Was Bethesda able to live up to my impossibly high standards?
I have a feeling this little article might ruffle a couple of feathers, in the gaming flocks. After all, game reviewers are going bat-balls crazy for the game. Some reviewers think the game is better than water; others believe it better than Gears of War crossed with Final Fantasy 7, etcetra. Some reviewers think Bethesda does better work than Dostoevsky.
Don't get me wrong. Fallout 3 isn't good -- it's great. One of the best games of the year, easily...but even still: could it have been better? Are mods going to bring Fallout 3 to incredibly new heights, like mods made a gem out of the rough diamond of Bethesda's Oblivion?
Fallout 2 is probably my favorite RPG of all time. So, understandably (I hope), any game I'm going to compare to Fallout 2 is going to come up short. Well Fallout 3 is the sequel to Fallout 2, right? Well I'm going to compare them. And guess what -- Fallout 3 is going to come up short.
Here's my brief list of 11 ways Fallout 3 fell short of Fallout 2. In no particular order.
1. Tag skills
Bethesda completely missed the boat on the whole notion of 'Tag Skills' from the original games. In the originals, you picked three tag skills at the beginning of the game. They were your character's specialties. You want a medic with a good throwing arm that can pick locks? Pick Medicine, Throwing, Lock Picking. For the rest of the game, every time you level, and skill point put into a tag skill will be doubled. So, like, it's easier to become proficient at your character's specialties.
This isn't how it works in Fallout 3.
In Fallout 3, you pick three tag skills at the beginning. These tag picks give you a +10 bonus to the skill and... that's it.
How dumb is that? Not sure why the crippled the Tag skills. Why not just give the player an extra 30 skill points to allocate when he makes his character? It would have the same in-game outcome.
Another criticism of the skills: In Fallout 3, like Oblivion, many characters are going to be masters of everything in the game. This wasn't really possible in Fallout 2 -- well not to the same extent. Stuff like tag skills and actually having to specialize gave your character more... character.
Oh yeah: Fallout 2: 18 skills. Fallout 3: 13 skills. Enough said.
2. Items that magically boost stats
Only a small handful of items in Fallout 2 modified your skills or attributes. Not so in Fallout 3. This time around, we have leather jackets that magically give you bonuses to melee combat. What's up with that? Having a dictionary in my pocket may prevent me from making less errors when writing something like this out -- sure. But what if I'm wearing a shirt with a dictionary on it? Should that cut down on my grammatical errors? No, I don't thinke so.
And bobbleheads. There are 20 or so bobbleheads in the game. The all magically give you stats. I don't want to feel like my character is gimped if I don't track down some damn bobblehead hiding on some ledge some place that I'm never going to find without a in-depth walkthrough. Screw the bobbleheads.
3. Dumb weapons
The Fallout games never strived for realism, sure. But at no point in Fallout 2 did I build a weapon that shoots rail road spikes.
And the Fat Man launcher? Oh man. Don't get me started. I'm just going to pass on that one.
In Fallout 2 you could make molotov cocktails with gasoline and a bottle. Fallout 3, you can make a Rock-It Launcher that'll launch tin cans and plungers at people.
I'll stick with the molotov cocktails.
4. Random encounters
There was a bunch of cool random encounters you could have in Fallout 2. Sometimes you'd come across trading caravans that you could slaughter. Some were more rare, like the Cafe of Broken Dreams. Some were non-combat encounters -- people in the Wastes that you could talk and trade with.
In Fallout 3, enemies are all over the place, according to what zone you are in. There aren't really any random encounters per se -- which is another reason why the Luck stat isn't as much as big deal in Fallout 3 either.
Bethesda, here's a free idea you should use in Fallout 4. I won't charge you for it. Bring the Outdoorsman skill back. Any time you fast travel, to a skill roll on the Outdoorsman skill. If you fail, you run into a random encounter. And 'random encounter' doesn't have to mean 'Random people that want to kill you.' It can be other stuff instead... like roleplaying game type stuff.
5. Difficulty levels
This one will be short. Fallout 2: difficulty levels make combat harder, and all skills rolls harder. The game is much harder.
Fallout 3: higher difficulty levels gives your enemies more health... and that's it. On the harder difficulty levels Fallout 3 is only harder because you run out of ammo more often.
Ho hum.
6. Open world freedom
Fallout 3 has a lot of this. But not as much as Fallout 2.
In Fallout 2 if you knew what you were doing you could go right from your starting point in the game to the final location. Sure, you wouldn't be able to beat the opponents with out some tricks, but you could do it.
In the entire south-eastern quarter of the Fallout 3 map you are in a city that has invisible walls everywhere. There basically only one way you can go. You are on a quest train track that starts at one location, has 13 (or whatever) stages, and ends.
Don't go down that street dude. There is a big pile of rubble blocking the path. Strangely, just like the other 40 streets.
Just follow the path through the open world.
7.Immersion free NPC's
Most of the dialogue in the game is not memorable, consequently, most characters are forgettable. Many times half way through conversations I just clicked right through to the end bit, where they dispense the quest or what-not.
People like the wasteland super-hero Antangonizer just would not exist, even after a nuclear war. Give me a break.
So many characters are just so unbelievable -- even by RPG standards. The NPC's don't exist as non-playing characters. Most exist solely as pieces of game mechanic furniture -- like the Nuka Cola machines everywhere that somehow, amazingly, all still have Nuka in them. They are function. Not personalities.
I don't want to battle through a legion of Super Mutants, climb through a tunnel, then run into this strangely dressed guy deep in the wreckage of the Wasteland that greets me by saying, "What would you like to purchase?"
In the real world, I've never met anyone anywhere who introduced himself, and then thirty seconds later offered me some money to nuke a city. I wish there were more NPC's in the game that didn't give quests or heal you or trade with you -- they are just like, you know, NPC's that are doing there own thing.
8. Ghouls
In Fallout 2, most ghouls were like radiated, semi-mutated ex-human being people. You could talk with them. Have them join you as team members. Ghouls were people too, in Fallout 2.
In Fallout 3, ghouls are zombies. Besides that one dude Gob, in Megatown, ghouls are stupid zombies that immediately attack you on sight.
I realize RPG's need random enemies to kill. Sure. But why did Bethesda have to make them ghouls? Why not anything else? They had the whole wasteland of creativity at their disposal. They could have made you fight anything. Like L. Ron Hubologist cultists. Or mutated raccoons.
Every time I shoot a ghoul I want to cry. I think to myself: "Damn! That ghoul could have been innocent!"
Maybe it was all a misunderstanding.
9. Open ended quests
Not much tops Fallout 2 when it came to open ended quests. Let's take one of the better examples in F2 -- dealing with the Slavers in the city called the Den. The Slavers have a buddy of yours, Vic, that you want to rescue. There were many ways of getting this done.
You could go into the slaver headquarters and shoot them all up. If you were a explosive traps guy, (like my guy was), you could go in the building and plant dynamite, then leave, and blow everyone up. If you had high intelligence and high speech, you could convince the slavers to stop trading slaves, and get them to free Vic. If you were a jerk, you could join the Slavers, get a slaver tattoo on your forehead that would have consequences for the rest of the game, and sell your tribal companion into a life of servitude. If you were a chick with a decent charisma, you can have sex with the head slaver guy for Vic's freedom.
The vast majority of quests in Fallout 3 are like this: go talk to this guy. Kill everybody in your way. The end.
Some of the quests, if you have a high speech skill, you can lie and not have to kill the dudes.
Yay. Woot. Let's RPG it up. Let's go kill all the enemy dudes and get the magical hamster or super Frisbee or W-ever-TF they want me to get. Yay this is fun.
10. Not-so-funny humor
There were parts of Fallout 2 that made me laugh out loud, even before the acroynm LOL was even around.
Opinions are like assholes. Everyone has them and they all stink.
That last paragraph was a pair of lines that I remember from a game that came out more than 10 years ago. Do you remember any lines from any games that you played 10 years ago? Do you remember any lines from a game -- say, Fallout 3 -- that you played last night? All hail Fallout 2.
Some of the characters are often so un-funny in Fallout 3 that I wish the game had a strangle button.
Like when that ditzy chick in the supply store came up to me, asking me to go hunt molerats for her. Her voice is so grating. Her character is annoying.
Where is that strangle button?
"Oh you are such a sweet heart for getting severly wounded for me so I can study wounds for my book. I hope it didn't hurt! Tee-hee-hee-haw-haw."
Strangle. Strangle.
11. Complete abandoning of any sort of realism
Bethesda, listen up.
Years after a global nuclear holocaust you will not find unopened boxes of macaroni all over the place. You will not be going through a sewer and trip over a box full of 5.56 mm ammunition.
People will not be launching mini-nukes at super-mutants. Not even every once in a while.
Drinking water mixed with radioactive waste will not fix you up after being shot five times in the face with a shotgun.
People will not be all friendly and nice to me in the barren wasteland. Some people will be jerks. Many won't even have quests for me. Some won't even care about me at all.
Forlorn offices in abandoned dilapidated factories will not have working computer terminals that control robotic guards.
Every-day dudes will not have robotic butlers, after a global thermonuclear war.
In the end...
In the end, Fallout 3 is a lot of fun, is one of the better games I played this year. But it isn't three-quarters of the RPG that Fallout 2 was. I'm sorry -- it's just not. Maybe with mods. But not at the moment.
