Why i hate fallout 3.
- Thread starter DalekJaas
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Fallout 3 is an okay game. Since we appear to be comparing Fallout 3 and Oblivion, and since I'm sure that the point that they're completely different games has already been made, I'll just say that I didn't enjoy Fallout as much because it didn't suit my tastes. I love the post apocalyptic feel of it, and the music, and the setting of the game to an extent, it just isn't as much fun as Oblivion is IMO.
It probably took forever to level up because you weren't training your major skills. I always choose ones with blade, sneak, security, and marksman, for example, since those are some of the things that I am constantly doing.
And sleeping isn't too much trouble, unless you're just extremely impatient.
Basically what I'm saying is that your argument is invalid, other than on the level of personal opinion.
Why can't you?Blitzkrieg8 said:
It probably took forever to level up because you weren't training your major skills. I always choose ones with blade, sneak, security, and marksman, for example, since those are some of the things that I am constantly doing.
And sleeping isn't too much trouble, unless you're just extremely impatient.
Basically what I'm saying is that your argument is invalid, other than on the level of personal opinion.
What can I say, playing it now and finding it to be pretty fun, althou aiming is a bit of a trouble for me. All in all, If you compare it to Oblivion I say it wins on a few levels. Now all I have to do is to get my hands on the original two games... and is it just me, or does the characters in the game move in a way similar to dolls? dosnt really feel as they are a part of the world, hard to describe...
In Oblivion you couldn't join the Daedra, and go onto Mehrunes Dagon's side.
If you payed attention to the storyline, You would know it is set in an alternate future where the Cold War escalated instead of died down, and this was the reason for no culture change.
And Brotherhood of Steel is better than Oblivion's unimaginatively named 'Fighters Guild' 'Mages Guild' or whatever it was.
If you payed attention to the storyline, You would know it is set in an alternate future where the Cold War escalated instead of died down, and this was the reason for no culture change.
And Brotherhood of Steel is better than Oblivion's unimaginatively named 'Fighters Guild' 'Mages Guild' or whatever it was.
...There was a guild of fighters, a guild of mages, and a guild of thieves.Chesterfield Snapdragon McFisticuffs said:
Fighters' Guild
Mages' Guild
Thieves' Guild
Those were official names given to them. Would it have made more sense if they called them "The fisting masters of blades and such", "The den of spells for all spellcasters", and "The stealers of things"? Or other such things. I'm sure they're more imaginative than I am, but STILL.
I decided to do that on my most recent character; guess what randomly spawns at the Convenience Store outside Megation in front of me, freshly out of the Vault?Necrith said:
A fucking Deathclaw. I nearly shit my pants.
Luckily, the Raiders had softened it up before dying in the most gruesome ways possible.
I'm consistently stunned by how highly Oblivion is regarded.Chesterfield Snapdragon McFisticuffs said:
With some exceptions (the Dark Brotherhood and Daedra questlines in particular) it just seems like Bethesda took everything that was great about Morrowind and tossed it out the window in favor of an utterly generic fantasy game world populated by hideous, inbred-looking characters who all sound the same. The main story was more or less the same "kill this ultimate evil" we've all seen a million times. Nearly all of the non-quest specific dungeons (forts, Ayleid ruins, planes of Oblivion) are copies of each other. The whole exercise just felt really, really sloppy.
And people are saying THIS is better than Fallout 3?
@#1: The environment of Fallout is not meant to be the same style as Oblivion. "Immersive", when refering to video games, means that the game makes you feel as if you are there; as part of the world. In my opinion, Fallout 3's environment is very immersive; it simulates a nuclear wasteland pretty well and the feeling of desperation that comes with it as well (although once you get the plasma rifle and enough microfusion cells to kill every creature in the game twice over, you kind of lose the sense of desparation, but w/e). Now, when you say you wanted more "realistic creatures", I'm pretty sure you didn't take into account the effects of radiation on the local wildlife. What, did you expect there to be no mutations? I kinda have to agree with the super mutant thing, but it doesn't bother me. And there's no saying 200 years of radiation wouldn't mutate some creatures to be stronger than they are (i.e. massive scorpions or bugs).
