Is it normal to rage at Fallout 3 ??

[5t3v0]

For those of you who hate on it for being a "poor" sequel... just remember that the franchise went to shit for several games after Fallout 2, and bethesda actually brought it back to a tolerable and competent standard... and gave it a much needed redesign (Isometric Turn Based Rpgs do not age well).

People who rage about the bugs in F3, forget that F2 was a mess initially, and most of the game breaking bugs never got fixed by the official team.

You have no reason to rage at this game.

Oh for fucks sake, why is it that everytime an old fan rages on Fallout 3, one of the first things they think about is "Oh, its not turn based, they must think its crap because of that." Hell, most of these people probably liked the vision of fallout 3. One thing you guys have to realise is that older fans are very story and lore focused as it was a ROLE PLAYING GAME.

That said, we are all entitled to our opinions. But that works both ways dude. You are entitled to yours, but you can't go around saying "You have no reason to rage at this game". Its like with me, even though I experienced few bugs with New Vegas, I can't go around saying "There are no bugs in this game because I never had any". Its just plain wrong.

 

[Ragsnstitches]

For those of you who hate on it for being a "poor" sequel... just remember that the franchise went to shit for several games after Fallout 2, and bethesda actually brought it back to a tolerable and competent standard... and gave it a much needed redesign (Isometric Turn Based Rpgs do not age well).

People who rage about the bugs in F3, forget that F2 was a mess initially, and most of the game breaking bugs never got fixed by the official team.

You have no reason to rage at this game.

Oh for fucks sake, why is it that everytime an old fan rages on Fallout 3, one of the first things they think about is "Oh, its not turn based, they must think its crap because of that." Hell, most of these people probably liked the vision of fallout 3. One thing you guys have to realise is that older fans are very story and lore focused as it was a ROLE PLAYING GAME.

That said, we are all entitled to our opinions. But that works both ways dude. You are entitled to yours, but you can't go around saying "You have no reason to rage at this game". Its like with me, even though I experienced few bugs with New Vegas, I can't go around saying "There are no bugs in this game because I never had any". Its just plain wrong.

I'm confused as to what I said that has disgruntled you so. I put forward an opinion, you seemingly burst because of it... then tell me we are all entitled to an opinion? What in my comment, stated that my opinion was

Me saying "There is no reason for you to Rage" is not only opinion, but a recommendation... it's a game delivered by an industry. Not something you personally crafted, so it becoming something you had not envisioned is still no reason to rage at it. Boycott it by all means, but raging is pointless.

'Oh, its not turn based, they must think its crap because of that.' Hell, most of these people probably liked the vision of fallout 3. One thing you guys have to realise is that older fans are very story and lore focused as it was a ROLE PLAYING GAME.

I'm presuming this directed at this:

"just remember that the franchise went to shit for several games after Fallout 2, and bethesda actually brought it back to a tolerable and competent standard... and gave it a much needed redesign (Isometric Turn Based Rpgs do not age well)."

First of all, my point on it's Turn Based origins was a secondary opinion and not in any way a judgement of "old fans". Secondly I AM AN OLDER FAN... If you bothered to read comments beyond the first page, you might have noticed me say this:

I much prefer new vegas over 3, despite the state it was released in, but that's not in discussion now. Between the numbered sequels, 2 was my favourite.

Implying that both 1): I'm an old fan and 2): I'm one of those people you think I was slandering.