Next time you see someone saying that in some ways Fallout 2 was better than Fallout 3, please, be easy on him. Cut him slack. He at least has an argument worth listening to.
And if you never played Fallout 2, then please, please, I beg of you, don't trash the game. That's just not right. You just don't know what you are talking about.
If 30 megaton bombs were falling from the sky and I could only install two games on my Pipboy 3000, I'd pass on the F3, and double-install Fallout 2.
Sections: Console Games, PC Games
| · | Asus Sabertooth X79 TUF (German) |
| · | Crucial Adrenaline |
| · | Roccat Isku |
| · | Lian Li PC-TU200 |
| · | Corsair Obsidian 550D (German) |
| · | SilenX Effizio EFZ-120HA5 |
So maybe I should scratch 8 from my list.
Lemme address some of these points you made:
1. Tag skills.
I agree with you here. Fallout 3 doesn't provide any scalable bonus for skills selected as "Tags." Considering this, I don't even know what they mean with "Tag" except that it's supposed to be part of your character's origin narrative.
2. Items that magically boost stats.
This is one of the staples of Japanese and Western RPGS (i.e. most RPGs ever made). Why do you think this is so awful of an attribute to Fallout 3 armor? The only reason I see you've come up with is because it's different than Fallout 2. That's just an appeal to the tradition of the series, not a legitimate reason.
In Fallout 2, the power armor was the be-all and end-all. You didn't go back once you got that. This time, Bethesda has given the player some motivation for keeping other sets of apparel around. True, it's kinda weird that shirt gives a +5 bonus to melee weapons or something, but this is not a new aspect to RPGs in any way.
3. Dumb weapons
I'm not going to argue with your opinion on what's a cool weapon and what's not. BUT I think you're forgetting Fallout 2's Holy Hand Grenade. Nothing in Fallout 3 is unrealistic and inside-jokey like that.
4. Random encounters
Fallout 3 has random quests, which I think are even more creative than random encounters.
6. Open world freedom
You write Fallout 2 has more, and I guess you mean it has a bigger map. My response: Fallout 3 has 3 dimensions--meaning, you can look up and down too. And it looks more real. Fallout 3 clearly wins this one.
7.Immersion free NPC's
You write: I don't want to battle through a legion of Super Mutants, climb through a tunnel, then run into this strangely dressed guy deep in the wreckage of the Wasteland that greets me by saying, "What would you like to purchase?"
How can you make this criticism of Fallout 3 when F2 has so much more goofy, jokey stuff? Next...
8. Ghouls
This one's easy: you obviously haven't met the other sentient ghouls in Fallout 3.
9. Open ended quests
I'm not going to go so far as to accuse of trolling here, but this is a pretty ridiculous claim. Many of F3's quests are not simply "talk to guy; kill other guy." Play it more.
10. Not-so-funny humor
Agreed! F2 is LOL funny. F3 is unfortunately not. They shoulda kept the humor.
11. Complete abandoning of any sort of realism
I am trying to believe you're being serious here can't. Let's compare:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallout_2#Cultural_references
vs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallout_3#Cultural_references
(You'll notice the latter page doesn't exist.)
I'll give you this: Fallout 2 was funnier, comparatively more exciting for its time, and, IMO, blew all other similar rpgs away. Fallout 3, however, is a solid game for its time and it deserves best-of-year awards, and a lot of your arguments don't stand up.
2-A lab coat that gives a science bonus? How does that work? There are 100 other items like that. I know this par for the course in a Japanese RPG, but in a non-fantasy Western RPG it seems strange. Reading a book to raise a skill -- that's cool. Wearing a hat the gives you a bonus to a your small arms skills? I just think that is sort of lame.
3. Fallout 2 had some FAR OUT items, like the alien UFO pistol. But only a few. It's like 95% of the weapons were reasonable (shotguns, knives), and they had a couple that were really, really far out.
4. I can't say I can think of any random quests that have come up. I've played the game like 20 hours so far. Are you sure they are random?
6. Traveling around the wastes in Fallout 3 is pretty cool. I guess just DC annoyed me -- you can pretty much only go from location to location. It did not feel like a big wrecked city.
9. Some quests you can modify through your speech skill, but I really think that FAllout 2 on average had far more ways to complete quests. Many of the quests in Fallout 3 are just go here kill that, or get that.
11. Besides the few REALLY far out joke stuff, like the monty python guy on the bridge, and those few things, Fallout 2 overall just felt like a more realistic wasteland to me. The people and places in Fallout 3 just sort of seem like they are all there to amuse me in a obvious RPG way. In Fallout 3 I feel that everyone's lives, and every location are there for the benefit of my character I'm playing.
Thanks for comments.
And once again I think Fallout 3 is GREAT. One of the most enjoyable games I played all year. It's just that it had a lot of things that really annoyed me; and a lot of things that I think if fixed up, would have made the game even more remarkable.
Diablo 3 is going to completely own. You won't miss much from just starting with Diablo 3. It looks like it'll be superior to Diablo 1 + 2 in pretty much every way.
Fallout 2 and 3 don't have nearly as much in common.
Honestly, as much as I love Fallout 2, it might be a bit hard to get into because it will seem graphically very dated -- it did come out in '98 or so. But I wish you luck with it. Commit 4 hours into playing it, give it a whirl, and download this high-resolution patch:
http://www.nma-fallout.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=42386
Also, reducing some of the skills make sense. Do you really need both Doctor and Medicine?
You also mention how Fallout 2 gave you more methods to complete quests, but failed to mention that Fallout 3 ties the skill system better.
Instead of just the usual speech and intelligence check, we now have options on strength, agility, karma etc.
I think the fact that Bethesda aimed for a slightly less mature game meant that a lot of the options previously available, like sleeping around to get ahead, had to be cut.
For someone who claims Fallout 3 is great, you sure have a bigoted view of the game in this article.
I came across a random encounter spot (and saved it so I could experiment) where after I turned a corner there was always someone differant. Sometimes it was people getting shot at or attacked by a beast, sometimes a guy begging for water, sometimes slaves, etc. But what made me save was this time something flew overhead and blew up with a bang, dropping alien power cells and an alien blaster (kinda like the crashed alien ship random encounter in past fallout games).
Also the tag skills are 15 boost in FO3, not 10. And yes, they suck compared to other fallouts.
Re tag skills: You could reduce how easy it is to cap your skills. In F3, it is far easier to max out your skills than in F2. It'd be fairly easy to fix this. Like make it 2 tag skills and give 4 less skill points a level, or what not. Getting rid off the fundamentals of the whole Tagging system is not necessary.
Combining Doctor and Medicine was totally a good move. I miss throwing, traps, gambling and outdoorsman.
I have to disagree with you on your third and fourth sentence. Fallout 2 had more numerous checks. Like your science skill did more than help you help out with hacking, for instance.
Regarding the sex thing -- I think your wrong here: prostitutes are in Fallout 3, and the game is rated Mature. But it isn't even about the sex at all -- more that I was trying to show how NPCs in the game react to the unique things about your character better, and more often, than in Fallout 2. If you play as a woman in Fallout 3, many times people will still even refer to you as Sir or Boy.
Re your last point, honestly I think the game is really good, but there are many things about it that just had to wonder out loud, "Why did the choose to do that that way?" The game is really good but could have been better.
For anyone that just absolutely adores Fallout 3, hey , that's great. There are games for everyone and I'm just more of a Fallout 2 guy I guess.
in fallout 2 you had multi-tools to help with repairs, lockpicking sets, doctor's bags, first aid kits and such.
there were no robes of agility +1 because fallout isnt a fantasy game
The strange weapons are more like improvised weapons. The rock-it launcher is like a makeshift cannon and the railway launcher is like a way of using a now useless thing to protect yourself.
About the freedom as well, i have missed some chunks out of the main story by being a bit too trigger happy and by talking my way out of things.
Finally, and this is a general comment not aimed at anybody, i don't understand why people complain about fun features in games when the point of games is to have fun. Yes, you can gain satisfaction from spending hours burning your eyeballs playing ridiculously hard games (proved by my great love of Ikaruga and mega man) but in modern times games are used as a means of relaxation and do people want to make themselves more stressed playing a game when their lives are full of stress? 10 and 20 years ago when games were harder the average gamer was younger and as such had more time to spend playing games and were less likely to get stressed. As the age of gamers expands games are only going to get easier and a select few companies with way too much money are going to cater for the hardcore. We musn't forget that all of these companies have to make money and in the current market a FPS type RPG is going to make more money than a number crunching isometric game. As much as i would have loved to have seen fallout 3 in the same style as the first 2 and done by interplay, interplay's financial history only goes to prove that companies cannot always cater to a smaller market as they will ultimately become bankrupt.
Sorry for the rant, it's 4 in the morning and i'm bored, tired and excited about the elections despite being in the UK. I don't mean any offence to anyone in this comment and apologize if the tone seems angry or condescending. I also apologize for my spelling, which is most likely very bad.
Not to be a whore, but I reccomend GOG. $5.99, includes goodies, no DRM, download as many times as you like.
Stevie> Your spelling is quite good. Also I think you bring up a good point -- maybe we take games too seriously sometimes. I understand Kevin's position however -- Fallout is clearly dear to him..I'm like that with some games too.
