Fallout: A Post Apocalyptic Rpg

[Doubler]

why change something that isn't broken? I don't want to have to drink water.[/b]Unless you're saying that the game was absolutely perfect (I think you'll find that quite a controversial statement - or otherwise the game might not be 'broken' per-sé but still not be good as it could/should be, or might just be functioning poorly - the reason why you will never hear me say 'don't fix what isn't broken'), this isn't changing anything you're considering. :P
It's adding something to the game, something that's subject to change but is not in itself a change of something that was already there (as long as you don't consider an absence 'something', which would be plain odd). Whether it's a good addition or not is your own concern, and you might have your reasons which may be better or worse and more or less universal.

I think Fallout could do with more survival elements befitting the setting and the feel of the game, but with fewer moronic nuclear devices that barely if at all fit, and might just be plain contradictory to the retro-future aspect. The new survival elements seem more in line with the limited supply of bullets I might have to keep an eye on. Or plainly my health. Things you have to pay attention to no matter your choices (I guess you could bypass ammo to some extent), and I suspect those choices are what you mean when you describe Fallout, as taking it literally as 'Fallout = story and do whatever you want' would be a rather poor description. The doing whatever you want was naturally limited by the choice-consequence in the game. Fallout is certainly not a sandbox game.
Anyway, in essence these things will not even necessarily limit you concentrating on the story and doing whatever you want, choosing whatever you want. It's part of the gameplay which is involved in just that.

As for your suggestion of a choice. Wouldn't it be nice if absolutely everything in the game was up to the player to decide? Wonder why they don't do that... ;)
Robinson's Requiem is the game you're thinking about, I believe. Thing is, it's a survival game. The arcade function's a watered-down survival game - an easy mode P

[12turtle12]

I'm not saying this Fallout isn't good, or isn't going to be good when they do release it, but it's definitely a Bethesda flavor, not Interplay. I think you could agree with that...? *BTW- what's a sandbox game?* I'm still going to buy it when it comes out. I think I'll still enjoy it when it comes out. The graphics look great, the character creation is a bit different, and actually I think I'll like that too, rather than just "coming out of the womb" grown up. (Although there should be an option to just make your character in case you're playing the game through for the 10th time like I have all the other Fallout games) But, I think there's a fine balance to making finding water and testing it w/ your portable ... not seismograph...crap...your radioactive-tester thingy, an integral part of the game. If I'm playing the game through for time #5, I already know where the water is. I know I need it, for the 30th time during gameplay this time. I don't want to go find the water again. I want to play the game through for the storyline, and to do different things to change the outcome of the ending sequence. I don't want to waste my time finding water for the 1000th time in my life. That's why I made the comment about experience grinding in some games. Just how frequently are you going to have to go search for water, or go 15 minutes out of your way for it? If it's almost as big as Oblivion world, like the article said I believe, they better have a "jump" option to that important oasis. If not, that's just going to suck.
P.S. - It's not RR, you drop down from an airplane or crashing helicopter, and the first thing you see as you go forward was either a dinosaur or a caveman type guy.

[Doubler]

I'm not saying this Fallout isn't good, or isn't going to be good when they do release it, but it's definitely a Bethesda flavor, not Interplay. I think you could agree with that...?[/b]Yeah. I'm not sure I like it myself, but I'm suspending judgement to judgement day.

What I'd call a sandbox game is a game in which restraints are lifted as much as possible in favour of always being having all options open - always being able to do whatever you want.
Why isn't Fallout one? Fallout's choice and consequence already limits your options, your possibilities, and railroads you to some extent into you further moves.

radioactive-tester thingy[/b]Geiger counter? :P
And the 'portable' bit is somewhat redundant. Geiger counters are usually quite portable ;)

As for water. I would imagine finding water isn't the problem in the first place. I'm also hoping that skills play a big role in this.
Of course that's speculation and hoping.

P.S. - It's not RR, you drop down from an airplane or crashing helicopter, and the first thing you see as you go forward was either a dinosaur or a caveman type guy.[/b]Sounds a lot like Deus. The sequel to RR.

