Fallout 3 Producer Responds to Fan Criticisms

Jared Rea

New member
Aug 11, 2008
502
0
0
Fallout 3 Producer Responds to Fan Criticisms

Did you feel that the ending wasn't satisfying? Did you find yourself becoming bored at higher levels? Here are your answers.

Bethesda's post-apocalyptic RPG, common grievances [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/editorials/reviews/5419-Review-Fallout-3] and laid them out to Fallout 3 executive producer Todd Howard.

Criticism the first is an odd one, being that when judged as a first-person shooter, Fallout 3 comes up short. Howard's response is curt and to the point: "Agreed." I hadn't heard of this one myself, as comparing Fallout 3 to Halo would be like comparing Grand Theft Auto IV to Gran Turismo. Just because you get to race cars in the two games, it doesn't mean that they should be held to the same standards.

The second criticism is one that a lot of players feel quite strongly about, which is that the ending isn't very satisfying and, when compared to previous Fallout titles, it doesn't quite stack up. "Based on the feedback I've seen, most people are pissed off that it ends, not the 'ending' itself," levels Howard. "That's another thing we're changing in ["Broken Steel," the third piece of downloadable content [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/88554-New-Fallout-3-DLC-Increases-Level-Cap] due in March]. We really underestimated how many people would want to keep playing, so that's probably the last time we'll do something like that."

For those unaware, completing Fallout 3 renders your current game essentially useless as you can no longer continuing playing with that character unless you made sure to hold on to a previous save. Reversing this decision via downloadable content opens up a whole other can of worms, specifically for PlayStation 3 owners. While Xbox 360 players have downloadable content to look forward to and PC users can easily July 2008 [http://www.fileplanet.com/194884/190000/fileinfo/Fallout-3---Free-Play-Post-Main-Quest-Mod] that Fallout 3 DLC would not be made available for the PlayStation 3 edition of the game.

The final criticism is that V.A.T.S, the auto-targeting system found within the game, is boring once your accuracy rating makes for easy head shots later in the game. Howard responds, "Depends on what you find entertaining. I like to blow people's heads off, so, well, it never got old for me."

Agreed.

Permalink
 

Cousin_IT

New member
Feb 6, 2008
1,822
0
0
As someone who relied pretty heavy on VATS when playing, getting all the VAT improvement perks was nothing but good for me \o/
 

Jared Rea

New member
Aug 11, 2008
502
0
0
I still say that charging us to fix a major flaw in the game is a real dick move, even if it was allowed on all platforms.
 

Beffudled Sheep

New member
May 29, 2020
2,030
0
0
Country
Texas
Im pissed that Bethesda told us ps3 owners to fuck off and never come back.Thats it Bethesda has lost all of my respect and support.
 

ygetoff

New member
Oct 22, 2008
1,019
0
0
I would comment on how to get around the end, but I don't know how to spoiler tag things.
 

Copter400

New member
Sep 14, 2007
1,813
0
0
ygetoff said:
I would comment on how to get around the end, but I don't know how to spoiler tag things.
Just do [ spoiler ] YOUR MESSAGE [ /spoiler ] without the spaces and watch the magic happen.

I go with the Todd Howard/Jared Rea line of reasoning: there's no such thing as too many head explosions.
 

ygetoff

New member
Oct 22, 2008
1,019
0
0
Copter400 said:
ygetoff said:
I would comment on how to get around the end, but I don't know how to spoiler tag things.
Just do [ spoiler ] YOUR MESSAGE [ /spoiler ] without the spaces and watch the magic happen.

I go with the Todd Howard/Jared Rea line of reasoning: there's no such thing as too many head explosions.
Thank you.
really, thank you.

To get around the end:
I get around it by simply leaving the Jefferson Memorial before you enter the purifier room. The Lyons Pride waits for you there, and you can run around the gameworld doing whatever you like forever. I plan to do that until "Broken Steel" comes out.
 

JD4566

New member
May 24, 2008
32
0
0
Jester Lord said:
Im pissed that Bethesda told us ps3 owners to fuck off and never come back.Thats it Bethesda has lost all of my respect and support.
What a shame.
 

Zeldadudes

New member
Sep 12, 2008
403
0
0
Indigo_Dingo said:
I still say that charging us to fix a major flaw in the game is a real dick move, even if it was allowed on all platforms.
Sounds like a Lionhead move eh? *Cough Fable 2*
Didn't think Bethesda would do the same.
 

