Fallout 3 Review...By Tavenos

Recommended Videos

Knight Templar

Moved on
Dec 29, 2007
3,848
0
0
You have a kinda large spoiler(s) in the first part of your story section, I'm sorry but any review that has spoilers like that makes itself pointless or harmfull to people yet to play the game. Apart from those who don't care about story.

Anyway you didn't really back up a few of your points so be ready to defend them.
 

Alex_P

All I really do is threadcrap
Mar 27, 2008
2,712
0
0
Knight Templar said:
I'm sorry but any review that has spoilers like that makes itself pointless or harmfull to people yet to play the game. Apart from those who don't care about story.
I care about stories. A lot.
In over a decade of being on the Internet, I don't think I've ever run across a spoiler that truly "spoiled" anything for me, though.
Some people do, indeed, find their experience "spoiled" by spoilers, but it's not a universal thing.

Also, the OP was kind enough to signpost the spoilers for those that care, so I think it's a non-issue even if you are the kind of person who is put off by spoilers.

-- Alex
 

DangerChimp

New member
Nov 28, 2008
174
0
0
There's not been a really good RPG on the consoles since Oblivion (I don't count JRPGs because I can't stand them). Great review.
 

tavenos

New member
Jan 30, 2009
46
0
0
^I hardly see Deus Ex players, or at least don't see ones who say it without provocation...

Anyway, I played Fallout 2 after I finished this and it's a good experience. I don't like comparing the two because they are two different genres really. I think Fallout 2 is the better game, but thats based on what I expect from the genre and time periods.
 

51gunner

New member
Jun 12, 2008
583
0
0
I think a lot of people fail to see that 6.5/10 is still a passing grade. In this case, passing is a recommendation, so 6.5 fits with your description too. I despise reviewers that see an eight as a bad score and never dip below six.
 

JamminOz07

New member
Nov 19, 2008
342
0
0
Any game that I start replaying straight after completion must be pretty good, and any game that keeps me entertained for 40+ hours is worth a score of at 9/10. (I would go 10, as it was my favourite game of 2008, but there is definately room for improvement).
 

keptsimple

New member
Feb 26, 2009
223
0
0
I would give the game a higher score. However, I agree with your points on the writing and story. While there is not much groan-worthy dialogue, most of the characters hardly have anything interesting to say. And many of the NPCs simply repeat the same basic statements as other characters in the area.

I don't think this has anything to do with the fact that this game was rushed. This is simply Bethesda being Bethesda. The characters in Elder Scrolls 3 & 4 were as dull as dirt too.
 

McClaud

New member
Nov 2, 2007
923
0
0
sycotik said:
JC Denton said:
Fallout 1 & 2 > Fallout 3
I have to agree with this. I have played Fallout 1 & 2 as well as tactics. I also played Wasteland and Fountain of Dreams (Slightly off topic). The problem that I had with Fallout 3 was not the game play, but the story immersion. You could treat Fallout 3 strictly as a FPS and completely ignore the story. You really couldn't do that with the previous games, because what you did really forged the story. My biggest disappointment with the game was the ending. This has nothing to do with how it ended, but in the previous games you were rewarded with how every place and thing you touched was altered by what you did. In Fallout 3 you get this kind of general meh.
That was my opinion as well.

Storywise, yes. Fallout 1 and 2 were better than Fallout 3.

At the time, the gameplay was also fairly good in 1 & 2. Now, I wish people would expect more than isometric, turn-based RPGs for the Fallout license. I think the FPS and graphics made the game better than 1 & 2, and wish someone would seriously re-make both of the first Fallouts with gameplay and visual upgrades.

Make them exactly the same in terms of story and impact, mind you, with only Fallout 3's gameplay and visuals.
 

Sparrow

New member
Feb 22, 2009
6,848
0
0
Seems a little like your giving a bad review just to get some views.

