Why the hate for the Bethesda fallouts?

[Don Savik]

The fact that it got GOTY is reason enough for the fanboys of the old series to shut their mouths.

Also people FREAK THE HELL OUT if they see a technical problem. I mean, Obsidian could test some more, but there are time constrants, and finding all the bugs in an open world game is still hard. Besides, 1 or 2 patches fix that anyways.

 

[JCBFGD]

OP, how can you be so stupid?! The answer is obvious!! The perspective of the game is clearly more important than all other parts, and since Bethesda made it first-/third-person, they COMPLETELY RUINED THE GAME.

That's an actual complaint, by the way. Dunno why. Where the camera is located is an important part, but not one that should ever make or break a game. From what I can gather from the hate-complaints I've read, most of these people are fanboys. I don't even think they gave the game a fair chance; I think that either they saw it wasn't isometric, or that it wasn't by Interplay, or something similar, and right then and there they decided to hate it.

By the way, I'm not saying that it's not okay to not like the game because of a legitimate problem...I'm just saying that it's ridiculous to go, "Not isometric, not Interplay, it sucks," which is most of the complaints I've seen.

Also, the main quest in FO3 did, in fact, suck ass. So they do have a point there.

 

[spartxn]

Y is there always a post where people r asking "Y the hate for ****"? I think that is a better question.

And this is coming from someone(me) who will proudly admit that Fallout 3 is my favorite game of all time.

 

[TheIronRuler]

Having played fallout 3 and new vegas, and enjoyed them and i was curious to know why there is such a dislike for them from (some) old school fallout fans, is just because its now a first person perspective, or just how they treat the brand. was curious to know why

They were two different genres of game.
It's like how people are hating the Syndicate remake or game based on the franchise, whatever it may be because it did the same switch, although this time you shouldn't expect much Role-Playing.
.
The fact that Fallout 3 was not cannon friendly. They put a ""remake"" of the first game with their very own vault dweller and water chip problem to somehow nudge the older players and say, "Hey, remember that game from a decade ago? Well? do You? This is a reference!". The story was bearable (in my opinion) and it was fun at some points.
It would be as if you had made a pokemon game that looks like a sequel but is set on a nearby island that wasn't touched by the series so far, where Pokemons rule Humans.

 

[SinisterGehe]

I like both of them a lot!!! And their DLC, but Fallout 3 is still my favorite, I dunno, I just like the capital wasteland more than I liked the Nevada desert, there is something about the ideas of walking around a deserted and destroyed towns that speaks to me.

And I got the Fallout 1-3 tactics also and enjoy them a lot, even tho I can not get them working properly on windows 7. I just like the idea and atmosphere. The idea of Fallout in any form of execution, I like the IDEA of it! It just speaks to me, it is like my dream, my fantasy!

 

[walrusaurus]

I have never played fallout 1 or 2, but i still disliked fallout 3. There's just a lot to dislike about it as a game, for those who consider its place ina franchise too its even more understandable. I disliked the game for 2 reasons.
1. there was a lack of meaningful content. You could explore the world, sure but there was no incentive/nothing to do in it.
2. The games systems were a disaster. Sure there were dozens of perks and skills, but nearly all of them where utterly pointless/grossly underpowered. I'm fune with laser guns being more powerful than rifles/melee weapons in general. But they were so much more powerful, with no drawbacks, and against absolutely everything, that everything just feels nonviable by comparison. Lockpicking repair and security were more or less mandatory skills, and everything else was so narrow/ weak why even bother.

 

[Arina Love]

i don't like setting and locations design, and i don't like combat and story. i was forcing myself to complete main story and i don't want to do it ever again.