@#2: The setting is meant to be as such: Fallout 3 is centered in an alternate universe where following WWII, technology rapidly advanced (to where autonomous AI and plasma and laser weaponry were common) while the culture remained locked in a 1950's type setting. From a historic standpoint, I have to agree with you: Whenever a massive leap in technology is made, culture evolves with it, so the culture of Fallout shouldn't have remained "50's-ish". But personally, I think the 50's look matches the nuclear disaster plot very well; after all, we associate this period with the Cold War and the nuclear arms race. I don't think it makes sense to put it in any other time period, but again, it's just my opinion.
@#3: Honestly, I think it seems less absurd this time around. It definitely felt more realistic to me.
@#4: I'm totally in your camp for this one. I have thought about how much more interesting it would be to be able to play both sides of the conflict. Despite my best wishes to be an evil asshole, I can't join the evil asshole team; I'm stuck with the Brotherhood. Even though you can kind of "subvert" some of what the Brotherhood is doing, you can't actually fight against them in the story (anyone who has downloaded Broken Steel knows about the two options for finishing the expansion pack; though the "evil" choice is hilarious and satisfying, you are left with very little advantage afterwards. For some reason, the Enclave is STILL your enemy, and the Brotherhood is, obviously, now your enemy also. What gives?!)
@#5: Its not THAT bad... but yeah, now that you mention it it does remind me of that
But really, that's not a legitimate reason to hate a game...
@#6: The "showcase" feature of the game, VATS, would be rendered pointless by allowing you to use ironsights a la COD4. Ironsights would make the weapons point and fire exactly at where you aim; though this is in fact the whole point of having ironsights, that would mean that VATS, where you hit the body part only if you are lucky enough, would be unnecessary as you could just as easily free aim and hit the part you want. Though it's kind of a cheap way of doing this, by having aiming the way it is and by having the weapons not be very accurate, it encourages the player to use the VATS system whenever possible. To me, this is not really a bad thing, as VATS saves ammo and is pretty damn cool to watch.
@#7: How is the setting ridiculous? I mean be honest: if these events were to actually happen, who's to say it wouldn't be even more "ridiculous" that it is depicted in the game? If by "ridiculous" you mean "out of the ordinary", you'd be absolutely right: the game's setting is supposed to be a very strange and unfamiliar scene to us. Now I don't know how you feel about the following games, but that would be like claiming Halo 3, Final Fantasy, Super Mario Galaxy etc. were bad simply because their settings are out of the ordinary.
I totally respect your opinion, but I think it's a little bit unfounded.
@#2: The setting is meant to be as such: Fallout 3 is centered in an alternate universe where following WWII, technology rapidly advanced (to where autonomous AI and plasma and laser weaponry were common) while the culture remained locked in a 1950's type setting. From a historic standpoint, I have to agree with you: Whenever a massive leap in technology is made, culture evolves with it, so the culture of Fallout shouldn't have remained "50's-ish". But personally, I think the 50's look matches the nuclear disaster plot very well; after all, we associate this period with the Cold War and the nuclear arms race. I don't think it makes sense to put it in any other time period, but again, it's just my opinion.
@#3: Honestly, I think it seems less absurd this time around. It definitely felt more realistic to me.
@#4: I'm totally in your camp for this one. I have thought about how much more interesting it would be to be able to play both sides of the conflict. Despite my best wishes to be an evil asshole, I can't join the evil asshole team; I'm stuck with the Brotherhood. Even though you can kind of "subvert" some of what the Brotherhood is doing, you can't actually fight against them in the story (anyone who has downloaded Broken Steel knows about the two options for finishing the expansion pack; though the "evil" choice is hilarious and satisfying, you are left with very little advantage afterwards. For some reason, the Enclave is STILL your enemy, and the Brotherhood is, obviously, now your enemy also. What gives?!)