Then again I would say that. I love this game after all.
 

kawligia

New member
Feb 24, 2009
779
0
0
Actually, I found the stories and characters to be one of its strongest points. Except the main quest that is. Strictly speaking about the main quest, I would have to say that story was short, linear, and uninspired. The ending was very anti-climatic. I think I would have fonder memories of the game had I turned it off before ever witnessing the ending; at least then I could speculate. :/

However, the rest of the game had plenty of quests and characters that were interesting and original. Many of the characters' personalities were unique enough and developed enough that I feel like I can easily imagine how each one of them would handle a particular situation and why. That's a LOT more than I can say for most games' NPCs with maybe the exception of 1 or 2 of the main characters. The quests were also a breath of fresh air since there were about as interesting and varied as I could expect.

Exploration was also quite cool. I was never more interested in what was in that structure just over the next hill. Some of those locations, especially that one place which left a purple taste in my mouth (I call it that for spoiler reasons), were almost as creepy and "edge of the seat" attention-grabbing as a good suspense movie. I say Bravo!

The only problem (aside fromt he main quest and ending) was that exploration lacked in the "loot" area. There was very little equipment to find. There were a few weapons for each weapon skill and a somewhat unique named version of each but that was about it. There were a lot of lateral additions to your arsenal but few upgrades. And most of the upgrades that were there came from quests, not exploration. Maybe if the craftable weapons were more useful and the extra schematics brought better improvements it might have been better. Also, they should have put in schematics for weapon and armor upgrades (More armor, lighter weight, less recoil, etc.)

Mods helped me out a great deal though. I found one mod that SERIOUSLY reduced the amount of supplies you get from and during quests. That really made me raid the ruins to stock up on supplies for a mission.

Edit: Oh, and one more major problem; the quests need to have bigger impacts based on how you complete them. I applaud the varying ways in which you can complete a quest. I applaud the way in which the reward and quest dialogue will change based on those actions. But what the game needs is post-quest effects. If you complete a quest by killing Jimbo, then that should open some doors for you while closing others. Perhaps if you kill Jimbo you will get a bigger reward, but if you keep him alive, you can perform quests for HIM and go down a different path. That would seriously add to the games replayability and would really make you think harder about what you do.
 

mattttherman3

New member
Dec 16, 2008
3,105
0
0
Well, while you pointed out several flaws, you pretty much enmphasized on them, not too much emphasis on the good points of the game. I think the game is 8.5 out of 10.
 

Tryzon

New member
Jul 19, 2008
700
0
0
While I'm very much of the Fallout 3 > Oblivion crowd, it is undeniable that the newer game often falls back on bad habits of the developers, in particular having useless skills like unarmed, and the fact that the main quest is somehow the weakest element of the whole thing.

Regardless my only complaint about the review is the scoring system: 6.5? That's 65%, meaning out of 100. That kind of score is just too pinpoint precise, and should be replaced with an out of 10 system, which is vague without being too much so. That's just my niggling feeling, though. Decent job, otherwise.
 

kawligia

New member
Feb 24, 2009
779
0
0
Tryzon said:
While I'm very much of the Fallout 3 > Oblivion crowd, it is undeniable that the newer game often falls back on bad habits of the developers, in particular having useless skills like unarmed, and the fact that the main quest is somehow the weakest element of the whole thing.
I don't think there were any useless skills. Unarmed and Melee were there for two reasons: 1) To give people a challenge since its much easier with a gun 2) to have some sort of backup for people who only wanted to use a very specific set of weapons. If you only have a desire to use energy weapons (or especially Big Guns) you might find youself without ammo. Well, that tire iron doesn't need any.

Also, the skills were far from weak. With the paralyze perk (w/e its called) you can take out a behemoth with no ammo and minimal damage although it will take a minute or two. And the stronger melee weps cause the enemies to stagger a lot, meaning they do less damage to you.

I admit the playstyles that would use them are pretty specific, but useless? Nah.

Edit: Ok, I take it back. Barter really was useless. By the time it had any effect at all, you had so much money that you didn't need anymore. At least speech gave you some unique dialogue options so it wasn't totally useless. It was mostly there for the RP crowd though.