Avatar Roku

New member
Jul 9, 2008
6,169
0
0
Jester Lord said:
Im pissed that Bethesda told us ps3 owners to fuck off and never come back.Thats it Bethesda has lost all of my respect and support.
Not as simple as that. They didn't just sit around going "Fuck the PS3," MS bought the rights to the DLC.
 

TsunamiWombat

New member
Sep 6, 2008
5,870
0
0
orannis62 said:
Jester Lord said:
Im pissed that Bethesda told us ps3 owners to fuck off and never come back.Thats it Bethesda has lost all of my respect and support.
Not as simple as that. They didn't just sit around going "Fuck the PS3," MS bought the rights to the DLC.
Money talks, bullshit walks. Don't hate the game, playa.

Silly euphanisms aside, yeah that sucks for you. I got my xbox360 copy with the full intention of buying it for the PC some day and modding the crap out of it though, so... there's always that.
 

Jared Rea

New member
Aug 11, 2008
502
0
0
There is an unfair amount of balance between the PS3 and the 360 - the 360 gets the best service by developers, while the PS3 gets horse manure. But, then again, you PS3 owners should thank your lucky stars that when (not if) your console breaks for the millionth time, you don't get put through to a call-centre in Dubai, where they speak no English and just give me a number to fuck-all.

Damn you, Microsoft Customer Service!
 

Kriegsherr

New member
Jan 10, 2009
120
0
0
fish food carl said:
There is an unfair amount of balance between the PS3 and the 360 - the 360 gets the best service by developers, while the PS3 gets horse manure. But, then again, you PS3 owners should thank your lucky stars that when (not if) your console breaks for the millionth time, you don't get put through to a call-centre in Dubai, where they speak no English and just give me a number to fuck-all.

Damn you, Microsoft Customer Service!
And the PC gets whats left 8 months later because theres the assumption that everybody will just pirate it anyway, like many other games, Fallout 3 was great fun and totally worth the money I paid for it
 

PedroSteckecilo

Mexican Fugitive
Feb 7, 2008
6,732
0
0
This confirms my theory that Fallout 4 will be the game we really wanted from Bethesda, they seem to understand some of the mistakes they made and are working to correct them. Kudos.
 

Chocolate Source

New member
Jul 17, 2008
52
0
0
I'm in the pro-vats camp, shooting a grenade mid-air then headshotting 4 people in row never got old =)

But after I first went through the ending I thought "the dev who did this should never work on games again. Never ever. Ever." To put it politely.
 

Arcticflame

New member
Nov 7, 2006
1,063
0
0
Jared Rea said:
"Based on the feedback I've seen, most people are pissed off that it ends, not the 'ending' itself," levels Howard.
Eh? I thought most people were pissed at both. To be honest I've seen more people who hate the ending then hate that it ends.
 

Dectilon

New member
Sep 20, 2007
1,044
0
0
I've never much liked Bethesda. They seem to think they are the Tolkiens of video games when in actuallity the are hacks with this friend that's really good at drawing.
 

Nimbus

Token Irish Guy
Oct 22, 2008
2,162
0
0
Wow. It's unuasual to see a game company actually come out, put their hands and and say "We fucked up.".

Kudos.
 

Jared Rea

New member
Aug 11, 2008
502
0
0
Lol 2 out of 3 of those "criticisms" were just ridiculous. Ive heard no one compare Fallout 3 to actual FPS's let alone AAA ones. Besides, what RPG DOESN'T get easier when your all levelled up with the best kit? In fact if it ain't getting easier your playing it wrong.

Oh btw I was unaware PS3 wasnt getting the DLC, but thats just the delicious chocolate frosting on the already yummy Fallout chocolate cake :D (yeh im a fanboy but then again, who isnt these days?)
 

acer840

(Insert Awesome Title)
Oct 21, 2020
353
1
1
Country
Australia
I just hate how I got the PS3 version, and now we don't get DLC for it. They did this with GTA4 and now Fallout 3. I hate Microsoft buying the monopoly of DLC. Rather than make me buy it for thier console, it just makes me hate them more. All they are after is consumers money (obviously) by buying out the compitition. And I wish devalopers would stop allowing themselves to be sold like that.
 

Brokkr

New member
Nov 25, 2008
656
0
0
Stubee said:
Lol 2 out of 3 of those "criticisms" were just ridiculous. Ive heard no one compare Fallout 3 to actual FPS's let alone AAA ones. Besides, what RPG DOESN'T get easier when your all levelled up with the best kit? In fact if it ain't getting easier your playing it wrong.
I agree. It's ridiculous trying to compare Fallout 3 to a FPS. It's not trying to be one. It's almost like complaining that Oblivion was a horrible fighting game when compared to Soul Caliber because you can swing a sword in both. Also I would be more pissed off if it didn't get easier as I leveled up. Because if it stayed the same, there would be no point and then I would just be pissed off at the scaled enemies.
 