[12turtle12]

Geiger Counter! Thanks!
We're all just speculating at this point. There's really very little information any of us have, but if I get my
expectations for this game too high, I think it'll be a disappointment. How many companies have taken over a sequel to a hit game or movie and made it as good or better, w/ the same "spirit" as the original? It's very difficult. I think that's the biggest problem a lot of fans have. We're worried that Bethesda will put too much Bethesda and not as much Interplay. I'll rate the game when it comes out not based only on it's own merit, but how much it represents the atmosphere and history of the games before it. That's the curse you get when you make a sequel. You have to stay true in certain ways to the original.

[Tulac]

I think the biggest problem is the ten year span. The way I see it they can't have positive reactions no matter what they do. It can either be:
a) Too many changes, not in true spirit of original, bla bla. Which is what we see with Fallout 3.
b) It's too close to original, I can't see any changes it's an old game with only new graphics, bla bla. Which is what we see with Starcraft 2.

So basically fan boys are impossible to please, especially after such a long time.

[mercenary]

Only thing Fallout funs don't want is Oblivion with guns as Fallout 3.
Oblivion is so dumb by means of conversation path and quest solving choices, that it is disgusting for any Fallouter. Also, most of funs (including me), don't want real-time combat.
Level cap for both Fallouts was 99, but I rearly reached more than 30 in 1, and 50 in 2.

[silz]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Doubler @ Jun 16 2007, 03:09 PM) 294709</div>

But, one consideration I won't regret losing:
"Oh no... a dozen opponents. Should I go make dinner or buy some new clothes while waiting for the them to finish their turn?" :P
[/b]

hehe yeah and you can't even press esc to reload.

[Blood-Pigggy]

Fallout 3 site has updated, looks nice.
The game is coming along fine, although I tend to ignore most of the propaganda, coming from both "sides".

The breakdown.

People who whine constantly = retards.
People who praise constantly = retards.

[_r.u.s.s.]

i want some real in game action movie, not the crap in their 'trailer' :titan:
(which looks more like a teaser to me..)

[Blood-Pigggy]

Stop whining :w00t:

[Doubler]

Russ, that is a teaser :P
It was never marketed as a trailer, except by a couple of non-affiliated sites. Bethesda called it a teaser from the beginning (which actually lead to threads on the forums about how it was likely just some music with "Fallout" appearing from black :P).

[_r.u.s.s.]

http://fallout.bethsoft.com/downloads/videos.html
<title>Fallout: Welcome to the Official Site</title>
Fallout 3 Trailer

Download from one of our mirror sites below:
WorthPlaying - FileShack - FilePlanet - FileFront - IGN - Gamespot - Internode - Gamevideos - GamesRadar[/b]

[Doubler]

Yeah, I just saw it following the link earlier in the thread.
But that's still new. Beforehand they called it the teaser that it is ;)

[_r.u.s.s.]

well, seems they changed it in to "trailer" :P

[Blood-Pigggy]

Yah, well they did it just to piss you off.

[skaven510]

It's nice to see that everywhere I go there is at least one topic on Fallout. I'm not sure of any game anywhere that has had such an emotional impact on a community. Well, there are the Star Trek fans that are pretty upset the way Beth messed up the latest Star Trek Game and then of course there are the Star Wars fans that get upset when a game maker screws up their franchise. Hey I just realised Fallout needs a TV series or at the very least a movie :)

[The Fifth Horseman]

A movie?
Hmm... Mad Max, anyone?

[skaven510]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(the_fifth_horseman @ Aug 8 2007, 04:16 PM) 303650</div>
A movie?
Hmm... Mad Max, anyone?
[/b]

Yes, yes Fallout put in some easter eggs from Mad Max (Dogmeat) but there was no Virus, no BOS, No ghouls, no mission to find a water chip and above all no ghoul with a tree growing out of their head :). Above all Fallout didn't revolve around getting GAS. I hated that about that movie. What about food and water. I guess in the movie everyone could use gas for everything including drinking it to stay alive.