Sorry for all the questions, but if someone says that Fallout 2 is better than Fallout 3, then Fallout 2 must be worth looking into, and considering it is 6 dollars, I don't have much to lose.
No worries about all the questions..we're geeks and love answering.
Guess again. I might have liked Fallout 3 at the age of 15. Now that I'm nearly 30 less complex games are simply not appealing. If it won't even attempt to get me to use my brains it's not worth the trouble.
PLEASE
Bethesda, listen up.
Years after a global nuclear holocaust you will not find unopened boxes of macaroni all over the place. You will not be going through a sewer and trip over a box full of 5.56 mm ammunition.
Because somehow when Bethesda does it, it's less realistic than when Interplay did it? Do you realize how many unopened boxes of macaroni I found in the originals? Do you realize how many boxes of ammunition I found in random places that made no sense?... LIKE CAVES?! Don't complain about Bethesda doing stuff in comparing it to the game you're saying did stuff so much better when it did the EXACT SAME THING.
People will not be launching mini-nukes at super-mutants. Not even every once in a while.
Much like people wouldn't be fighting super-mutants, centaurs, ghouls, deathclaws, or those wanamingo aliens with submachine guns and gatling lasers.
Drinking water mixed with radioactive waste will not fix you up after being shot five times in the face with a shotgun.
Neither would first-aid, but apparently that was good enough in the originals.
People will not be all friendly and nice to me in the barren wasteland. Some people will be jerks. Many won't even have quests for me. Some won't even care about me at all.
And some don't. I got shot at plenty of times by random people, raiders and otherwise, in FO3. So what's your complaint there? That the people who build little communities and choose to live with other people in the game are FRIENDLY to other people? They kinda have to be to be building communities with them.
Forlorn offices in abandoned dilapidated factories will not have working computer terminals that control robotic guards.
Again, exactly the same as the originals.
Every-day dudes will not have robotic butlers, after a global thermonuclear war.
And neither will the military be creating robotic dogs that befriend someone who brings them new servos.
Overall, stop complaining about stuff that is exactly the same as the game you claim to wish it would have been. Maybe instead, you could complain about something more realistic - like the fact that virtually none of the weapons you find in the game are based on real-world weapons like they were in FO1 and FO2. The Pancor Jackhammer was a real-life automatic shotgun that some guy built. The assault rifles using caseless ammunition were real H&K assault rifles built for the ACR and related competitions, and were put into use. No, instead, I get the generic 'sniper rifle', 'hunting rifle', 'mini gun', '.32 pistol', and various other sunny-select weapons. People talk about there being some strange weapons in FO1 and FO2, but those were all sci-fi weapons. The rest of the weapons were freakin REAL, they were just obscure and scary as hell. You won't see anything of that sort in FO3. Instead you choose to complain about stuff and compare things that are done the same way, when they're no different at all. You make me sick.
Ammo in caves was on bones or corpses or the caves housed an ancient amry facility/raider camp/... but caves always make sense to stockpile things. Open houses in the middle of the desert with untouched containers do not.
Mini nukes are the least possible thing from all the fantasy/scifi weapons and the make the least sense to be used too.
Maybe you should look at the weapons in F3 again, most small guns are based on REAL weapons .they might have generic names, but their looks are not.
in the first game, the world was very, very lo-tech. There was a contrast between the dilapitated world with scarce resources (the "New world"), and the very rare remnants of the "old world": very rare underground bunkers inaccessible to most people (fallout the first has like 4-5 dungeons wich had sense in the plot and wich weren't combat infested dungeons). This is were you found the hitech stuff.
There was nothing dumb like robots in cities, working computers in the "new world" part of the wastelands(like a long forgotten bunker so full of radiation that nobody ever made to it to retrieve the stuff it contained)
Compare this to fallout 3 where you stumble upon laser pistols everywhere, in every ruin, in every sewer- and there are thousands of them comapred to the 4-5 dungeons you found in the first fallout.
What you are saying about fallout 2 is not incorrect, actually. It was worse than the first chapter.
Keep up the good work, Kevin! And hope to see more cool reviews from you.
LOL--bad English language skills are not "like" only in speaking they are "like" in writing too. Please rewrite this if you want to be taken the least bit seriously.
PS: i wouldn't mind if fallout4 will come out 2D.
I was only going to get this game because I'm a fan of SandBox, openworld, games. If there are invisible walls, and I Can't travel in any direction, swaying away from the linear questing and explore areas and gain XP in my own way, well I won't be buying it.
I HATE invisible walls, nothing spells lazy developers more.
fallout tactics is same as fallout 1/2 in basic play. its top down, alot of same weaponry and what not. but its not open gameplay as much. you go bunker to bunker working for the brotherhood of steel simply doing quests and owning suckas with up to a 6 person squad. IMO it was damn fun but it is certainly strategy, not so much adventure/rpg game.
uh...inside joke? It's from Monty Python and the Holy Grail...that's one massive inside joke, there honcho.
Infact, that is one of the things that makes FO2 far superior to FO3. FO3 is almost completely void of social commentary and pop culture easter eggs. You can hardly walk through a town in FO2 without running into atleast 5 pop-culture refferences hillariously adapted to the [real] Fallout universe.
First off LOGIN SLAYER -=> Personally my favorite is Fallout 2. Fallout 1 is arguably as good; Fallout Tactics is okay but nothing really worth hunting down.
ViperMask-=> Ya, some people think that just because you like F2, you are automatically against the evolution of game design. Which isn't true. I like turn-base combat, but the VATS and 1st person perspective in F3 is pretty good as well.
brucelee-=> Most of the game is pretty open world. Sometimes it doesn't feel very open-worldish though.
travb-=> My goal is to not be taken the least bit seriously.
28monkeys-=> Thanks a lot man! Welcome to Neoseeker.
mastah-=> I think I was wrong on the ghouls, and maybe the random encounters, but the rest? I'm not sure.
Yes-=> I completely agree with you.
'nother Fan-=> Thanks for reminding me about the Wandingo aliens. I forgot about those. I apologize if my article made you ill. Please don't sue me -- I'm broke.
Gondolin-=> I'm with ya. I find most games far too easy. I also feel that many designers make games too simple because they are lazy or uninspired, not because simple games are better, and this is what people want. (Of course there are many exceptions.)
Re-skinned genre formula games have no appeal for me.
Fan of FO-=> If Bethesda releases the SDK, or modders mod the Oblivion SDK to work with Fallout, I'm pretty much certain that the talented and hardcore Fallout fans out there will fix everything I don't like about F3. I thought Oblivion was pretty average until I installed Obscuro's Oblivion Overhaul, and then the game transformed into brilliance.
Login Slayer pt.2 -=> You can d/l Fallout 2 for 6 bucks at Good Ole Games.
Thanks for all the comments ppl. Even those of you who think I'm the anti-christ, or what not. Thanks!
As for which was better...FO2 > FO1 > Tactics. I can't really compare F03, b/c it feels like a totaly different game...more like "TESV:Wasteland". It's still a great game, but there are things that feel geared to console gamers.
If you are interested I can upload the FO3 PC savegame with the random encounter point somewhere if you want to play with random encounters on a known random encounter spot.
Fallout 2 = Best RPG ever.
Fallout Tactics = Mission based tactical RPG.
Fallout 3 = Oblivion 2.
As soon as you go to the Citadel, you'll know what I mean. Not only is it FO Blasphemy, it's absolute laziness on Bethesda's part.
As for the Ghouls, there are very very very few sentient Ghouls in the game. like you could count them on all your fingers and toes. You never run into a random sentient Ghoul out in the wasteland, it's just all this Feral Ghoul nonsense.
6.5/20 and dropping.
MassErect-=> I've only been to the front gates of the BoS. Guess I'm not to anxious to go inside! Right now I'm in Rivet City, doing that complete rip-off of Blade Runner mission Replicated Man.
Often playing the game I just feel like Bethesda was trying too hard to emulate Fallout, and missed the mark. You can tell they didn't come up with the world themselves.
It's like they have the check list of Fallout paraphernalia that just went through, one by one: Nuka Cola, check, Death Claws, check, Inkspots, check, SPECIAL, check, and further down the list...but missed the real essence of the original games... instead of trying some new stuff on their own, Fallout 3 is drenched in this ersatz authenticity.
It's like trying to build Disneyland by plastering Mickey Mouse's face on every square foot of your theme park.
And can anyone tell me if Moria's bodyguard is a vampire? If you can become a vampire in Fallout 3 I'm going to vomit.
Fallout 1 was a great game, but it had a time limit. Anyone who thinks that this was a good idea is probably just suffering from an extreme case of nostalgia. A great game marred by one (huge) limitation.
Like trying to finish as much of a great meal as you can before someone snatches the plate away. The very principle pissed me off. Nowadays I would immediately take back any new game that had a time limit on it. Fallout 2 is probably one of my favorite games of all time. End of story. If you have played a lot of new games recently, like Oblivion, NWN 2, etc. You will be turned off by the extremely dated(bad) graphics and having to **fake gasp** read dialogue. But stick with it, because the environment and story (and dark humor) is just that compelling.
For both games, you occasionally wonder what the **** you are supposed to be doing in certain indoor locations, and sometimes just move the mouse around the darkened areas until you see something you can interact with (eg. the Enclave in 2).
Most video game snobs have already played these games and love them for what they are, and you should too.
Fallout 3 doesnt compare to fallout 2.