 

[TJC]

oooh, awesome the same thread within two week to which I can reply exactly the same thing... which I will:

Why do people interpret a lack of enthusiastic ball sucking as hate?
I'm not exactly in love with RPGs and you may whine as much as you like, that won't change. And when I call you out for being as annoying as social networks, you whine because of my 'hate'

Christ, enjoy your damn game and shut up about it. Why do you need the world's approval for that? (unless of course you aren't enjoying the game as much as you think you are and it's just your fanboy instincts that keep on playing)

PS:
The only people who actually write/rant/talk about a certain game on the interwebs are either fanboys or haters because the rest doesn't give a flying crap, thus you're perspective's distorted because there is no hate aside from haters' hate who hate for hatred's sake.

 

[DracoSuave]

The fact that it got GOTY is reason enough for the fanboys of the old series to shut their mouths.

Also people FREAK THE HELL OUT if they see a technical problem. I mean, Obsidian could test some more, but there are time constrants, and finding all the bugs in an open world game is still hard. Besides, 1 or 2 patches fix that anyways.

Size of world does not excuse bugs involving graphics engine or save features, which can be caught before the world building is even half complete.

Some bugs are inexcusable.

Fallout 3 and NV are like every bethesda game, incredibly ambitious and incredibly lacking in the basic QA.

For the record I like them, but I'm not going to give bethesda awards for trying when in many ways, they actually don't.

 

[theonecookie]

Bah it was just nostalgia Hate for the most part Your free To not like the game But to compare the old fallout's to the new fallout's and say the old ones are better is just insanity and anyone who says otherwise has got some pretty heavy rose tinted specs on

 

[orangeban]

Well, having played the original Fallout, Fallout 3 had awful writing, and an awful story. They removed the (in my opinion) excellent turn based combat for dull shooting. And Fallout 3 was uglier, too green and grey (and when I say green, I refer to the sickly green tint that was ever present).

 

[Frost27]

I don't hate Fallout 3 and New Vegas, but I certainly don't put them in the same class as the RPG originals. Even today the originall Fallout is second to none.

The problem I do have is the bugs. Crashes, lockups, characters getting stuck and all around playing like an alpha even on consoles. This is less a problem with the game and more a problem with the developers and their slack approach to quality control.

I am approaching Skyrim with more of an open and hopeful mind though, it is a totally new engine (though similar) and the Skyrim team is more Morrowind and less Oblivion so I am hopeful for better results.

 

[qazcake]

I dont know mabie its the rampaging ammount of bugs, glitches and other foreces breaking parts of the game.

 

[Clive Howlitzer]

I liked Fallout 3 quite a bit, much more than Fallout: New Vegas. I never played Fallout 1 and 2, despite having been the right age to play them. I love Black Isle studios but somehow those games slipped past my radar back in the day. I tried to play them after playing Fallout 3 and just couldn't, they were too dated and far too cumbersome to play, a shame.
I didn't run into a lot of the issues everyone else had regarding bugs and such with Fallout 3 though. I never run into bugs with any Bethesda game. I am uniquely capable of enjoying almost any game on its own merits though unless it is really truly terrible. I never stack a game up against another game in the series.
Probably the ONLY time I let myself do this was with Starcraft 2 but I still played the game a lot.

 

[mavkiel]

Both of them were bug ridden and liked to ctd.

I'd agree that new vegas captured more of the spirit of fallout. But I have a feeling thats due more to modders then the developers. (As in pretty much every feature of f:nv was already modded into fo3 at that point.

Also, the story in fallout new vegas kind of sucked. I really didn't like the story of the courier at all. Great I got shot in the head and buried alive, so the first thing I do is look up said person who shot me?

I am kind of biased though, I really liked starting from a vault.

 

[TheIronRuler]

The fact that it got GOTY is reason enough for the fanboys of the old series to shut their mouths.

Also people FREAK THE HELL OUT if they see a technical problem. I mean, Obsidian could test some more, but there are time constrants, and finding all the bugs in an open world game is still hard. Besides, 1 or 2 patches fix that anyways.

.
GOTY is not a title that all of the world of gaming gives out to one game. This is not a reason. plus, you could claim that nothing better was out that year.

