Fallout 3's wasteland was just... empty. And there wasn't much of a push or pull to go anywhere. It is a problem shared with Oblivion; not a lot there, no real reason to go anywhere.
Why is everyone so down on Fallout 3?
- Thread starter h@wke
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Story in Fallout 3 is not good, it is complete fubar really. It also have other huge fault of bethesda games which is no good characters. They even managed somehow to make Harold more boring than he ever was, yet he is best character game has.
Fallout 1 and 2 just are overall better games which much better humor. Fallout 3 isn't bad game though, it just doesn't make his parents very proud in my opinion, unlike New Vegas.
Fallout 1 and 2 just are overall better games which much better humor. Fallout 3 isn't bad game though, it just doesn't make his parents very proud in my opinion, unlike New Vegas.
A lot of people dislike 3 because the company changed from 1and 2, not to mention the visual aesthetic.
3's not perfect by any stretch of the imagination, the main story is STUPIDLY short, you can't continue playing after you finish it (without shelling out for Broken Steel, which is totally worth it) the 'ending' decision/sacrifice is flawed and it's more than a little buggy in places.
It's also one of the best games I've ever played, if not just for 'that bit where you come out of the vault'
What Bethesda need to do is make a Fallout game with the visuals/world design/atmosphere of 3 but with the mechanics of New Vegas, that would be perfect 8)
But that's just my 2 cents ^_^
3's not perfect by any stretch of the imagination, the main story is STUPIDLY short, you can't continue playing after you finish it (without shelling out for Broken Steel, which is totally worth it) the 'ending' decision/sacrifice is flawed and it's more than a little buggy in places.
It's also one of the best games I've ever played, if not just for 'that bit where you come out of the vault'
What Bethesda need to do is make a Fallout game with the visuals/world design/atmosphere of 3 but with the mechanics of New Vegas, that would be perfect 8)
But that's just my 2 cents ^_^
maybe i'm weird, but i don't know, i just found 3 to be more entertaining than NV. so *shrugs*
Also, never played 1 or 2, so.. that might help.
Also, never played 1 or 2, so.. that might help.
Different people have different opinions. What will be a good story to one person will be terrible to another; a well-rounded character to one person might seem like a parody to another; what seems inconsistent with lore to one person might make perfect sense to somebody with different interpretations of the setting.
Of course, negative opinions tend to get worse when a person's opinon disagrees with the general consensus. If you have your own reasons to dislike something that was generally well recieved by audiences and critics with different opinions from your own, then they are obviously wrong and the entire review system is broken.
Of course, negative opinions tend to get worse when a person's opinon disagrees with the general consensus. If you have your own reasons to dislike something that was generally well recieved by audiences and critics with different opinions from your own, then they are obviously wrong and the entire review system is broken.
People dislike FO3?
Huh...
It's kinda strange because all I've seen is people praising it, while adding their dislike of New Vegas being essentially an expansion for it (Due to it looking the same) I've not heard many people who didn't like it (Who also liked the genre)
But I guess people have their own opinions...
On a side note I really enjoyed FO:3 I played it for hours on end (Which incidentally got me into the habit of pressing F5 every minute whenever I play a game...) and I only really stopped when New Vegas came out which then took over most of my time (Which is now replaced by Skyrim...)
Huh...
It's kinda strange because all I've seen is people praising it, while adding their dislike of New Vegas being essentially an expansion for it (Due to it looking the same) I've not heard many people who didn't like it (Who also liked the genre)
But I guess people have their own opinions...
On a side note I really enjoyed FO:3 I played it for hours on end (Which incidentally got me into the habit of pressing F5 every minute whenever I play a game...) and I only really stopped when New Vegas came out which then took over most of my time (Which is now replaced by Skyrim...)
.h@wke said:
As a whole, it's not good. But as smaller areas, cool sh*t like that is of high quality. It just looked like they played around with some ideas but never had anything concrete.
If you'll disregard that, what else are you doing to ignore? The horrible fps shooter controls?
wait, people think FO3 is bad?
now, I've played both of the original falloutses and tactics, and i believe that fallout 3 is better than those games, and is also the best game Bethesda has ever made.
