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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Oh btw I was unaware PS3 wasnt getting the DLC, but thats just the delicious chocolate frosting on the already yummy Fallout chocolate cake (yeh im a fanboy but then again, who isnt these days?)
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.
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.
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 (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.'
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.
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.
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...)
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'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.
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.
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.
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).
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
(yeh im a fanboy but then again, who isnt these days?)