First off, there are a lot of "human" Ghouls in the game. There is a whole city of them, in fact. Also, in the game it talks about how the Ghouls are destined to go "feral" when their body decay reaches their brains. It's actually sort of interesting that there are sentient and good people out there being slowly driven insane, and your character gets to decide several times over a few quests how he/she is going to deal with them (people, animals, etc.).
Secondly, your criticism of the open-ended nature of the quests. I was and am quite surprised at how well Bethesda has done with making the quest open-ended and "Fallout-esque." The maturity is not there, which honestly I never expected, but most quests can be solved numerous different ways, both peaceful and through combat, and this seperates the game from Oblivion and indeed most modern "consolized" RPGs.
The rest of your complaints I agree with to some extent, and I agree that the game is not a true successor to Fallout and Fallout 2, but I do think it gets DAMN close, much closer than I expected from Bethesda.
3. Dumb weapons
This is more personal, but I like the Rock-It Launcher and Railway Gun. My first moment of believing this game was awesome was taking off a Raider's head with a teddy bear.
4. Random encounters
I've met Scavengers, Friendly Ghouls, Traders, even some guy with a mutated bear as a pet who sold me some stims, even a guy running up yo me and yelling, 'Help! Those Raiders stuck a bomb to me!'. I'd say there's a few for you.
6. Open world freedom
Mixed, some areas I feel the world is wonderfully open, but in the city, I have to agree, far too many barricades.
7.Immersion free NPC's
I'm mixed on this, your dad's definitely an example of immersion, if only due to his voice actor.But honestly I think it's the closest Bethesda's gotten to the mark yet.
8. Ghouls
There's a city of sentient ghouls in the Museum of History. Gob's a nice guy, and you can even find random ghouls wandering around and talk with them. They thanks me for not shooting them on sight since that's common.
"And can anyone tell me if Moria's bodyguard is a vampire? If you can become a vampire in Fallout 3 I'm going to vomit."
Think that rumor he never sleeps was more a nod to his programing not making him sleep, but in one quest there are 'vampires'. They're Cannibals trying to fend off their desire to eat flesh and trying to stick with blood alone so they're less dangerous. That and their leader thinks he is a vampire, but he's just crazy.
I don't like Oblivion kind of game, but i have to admit that Fallout 3 is a real cool game.There are a few things like: is quite impossible to be real evil and too *bleep*ing easy to be good, lot of bugs, restriction at the rolegaming, edges of the world NOT blocked (i recive the message "you can't go this way", but there are any radiation field who can kill you or other physical obstacle and this cut a lot of the immersion experience), non strategic AI for companion who seems like to be obliterated,ecc...
But beside every defect, the background is really amazing, you "feel" a lot of the world and (strange to said this for myself) the first person work good for this game.
Probably the best rpg of the last 2-3 years (i don't remember exactly when NWN2 and Planescape exit)
(edit after reading DocMadfox's comment) -=> Well that works out. That sounds okay. Just as long as there are no cape-teeth-Count-undead-cursed "Vla!" type vampires, that works for me.
Fallout 2's timelimit was again 13 years after you saved everyone from the Enclave, which you could do fairly soon if you knew what you were doing, or within 20 minutes if you really knew the game.
Lets look at those limits a moment - Time didnt really progress that quickly in either game, so can you really imagine there be nothing left to do except start a new game to try different things before that time limit ran out? Never did myself, even after doing everything, getting my car fully fitted out, getting a copy of each gun with varying amounts of ammo for each one, huge karma, max skills, everything, doesnt take more than 5 game years to do everything, so thats another 8 years to go...yeah, seems like a real limitation to me. Makes me glad I still have my original Fallout 2 disc, which surprisingly hasnt burnt out over a decade of playing it.
Vault's 108 and 87 are just plain laziness, most especially 108.
For example yesterday I decided that it was time to put an end to my association with the Mordinos. So I wreak havoc in the their crowded casino, the Desperado, and general chaos ensue. People run yelling, other hide in corners, others even fight back, some against the casino guards, some against me.
And then i see that whore on the outside, where things begin to go awry as well, and it reads in the combat log: "prostitute uses jet," and then she runs toward a Tommy gun totting guard, yelling "I AM DANGEROUS REALLY I AM."
Oh my.
I'm happy that I'll have fun (in a detached, superficial, modern sense) playing Fallout 3, but for now excuse me I'm in imagination's wonderland. A land where i go to click on the next guy just to hear what he has to say, and how. Good writing never gets old.
Fallout 2 was pathetic compared to Fallout 1, so why do you compare the new one to the half-assed sequel to the great game?
Fallout 2: Totally uninspired boring dialog, Fallout 1 had great dialog, Fallout 3 has a LOT of dialog choices which really adds to it.
Fallout 2: Shitty plot. You start out in a "Tribe" and you attack more Radscorpions (So killing millions in Fallout 1 wasn't enough?) to get the stupid Vault 101 shirt. Then you go to some society that's been built up... it's just bad. Fallout 1 was dark and the plot rocked.
Fallout 2: Almost no new items, there were a few but they used the same models and icons as the last game more often than not. The progression of items was the EXACT same, ie leather -> metal -> power armor. 10mm pistol -> whatever sort of rifle you prefer -> minigun/missle launcher -> gatling laser. Same models, same effects, same same same same. In Fallout 3, sure its the same idea but its 10 years later, it looks awesome, they did a phenomenal job on the sound and it tries to please people like you who think its bad because it "doesn't stick to the original" or in your case, the shitty sequel.
I honestly can't think of one single way Fallout 2 was better than Fallout 1, it just wasn't. Fallout 3 is closer to what Fallout 1 was about by a long shot. Fallout 3 keeps it dark enough, but not dark is a campy-poor-jokes-poor-dialog-over-the-top kind of way. Fallout 1 and 3 have subtlety, Fallout 2 did not.
Fallout II was riddled with pop culture references, inside jokes, and was indeed darker than the first since you were finally allowed to kill children, become a slaver, sell your companions into slavery if you didn't want them anymore but wanted some money for em and turn communities against themselves, such as the case of Broken Hills. The introduction of the Enclave, with them kidnapping your tribe after you find a way to save them was similar to you finding the waterchip in the first, and after you get the GECK in 3, the Enclave once again appear with you once moer going to their base to meet their president, blow the place up and leave, which is more or less the same as in 2 without the overall sinister tones of what the Enclave really were, what they were trying to do and why they were doing it. You even found out the cause of the waterchip's failure and who stole the water in Vault 13's supply room in the first.
Ways Fallout II was better than the original? The fact that after you completed the game, yuo had the choice to carry on after you finished the game, which you cant do in 1 or 3. You could visit a few places from the original and see the results of the Vault Dwellers adventures, NCR, military base, and the Holy 13 as an example. New items? People were still struggling to survive in the wasteland and thus didn't have much time for research into new weaponary outside the Brotherhood, although the majority of weapons could be upgraded in certain places, and we finally had access to the pulse technology of the Alien Blaster in better weapons, although not many people had access to the high-tech stuff such as laser pistols, laser rifles and super sledgehammers, they were hard to find weapons until you came across the Enclave, but laser weaponary is abundant in 3, heck, if you leave the Vault and walk past Megaton to the Super-Duper Mart, there's a laser pistol laying on a table behind the checkout. More companions, a variety to them, from Marcus the Super Mutant to Skynet the Robobrain, giving you greater choice on how you wanted your team to be. The car was a great touch because once you found out about it, you had an incentive to explore all over the waste's for every possible upgrade to it, to "pimp your ride" as it were.
You say the dialogue was over the top, campy and filled with poor jokes included in poor dialogue in 2, well its alot like the original and quite different from the third, you had bits from the first finally make sense in the second such as what the deathclaws are and how they came about, you had the bigorty of the wasteland to deal with, you had hatred and prejudice to deal with. You had more options to your "career" path based on your karma, people reacted to you more directly, try going to the Wright Family in New Reno as either a slaver or a porn star, talking to Mrs. Wright for example, look at her reaction to you. Or wear Power Armour and talk to any generic NPC, they'll comment on your choice of attire. You had more interaction available, more apths you could follow, more open-ended as a whole.
Did you really play Fallout 2? You can be honest with me, did you really play it or did you just try it? I may hate the third, but I've played it all the way through so I could find out how much I'd hate it, and I really do hate it, the ending is just cheap, its too confined and limited as a game, it would of been a much better game if they simply hadn't used Fallout but had gone with Wasteland instead and wouldn't of left me feeling like...like I bought a collectors edition FIFA 09 and got Actua Soccer 1 instead.
Fallout 2 was for sure my favorite of the series, though I have also played and enjoyed F1 and Tactics. Fallout 1 felt a little bit weird for me, I only played it recently (around a year or so ago) and I played Fallout 2 for the first time around 1998-9 when it came out, so I guess I was seasoned to Fallout 2 a lot more than Fallout 1 and my criticism is unfair on the game, but I just felt a little bit out of place during F1 and the time limit (though it doesn't really make a difference since I completed the game around 100 days early both times I did it) seems to press on me. Fallout 2, which I have played with about 10-15 different characters and completed a good 4-5 times felt like an entirely real world with so much incredible things to do and so many choices as to how to do it. I loved Vault City and the way it was viewed as a "snotty town", it kind of reminds me of Tenpenny tower though a lot more Vault-esque. I loved New Reno and the NCR and San Fran and even Klamath, all these towns and cities were so cool and had so many amazing characters with a reason to be there versus as someone in this thread put it "created to cater to my character in the game". Another thing which was really cool was Broken Hills, because it was awesome to have all the Super Mutants, ghouls and people living together and see how they function together... the list of awesome things about Fallout 2 goes on and I don't want to bore you, too much.