Bored Tomatoe

New member
Aug 15, 2008
3,619
0
0
Jester Lord said:
Im pissed that Bethesda told us ps3 owners to fuck off and never come back.Thats it Bethesda has lost all of my respect and support.
Microsoft bought the exclusive rights to the DLC, not Bethesda, and they warned you, don't get pissed off at Bethsoft.
 

scarbunny

Beware of geeks bearing gifs.
Aug 11, 2008
398
0
0
I like the way he responds to the critisism with out really accepting that the critisism may be justified. I interprate the replies as follows

A)Yep we agree Fallout is a terrible FPS, but thats the way we designed it so we are right. (I understand its not an FPS but it lets you play it as one and so it should at least be playable as an FPS)

B)The ending is crap sure but we're perfectly happy to fix that for you...... for a fee.

C)I like VATS, thats all that matters so fuck off

Not that Im saying its a bad game, I enjoyed it very much till the end, but the VATS system could have been improved, maybe with the option of not having to watch the slow mo head shot every single time. Sure its great for a while but after the 1000th it gets a little bit annoying.
 

Rolling Thunder

New member
Dec 23, 2007
2,265
0
0
As a PC-man myself, I must say that Bethsedea's behaviour in this matter was clearly short-sighted. Instead of simply releasing to all platforms and taking the cash in then, they went and allowed Microsoft to purchase the rights. This has had the dual effect of loosing them the profits from the PS3 market AND earning them the emnity of a large slice of console gamers. In short, they fucked up, they went for liquidity instead of larger, longer-term profits, and they're losing out for it in revenue and customers.

So, yes, I will blame Bethsedea. However, there game is so excellent that I forgive them wholly for their mistakes.
 

Jumplion

New member
Mar 10, 2008
7,873
0
0
EH, I guess I'll join up the rest of the Ps3 guys here.

Screw you Bethesda! Then again, Microsoft did pay the rights, so Fuck you Microsoft!

Woohoo! A perfectly valid reason to release my inner fanboy!
 

TygerFish

New member
Dec 5, 2008
3
0
0
I agree with many others that these criticisms are a really strange choice for the top three. For my money, the stupid, trite, illogical, one-dimensional ending came close to tainting the whole thing for me.

For one thing, when I played through, I had Fawkes standing right there. Hello! Radiation? Remember what we did last time someone had to go into an irradiated place? In the main story arc nonetheless? Or was Fawkes just totally spacing? Oh, right, they had to force you into an inane, oversimplified approximation of good vs. evil so they could describe your forced choice in an overblown, melodramatic voiceover.

Chocolate Source said:
But after I first went through the ending I thought "the dev who did this should never work on games again. Never ever. Ever." To put it politely.
Exactly.

The fact that it ended at all? Not a big deal. Just re-load your last save and continue on your way without finishing it. Although, really, the awfulness of that ending almost made me put it down in disgust.
 

Lt. Sera

New member
Apr 22, 2008
488
0
0
I actually liked the ending exept for the inconsistencies:

You shoul've been able to send in the Ghoul, Mutant or Whatsherface Paladin in and be able to continue playing. Going in yourself and dieing is a fine ending in my book, but if I didn't sacrifice myself, how come I can't just walk out of there and be on my merry way?

I loved VATS and the game being a mediocre shooter is pretty logical, since it's not just a shooter.
 

squid5580

New member
Feb 20, 2008
5,106
0
0
Ahhh at least they are listening. They could have easily said it is perfect the way it is. Still sucks about the PS3 getting hosed
 

ButtonedDownParadox

New member
Aug 11, 2008
248
0
0
scarbunny said:
I like the way he responds to the critisism with out really accepting that the critisism may be justified. I interprate the replies as follows

B)The ending is crap sure but we're perfectly happy to fix that for you...... for a fee.
Not even that! It was more like, "What do you mean? Everybody loves the ending and thinks it makes total sense and is wholly original and gives you a fulfilling sense that all the good/evil things you have done prior to the end was worth more than a faded out picture set to one of two voice-overs! It was totally an evolution on a game made ten years ago! They just wanted to play more is all. And who can blame them, am I right?"
 

Dectilon

New member
Sep 20, 2007
1,044
0
0
Nimbus said:
Wow. It's unuasual to see a game company actually come out, put their hands and and say "We fucked up.".