@#5: Its not THAT bad... but yeah, now that you mention it it does remind me of that
But really, that's not a legitimate reason to hate a game...@#6: The "showcase" feature of the game, VATS, would be rendered pointless by allowing you to use ironsights a la COD4. Ironsights would make the weapons point and fire exactly at where you aim; though this is in fact the whole point of having ironsights, that would mean that VATS, where you hit the body part only if you are lucky enough, would be unnecessary as you could just as easily free aim and hit the part you want. Though it's kind of a cheap way of doing this, by having aiming the way it is and by having the weapons not be very accurate, it encourages the player to use the VATS system whenever possible. To me, this is not really a bad thing, as VATS saves ammo and is pretty damn cool to watch.
@#7: How is the setting ridiculous? I mean be honest: if these events were to actually happen, who's to say it wouldn't be even more "ridiculous" that it is depicted in the game? If by "ridiculous" you mean "out of the ordinary", you'd be absolutely right: the game's setting is supposed to be a very strange and unfamiliar scene to us. Now I don't know how you feel about the following games, but that would be like claiming Halo 3, Final Fantasy, Super Mario Galaxy etc. were bad simply because their settings are out of the ordinary.
I totally respect your opinion, but I think it's a little bit unfounded.
fallout 3 was a major improvement over oblivion. the controls were far more user friendly, the VO wasnt a fat loud of horseshit, the enemies were varied and interesting. The only real fault i found with the game came at hour 400. after beating all the side quests, unmarked quests and random events. after collecting every freaking weapon. after beating every DLC. after cheating a bit so i had every NPC follower (minus dog meat and the stupid robo) complete with power armor, after raiding paradise falls and declaring it my new home, after hitting every town, every dungeon, every freaking truck stop, i came to a sudden realization. Now What? the answer, kill everything and then strip their bodies naked, cause fuck you thats why.
1) Fallout was never met to be taken seriously, you must play the previous Fallout games to understand, Fallout humor is awesome. (What happened to China? Not sure, China might be fictional.)
2) The bomb was dropped in the mid 21st Century, around 2050s, I forgot. The world's history setting is not the same as the world we live in.
3) Yea, it sucks.
4) Well, you can blow up the Citadel. lol
Oh, the Brotherhood of Steel on the East Coast are bunch of pussies, their only objective is to preserve technology, not to help the innocence, screw that. Enclave breaks into vaults and use human as virus experiment subjects (Fallout 2), that is not very nice. Well, the motivation for you to fight to Enclave is definitely weaker than the previous games.
5) You just have to understand the true purpose of The Brotherhood of Steel to know why it's called that way
6) Like you said, it's not an FPS. lol
7) The first point, it's just Fallout humor, Fallout culture, I don't blame you for not liking it, but this is not a true sequel of Fallout 2, that I can tell you.
2) The bomb was dropped in the mid 21st Century, around 2050s, I forgot. The world's history setting is not the same as the world we live in.
3) Yea, it sucks.
4) Well, you can blow up the Citadel. lol
Oh, the Brotherhood of Steel on the East Coast are bunch of pussies, their only objective is to preserve technology, not to help the innocence, screw that. Enclave breaks into vaults and use human as virus experiment subjects (Fallout 2), that is not very nice. Well, the motivation for you to fight to Enclave is definitely weaker than the previous games.
5) You just have to understand the true purpose of The Brotherhood of Steel to know why it's called that way
6) Like you said, it's not an FPS. lol
7) The first point, it's just Fallout humor, Fallout culture, I don't blame you for not liking it, but this is not a true sequel of Fallout 2, that I can tell you.
I like fallout 3 more than oblivion because i still get a challenge from the enemies in fallout 3 but in oblivion i got to about level 22 and the challenge ended but in fallout 3 Im at level 30 and i still get a challenge from the enemies.
Lolol, speaking of which...Sharpeye42 said:
I was fighting a Albino Radscorpin, Sentry Bot, and TWO FUCKING Deathclaws AT THE SAME TIME. It was too funny that how it happened.
Many of your points would appear to be invalid. Fallout doesn't compare to Oblivion. And it shouldn't be compared, as it can lead people, like the OP, to believe that Fallout IS Oblivion. You'll have to understand that it isn't right to compare two different series, even if they are put out by the same studio.
Game too easy? Try adjusting the difficulty.
Don't Like Vats? Don't use vats.