 

[Thyunda]

I happen to be a huge fan of the recent Fallout games. I tried to play the original Fallout games, including 2 and Tactics, and I could not get into them. They were horribly cumbersome and so difficult to actually get immersed in.
Also, I wouldn't call the new Fallouts shooters. Yes. Shooting gets done. However, that's 25% of the game at most - combat. I always made my characters into Speech/Science/Medicine, because I hated being locked out of conversation topics or diary entries on computers. I loved the data mining of the series...going out of your way to discover backstory. I loved the feeling of power you have when you're justified in wiping out a certain group...

For example. Old World Blues. It's been out for a long time, so I don't know if spoilers are acceptable, but my brain told me some things...some things that make me very angry. And I will go out and commit a terrible act, but I'm going to feel damn good about it, because I know those smug bastards deserve it.

 

[darth.pixie]

Bad writing, fallout 3 screwed up lore, sucky main quests, repetitive surroundings, repetitive monsters, HAROLD, things that were completely nonsensical, aliens, glitches, bugs, crashes...

I've got a small question for you; did you actually play the first two games in the series?

The surroundings were all completely copy-pasted, every single monster of a kind was 100% identical, there were aliens, a TARDIS, the damn Bridge of Death, time travel, glitches&bugs&crashes up the bum, et cetera.

You may not like Fallout 3, but you're just being silly when you criticize it for things that are just as rampant in the first two games.

Did so, but I was also distracted at the time with, what I thought, was good writing and amusement. That's why I said that that was my biggest complaint. And in Fallout 2, yes there were the pop culture references and stuff, but they weren't canon per se. Perhaps I should have used the "Vampires" thing instead of the aliens, but my point stands.

The idea is that if the game is not really all that good, at least distract the player in some manner. Make dialogue amusing, scatter some fun encounters and add some interesting characters or monsters. Fallout 3 didn't do that. I remember walking through DC and all I had to shoot were Mutants. Even when the game was trying to toss amusement at me, it was thin and sort of awkward. Compared to Fallout 1, 3 was silly. Compared to 2, it wasn't funny and interesting and clever. It is atmospheric in some parts and the landscape was interesting in certain areas but it's offset by the fact that every time someone opened their mouth, I wanted to shoot them.

I'm not really into thrashing either game because I know I'm a nitpicker but those were just my reasons for disliking it.

 

[userwhoquitthesite]

cause it stripped down everything from writing to gameplay to appeal to the CoD crowd. new vegas had pretty good writing, but it was still crap as a game.

Strippped down? Hurr... its a couple hundred hours long and packed with detail you crazy stallion.

Don't tell lies, Vanilla FO3 was about 40 hours max. Still, thats a respectable game length

The real reason old players hate the new games is because change isn't acceptable.

Really, if you just renamed New Vegas FO3, and made 3 into Fallout: Capital Wasteland, no one would *****.

 

[TheIronRuler]

I happen to be a huge fan of the recent Fallout games. I tried to play the original Fallout games, including 2 and Tactics, and I could not get into them. They were horribly cumbersome and so difficult to actually get immersed in.
Also, I wouldn't call the new Fallouts shooters. Yes. Shooting gets done. However, that's 25% of the game at most - combat. I always made my characters into Speech/Science/Medicine, because I hated being locked out of conversation topics or diary entries on computers. I loved the data mining of the series...going out of your way to discover backstory. I loved the feeling of power you have when you're justified in wiping out a certain group...

For example. Old World Blues. It's been out for a long time, so I don't know if spoilers are acceptable, but my brain told me some things...some things that make me very angry. And I will go out and commit a terrible act, but I'm going to feel damn good about it, because I know those smug bastards deserve it.

.
Combat is a huge part of the world. Since they moved it from the type of movement that was in Fallout 1/2 to open sandbox, you had to populate the wasteland with much more creatures to not make travels incredibly boring (What made them boring was the broken combat). Therefore whenever you went from A to B, at least early in the game you had to encounter some creatures and initiate combat. The fast travel system does rip it to shreds, but the dungeons are still filled with creatures.