[12turtle12]

Mad Max and the Road Warrior were NOT about Fallout. Fallout draws from their story, not the other way around. Fallout 3 is looking to be a disappointment for Fallout fans, but will probably keep the franchise alive for newcomers to the series, and casual gamers.

skaven - what game did you get your avatar off of?

Most anything you want to know about fallout you can find here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallout_%28series%29

I probably will still buy and play to death the new game.....

Oh, and the comment about Fallout not being about gas? Well...now a big part of it is going to be about finding water, so there goes your happy thought. :whistling:

[Blood-Pigggy]

That's a general statement, the only Fallout fans that are whining are those that spend most of their time on message boards, most people I know who don't really spend a lot of time on the computer (on the internet that is) have played Fallout, enjoyed it, and are looking forward to Fallout 3.

So to be more exact, it's the idiots who constantly complain.

[12turtle12]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Blood-Pigggy @ Aug 8 2007, 07:26 PM) 303686</div>
That's a general statement, the only Fallout fans that are whining are those that spend most of their time on message boards, most people I know who don't really spend a lot of time on the computer (on the internet that is) have played Fallout, enjoyed it, and are looking forward to Fallout 3.

So to be more exact, it's the idiots who constantly complain.
[/b]

Well, most of those "Fallout fans" who are whining are those who have spent extensive time and effort making mods, new maps, etc etc playing it to death. Which supports my claim that #3 will probably appeal more to those non-hardcore fans of the series. I think that all the time spent by those fans gives them a right to complain. Free speech, right Mr. *meep*ing USA?
That's also what gives you the right to complain about those complainers..... :whistling:

[Blood-Pigggy]

Are you kidding me? Most of the people who make the mods hardly say anything about the third game. There are people have have been making mods forever Timeslip, for example, and they hardly voice anything about the sequel. Face it, the majority of people that complain about the game itself are those that have just played it and consider themselves expert, especially since they believe that calling anyone who says that the game is easier with a combat character and decked out NPCs over a diplo character retarded is justified.

They're just stupid.

[12turtle12]

"those that have just played it and consider themselves expert, "---What do YOU consider an expert?

"especially since they believe that calling anyone who says that the game is easier with a combat character and decked out NPCs over a diplo character retarded is justified."---I would say either is just fine, until you get to the offshore rig - at that point it's "shut up and fight"

"They're just stupid." - they would say the same of you.... :whistling: ( I love that smiley )

[Luchsen]

Fallout 3 won't be a Fallout (literally it will), that's clear. And I only know people:
not interested in Fallout at all and not knowing that there is a Fallout 3 in development
or
addicted to Fallout and upset about Fallout 3.

I'm one of the freaks that want Fallout 1 with new stories.

But the best is:

"What it comes down to is that we're all Fallout fans. We love the original games. (But) not every Fallout fan wants a turn-based isometric game." Emil Pagliarulo, Lead Designer, Fallout 3

And similar quotes like: We are great Fallout fans, so we know what Fallout 3 has to be.

A Fallout game has to be turnbased and isometric to be a Fallout game. Implication: Fans don't want a Fallout game?

I shouldn't have posted this. There's so much to say...

[Blood-Pigggy]

A Fallout game doesn't have to be turn based or isometric, I think that has been established in so many different forms of media that it's just ridiculous to say something like that.

It's the same way that all the Alien films weren't the same, the first one was a thriller, and the second was an action horror film, you can't classify something as being "out of series" just because it deviates on the matter.
We might as well just say Wasteland 2 won't be a sequel because it's sure as hell not going to have the combat's text display, instead, it's probably going to have 3D models representing everything while the information is represented in a different format.

A turn-based Fallout wouldn't have been bad, but consider the fact that the turn-based combat in Fallout was pathetic to begin with (it improved with Tactics, but that game was ok at best) I think it's insulting to the game to say that that was one of the things that solidified its legacy, because it certainly wasn't very well done in that regard.

The isometric thing I can agree with, Fallout 3's perspective is disconcerting, but that's feeling has been removed after I realized that you really can't change what the game is, legally, Fallout 3 is a true sequel, not a spin-off or any such thing. 14 Degrees East couldn't make Tactics canonical (without authorization) or a direct sequel because they didn't have the legal ability to, they were assigned to make a spin-off, and therefore, that's what resulted.

