us are going to have significant nostalgia/emotional attachment to the games that we likely won't have with Fallout 3.
Granted, I expect to enjoy it as much as I enjoyed the old games, as a fun post-apoc RPG with some humor and copious gore.
I really liked the Knights of the Nine quest, and I hear Shivering Isles is just awesome. I have the expansion, but I haven't ventured into that new content yet.
Well, there were diamonds in that turd, but lets say the whole experience was not terribly... consistent.
You know what? If all I have to do is sift through a turd to get some fucking diamonds, that's a good exchange to me. I can wash my hands afterwards and I still have the diamonds.
Did you just try to put Oblivion on the same level as Fallout 1 and 2?
And the way to get impossibly good armor in Fallout 1 and Fallout 2 required intimate details of the environment and exploits. Come on. I don't know a single person who pulled this off on accident.
Based on your post I don't even think you played F1 and F2 at release.
In regards to Fallout 3, these issues seem to have been addressed fairly early after it's unveiling. They mentioned the boring quests and NPCs quite a long time ago, so I'm surprised people keep bringing it up so much. They admitted they weren't interesting, saying that because they had so many of them, they couldn't focus on making them all interesting. Fallout 3, on the other hand, has a significant amount less of NPCs, which they've said they were able to give a lot more attention to. A lot of the quests mentioned in previews sound quite good, too.
The level scaling is no more, as you wander off and get into areas you really shouldn't be quite yet. And from what we've seen of the land, it looks like there will be plenty of interesting places to explore this time around. It's not cave dungeons anymore, it's schools and subways and houses and Washington monuments, etc. So I'm excited, and I could care less whether or not it may or may not be as good as Fallout 1 or 2. I'm confident it'll be a good game worth exploring, and that's all that matters to me.
I played all three games when the were released. I played them all for what they were, and thoroughly enjoyed all three games.
I thought all three were excellent games (although the reviews of Fallout 2 are definitely mixed).
My point was, that looking back, I think people are really overdoing it, holding Fallout as the shining example of the most perfect game ever, while, as one poster just remarked, Oblivion was a smoking heap of turd. I think that's absolutely untrue and unfair.
Sure people, can make that argument based on what they personally liked/didn't like about the games, but I feel strongly that people are getting carried away with the gushing admiration/harsh criticisms of each respective game.
And for the record, I don't understand how you can draw such a conclusion from anything I've posted, other than the fact that you're wounded by the opinion that maybe, just maybe Fallout wasn't as glorious as you want to remember it was, and Oblivion isn't as worthless as you want to believe it is.
I made it based on the fact that you thought people could just run around getting the best gear in the game on accident. Anyone who played the games knows how difficult early game combat can be if you aren't using any sort of exploit.
And no, I'm not overdoing how good the early Fallout series was. And no, I'm not overdoing how bad Oblivion was. I didn't necessarily call it bad, but it was nowhere near as good as Fallout. Hell, I played Two Worlds about as much as I played Oblivion. And Gothic 3 was better than both. And I wouldn't put Gothic 3 anywhere near Fallout either.
I think part of it is also that the way games are promoted, previewed, etc has changed a lot since Fallout 1.
When Fallout 1 came out, I remember being absolutely amazed at this game which had just come out of nowhere and was a whole lot of awesome. I was all of 15 or so, and still jobless, so one kickass game generally had to tide me over for a long time...generally about 6 months or so. Something like Fallout was a rare gem (especially since I never cared for the Ultima/M&M games, PC RPGs were largely uninteresting to me).
Nowadays, with a game like Oblivion, we had screens and video and preview after preview after preview for months leading up to release, we had in-depth interviews with developers telling us about things they were trying to do, getting us excited about things that ultimately didn't make it into the game (even though they in no way hurt them game by being absent). Nowadays (at least for me), I buy games when I want them...if a new game comes out and I want to play it, I do, and if something else comes the week after that I want, I play that too...and games tend to get lost in the shuffle, rather than being a single title I can (and indeed must, if I'm playing at all) focus on.
I believe both Fallout 1/2 and Oblivion are legitimately fantastic games that had their share of problems, but I would say Oblivion is perhaps less *significant* in the minds of most modern gamers, because for most of us who've been playing for a long time, it was just another fun (or not, if you didn't care for it) game in an endless stream of quality titles.
I rest my case. Don't make shit up and then attribute it to me.
And yes, when I look at both games objectively, I would put Fallout and Oblivion on the same level.
And personally, I think Fallout 3 is going to blow them both away.
My last question for you, out of respect for not turning this thread into my own personal flame war, is, if Oblivion was such a terrible game, why does your Xfire profile list 98 hours for you under playtime for Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivon?
Consider that a rhetorical question. If you want to personally attack or flame me more, you know how to private message me.
As for myself, I stand by my comments concerning Fallout, Oblivion and Bethesda.
I've posted it before, and I'll post again.
Oblivion was an excellent game. I thoroughly enjoyed it.
Fallout 3 will be an excellent game. I will thoroughly enjoy it.
Saying that Fallout, a 2D isometric CRPG from 1997, stacks right up against Oblivion, a 3D first-person open-world RPG from 2006, is saying that Fallout has held up pretty god damn well over the years. That's like saying the original Doom is just as good as Halo 3.
That's a good point, but it also explains why people have high expectations out of a FO3.
I've done all of that, yes, including the Dark Brotherhood stuff. The NPC interaction is pretty much universally bland and formulaic and I wasn't particularly impressed by any of the storylines, large or small.
Then you might as well just stop being excited about Fallout 3 and never post in this thread again, because it sounds like it's not something you'd care for.