Kudos.
They don't though. They basically say that they are fixing the things they intended to fix to begin with, yet the claim credit for adressing issues, pat themselves on the back and just ignore all other criticism.
 

Jared Rea

New member
Aug 11, 2008
502
0
0
Jester Lord said:
Im pissed that Bethesda told us ps3 owners to fuck off and never come back.Thats it Bethesda has lost all of my respect and support.
How so? I got 140 hours out of my first playthrough on 360 (I have a ps3 too, but always buy multip platform on 360). Let's say you get 60 hours out of a playthrough, did you really not get your money's worth? Don't be simple, dude. You got exactly what you paid for just like 360 owners did. The content we're getting on 360 isn't free. We're PAYING for more. I could understand your ire if we were getting free bonus content only on 360.

There are business decisions made on this stuff and PS3 owners WERE used to getting all the good exclusives back in the day. It's a different market now and you need to accept that. No one forced you to buy a PS3. Chances are you bought one, like many, under the assumption that it's a PS model and will get it all. Did you really think MS would be outdone for long? C'mon. Too much $$$ to not get what they want.

Quit whining and realize you got the same great game everyone else did. You just don't get to buy the new stuff. FYI: I own 360, PS3 and the $250 paper weight from Nintendo.
 

Jared Rea

New member
Aug 11, 2008
502
0
0
I didn't mind the ending, but it's so typical of games nowadays. Most games just have lackluster endings for whatever reason. Games don't have an 8 hour FF7 ending like back in the day. I also think that games have evolved and become so amazing that a big ending isn't totally necessary. I think you have to accept the ending as just an extension of the story that you just played through instead. Also, graphics are so good now that you don't need to use CG to tell the story part (MGS1 did this so well). You're playing through it.

Take Bioshock's ending: it was very short and not phenominal, but it was just the finish to the story I played through, IMO. Games that lack story maybe should have a longer ending, but either way, I'm not that affected by it. I enjoyed Fallout 3 for about 180 hours (logged) with 2 playthroughs and the last 2 minutes didn't ruin that for me at all.
 

Jared Rea

New member
Aug 11, 2008
502
0
0
Indigo_Dingo said:
I still say that charging us to fix a major flaw in the game is a real dick move, even if it was allowed on all platforms.
Sorry about all the posts in a row: I was just wondering what you meant here. Are you talking about Broken Steel? Aren't you still subjected to the same ending, but this is what happens with the Bros of Steel after? You're not the same character, are you?
 

Powas

New member
Dec 18, 2008
20
0
0
Hahaha, Todd himself answering the questions. Too bad he adressed the super minor issues Fallout fans have with this piece of garbage called Fallout 3. What a douche... yep, that's Todd for sure.
 

bue519

New member
Oct 3, 2007
913
0
0
Indigo_Dingo said:
I still say that charging us to fix a major flaw in the game is a real dick move, even if it was allowed on all platforms.
Yay capitalism. Sell the disease and the cure.
 

Jared Rea

New member
Aug 11, 2008
502
0
0
Jared Rea said:
For those unaware, completing Fallout 3 renders your current game essentially useless as you can no longer continuing playing with that character unless you made sure to hold on to a previous save.
The game automatically creates a save game as you enter the Jefferson Memorial for the final time, right before the point-of-no-return. Does no-one realise this?
 

Vyacheslav

New member
Jan 27, 2009
6
0
0
The ending wasn't a real problem? You have got to be joking me. There were plenty of small grievances that nagged me through the game, but I still mostly enjoyed it until I reached the end, which was the most horrible piece of writing I have ever seen. I'm still thinking it must have some kind of poor attempt of a parody of something or other, since I think cocking it up like that requires that you're actually trying to do just that.

So there's supposed to be a huge choice of sacrificing yourself in chamber filled with radiation. The dramatic effect is slightly hampered by the fact that half of the companions you can find are actually immune to radiation. In the main plot a big deal is made of the fact that one is immune, and another one is not only immune, but actually bound to do anything you order him to do. Still, both of them refuse and are perfectly happy to let you or the whatshername paladin bite the bullet. To add insult to injury, Bethesda broke the tradition of the great Fallout endings where the destiny of each town is described, and that maintaining it wouldn't have required more than a couple of hours of writing and a moment of extra studio time with Ron Perlman.

Actually, now that I write it down, I can't think it could be anything but a parody. I can't imagine anyone with two functioning brain cells looking at this tripe and saying "Good enough, let's ship it". After that ending, I couldn't have cared less that you couldn't play the game anymore. I wouldn't have continued if I could have, and I sure as hell am not buying another Bethesda game ever again. I happen to believe that writing matters, especially in the RPG genre.
 