Unfortunatly for the majority of Fallout "fans" Fallout 3, will, and no matter what you say, is a sequel, it's written in stone, what Bethesda says will technically be canon, and although personal opinion and perception will differ, that's how it will be shown and portrayed. Considering Bethesda's PR (Who before Oblivion was released, I thought only made sports games because Wayne Gretzky's Hockey was the immediate game I thought of with the name Bethesda) the game will sell well, and there will most likely be more sequels.

There's a strange belief that Bethesda can't make a good game and have good marketing at the same time. Now in no way was Oblivion a "great" game, (I think the attention it got was more directed to the fact that it was one of the first true next gen games) but it's still decent, and people that gas about it sucking are over reacting bung holes who have their own heads where the sun don't shine.
There's some "factual" representation in the Fallout "Community" (IE No Mutants Allowed, Duck & Cover) that all the TES games were terrible.

Just like the people who tell fans that they are afraid of change in the series, the Fallout "fans" (directing to those specifically) attack the TES series without probably have playing it thoroughly. What's interesting is that Fallout can hardly be considered more than a cult game, it's not revolutionary in any way, yet this is what the majority of people assert with the game.

No one will believe such a stone cold view, if Fallout fans enjoy blowing up their favorite game to such huge titles, they should deal with the so-called "Bethesda drones" or "casual gamers" who drool all over the third game, this is the attention they thought the titles should have deserved in the first place, yet now they believe that these gamers are for some reason unworthy, even when it comes to playing the older titles out of curiosity.

I'm no snob, but playing the Fallout titles and maybe Wasteland (although the majority of Fallout "fans" who claim they have played it are flat out liars, they wouldn't spend five minutes on the archaic interface unless they were forced to at a young age, like me for example, it was the only damn game that I had for six months) does not make you some kind of gaming genius or exultant. Perhaps they should smack their lips on their own hypocrisy when they insult Bethesda's writing when they apparently enjoyed Wasteland immensely, which anyone who has played it can tell you, had some of the most soulless writing in existence of large scale RPGs.


The thing is, if Fallout "fans" want to complain, that's fine, go ahead. But the manner in which they do it is ultimately incredibly childish. Their superiority complex is baffling and moronic. I can't understand how they believe they should be seen as a valid and sophisticated gaming community if they continue to act like a bunch of Myrons.

I once read a post on one of their forums where they compared themselves to a "bunch of deathclaws about to tear something apart" when in reality it's more like "a bunch of Myrons ready to run when a Mantis does 1 damage in close combat".
They enjoy being douches, then maybe they should enjoy the negative attention they get.

[STFM]

I will be happy if the game has the following aspects:

Its an RPG
Atomic 50's style post apocalyptic theme
Guns
Blood
The ability to use Guns to generate Blood
Skintight blue suits

I think im safe.

[skaven510]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(cazgotsaved @ Aug 8 2007, 06:28 PM) 303679</div>


skaven - what game did you get your avatar off of?


Oh, and the comment about Fallout not being about gas? Well...now a big part of it is going to be about finding water, so there goes your happy thought. :whistling:
[/b]

I got the skaven pic from www.civfantics.com They made a great warhammer mod for civilization 3. I got this pic from one of the units a fan did for the mod. I can't really remember which artist did this particular one because I got it a long time ago but if you go here and search for skaven you'll find a lot of units fans have made http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=cat&id=76 If you like Civilization 3 and Warhammer you should definatly download the warhammer mod it's great.

About fallout looking for water well that makes more sense than gas, that's what I meant about Mad Max being silly. At least fallout didn't just flat out ignore the need for food, shelter and water as a means for survival :-)



<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Blood-Pigggy @ Aug 8 2007, 07:59 PM) 303691</div>
They're just stupid.
[/b]

Really? They're stupid? It is their opinion and for voicing that opinion they're stupid. I suppose that everyone who has played Fallout should have the same opinion about it as you do or they're stupid. Okey dokey then I'm stupid.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Luchsen @ Aug 8 2007, 10:26 PM) 303733</div>
But the best is:

"What it comes down to is that we're all Fallout fans. We love the original games. (But) not every Fallout fan wants a turn-based isometric game." Emil Pagliarulo, Lead Designer, Fallout 3

And similar quotes like: We are great Fallout fans, so we know what Fallout 3 has to be.

