My Fallout 3 impressions.

[1eyedking]

He forgot to wrote about such great things like shitty dialogues, dumb writing, stupid AI, unneeded stat system, boring mini-games, cliche characters and boring boring boring overcrowded wasteland. Just because unlike Oblivion Fallout 3 has dialogues written in 3 minutes it is a very good game fo sho.

Personally I would've wanted Oblivion-style "megaton/rumours" "dialogues". At least they didn't make my character sound like a stupid teen.

But I fail to see how a game where everything ranges from mediocre to bad is a "pretty good game"

I'm guessing it's the current lack of proper RPGs that has made people forget what the good ones were all about.

 

[DefJam101]

Hey, Stevee Wonder is back?

In before Phantasmal spamorgy.

 

[Drakron]

I'm guessing it's the current lack of proper RPGs that has made people forget what the good ones were all about.

Well I am going to say that is and its not true.

Some of us older folk would not mind a game with the "old tech" of sprites and painted backdrops and text speech but I think sometimes we give too much credit to the old classics as we forgot or ignore their flaws.

Also you are going to be stuck on "what the good ones were all about" because I can point out some of those old ones were really not as good, I said many times PlaneScape:Torment is a fine adventure game but is a bad RPG and I know damn well that such statement does not fly well with the "RPG Codex mantra".

I can also point out a old classic, Lands of Lore, is a game on rails with little to no liberty at all in terms of development, we are simply lead from one level to another and many games were like that.

The thing I see wrong with today RPGs is how they are either click fests or rely on the player skills instead of the characters skills with abusing mini games as a gameplay gimmick (and yes, Fallout 3 does that ... I voiced my distaste for the hacking mini game and seem people defending it for the wrong reasons) so why should I be saying Fallout 3 sucks ass when it offers C&C, skill checks, stats checks? because they ditched strength chekcs for weapons?

 

[Ogg]

My turn, yeah!

Pros:
the lockpick minigame isn't as annoying as it could've been

Cons: You already know that part and I'm already too depressed to force myself to remember this game anylonger

Gameplay: 4/10
Graphics: 7/10
Sound: 8/10
Story: 2/10
Final note: 9,9/10

 

[Twinfalls]

So, Andyman (locue?), planning on paying Bethesda any money for giving you a game you played right through to the end?

As for the rest of you - I've changed my mind. It's not a very good game. It's a fantastic game. As an action game it's miles better than the two biggies that get cited: Half Life 2, because it is not railroaded like that game - you can roam anywhere around the place, I have far more options available to deal with fights, with far more consequences for my decisions (eg changing weapons can take a serious chunk of time, depending on the weapon. No insta-arming of a rocket launcher) there are not the endless convenient-and-spookily-appropriate weapons caches, the characters have real dialogues with options, and the setting and especially characters are better (Alyx and her father are two people I'd love to shoot for their insufferable goody-goodiness, but cannot. I am trapped with them the whole fucking way). Unlike FO3 where, for example, I got fed up with a certain key character early in the MQ who insisted on blackmailing me into running a dangerous errand, and thusly I flamed him to a cinder. The game let me continue my search but without any immediate clue as to where I was to go next. That character's death is also reflected by the game very effectively from that point onwards. Crysis - well, to be honest I haven't seen it. But I've played Far Cry and that was very poor. A tech demo with utterly feeble story mechanics. I don't expect the latest to be all that different, but I'm sure that poster earlier in this thread just loves the animations.

Last evening I ventured into the wasteland north of Minefield. After disposing of a mini-gun wielding insect-loving freak and evading (just) several obviously lethal creatures, what I stumbled on next - the derelict power station infested with feral ghouls, was one of the creepiest settings I've encountered in a game. Dying about 5 times I gave up on exploring it. I'll come back later. Or maybe I'll forget about it as I venture somewhere 10 miles south of that.

 

[CrimsonAngel]

Twinfalls sounds like you never played STALKER

 

[Twinfalls]

True.

Tell me about it. Does it have skill-checks like this one? I note a 'lack of polish' is complained about FO3 in this thread. Is Stalker super-polished?

 

[Ogg]

I have far more options available to deal with fights, with far more consequences for my decisions (eg changing weapons can take a serious chunk of time, depending on the weapon. No insta-arming of a rocket launcher)

What about stimpacks then?

I'd love to shoot for their insufferable goody-goodiness, but cannot. I am trapped with them the whole fucking way

And of course, there aren't any unkillable NPC in FO3.... You haven't played much of the MQ, it seems. One noun: Lyons.