Vyacheslav

New member
Jan 27, 2009
6
0
0
Oh, and the lazy writing seeped through every seam of the game. My favorite was certainly the speech skill, which I heard someone compare to Obi-Wan Kenobi waving his hand at the storm troopers.

Now, in the first Fallout you could convince the main villain that his plan was doomed to fail which resulted in him committing suicide, but that involved a lengthy conversation complete with presenting evidence of the matter. Compare that to Fallout 3:

Player: Kill yourself.
The Big Bad: No.
Player: [SPEECH] Come on, kill yourself!
The Big Bad: Well, okay.
 

lornb

New member
Jan 16, 2009
89
0
0
What the deuce! I'm still playing this, now I'm afraid to continue on the storyline until that DLC comes. I do confess I like games not having that big boss ending, or better ways to circumvent that kind of ending.. like multiple endings, because I'm just not the big boss type. In fact, its precisely why I find myself actually finishing games nowadays instead of becoming frustrated and forgetting them in a dusty corner. Obviously you can't please everyone but there has to be some middle ground here. Also, V.A.T.S rocks.
 

JakubK666

New member
Jan 1, 2008
781
0
0
Classic Action RPG Defence - one of the reason Oblivion got away with criticism. If you complain about shitty shooting, they can always say 'Hey, it's an action-RPG'. If the other group points that the story and stats are a shallow and the entire game is essentially a dumbed down sequel? 'DUH! It's an ACTION-rpg!'

As for the ending...I do believe that the main criticism was not that you couldn't play past it, but the fact it made no fucking sense whatsoever and failed to provide a satisfying conclusion.

VATS, I liked the mechanic of being able to slow down but I felt that it should've been much more exclusive and special as opposed to you just using it non-stop through the entire game and that it was too much of a 'Fuck You' button as Yahtzee best put it.You get to slow down time to the max and use bullet time to put five-six bursts into the skull of your enemy before he even has a chance to shoot back, something there's no fucking way you'd without VATS.
 

mattttherman3

New member
Dec 16, 2008
3,105
0
0
Well I can see why PS3 owners would be pissed, they should at least release it as an expansion pack or something. Oh well what are you gonna do, I am gald that they are changing the ending though.
 

SmugFrog

Ribbit
Sep 4, 2008
1,237
0
0
Dang! PS3 owners get no DLC for GTA4 or FO3? WTF? I'm not a PS3 owner, but that just sucks.
 

Eipok Kruden

New member
Aug 29, 2008
1,209
0
0
orannis62 said:
Jester Lord said:
Im pissed that Bethesda told us ps3 owners to fuck off and never come back.Thats it Bethesda has lost all of my respect and support.
Not as simple as that. They didn't just sit around going "Fuck the PS3," MS bought the rights to the DLC.
Yea, M$ dished out some serious cash and made Fable II's DLC, Fallout 3's DLC, and GTA IV's DLC all 360 exclusive. The devs aren't hating on PS3 owners, they're just padding their wallets with cash.
 

Frank_Sinatra_

Digs Giant Robots
Dec 30, 2008
2,306
0
0
Stubee said:
Oh btw I was unaware PS3 wasnt getting the DLC, but thats just the delicious chocolate frosting on the already yummy Fallout chocolate cake :D (yeh im a fanboy but then again, who isnt these days?)
Last time I checked around here if you are a fanboy keep it to your self so you don't start a flame war.
 

slxiii

New member
Sep 17, 2008
31
0
0
he's wrong. its not that it ends is bad, you can re load a save. the ending BLEW.
compared to the previous fallouts and their endings, this game's ending is truly painful.
 

slxiii

New member
Sep 17, 2008
31
0
0
Vyacheslav said:
The ending wasn't a real problem? You have got to be joking me. There were plenty of small grievances that nagged me through the game, but I still mostly enjoyed it until I reached the end, which was the most horrible piece of writing I have ever seen. I'm still thinking it must have some kind of poor attempt of a parody of something or other, since I think cocking it up like that requires that you're actually trying to do just that.

So there's supposed to be a huge choice of sacrificing yourself in chamber filled with radiation. The dramatic effect is slightly hampered by the fact that half of the companions you can find are actually immune to radiation. In the main plot a big deal is made of the fact that one is immune, and another one is not only immune, but actually bound to do anything you order him to do. Still, both of them refuse and are perfectly happy to let you or the whatshername paladin bite the bullet. To add insult to injury, Bethesda broke the tradition of the great Fallout endings where the destiny of each town is described, and that maintaining it wouldn't have required more than a couple of hours of writing and a moment of extra studio time with Ron Perlman.