A Fallout game has to be turnbased and isometric to be a Fallout game. Implication: Fans don't want a Fallout game?

I shouldn't have posted this. There's so much to say...
[/b]

I loved that quote by Emil also. Let's reverse it and see if any fans would be upset. I could say Hey I loved Counter Strike and I'm a huge fan but not everyone wants FPS so we're going to make it TB and take away the multiplayer aspect of it. Do you think many CS fans would get a little peeved? I think so.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Blood-Pigggy @ Aug 9 2007, 12:31 AM) 303750</div>


Unfortunatly for the majority of Fallout "fans" Fallout 3, will, and no matter what you say, is a sequel, it's written in stone, what Bethesda says will technically be canon, and although personal opinion and perception will differ, that's how it will be shown and portrayed. Considering Bethesda's PR (Who before Oblivion was released, I thought only made sports games because Wayne Gretzky's Hockey was the immediate game I thought of with the name Bethesda) the game will sell well, and there will most likely be more sequels.

There's a strange belief that Bethesda can't make a good game and have good marketing at the same time. Now in no way was Oblivion a "great" game, (I think the attention it got was more directed to the fact that it was one of the first true next gen games) but it's still decent, and people that gas about it sucking are over reacting bung holes who have their own heads where the sun don't shine.
There's some "factual" representation in the Fallout "Community" (IE No Mutants Allowed, Duck & Cover) that all the TES games were terrible.

I'm no snob, but playing the Fallout titles and maybe Wasteland (although the majority of Fallout "fans" who claim they have played it are flat out liars, they wouldn't spend five minutes on the archaic interface unless they were forced to at a young age, like me for example, it was the only damn game that I had for six months) does not make you some kind of gaming genius or exultant.

They enjoy being douches, then maybe they should enjoy the negative attention they get.
[/b]

Question: You loved BOS for the x-box right?
It also was set in the fallout world and wasn't TB. Does anyone even consider that load of garbage a part of the Fallout world? ummm nope. The same applies here.
God you must of hated having to use DOS and play all those nasty RPG back in the 80's and 90's. I personally love them and still do. I'm replaying starflight 2 as we speak because nothing even remotely interesting is available now. Well Overlords was pretty fun but finished it waay too fast.

Also D&C and No Mutants have been here for a loooonnnnngggg time and if it wasn't for forums like theirs I doubt Interplay could of sold the Fallout IP for as much as they did and if you're wondering why people are worried about what Beth will do to their beloved frachise take a look at the Star Trek game Beth did, legacy, and tell me that isn't a big pile of poo. Also not everyone is a fan of Oblivion style games. I bought all of Beth's games since Daggerfall and enjoyed them up to a point but I without a doubt become bored with the nonsense in these games and quit after a few weeks.

I can't believe I've been sucked into a Fallout debate, I just wanted to say it was nice to see everyone talking about it and thought we should have a movie but everywhere I go I see comments like from bloody dolphin piggy boy up there and I've finally had enough. Dude here is the bottom line, it's our opinion. It's not wrong or right or smart or stupid or we're all being a bunch of douches. We loved the game the way it is we just wish they bought the franchise with the fans of it in mind. Seriously they could of just made Oblivion with guns and it would of sold well without this hatred from the fans that loved the story, combat (YES TB Not the Tactical mumbo jumbo) and the way you had freedom in the game without the NPC's all having the same voice and saying the same stuff over and over and over again. I'm a bit surprised to find this kind of hatred for the fans over here at abandonia. By definition people here normally like and still enjoy playing older computer games which a lot of the at the time were TB. Oh well I guess you get hatred for Fallout fans everywhere you go.