Fallout Tactics is just that, if you like tactics mixed with the BoS, Deathclaws, ghouls and SPECIAL, then it for you. Not if you like open realistic world game play like Fallout 1 2 and somewhat 3 give you.
Fallout 3 for me just does give the same feeling (or a similar one for that matter). It feels like Oblivion, for which I also got the OOO mod to make it decent. The most shameful thing Bethesda has done however is make the game so grossly not funny, it just doesn't ever make me laugh, I sometimes try to laugh but that just depresses me to do just to pretend it's anything like F1 or F2. However, I can't blame Bethesda, it's just that Black Isle was so genius that it hard to live up to it, impossible really.
I see what youre saying but I think the way Hasu and Kevin probably feel is that change is great, but Black Isle would've handled it better.
it looks like youre one of those guys that ONLY listens to judas priests first two albums..and everything there after is utter crap.
take it for what it is..its betshedas version of wasteland.... if they had done number 3 ten years ago..? or if the original makers of fallout had done the game now,2008? who knows what it would have looked like..
if realism is your key for a good game,try the game of life.i think we can all agree very much that fallout 1 + 2 is NOT very realistic.
+ .. what if theres a nuclear war..and what if theres gonna be nuka-colas everywhere?
Okay, the first thing I would like to say is that FO3 is truely a great game and I highly recommend it, BUT FO2 is my personal choice (meaning I mostly agree with Kev). I'll start with the things I remembered while reading through the comments:
The enchanted items are a hot topic. Okay so that leather jacket is very comfy and allows me to swing my knife like crazy, run faster or whatever, that's explainable, but what's the deal with the lab coat giving intelligence? I mean you can't expect realism from a game overall, but come on. Maybe the coat has some notes and you don't actually get smarter - YOU CHEAT! Or maybe it's a true "be who you wanna be" game or what you might call a real RPG. That's totally reasonable, put on some armor - become a warrior, put on a lab coat - be a scientist, put on a suit - become the president and get on those high heels to become a girl. I DON'T say no tho the enchanting items, but I DO say no to the ones that are way too fantasy. I'll probably get back to this one (not sure why, but who knows).
The main thing I don't like about FO3 is that it isn't what the other FO1 and FO2 were. It's not the legacy anymore. The main idea of Fallout was you enter a broken world lacking law and everyone making a living by any means (you included). Why not have prostitutes? Why not have drugs? If 5 people come out of nowhere trying to kill you, but the bruiser that you are, you survive wouldn't you like a meaningless, non-engaging, stress-releaving *bleep* and a cigar? I'm not a smoker, but I've never been ambushed by a gang of guys so well armed that they got some metal teeth to bite you if all else fails. This is a post-nuclear world we are talking about and we can't know what it's going to be like, but I bet FO3 isn't nearly as broken as it will be. So what I am trying to say is that FO2 set a basinc idea of what it would be like and FO3 didn't keep to it. In terms of realism tho, if you want to shoot a child why can't you?It's an RPG after all. OK ignore that last one I know it has a sh*t load of answers and they are all good.
Another thing I noticed. FO3 really seems like it's straight forward. The main thing is that you want to find your dad and you keep to it. Well I've had moments in FO2 that suddenly I talk to someone and see G.E.C.K. and I'm like "HOLY S*IT I FORGOT". I've seen videos around the net "Complete Fallout 2 in 15 mins" or whatever I have myself completed FO1 in some record times, but is that what a game is all about - completing it?
One thing I noticed is a discussion about the map size. Why is this even here? I'll try to be short. You say "FO3 has a huge map you can explore and find random animals and people", I say "Good for you, I could only wish that every game had a map that took 10 hours to run through with bloodthirsty bastards to complete one of those get the magic hamster quests (yeah, Kev that's your line
Another thing that just nested itself in my head is the age range of games or something like that. Dudes, that's totally individual. Like me, some people actually like games with big green mother*bleep*ers raping innocent women and your job is to thing of a way to kill the thing before it sees you, kills you just by spitting at you and finishes the job with that girl we were talking about (knowing the *bleep*ed up world of FO2 the girl is probably 12 or 13), and then there are the people that like racing ponies... just looking at the... moving... pooooonies... Anyway, like I said it's very individual. I can't imagine my father, for instance, after a hard day of work playing a game of that calliber. Don't get me wrong he wouldn't take the ponies either.
Gore - I don't know why but FO2 is just more gory if you ask me. Sure in FO3 you get loads of flying parts, jawbones and all that, but the things I saw in FO2 just sometimes made me say "Damn, dude, that's sick". I really don't know why.
I am going to say this once! To all of the people saying "Those weapons are real weapons with different names" or something like that remember this is our world I would be surprised and even disgusted if there weren't familiar to us weapons.
Finaly (for now) I'll say this:
Everything that is FO3 is what you'd expect from FO, but it's not what you'd expect.
Don't forget, dudes, I'm on Kev side here.
"I made my mind - I WILL REGISTER!!!" is what I was going to say if I hadn't already registered.
WHEW!!! Quite the post there.
Another point that aggravates me is your companions, why only one at a time? In Fallout II, I remember walking around with Sulik, Vic, Myron, Dogmeat and Marcus, was fun, but now you can only have one companion at a time, not including Dogmeat? Thats just s--t! And another thing, why does Dogmeat looked so well bred? Dogmeat has always been a "mangy" wasteland dog, a vicious little killer that turned you psychotic when you saw someone attacking your faithful hound, now he looks like you got him from some prize show and there's none of that "you touched my dog, I'll melt you with my plasma rifle!!!/smash you with my supersledgehammer!!!" of Fallout + II.
Bethesda did try very hard to make a Fallout game, however they tried too hard, they went over the top on dialogue, stories, humour and characters, its just not fun or funny anymore, not like it was, sigh...
Personally I'm putting Fallout 3 aside for a while. I realized last night the entire Charisma stat in the game has no purpose besides modifying your speech and barter skill, and that was another disappointment. (In F1/F2, Charisma determined how many NPC's could join your party. It F3 you can only dogmeat + 1 NPC, which is lame.)
I'm going to put the game aside until the mods come out.
typuct -=> That's quite the epic comment post Typuct. Don't feel better after getting that off your chest? I know I did
calloused -=> Call me a dumb ass, but I spent a great deal of time having to wander around the sewers trying to find which way to go. It's easy to get lost in DC because of all the artificial barriers everywhere. I'm not sure if I was the only one, but finding the right route to go was sometime pretty tricky.
prutten-=> IMHO all of Judas Priest's records suck. That's my opinion. Maybe you prefer Fallout 3 over Fallout 2? That's fine. I can honestly tell you it has nothing to do with the way the game looks. And I don't care so much for realism...it's more that if there is too much stuff that seems ridiculously unrealistic, I find it hard to get immersed in the fictional landscape of the game. All the robots and nukes around just seemed really ... not so much unrealistic... just immature and stupid.
Con-=> I've put maybe 30 hours into Fallout 3. If that's not giving it a chance, that I don't know what would be, by your criteria. I agree with you on what you say about change.
Hasu -=> Very insightful and well written comments. Thanks for adding to the discussion. I pretty much agree with everything said.
Calloused (earlier post) -=> Oh dude of course I played through Fallout 2. I wouldn't have written the article if I had not. Any errors in my recollection of the game are due to the fact that I played it like 9 years ago.
About the NPCs - well I haven't really gone deep into that aspect of the game in FO3. The first one willing to join me told me I was too good and then I blew him up, the second one told me I was too evil and I never really found Dogmeat, but I saw some pictures and I wouldn't say prize show, but the mutt looks pretty good for a 100+ year old dog. The AI in FO2 however had some major flaws. The worst was that all creatures/NPCs could have only 1 target per turn. When you have a companion like Dogmeat or any other dog that has like 20 hits per turn you get really pissed of when it kills it's target with the first blow and ends it's turn.
About the ammo - maybe it looks strange and I personally don't like it, but I guess that's what's left behind from the war. In FO2 I rarely found ammo out of shops or fresh corpses and I liked that.
I'm thinking of trying 2 mods:
Project Restoration - sounds interesting and I will try it as soon as I conmplete the game yet again.
Wasteland Mercs - I think that NOT being someone special is going to be fun.
Don't get me wrong, I understand you are a fallout fan and Beth Soft have butchered (according to fallout fans) the series but out of 11 reasons, I only find erm...none valid.
True I haven't played Fallout 2...yet, it is currently sitting on my shelf waiting to be installed along with Fallout 1 and Tactics but you have been considerably harsh and here's why:
- Open world freedom - On the surface, no not much freedom but Beth Soft don't want you to run over the surface like an athlete. They want you to use the tunnels, to meet with enemies and fight for your life.
The real reason though is due to the way they have made the world. The blocked paths stop you from walking into "nothingness" basically a blocked path means "go down into the tunnels, there are no graphics after this bit"This is to cut down the unneccessary loading times, freezes and crashes, which was the reason why Oblivion died so much. By taking some of the world out so to speak, it is smoother due to the sections of the world being placed into different areas. In other words you aren't running over one big world, there are separate sections all connected to make one big world.
