What makes a Fallout game?

Recommended Videos

sma_warrior

New member
Jan 23, 2008
129
0
0
Okay, so in all the topics involving Fallout 3, most invariably come back to some people stating that while it might have the name Fallout 3, it isn't a 'true' successor to Fallout 1 and 2.

What I want to know is why? What is missing from this game OTHER than an outdated graphics engine.
 

PurpleRain

New member
Dec 2, 2007
5,001
0
0
I can see this thread getting locked really soon.

But as for the OP in general:

The ability to hit children in the nuts with a crowbar.
 

Psychochef

New member
Jul 22, 2008
65
0
0
Meh. Bethesda's developing, and their games haven't been too shabby recently. I reserve judgment until the games comes out. Then I'll mercilessly disembowel it.
 

J'aen

New member
Jul 6, 2008
312
0
0
Psychochef said:
Meh. Bethesda's developing, and their games haven't been too shabby recently. I reserve judgment until the games comes out. Then I'll mercilessly disembowel it.
Good man. I wish No Mutants Allowed had a few more like you.
 

The_Toe_Bighter98

New member
Mar 22, 2008
405
0
0
The ability to choose how to approach things.

Also, having a character look exactly alike Mad Max. Especially when you get Dog Meat following your ass, then your nigh impossible to tell from Mad Max.
 

sma_warrior

New member
Jan 23, 2008
129
0
0
PurpleRain said:
I can see this thread getting locked really soon.
Why is that?

I'm just curious as I've never played the first two games *ducks to avoid the rocks being thrown* and so I just find it absolutely fascinating that so many people are making judgements without having played the thing. I have now though got a copy of the fallout collection on the way though (1, 2, and Tactics).
 

Psychochef

New member
Jul 22, 2008
65
0
0
sma_warrior said:
I'm just curious as I've never played the first two games *ducks to avoid the rocks being thrown* and so I just find it absolutely fascinating that so many people are making judgements without having played the thing. I have now though got a copy of the fallout collection on the way though (1, 2, and Tactics).
Bit of advice, then.

1. Don't play Tactics. Trust me on this.
2. After you've played the other games, you'll understand where all the hype comes from. I myself have repurchased the Fallout games three times. (Damaged disks.) It's THAT good.
 

Cab00se206

New member
Jul 9, 2008
160
0
0
sma_warrior said:
I'm just curious as I've never played the first two games *ducks to avoid the rocks being thrown* and so I just find it absolutely fascinating that so many people are making judgements without having played the thing.
I also am a Fallout noob, but what I can make out is this:
The original makers of Fallout released a great game and was praised for it. Most people think that no company can remove a series from its original publishers and make it GOOD, hence when Buthesda made the announcement many people condemned it for being leech-like and incapable of retaining the spirit of the earlier installments.

Also I think that the switch to 3rd person shooter also raised criticism, as people were afraid that it was untrue to the spirit of the game and was trying to capitalize on the acclaim FPS's get nowadays.

Truth be told, I think that I, and people like me, who have never played a Fallout game before will approach this with more enjoyment and forgivingness than others. I have no 'awesome memories' that Buthesda can potentially destroy, though I think that my contribution is rather moot, since the fucking OFLC of Australia has banned the damn thing. I heard about the game from a gaming magazine like a fucking month before the news that it was going to be banned, and I still wept.
 

Cab00se206

New member
Jul 9, 2008
160
0
0
Also, can I point out the Command and Conquer series as a shining example of a great game made excellent by a different company. Westwood made C&C, C&C: Tiberian Sun, Red Alert, Red Alert 2 and a bunch of expansions, but now the games are being made by Electronic Arts Los Angeles and they're better then ever. Seriously. C&C3 is one of the all time greatest RTS games made, the expansion added new things and filled in some plot holes and Red Alert 3 is soon to be released, and they have all remained true to the spirit and feel of it's predecesors (though I had to say that the Nod campaign FMVs were a little wierd and melodromatic in C&C3)
 

PurpleRain

New member
Dec 2, 2007
5,001
0
0
sma_warrior said:
PurpleRain said:
I can see this thread getting locked really soon.
Why is that?

I'm just curious as I've never played the first two games *ducks to avoid the rocks being thrown* and so I just find it absolutely fascinating that so many people are making judgements without having played the thing. I have now though got a copy of the fallout collection on the way though (1, 2, and Tactics).
It's just that there are a few more topics about this that have spiraled out of control.

Good to see you bought the games. The learning curve is crazy. At first you have no idea what the hell you're doing, but after a while, you'll work it all out and have a bit of fun... putting crowbars between childrens legs (oh, that sounded so bad I feel terrible).
 

Archaeology Hat

New member
Nov 6, 2007
430
0
0
PurpleRain said:
I can see this thread getting locked really soon.

But as for the OP in general:

The ability to hit children in the nuts with a crowbar.
Except that in the EU this was illeagal and removed, without putting anything in to replace it (In fallout 2 this essentially blocked the player from completing a number of missions) in the areas where the children were part of a mission. Really badly done and not worth the trouble. Having children in games is a PR nightmare and I can see why Bethesda would choose not to have children in the game. It is indeed better for them not to exist at all than to exist and have to be removed badly or to exist and be unkillable. Also, the first two Fallout games were pretty crap 2D isometric games, so even if/when you did kill/wound the children (I eventually downloaded a "patch" of dubious legality to attempt to complete Fallout properly) it wasn't close to "realism". Nowadays... all it would take is one screenshot and you'd have people scream "think of the children!" and blaming gun-crime on Fallout 3.

To be honest, what makes a fallout game for me is the dark-post-apocalyptic humour, with or without sick violence. Done well, this style doesn't even need violence half the time. Oh and it needs a vault... and it needs drugs and dubious morals.
 

Goenitz

New member
Jul 22, 2008
234
0
0
Tonnes of drugs, and little regard for your personal health. Oh yeah, and lots of violence.