(Skyrim's cool and all, but fallout 3 is just... better)
now, I've played both of the original falloutses and tactics, and i believe that fallout 3 is better than those games, and is also the best game Bethesda has ever made.
(Skyrim's cool and all, but fallout 3 is just... better)
Fallout 3 is good if you take it as a stand alone game. It's when you compare it to Fallout 1, 2, and New Vegas is when the game starts to fall apart.
Although having Qui-Gon Jinn as your father is pretty badass...
Although having Qui-Gon Jinn as your father is pretty badass...
Fallout 3 is a fun game on its own, but not a great continuation of the series. It's really Oblivion with guns and dialogue, and the things that make it a Fallout game feel very superficial.
This is a very good point too. The story and world in F1 and F2 were closely connected, whereas in F3 they seem to exist independently of each other. There are cool places to explore and there's a main plot that has nothing to do with those places.TheIronRuler said:
What the bloody fuck is the difference between Fallout 3 and New Vegas? I couldn't get in to New Vegas because for all the differences between it an Fallout 3, it may as well have been a full-priced expansion pack. Gameplay mechanics exactly the same. Wasteland desert looks no different than wasteland DC. Story was still stupid in New Vegas, not that I cared much, I didn't like Fallout 3 for the story.
What exactly do you mean by "mechanics"? Because from where I stand, Fallout 3 had the exact same mechanics as New Vegas.
Lederin said:
What exactly do you mean by "mechanics"? Because from where I stand, Fallout 3 had the exact same mechanics as New Vegas.
As someone who was introduced to the Fallout world through Fallout 3 I can honestly say...they all suck.
They suck serious ass.
/troll.
Fallout 3 was so far removed (other than the universe) from the other games that people moan about that but, and this is a big but, Fallout 3 makes up for it in so many different ways by being a great standalone game that you didn't need to play the other games to get it.
I really couldn't get into Fallout: New Vegas because it assumed you'd be familiar with their world. Among other design choices I find flawed.
Fallout 3 is the best game I've ever played because it starts from a more or less blank slate from the point of view of the player.
They suck serious ass.
/troll.
Fallout 3 was so far removed (other than the universe) from the other games that people moan about that but, and this is a big but, Fallout 3 makes up for it in so many different ways by being a great standalone game that you didn't need to play the other games to get it.
I really couldn't get into Fallout: New Vegas because it assumed you'd be familiar with their world. Among other design choices I find flawed.
Fallout 3 is the best game I've ever played because it starts from a more or less blank slate from the point of view of the player.
Fallout 3 is a deeply flawed game in some respects, but I still enjoyed it a lot. Some people can't accept certain flaws with a game and let it ruin what parts of it work.
Some of those people are diehard series fans, some not as much. Some of the complaints have merit, but they weren't enough to ruin the game for me.
Some of those people are diehard series fans, some not as much. Some of the complaints have merit, but they weren't enough to ruin the game for me.
To anyone that thinks that this guy is wrong, I ask you to think about this words and see what comes into your minds:Metalhandkerchief said:
FALLOUT: BROTHERHOOD OF STEEL
Not denying that last point at all actually, given how much of a fuck you Brotherhood of Steel was to the series' fans. Just saying that I can see where the complaints are coming from, no one's happy when their favourite series gets changed in such a radical way, but I'd say Bethesda managed a good job of it.Metalhandkerchief said:
Standard plot hook of "why does everyone hate thing I saw one or two people complain about once?"RedEyesBlackGamer said:
Fallout fans don't like fallout 3 because it was change.
It's the whole 'MY WORLD IS CHANGING AND I DON'T LIKE IT!' thing. Fallout 3 was a very, very good game. But all the fans hooked up on the older parts of the series which... let's face it, was nowhere near as good as fallout 3, hated fallout 3 and everything it stood for.
It's like people that hate modern games because they will testify to their grave that 70's retro games were better in every single way. Fuck that.
It's the whole 'MY WORLD IS CHANGING AND I DON'T LIKE IT!' thing. Fallout 3 was a very, very good game. But all the fans hooked up on the older parts of the series which... let's face it, was nowhere near as good as fallout 3, hated fallout 3 and everything it stood for.
It's like people that hate modern games because they will testify to their grave that 70's retro games were better in every single way. Fuck that.