Actually, now that I write it down, I can't think it could be anything but a parody. I can't imagine anyone with two functioning brain cells looking at this tripe and saying "Good enough, let's ship it". After that ending, I couldn't have cared less that you couldn't play the game anymore. I wouldn't have continued if I could have, and I sure as hell am not buying another Bethesda game ever again. I happen to believe that writing matters, especially in the RPG genre.
damn straight
if they worried about pirating before, imagine now that the people that bought the game dont want to pay for the DLC...
 

theultimateend

New member
Nov 1, 2007
3,621
0
0
Stubee said:
Lol 2 out of 3 of those "criticisms" were just ridiculous. Ive heard no one compare Fallout 3 to actual FPS's let alone AAA ones. Besides, what RPG DOESN'T get easier when your all levelled up with the best kit? In fact if it ain't getting easier your playing it wrong.

Oh btw I was unaware PS3 wasnt getting the DLC, but thats just the delicious chocolate frosting on the already yummy Fallout chocolate cake :D (yeh im a fanboy but then again, who isnt these days?)
Well I can see why people WOULD confuse it with a FPS.

Did you SEE their initial commercials for Fallout 3? It looked like a post-apocalyptic Halo with all the fast paced gun fights and the fast forwarded gameplay.

Frankly if Bethesda didn't let people overhaul their games they'd get MAULED because they are terrible vanilla. I mean I don't get it..."It's an experiment." No...it's 60 bucks. You know what an experiment is? It's a free goddamn flash game that you make to test theories and refine those things into an expensive product (considering you can't return games).

This is why I've stopped giving money to anyone that isn't Valve, Stardock, or an Indie Developer (Some small exceptions aside that I just don't remember). Because all the old companies I loved have either been consumed and shittyfied by EA or they've gone batshit insane.

DoWII...seriously? What the hell were they thinking. "Nah base building is too complicated and time consuming." ... ... ...

Again this shit should be done in little web experiments where people can play the concepts and tell the company if they are completely retarded. But NO they spend 5 years making a game that people end up waiting for and not enjoying because its 'an experiment.'

Bah...
 

Saltiness

New member
Dec 3, 2007
35
0
0
Oh god, Pete Hines missing a point completely? Say it 'aint so.

1. The game is an action RPG. ACTION. A-C-T-I-O-N. You also have a game with a shitty combat engine. Guess which part is epic fail. Don't want the game critiqued for being a shitty FPS quality? Gee, I thought thats what Bethsoft did best!

2. And it's a swing and a miss from Pete. People hate the ending, it's balls.

3. "lolz i liek exploding headz lololol". = Objective reply to criticism from Pete Hines.
 
Oct 19, 2008
642
0
0
Indigo_Dingo said:
I still say that charging us to fix a major flaw in the game is a real dick move, even if it was allowed on all platforms.
Too bad it isn't on all platforms Spencer,
personally i think that making the downloadable content option available is a good thing,
but i find stupid that they didn't think to include it all in the first place.
 

Jared Rea

New member
Aug 11, 2008
502
0
0
Vyacheslav said:
Player: Kill yourself.
The Big Bad: No.
Player: [SPEECH] Come on, kill yourself!
The Big Bad: Well, okay.
LOL.

One of the oddest aspects of the game was being able to open a conversation with the token asshole line (usually the bottom option) and then saying something vaguely pleasant and being rewarded with caps and favours. You can do this to pretty much any character, and the fact that you only need a Speech skill of ~50 to have 100% probability most of the time is even more bizarre.
 

Jared Rea

New member
Aug 11, 2008
502
0
0
theultimateend said:
Stubee said:
Lol 2 out of 3 of those "criticisms" were just ridiculous. Ive heard no one compare Fallout 3 to actual FPS's let alone AAA ones. Besides, what RPG DOESN'T get easier when your all levelled up with the best kit? In fact if it ain't getting easier your playing it wrong.

Oh btw I was unaware PS3 wasnt getting the DLC, but thats just the delicious chocolate frosting on the already yummy Fallout chocolate cake :D (yeh im a fanboy but then again, who isnt these days?)
Well I can see why people WOULD confuse it with a FPS.

Did you SEE their initial commercials for Fallout 3? It looked like a post-apocalyptic Halo with all the fast paced gun fights and the fast forwarded gameplay.