- NPC's - I somewhat agree with you on this but really? Would you want a town full of 30 interactive NPC's with tons of dialogue causing you to run around the town for hours on end and NOT do anything to progress through the game or 10 quest giving NPC's with 20 NPC's that don't really talk to you but fill in as background so that you don't waste time and get quests done?
If it's the first then I suggest you play the life sims or WoW, not fallout 3- realism - yes because video games are serious business and should mimic every little detail of life. Games are here to get away from realism and life. I WANT TO BE ABLE TO SHOOT MINI-NUKES AT 30FT MUTANTS because I can't do it in real life.
I'll leave you to think about what I have said Mr. KBy the way I respect your opinion and yes I will be looking into the rest of the fallout series but from reading this article, you clearly haven't played Fallout 3 to its full potential and worst of all, you are comparing fallout 3 like it is actually part of the fallout series and carrying on from fallout 2. It is a whole separate game, made by a different company 10 years on.
Strangely my top one hasn't been mentioned here - character durability. In FO 1/2/tactics you had to be very, very careful around the creatures with the big guns. A supermutant with a minigun could shred you in a single burst if it scored a critical and even a normal shot would halve your health. In FO3 it seems to take a team of enemies with guns to match the damage potential of one giant radscorpion. All that the difficulty button does is increase the enemy HP so that they become almost as durable as you. So now everybody is immersion-breakingly impossible to kill and can eat a mini-nuke without fatal consequences? Ugh. Hopefully there will be a reality tweak along to tone down your health and diversify gun damage a bit better (plus get rid of the level cap that kicks in way too early if you explore.)
A lot of the adult material is missing, which is a shame but inevitable given modern US attitudes about violence vs sex and drugs in games. On the other hand, they've really gone for the bleak backstory. The FO3 government are as evil as the Nazis if you go exploring all the lore. I never quite got that impression from FO 1/2 (they were bad, but not truly evil.) Props to BS for really going all-out there - shame its not woven into the main plot properly so that the Project Purity dialogue makes more sense.
But for now let me just say that I have played a great deal of Fallout 3. I've done most of the side quests, and I think I'm about half way through the main quest. I've wandered over pretty much the entire map.
I'm really surprised by your following quotation: "you are comparing fallout 3 like it is actually part of the fallout series and carrying on from fallout 2. It is a whole separate game, made by a different company 10 years on."
????
So you are saying Fallout 3 is not part of the Fallout series? Then why call it Fallout ----3--- ? That's a pretty ridiculous statement.
I was under the impression that Fallout 3 is part of the Fallout series.
I of course would be the first to point out all the differences between Fallout 1/2 and Fallout 3, but really, you can't say that they aren't part of the same series. I mean we need to be reasonable here.
Tag skills -=>10 or 15 points, who cares? The point is that tag skills have little relevance in the game. Trust me dude, there was a FAR greater amount of choice and freedom in developing your character in Fallout 1 + 2. Your SPECIAL attributes meant a great deal. The SPECIAL attributes hardly mean anything at all in Fallout 3. They were handled poorly because they were tacked on to an engine designed for a simplier RPG -- Oblivion.
Items -=> Your opinion is valid, but I still think Bobbleheads are dumb.
Weapons -=> Don't use the weapons I think are stupid? Ok fine. But I still think they are stupid. I didn't say anything about being forced to use them... I was just saying some of the weapons are dumb.
Random Encounters -=> Dice rolling --what? I hope you realize the cornerstone of any computer game is mathematics. "As you exit, you step on a strange landmine, it doesn't explode but you seem to not be in the same place as before" is not a good random encounter. For examples of a good random encounter system, play Fallout 2. Fallout 3 has them but they aren't handled as well, IMHO.
Open world freedom -=> I'm sorry, but this point is just misguided I think. I'm going to quote it right back to you with some bolding : "Open world freedom - On the surface, no not much freedom but Beth Soft don't want you to run over the surface like an athlete. They want you to use the tunnels, to meet with enemies and fight for your life."
Open world freedom is apparent ON THE SERVICE. "They want you to use the tunnels"... does that sound like open world freedom?
"By taking some of the world out so to speak, it is smoother due to the sections of the world being placed into different areas. " -=> Taking some of the world out and making invisible rubble piles that you can't pass is not the only way to smooth out a game world.
NPC's -=> I think a happy medium might be in order here. Like the Canteburry Commons town for example, has like six residents in the entire town. It does seem a bit empty. I just feel as player, that the town has been built for my character's benefit. It doesn't feel like a real town at all.
Ghouls -=> When I wrote this article, I had not yet discovered the ghoul town. I was wrong on this point.
Quests-=> This sort of comes back to the stats. It really felt like you could complete Fallout 1 and 2 according to the design of your character. Like it really seemed (and in many ways it was possible) that you could complete the game with, say, a guy that was awesome at speech,barter and had a high intelligence. This is not the case in Fallout 3. The quests in Fallout 1 / 2 felt like actual quests I was on...the quests in Fallout 3 are for the most part, pretty lame. Most of the time I can't even become interested in the quests in Fallout 3...Having not played in Fallout 1 /2 it is difficult for you to compare the quests to Fallout 3 so I'll have to leave it there.
Funny -=> Actually humor is a big part of the Fallout series. And it was something that the designers said they were trying to capture. You can't think that the Antagonizer and the Robobrains are supposed to be serious?
Realism -=> Fair enough. For me, if I wanted to shoot 30 FT super mutants I'd prefer to play Gears of War 2.
Once again, I think "you are comparing fallout 3 like it is actually part of the fallout series and carrying on from fallout 2" is really silly. I see what you are saying, but Fallout 3 is part of the Fallout series. Actually, most of the Fallout fans out there that don't like Fallout 3 would have been absolutely, completely, totally thrilled if Bethesda decided to just call the game Fallout: Wasteland, or something like that. But the whole point was they called it Fallout 3 -- thus linking it directly to Fallout 1 and 2 and trying to play up this link as much as possible, not downplay it.
Thanks for your comments. I hope I didn't seem like a jerk... wasn't my intention...I also hope that you will play Fallout 2. Anyone that tries out a game that is 10(+) years old has my respect.
I'd probably add the fact that F3 VATS doesnt come anywhere near F2 TBC (not to mention JA2)
I like the VATS as well, though it does have problems.
I think I prefer combat more in Fallout 2, though the combat in Fallout 3 is for the most part pretty fun. I do find it far too easy though. All you have to do is run up to someone, go into VATS, and then blow off their head. You can't lose really.
Not to mention it was really fun to get into battles when you had like 3 or 4 guys in your posse, which is another thing you can't do in F3.
I possibly prefer the combat system in Mass Effect to the combat in any Fallout games, but I might have to replay Fallout 1/2 in order to say that with 100% certainty.
Encounters - I know that mathematics is a cornerstone in any game, it is generally a cornerstone in life and everything we do, however what I meant was, I would hate to have a system where every shot I made, was decided on a mere "If a roll of 6 is made, the hit is made" running in the background. I would rather it be my aiming to determine that.
Also the example I used was a bad one I admit but when I walk out of a metro station, I would rather run into a group of super mutants or talon mercs than say a little kid who has lost his parents. Granted if it was a decent encounter or activates a good quest then yes, random encounters would be great but generally I wouldn't like it.
Open world - To be honest my feeling on this part is mixed. Again what I meant by what I said was instead of just running over the surface, Beth Soft wanted to give a change of scenery and a reason for you to explore. Back in Oblivion, people complained about the reptitive scenery (more so cloned trees) while taking too long to walk from one end of the land to the other. In response, Beth Soft juggled it around.
The mixed feeling comes from the "missing world" pieces as I did find that out by accident when using the toggle collision command to fly about. Most of the missing area is around the washington monument, which is missing more or less due to stopping those that would simply go there to skip the quest in a matter of minutes (speed players basically) instead of playing the game like normal.
NPC's - Meh I just generally find that "too many" NPC's with too much to say means that effort was wasted when all that effort and time could have been placed into other areas. such as maybe solving some of these comparison problems that you and others are noticing.
Quests - Like you say, without me playing the original fallouts, I can't really say anything
Funny - Well of course not, to be honest that quest was more or less a "WTF moment" rather than a funny one
Reslism - Well up to you, though if you grab the PC version, there is a user mod that replaces the super mutant's green skin with a more human and gorier version. In that sense, then yes Beth Soft could have worked harder to make the mutants look realistic rather than a radioactive green but meh]
As to my comment about fallout 3 not being in the series, what I meant by that was that it doesn't directly follow on from fallout 2. In other words, you don't need knowledge of the fallout games or fallout lore in order to play the game and understand Fallout 3.
However at the end of the day, Beth Soft are using the Fallout franchise, they will make the games as close to the original lore etc. as possible but I really do think that Fallout fans should stop dreaming about another "perfect fallout" game.
Unless Interplay/Black Isle Studios come back and make a fallout game (which I believe Interplay are making a Fallout MMO ) then the fallout fans should stop kidding themselves, Beth Soft are not Black Isle Studios, Beth Soft did not make the original Fallouts or were they involved in the projects.