[gregor]

i think if you looked the posts there is one where someone hates the crosshair in TES games.... well why not just turn the crossair off (cause it doesn't have to be there...).


bah... waiting for Clear skies...


OH and i don't know what's this talk about Oblivion... as far as i know the game got numerous rewards & awards and sold extremelly well ("box office" game?!). so i am sure that Bethseda reached it's goal there - Make a lot of money!

anyone having a problem with that, can make their own game :P

[skaven510]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(gregor @ Aug 9 2007, 05:55 AM) 303793</div>
i think if you looked the posts there is one where someone hates the crosshair in TES games.... well why not just turn the crossair off (cause it doesn't have to be there...).


bah... waiting for Clear skies...


OH and i don't know what's this talk about Oblivion... as far as i know the game got numerous rewards & awards and sold extremelly well ("box office" game?!). so i am sure that Bethseda reached it's goal there - Make a lot of money!

anyone having a problem with that, can make their own game :P
[/b]

Seen the clear skies :)

I won't get into what makes games good or not but suffice it to say I'm not of the opinion that Oblivion was as great as all those "awards" made it out to be but like I said before that's my opinion.

I am glad that the RPG genre is getting some attention again. I just hope that developers and publishers will once again try to create some great RPGs now that they see that they can have commercial success with the RPG genre. Other than that I'll look foreward to playing Dragon age and Bioshock.

If your curious about people who have a problem with what Beth is doing and created their own Fallout esque game well there is The Omega Syndrome which is heavily based upon the Fallout engine if not the setting. http://www.ausgamedev.com/index.html

[12turtle12]

"A Fallout game doesn't have to be turn based or isometric,"
---It doesn't have to be, but the OPTION would be nice, like FOT.

"It's the same way that all the Alien films weren't the same, the first one was a thriller, and the second was an action horror film, you can't classify something as being "out of series" just because it deviates on the matter."
---True, but Super Mario Bros 2 was quite different in feel than the first AND third AND fourth in the series, and is generally considered to be inferior to those...and the first Alien movie sucked BTW. (opinion, I know)

"We might as well just say Wasteland 2 won't be a sequel"
---It is being made by a certain genius, though...

"A turn-based Fallout wouldn't have been bad, but consider the fact that the turn-based combat in Fallout was pathetic to begin with (it improved with Tactics, but that game was ok at best)"
---Considering this statement, I would not consider you a fan of the series.

Unfortunatly for the majority of Fallout "fans" Fallout 3, will, and no matter what you say, is a sequel, it's written in stone, what Bethesda says will technically be canon,
---Plenty of other series have had multiple companies make stories, and the "true fans" decide what they consider canon. That's the beauty of it.
and although personal opinion and perception will differ, that's how it will be shown and portrayed.
---I completely agree
Considering Bethesda's PR (Who before Oblivion was released, I thought only made sports games because Wayne Gretzky's Hockey was the immediate game I thought of with the name Bethesda)
---Which is why you are not upset. Although TES series is OK, it is by no means groundbreaking. It is sad to say but the fondest memory I have is of Daggerfall, which really the only thing it had going for it was you can go anywhere, and don't get me started onthe bugs...(Morrowind was also VERY buggy)

There's a strange belief that Bethesda can't make a good game and have good marketing at the same time. Now in no way was Oblivion a "great" game, (I think the attention it got was more directed to the fact that it was one of the first true next gen games) but it's still decent,
---Bethesda can, but I will be first to admit that Fallout FANS are VERY skeptical that Bethesda will come through, considering their very bland games which are similar, namely-TES series.

There's some "factual" representation in the Fallout "Community" (IE No Mutants Allowed, Duck & Cover) that all the TES games were terrible.
---See above statements. Those 2 communities are based almost solely on the Fallout series. Oh, and Fallout is flavored by Wasteland - Wasteland is not canonical (just remembered that, sorry)

Just like the people who tell fans that they are afraid of change in the series, the Fallout "fans" (directing to those specifically) attack the TES series without probably have playing it thoroughly.
---Read some of the forums on DaC - it seems quite a few of them have EXTENSIVELY played Morrowind, and I myself have played Daggerfall. Oblivion was IMO a disappointment. Very mediocre, like you said, just next-gen.