Frankly if Bethesda didn't let people overhaul their games they'd get MAULED because they are terrible vanilla. I mean I don't get it..."It's an experiment." No...it's 60 bucks. You know what an experiment is? It's a free goddamn flash game that you make to test theories and refine those things into an expensive product (considering you can't return games).

This is why I've stopped giving money to anyone that isn't Valve, Stardock, or an Indie Developer (Some small exceptions aside that I just don't remember). Because all the old companies I loved have either been consumed and shittyfied by EA or they've gone batshit insane.


Bah...
See thats where we differ, id give my left arm to help Bethesda or Bioware with their next title. Id also like to tear off the pretentious arms of every pretentious valve employee and beat pretentious valve fanboys to death with them :) (you can hit me back with the greedy arms of Bungie employees, granted they are heavier due to lifting there overstuffed wallets...)


wtf am i talkin about?
 

theultimateend

New member
Nov 1, 2007
3,621
0
0
Stubee said:
See thats where we differ, id give my left arm to help Bethesda or Bioware with their next title. Id also like to tear off the pretentious arms of every pretentious valve employee and beat pretentious valve fanboys to death with them :) (you can hit me back with the greedy arms of Bungie employees, granted they are heavier due to lifting there overstuffed wallets...)

wtf am i talkin about?
REally why?

Bioware is owned by EA now so you'd be getting treated like utter garbage.
Bethesda makes games that become great because of modding otherwise they are pretty bland (I mean I loved Morrowind but its been a downhill walk since then without mods).

Valve on the other hand tends to make games that are amazing out the door without mods. Plus their employees tend to be very pleased with their job.

I've always felt counting on your player base to make your games engaging is kind of a crutch that too many PC developers use.
 

BigCat91

New member
May 26, 2008
108
0
0
well i'm gonna start with how todd howard took the criticisms and just say THANK YOU!!! THANK YOU for being a man and standing up and saying "MY GAME ISN'T PERFECT!!!!" unlike sooooooooooo many developers who just cough and laugh at an e-mail regarding criticism.

Now to my opinion. Yeah fallout 3 wasn't the best shooter but then again it was an RPG with a phenomanol story line. Really i wish it was more like a shooter but VATS was so much fun and never got old. However i felt like i was cheating the game throughout and was robbing myself of the experience.

Now to the ending the reason why it's dissapointing is because it made it's self so epic until the very last 10 seconds which like many other games today made me feel like there is absolutley no closure.

Now on to something i find interesting nobody seems to have figured out how the game started off so challenging but then just dived into being easy after you hit a certain point in the game. some aspects which showed this are the amount of caps you have and the amount of bullets. When i came out of the vault it was difficult for me to survive because bullets were understandebly scarce and money was hard to come by (i mean after all the world nearly took care of it's self with giant atom bombs). But then when i went through the metro (which was confusing because it all looked alike) i ran into an absured amount of hunting rifles and ammo, and from that point on every thing turned down hill in term of difficulty.

Now the first two criticisms are passable because of either the game itself or what soooo many others do. but the last one really baffles me as to how people ignored the sudden difficulty curve plunged.
 

Saltiness

New member
Dec 3, 2007
35
0
0
BigCat91 said:
well i'm gonna start with how todd howard took the criticisms and just say THANK YOU!!! THANK YOU for being a man and standing up and saying "MY GAME ISN'T PERFECT!!!!" unlike sooooooooooo many developers who just cough and laugh at an e-mail regarding criticism.

Now the first two criticisms are passable because of either the game itself or what soooo many others do. but the last one really baffles me as to how people ignored the sudden difficulty curve plunged.
He didn't stand up and be a man, he market spinned the criticism about face to "but that's what we meant to do! and thus it's awesome". They didn't admit anything, they didn't say "gee, that was a shitty design decision" or "yeah, we're going to fix that in a (free) patch".

Maybe people ignored the difficulty curve, because not everyone experienced such a thing. I know alot of people (myself included) who played the game in Hard simply because the combat was so utterly boring and easy that it was making the game even more dull. But then there's people who've struggled with it, citing how hard they found it. To each their own.
 

Syntax Error

New member
Sep 7, 2008
2,323
0
0
It's a sucky FPS because people don't go down with a single headshot. That and the guns are a bit clumsy, but that's not the way the game is supposed to be played. Sure, you can go all Rambo, but your success will be limited and the game would be too difficult (hence the complaint). VATS is pretty much a necessity. Though I gotta agree that there should at least be an option to turn off the slo-mo in VATS.
 