Don't like the game? Don't play the game.
To all the Fallout 1 and 2 fans. Just be glad this is introducing more people to the fallout universe, and quit nitpicking the game already.
Don't Like Vats? Don't use vats.
Don't like the game? Don't play the game.
To all the Fallout 1 and 2 fans. Just be glad this is introducing more people to the fallout universe, and quit nitpicking the game already.
Well... he is kinda right on that, the voice actors kinda missed it.Rutawitz said:
Better doesn't mean good, ya know.
Fallout 3 is complete shit because it is supposed to be a game of heavy choice and consequence but has absolutely none. Nothing you do matters. Some of what you say I agree with and the other part I don't. I mean liking a setting like fallout's or the name like brotherhood of steel, or disliking it is your opinion. I happen to like both of these things. The problem is that Bethesda hasn't been good in making RPG's since morrowind. Even Oblivion was complete shit, but it was better than fallout simply because of the guild quests.
The only good quest from Fallout 3 was the replicated man. That was it. The main storyline was terrible, the characters are unconvincing, character development is shotty and you develop no relationship with them. Of course the voice acting is atrocious just like in oblivion and the writing is actually worse. All you have to do is walk into megaton your first time and you can see how bad it is going to be.
The AI is fucking terrible. Your companions run off like morons and you have no control over their movements. Enemy troops just sit in front of you out in the open or just charge in like retards. The combat is mediocre and sometimes when you have a clear shot of something, some invisible polygon blocks the shot.
The animations are also god awful. The worst fucking things ever. Modders can and do a better job than bethesda ever will and that goes for oblivion as well. There is no sex what so ever, no relationship sub plot and zero adult themes or humour what so ever. I laughed 3 fucking times throughout the whole game. That was not spoken dialogue, I had to read that on a computer monitor. I saw where they were going for the humor but it was so childish and stupid it was sad.
Not to mention they fucking butchered harold.
The only reason why people like this game is because of the exploration, and the "cool shit" like explosions and heads being blown off. It is actually worse than farcry 2 and has less staying power. At least farcry 2 had good voice acing and combat.
The only good quest from Fallout 3 was the replicated man. That was it. The main storyline was terrible, the characters are unconvincing, character development is shotty and you develop no relationship with them. Of course the voice acting is atrocious just like in oblivion and the writing is actually worse. All you have to do is walk into megaton your first time and you can see how bad it is going to be.
The AI is fucking terrible. Your companions run off like morons and you have no control over their movements. Enemy troops just sit in front of you out in the open or just charge in like retards. The combat is mediocre and sometimes when you have a clear shot of something, some invisible polygon blocks the shot.
The animations are also god awful. The worst fucking things ever. Modders can and do a better job than bethesda ever will and that goes for oblivion as well. There is no sex what so ever, no relationship sub plot and zero adult themes or humour what so ever. I laughed 3 fucking times throughout the whole game. That was not spoken dialogue, I had to read that on a computer monitor. I saw where they were going for the humor but it was so childish and stupid it was sad.
Not to mention they fucking butchered harold.
The only reason why people like this game is because of the exploration, and the "cool shit" like explosions and heads being blown off. It is actually worse than farcry 2 and has less staying power. At least farcry 2 had good voice acing and combat.
Again, you are mixing up the ideas of forming a perspective based upon past actions/ideas and the fresh perspective. He can complain about the game, since he is talking about how it made him feel and aspects he did not like or think were wrong. It doesn't matter whether the past games did things good or bad, its his point of view based on a experience without prior indulgence. He is not entitled to complain about the game if he is comparing it to past games fall out games which he did not play and therefore did not experience first hand.ThrobbingEgo said:
The quality of a game like fallout cannot be determined by absolute fact, it is personal opinion. I understand your feelings on the game and its series may be strong Rak, but that doesn't justify it as fact. It is another opinion along with the OPs. He has the same rights as you to complain about what he believed was wrong, without experience of prior games as long as those are used to justify his argument. The only justification put forth was how he felt on the matter. I'm trying to state this from an objective point, an attempt to separate fact from opinion and his right to speak.