Fallout 3 is their own project using the fallout world and lore, nothing more. Now if they were "carrying" on from Fallout 2, then fallout fans have every right to be angry
I think if I could call up Bethesda and ask them, they'd say they were very much trying to carry on from Fallout 1+2, and that Fallout 3 was as much as a 'real' Fallout game as was the earlier games... And if this is true, by your logic, all of hardcore Fallout 1/2 fans do have the right to be angry. And many of them are.
As for the perfect fallout game, perfection might not be achievable, but I'm incredibly optimistic about what the modding community will do with the game.
Of course the prospect for improvement will be greatly enhanced by Bethedsa releasing a SDK. Hopefully that'll make it out.
I think a lot of the stuff that bugs me in the game bugs many others, and I hope some talented dudes out there will make some mods that really improve the game for me -- that's why I've put it aside before finishing the main quest, I'm going to wait for mods.
It hasn't even been a month since release and even without a SDK a respectable number of mods have popped up.
http://www.fallout3nexus.com/downloads/
And once again, as much fun as it has been to rag on Fallout 3, it is still one of my favorite games that came out this year.
The reason why some of the game's design choices bother me as much as they do is that I feel if just a few things were changed, Fallout 3 could potentially become a classic (in my mind), instead of only 'merely' a great game.
http://www.nma-fallout.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=46721
i just played fallout 3 and im sorry but i just can not bring myself to talk to sarah lyons to complete the last quest. the whole game feels inadequate and reminds me too many ways than one of oblivion. the whole damn ambience spells of oblivion!! i just bought the game out of respect to the fallout series and mind you i own every single fallout title except the one on the xbox, which i heard did not do justice to the fallout series.
kevin your article reflects EXACTLY everything i thought about the moment i stepped into megaton. just that i have a few hundred other opinions of my own that most people wont like to hear. in fact i fell asleep on many occasions playing i was lapsing in and out of consciousness. it feels more of a chore to complete the next fallout series rather than enjoying the game. while i completed fallout 2 countless times i practically walked through the whole game dry off the top of my head
im going to be really blunt here. bethesda did a great job on fallout 3, but an even better oblivion mod. god lets pray the modding community will save this series from damnation.
I desperately wanted the game to fall on its ass and be an embarassment to Bethesda, but I'm now glad it isn't.
And on the note of one dimensional quests: Take for instance "The Replicated Man."
It can be started by either stumbling upon an audio tape, or talking to an NPC who wants you to return a runaway android. Then, you need to investigate with doctors and techies, and eventually a woman will come along and give you a part from said android, informing you that he is on the run because of moral objections to his job, and that he just wants to be human.
From here, you have choices - Hand over the part to the NPC and convince him the robot is dead, or continue investigating. If you keep on, you'll eventually be able to find out the robot had somebody else's memories put into it, and then retrieve a code which will allow you to return its old memories.
Again, choices - Do you turn in the robot to the quest giver? Do you return the memories to the robot? If so, do you encourage it to stay hiding as a human and subtly make the quest-giver leave, or do you encourage him to kill the quest-giver? Or do you even offer to do it yourself.
Try playing the game for a little longer. If you're not of the "explore everything" mindset, you're really not going to get much out of Fallout 3.
I think alot of issue's people ahve with this game could be solved by two simple things - Using a new story, not rehashing Fallout 2's, ya know, with the Elnclave coming along to stop you just as you've reached the point of problem solving, in 2 your village was taken when you got the GECK and you had to go the Enclave main base, with 3 the Enclave kidnap you to save you the effort of all those hours you'd be wandering the wasteland, just so yet again, the Enclave base can be blown up and the president killed, wow aint that great considering they had the license and development teams around for how long exactly?. And being able to continue on after the end, that was my main grief. If I sit down to a game and its got a main quest, then I'll do that quest just to get it out of the way and have freedom to play the rest of the game, however with Bethesda's brutally short storyline and pathetically dissappointing ending, do you really want to start a whole new game just to try doing it another way, just so you can spend a rough hour from start to out of the Vault?
The game is thoroughly dissappointing, after completing the game, I went back, and I did all the sidequests I could, as some negate others, and all the minor quests possible...its all just tedious "you go into this dungeon, you get this, you come back and then you go to this dungeon" or "you walk for this many hours, get this item, come back then travel around more", just as tedious as the Nuka-Cola challenge, and as I think about it, what was the point of those challenge's? to get the acheivements, but who were those achievements put there for? X-Box players so it can be just like all the other X-Box games that has achievement rankings, pathetic.
I'm still quite curious as to why the economy devolved back to Fallout I though. Sure in Fallout they used bottlecaps, it was easy and it was effecient given their timeline. Fallout 2 used gold as they'd had decades to work on it, yet in 3, a mere three decades later, no gold, only caps, why? Sure its on the other side of the country but seriously, given how much gold exists in the US and the fact that traders are always looking for new markets to sell their goods, the bartering and all that, dont you think you'd be above using bottlecaps?
Also, why is Harold there? How did he make the trip? How did a lone ghoul that was turning into a tree manage to cross an entire country without dying? He even states when you talk to him that he has been rooted in the same spot for "20 to 30" years, his memory might not be the best, but lets average it out to 25. Thats 5 years for Bob to grow from a small bonzai to fully rooted tree, growing inside Harold and making him slower, more treelike.
Oh, can anyone tell me the point of VATS in real time? I've got better accuracy with the right mouse button than I have with VATs, and it also doesnt send me into instant slow motion where I'm stuck by predefined actions, cant move, cant do anything but watch as I get shot/stabbed/beaten/fragged.
I explored everything, I spoke to everyone I could, I tried it all, then I uninstalled it and threw it on the roof so I wouldn't have to look at it anymore, just gotta hope it doesnt rain before it settles in to any moss, only been up there an hour or so.
Bethesda tried hard to make Fallout 3, you can see that they did genuinely try in alot of places, but they tried too hard. The dialogue is wrong, the humour is slapstick and not tongue-in-cheek like the previous titles, none of the skills really matter because your bombarded with perks that make them pointless. Only ya gun skill for ya chosen weapon, and explosives (up until you get the Lightstep perk) with maybe a touch of science are needed.It has none of the flavour, the appeal, the enticement of the Fallout's, even the radiation was trivial if you've played STALKER for more than ten minutes.
They tried to make an RPG mixed with FPS elements, but came out with a FPS that had "I wanna be an rpg" on its christmas wishlist. The easiest way and most enjoyable way to play this game is like this - Get a screenshot from Oblivion, look at it as you load up Fallout 2, keep looking at the screenshot every few minutes, and ya got 3 in an enjoyable fashion.
Quick edit: If Myron made Jet in 2, made it from materials not possible before the wasteland, why was Jet appearing in Vaults? Vault's that didnt even have dead raiders in them, just mirelurks, bloatflies and Gary's? Trying too hard again.
As to the whole debate...we will never agree to the same points or agree to disagree. However one thing you have said Kspiess is about the mod community.
I am not sure about the Fallout side but I certainly know when the Oblivion modders get their hands on it they will do not only great things but things that will keep both sides happy.
Such as the "gorier looking mutants" mod, gives humanoid appearance but gorier to the mutants instead of the sickly radioactive green look
For instance, killing children is now completely out-of-bounds (remember Temple of Elemental Evil had to pull all the kids at the last second?) Granted, a certain point in the main quest made that more noticeable than it had to be, but Bethesda couldn't have sold the game if it was rated AO. I suspect most of the toned down content was toned down for that reason.
I'm kind of torn about the "Character can be good at everything" parts. On one hand it does seem to cut down on the personalization of your character. On the other, it was a bit frustrating to be 3/4 of the way through the game and find out that I need 8 in a stat in order to do something cool.
The stat-boosting outfits were a bit lame. I could understand a few (Recon Armor upping your sneak) but I think they could have gotten rid of most of them and swapped them with tools. After all, I can always carry around the utility suit and put it on when I need to pick locks or repair stuff, right? Also, F3 (and Oblivion) really need item descriptions. A lot of the humor in F1 and 2 came in the items, and besides, it would be nice to know just what makes Vengeance different from every other Gatling Laser or just what Void Salts are, anyway?
And come on, double install of F2? What about F1 or Torment?
the magical skill items really ticked me off i dont see someone putting on and off armor by the minute just for skills its just stupid. not in fallout anyway. the whole game feels like a lazy attempt to choke out a game solely to roll in more money and to repeat.
they prolly know the modders would help them complete the last 3/4 of the game anyway
To sum it up for me: it´s been fun, but what is missing compared to the old games is replayability. While in 1/2 it was possible to play a pure diplomat / thief / whatever that could avoid almost all fights, in 3 I see no way to play a diplomat. Combat is much more important and central.
While speech and other skills allow you to avoid *some* combat, a lot can´t be and that forces you to play a fighting character. So you might as well go all the way... There´s no great incentive to go on exploring at the moment (ranger armor and Lincoln gun are all I need) and replaying would make me play almost exactly the same character again: Small guns hurray!
For those of you who said I haven't put in enough time in the game: I've put in about 30 hours. My character is level 17 or 18. That is enough time to judge the game, IMHO. Yes, I was WRONG about the ghouls. I never went to ghoul town.
I've stopped playing the game. I'm going to wait for mods to come out before I finish it -- I really can't see myself wanting to play it twice.
I have to conclude that the fundamental RPG elements of Fallout 3 are weak. I'm sorry, but they are. I just think Bethesda makes some poor design decisions. I think the designers do not understand the fundamental nature of the RPG genre, or where not able to implement the fundamentals as they would have hoped.