SmugFrog

Ribbit
Sep 4, 2008
1,237
0
0
Syntax Error said:
It's a sucky FPS because people don't go down with a single headshot.
That kind of reminds me of Oblivion where I bashed a mountain lion with my sword for about 15 minutes before I finally said, "You know what, this is friggin' retarded..." and toned the difficulty slider back a tad. I usually get pissed off when you can't kill someone with a single headshot (or at least one that doesn't look like it grazed them or hit their helmet, i.e. higher difficulties on Hitman). With Fallout 3 though, I buy into it a bit more with it being an RPG and stats involved - so it doesn't bother me as much if it takes 2-3 shots to kill a normal non-helmet wearing human.

I imagine you could always scale the difficult down a notch or 2 and it would be very realistic - at least for you to kill enemies. I'm sure there are a lot of mods out for the PC version (I've seen a lot of realism mods).
 

Jared Rea

New member
Aug 11, 2008
502
0
0
theultimateend said:
Stubee said:
See thats where we differ, id give my left arm to help Bethesda or Bioware with their next title. Id also like to tear off the pretentious arms of every pretentious valve employee and beat pretentious valve fanboys to death with them :) (you can hit me back with the greedy arms of Bungie employees, granted they are heavier due to lifting there overstuffed wallets...)

wtf am i talkin about?
REally why?

Bioware is owned by EA now so you'd be getting treated like utter garbage.
Bethesda makes games that become great because of modding otherwise they are pretty bland (I mean I loved Morrowind but its been a downhill walk since then without mods).

Valve on the other hand tends to make games that are amazing out the door without mods. Plus their employees tend to be very pleased with their job.

I've always felt counting on your player base to make your games engaging is kind of a crutch that too many PC developers use.
Well I have never modded a game to date and i have loved Morrowind, Oblivion and Fallout 3. Saying Bioware sucks because EA owns it is completly immature. Bioware are still responsible for the development of the games and even if they wernt EA are capable of creating amazing games (just look at Dead Space).

I know its just my opinion but i have never liked a game by Valve. I find the Half life series bland and lacking passion, TF2 was just inferior to so many other online shooters, Portal was soo short they couldnt even release it on its own and L4D gets boring after about 12 minutes.
Why do they keep returning to FPS's? Focus on a genre that needs a re vamp like ACTUAL survival horror (Dead Space and Resi are action horror IMO)
 

Bofus Teefus

New member
Jan 29, 2009
1,189
0
0
The end might not have lived up to my wildest dreams, but it didn't kill the 60 or so hours that I'd put into the game by then, nor did it ruin the additional 60 or so hours I've put in since the first time I beat it. I'm not raising the unfair criticism flag, but I did enjoy the hell out of the game.
 

theultimateend

New member
Nov 1, 2007
3,621
0
0
Stubee said:
theultimateend said:
Stubee said:
See thats where we differ, id give my left arm to help Bethesda or Bioware with their next title. Id also like to tear off the pretentious arms of every pretentious valve employee and beat pretentious valve fanboys to death with them :) (you can hit me back with the greedy arms of Bungie employees, granted they are heavier due to lifting there overstuffed wallets...)

wtf am i talkin about?
REally why?

Bioware is owned by EA now so you'd be getting treated like utter garbage.
Bethesda makes games that become great because of modding otherwise they are pretty bland (I mean I loved Morrowind but its been a downhill walk since then without mods).

Valve on the other hand tends to make games that are amazing out the door without mods. Plus their employees tend to be very pleased with their job.

I've always felt counting on your player base to make your games engaging is kind of a crutch that too many PC developers use.
Well I have never modded a game to date and i have loved Morrowind, Oblivion and Fallout 3. Saying Bioware sucks because EA owns it is completly immature. Bioware are still responsible for the development of the games and even if they wernt EA are capable of creating amazing games (just look at Dead Space).

I know its just my opinion but i have never liked a game by Valve. I find the Half life series bland and lacking passion, TF2 was just inferior to so many other online shooters, Portal was soo short they couldnt even release it on its own and L4D gets boring after about 12 minutes.
Why do they keep returning to FPS's? Focus on a genre that needs a re vamp like ACTUAL survival horror (Dead Space and Resi are action horror IMO)
As they say "You can't please everyone."

BUT considering the incredible drop in quality for basically every major company that EA absorbed I'd say that my comment was hardly immature. I'd be willing to wager its just a matter of time.

I mean they are so brutal about their takeovers sometimes that you can get banned for asking about it. Like Westwood for example.

Dead Space was painfully predictable. You could walk into a room for the first time and say exactly what was going to happen almost in the exact order it happens. I appreciated the concept but Event Horizon the video game panned out better in my head than it did in practice.

But again you can't please everyone.