What's interesting is that Fallout can hardly be considered more than a cult game, it's not revolutionary in any way, yet this is what the majority of people assert with the game.
---I wasn't very old before Fallout 1 came out, so please give examples of super-open ended, multiple endings, light/dark side point (KOTOR LOL sorry) GURPS video games......

"casual gamers" who drool all over the third game,
---Like I said, the casual gamer will probably like Fallout 3, and Bethesda will make plenty of money on an idea they never worked for.

I'm no snob,
---I'm thinking yes you are :whistling:
but playing the Fallout titles and maybe Wasteland (although the majority of Fallout "fans" who claim they have played it are flat out liars, they wouldn't spend five minutes on the archaic interface unless they were forced to at a young age,
---Anybody can download Wasteland now - and if people will play some of the "archaic" games like are offered on Abandonia, they will play Wasteland.

Perhaps they should smack their lips on their own hypocrisy when they insult Bethesda's writing when they apparently enjoyed Wasteland immensely, which anyone who has played it can tell you, had some of the most soulless writing in existence of large scale RPGs.
---Um....which Bethesda games are you talking about? Let's remember when Wasteland came out. I think the only one that comes close is Arena, and Daggerfall wasn't about dialogue, it was about being able to go anywhere, anytime. (I'm not sure the year DF came out...)


The thing is, if Fallout "fans" want to complain, that's fine, go ahead. But the manner in which they do it is ultimately incredibly childish. Their superiority complex is baffling and moronic. I can't understand how they believe they should be seen as a valid and sophisticated gaming community if they continue to act like a bunch of Myrons.
---If you played a game through 15 times, you'd think you were qualified to make statements about it, too.

I once read a post on one of their forums where they compared themselves to a "bunch of deathclaws about to tear something apart" when in reality it's more like "a bunch of Myrons ready to run when a Mantis does 1 damage in close combat".
They enjoy being douches, then maybe they should enjoy the negative attention they get.
--Please use intelligent arguments, and not just flame, thanks.


Well said, skaven, and thanks for the info :golfclap: (we need that smiley AB!)

[Luchsen]

Just had the idea to make Fallout: The Text Adventure aka FIF but am too lazy.

[mercenary]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Blood-Pigggy @ Aug 8 2007, 07:26 PM) 303686</div>
That's a general statement, the only Fallout fans that are whining are those that spend most of their time on message boards, most people I know who don't really spend a lot of time on the computer (on the internet that is) have played Fallout, enjoyed it, and are looking forward to Fallout 3.

So to be more exact, it's the idiots who constantly complain.
[/b]
People do not complain about F3 itself. It might be good or not, but we will all giveit a chance as it is. What we are complaining about is F3=ES5.
What I am trying to say is- Fallout 3 should be a sequel of Fallout, not compleatly new game, or new Elder scrolls.

[Morrin]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Blood-Pigggy @ Aug 8 2007, 07:26 PM) 303686</div>
That's a general statement, the only Fallout fans that are whining are those that spend most of their time on message boards, most people I know who don't really spend a lot of time on the computer (on the internet that is) have played Fallout, enjoyed it, and are looking forward to Fallout 3.

So to be more exact, it's the idiots who constantly complain.
[/b]

So they shouldn't? So they should eat all the muck bethesda throws at us?

Comparing how alien and aliens are different movies with different styles but in same canon, and comparing them to fallout, fallout 2 and fallout 3 in same fashion is weird. I understand what you mean.. kind of, but not. Instead of comparing alien and aliens in theme, maybe you should compare them in shooting techniques since that is what fallout3 complaits is most about: play style. People don't like how bethesda is making fallout3: appeal the teen boys instead of what fallout was about. They are worried that most of the idea of fallout3 is lost in bethesdas way to make everything look good and forget the rest, just like in oblivion (story, writing).

[Luchsen]

Look good? The graphics of the original Fallout are better. Ugly FPS 3D it is.