Your SPECIAL characteristics hardly matter. Where in Fallout 1 and Fallout 2 distributing your SPECIAL points had a massive impact for the whole game, in Fallout 3 they hardly matter. Charisma only modifies the Speech and Barter system -- this is dumb. Intelligence hardly comes into play in the game, besides giving bonuses to Science and Repair (or whatever 2 skills it is.) All the rest of the SPECIAL attributes don't do all that much.
I do not think the writing or the plot are particularly strong in the game. This may sound vastly egotistical of me to say, but I am confident I could write better dialogue, and a better plot, myself.
The Fallout universe is sort of handled okay -- but it seems like a 'false authentic', if I may invent an oxymoron to describe it.
Bethesda didn't really add anything much world-wise to the Fallout universe that didn't seem like a knock-off of something in the earlier games. It seems that there goal was to merely conform to the appearance of the Fallout mythos, without really grasping the true direction, and original inception, shown in the earlier titles.
Look: the game is going to make zillions of dollars. It's going to win all sorts of awards. Reviewers are all in tears about the game. I think it is lacking in many ways -- perhaps I am freak, I admit it.
When playing Fallout 3, I don't get much of a sense of having a character in the game. As I said earlier, the game feels like it was designed via some sort of 'RPG checklist' of things it should have, but there doesn't seem to be a thorough understanding of what makes a RPG evidenced in the design of the game.
What made Fallout 1 and 2 some of my all-time favorite RPGs, if not my ALL time favorite RPGs, was that you really had the sense that you could come up with an original character in those games, and deal with situations how your fictional character would deal with them. That's the soul of the game -- I've hardly ever played any games that had this sort of vitality in them, as did Fallout 1 and Fallout 2.
In Fallout 3, the primary engagement in the world isn't the RPG elements, it is the excess of combat. Having a combat such a huge element is fine -- but the problem is, the combat isn't that fun about half way through the game, as your character is invariably a complete God compared to everything else he faces.
Oh man, so much for being brief. Sorry.
Personally I think right now, Far Cry 2 is a better game -- for me, Far Cry 2 is an exceptionally executed open world FPS. Though Fallout 3 has massive production values (so much so that basically the game is guaranteed to be a success), I really feel like the game isn't much of a RPG, and the combat is not engaging enough for me to sustain my interest in playing the game.
Just to sum up: If I never played Fallout 1 or 2, I expect I'd have a much different opinion of Fallout 3 -- admittedly, I'd probably enjoy it much more. But to me, Fallout 3 feels like an knock-off: an expensive knock-off; but a knock-off nonetheless.
It's as if they made a Spiderman 4 movie that was a comedy, and didn't star Toby McQuire.
As far as dificulty levels go, Fallout 3's doesn't just effect the health, but the tactics as well. You have a much better chance of being surrounded or spotted earlier on the higher dificulty level, and noisy weapons echo further alerting enemies further away.
Your point on invisible walls is a bit weak. Sure there are streets where buildings have falled over and rubble prevents you from passing, but 90% of the invisible walls I have found paths around the buildings. If nothing else, this is probably one of the most realistic aspects of a post-war city, and therefore proof that Bethesda has done their research. When bombs fall and explode, they generally cause buildings to fall in one direction, as in if a street block lines up due east of the blast, the roads between the buildings would almost always be blocked, but the roads parallel would not necessarily. The cities, even the DC wasteland, is almost completely accessable if you care to walk around buildings, but they clearly were trying to make it more realistic in the dificulty it would be to get around cities after a war like this. Of course the mall would be clear, it's basically an open field with buildings lining the side. It SHOULD seem like a rail if you would sit and think about it for a minute.
And while I will admit to you most of the dialouge is much more dry than the previous game, I feel it is generally more believable of a post-apocalyptic wasteland.
And I will point out that once you further develope your skills, you get more options to complete quests. Once your science gets above 70 or so, you start having more options on completing quests. Science is good for more than just hacking terminals, trust me. You just seem set on playing though killing everyone... if you try, there are other options. I've only completed one mission by killing everyone.
All in all, I think you are one of those people who became hung up on a game when you were a kid and now that a new, different game is out, all you can think about is the ways it is different from your baby. Honestly, sometimes different is better.
My character in the game is a science-specialist, with a science skill of 100, and I can't think of one single situation in the game where my science skill has played any role besides affecting my hacking ability, and I'm like 25 or 30 hours into the game.
Please don't resort to the 'afraid of change' angle. I don't not like Fallout 3 because it is different -- I don't like it because it is a inferior RPG to Fallout 1 and 2, in my opinion. Nostalgia does shade my recollection of the games, sure, but I could argue until the end of time why they were better RPGs than Fallout 3. Someone could certainly convince me that they enjoyed Fallout 3 more than 1+2, or convince me that Fallout 3 is the better game compared to Fallout 1+2, but no one in the universe could convince me that Fallout 3 is a better RPG than Fallout 1 and 2, as far as RPG's are concerned.
Games are the opposite of movies: most of the time, the sequels are better. IMHO, this wasn't the case for Fallout 3.
(Damn I can't stop writing about this
Sure you don't have to kill everything to complete the quest -- you can take a speech roll to convince the quest-giver that you don't have to do the quest. A nice touch -- and a thing to have a speech skill for, in the game-- but not that deep.
Ya, maybe installing Fallout 1 instead of that hypothetical back-up installation of Fallout 2 would be a good idea.
But don't even get me started on Planescape Torment
The hard drives of the world would run out of free space before I could become exhausted, relating the heaps of praise I could pile onto that game.
That is all.
Does anyone know of a high-resolution patch? I recently installed it again on my 1280x1024 notebook and it was almost unplayable in the original resolution and too small a window if played in windowed mode.
yes im a bethesda hater, yes they shamed the series
Someone played this game 10 years ago designed for 10 year old computers. It was a life altering experience, (i.e., "Back In My Day Syndrome"). The new thing is not as good, and no amount of arguing can convince them of that.
Overall, I've played FO1 + 2 more times than I can count on my fingers and toes. FO3 is a pretty good extension into an inevitable 3D world (Interplay would have gone 3D by now too had they not fallen to pieces). 10 years have passed, things have changed.
Yes, you like FO2 best, that's fine. However, what does it matter if it somehow altered your perceived perfection? This game coming out does not ruin the experiences you had 10 years ago. It is an extension for those who play it, and continues the franchise.
Overall, if you don't like it, don't play it. If you do like it, and would rather have FO3 than no more Fallout at all, quit bitchin' so much.
The zombies? Ghouls as they're called , there's an entire settlement of friendlies , I've found 2 settlements. One friedly even gives you a zombie mask which lets who walk right by ALL zombies whether friendly or not and they will all fight for you.
Also SKILLS , what about the 25 perks I've unlocked? one of which gives you another skill to TAG . These perks act as pseudo SKILLS because they can be upgraded so in effect FAllout3 has MORE SKILLs than2.
Also you talk about openess, you can't even compare crappy OHV game to a 3-d world and those magical walls you can't climb over ,that's because you supposed to use the METRO tunnels in DC . Fallout3 maybe smaller but its BIGGER than part2.
I've logged 65 hours and only done 6 of the main quests.
The weapons in Fallout3 are awesome!
How can you not like the Rock-it Launcher????? Its frikken halrious to do a headshot with a carton of cigarettes or anything else you can put in it , Then there's the Shiskebob . Plus all these weapons have anvanced skematics v2 v3 etc.
Sounds like you haven't played much of the game ,as you get the zombie mask at tenpenny towers. WOW , that's the very first quest for just about everyone.
Side missions galore in Fallout3
However maybe because I have played Fallout 3 before number 2 but I just can't get into the game, then again I did start playing it at 1am this morning and I do miss the first person/third person perspective. Meh the game has yet to grow on me and I am hoping the recycling of Fallout 2 is just Beth Soft's way of making their mark on the fallout series saying "Look this is what the Fallout world looks like when put through modern day technology, give us a chance and we'll do something better in Fallout 4"
Then again keyword there is "hoping"
There's always MOD's, Fallout 4, Hell even the Fallout MMO interplay is working on.
AlexMe -=> You're just saying that because you are afraid of change, and don't like new games more than old games
sydneyroo -=> Studying the English language can be rewarding.
WilliamO, timekiller -=> I'll say it again: Even though I take a disparaging view of Fallout 3, I'm still glad it was made, glad it came out, and think it is a pretty good game, and I have had fun playing it. Only in comparison with my favorite RPGs, Fallout 1 +2, which I think are brilliant, does Fallout 3 come up really short.
http://takinginitiative.wordpress.com/2008/11/24/fallout-3-falling-flat
I have also completed Fallout 3 twice.
The RPG experience in 1/2 is way ahead of 3.
I wont be playing fallout 3 in a years' time. But even after a decade, i still play 1 and 2. Enough said.
Hopefully the world will see more RPGs as complex, fulfilling, and as well designed as Fallout 1 + 2. Hopefully some potential game designers of tomorrow might discover them, and be inspired by them.
jazzz-=> I'm totally going to do that dude. I'm finishing replaying Fallout 1 right now, and afterwards, I'm very much looking forward to replaying Fallout 2 with the restoration project installed (I've haven't yet tried it.)