Unlike FO3 where, for example, I got fed up with a certain key character early in the MQ who insisted on blackmailing me into running a dangerous errand, and thusly I flamed him to a cinder. The game let me continue my search but without any immediate clue as to where I was to go next. That character's death is also reflected by the game very effectively from that point onwards.

Do you mean that he stopped talking on the radio ? Actually, I killed him too. And I heard the news whereas I hadn't finished looting his body. Creepy. I also loved the fact that he kept calling my character a mass murderer on the radio, but when I came to his studio, he was all sugar and sweeties.

 

[Hamster]

As for the rest of you - I've changed my mind. It's not a very good game. It's a fantastic game. As an action game it's miles better than the two biggies that get cited: Half Life 2, because it is not railroaded like that game - you can roam anywhere around the place, I have far more options available to deal with fights, with far more consequences for my decisions (eg changing weapons can take a serious chunk of time, depending on the weapon. No insta-arming of a rocket launcher) there are not the endless convenient-and-spookily-appropriate weapons caches, the characters have real dialogues with options, and the setting and especially characters are better (Alyx and her father are two people I'd love to shoot for their insufferable goody-goodiness, but cannot. I am trapped with them the whole fucking way). Unlike FO3 where, for example, I got fed up with a certain key character early in the MQ who insisted on blackmailing me into running a dangerous errand, and thusly I flamed him to a cinder. The game let me continue my search but without any immediate clue as to where I was to go next.

Short variant:

Sand box RPG > Shooter

What a revelation!

 

[Twinfalls]

And of course, there aren't any unkillable NPC in FO3.... You haven't played much of the MQ, it seems. One noun: Lyons.

Are you stuck with her to the same extent as Alyx and her irritating-as-fuck father? Which of the 'friendly' characters in HL2 can you kill, or at least refuse to co-operate with? Is there other stuff you can do in HL2 other than the MQ?

And I heard the news whereas I hadn't finished looting his body. Creepy.

You're a bit fucking slow with your looting there, then. It's not just that he stops talking, but others fill in for him. It's a nice touch.

I also loved the fact that he kept calling my character a mass murderer on the radio, but when I came to his studio, he was all sugar and sweeties.

Why wouldn't he? He needs you to do stuff for him.

Short variant:

Sand box RPG > Shooter

What a revelation!

Short Variant:

Hamster: "Action game == shoot stuff on rails!"

 

[Hamster]

Short variant:

Sand box RPG > Shooter

What a revelation!

Short Variant:

Hamster: "Action game == shoot stuff on rails!"

Pretty much. Not all action games, but standart shooters like Half-Life 2 are not expected to be anything more.
There is not much sense in comparing games outsides of their genres, and all your reasons why Half-Life 2 is inferior to F3 are not relevant to HF2's genre, these games should not be compared at all.

 

[Twinfalls]

So we are not allowed to compare HL2 with Stalker then. Thanks for the comedy, Hamster.

 

[Ogg]

Are you stuck with her to the same extent as Alyx and her irritating-as-fuck father? Which of the 'friendly' characters in HL2 can you kill, or at least refuse to co-operate with? Is there other stuff you can do in HL2 other than the MQ?

Actually, I didn't play HL2. Scripted FPS is not for me. But as far as Lyons is concerned, you're stuck with her for half of the main quest yes. And I don't see any fucking reason for it.

You're a bit fucking slow with your looting there, then. It's not just that he stops talking, but others fill in for him. It's a nice touch.

I swear I heard the news of his death less than a second after I had killed him. What I would have considered a nice touch would have been if one of the dozens of paladins waiting downstairs had understood that I was the one who killed the dj.

Why wouldn't he? He needs you to do stuff for him.

I would at least have liked to be allowed to call him a douche before shooting him in the neck.

 

[Hamster]

So we are not allowed to compare HL2 with Stalker then. Thanks for the comedy, Hamster.

Of course you are allowed to compare F3 and Stalker to anything you want, even Transport Tycoon (what a piece of shit, no dialogue at all, only some bullshit trains and trucks), to show how awesome it is.
But if any of the retards here will even dare to compare F3 to F1 to show how F3 sucks balls, they are completely wrong!
Thanks for the comedy, Twinfalls

 

[Twinfalls]

I would at least have liked to be allowed to call him a douche before shooting him in the neck.

Well, you should have used the flame gun on his face instead - that's sort of like calling someone a douche.

 

[Ogg]

I would at least have liked to be allowed to call him a douche before shooting him in the neck.

Well, you should have used the flame gun on his face instead - that's sort of like calling someone a douche.

Tbh, I used the flame sword. Oblivion with guns is far better without guns.

 

[Twinfalls]

So we are not allowed to compare HL2 with Stalker then. Thanks for the comedy, Hamster.

Of course you are allowed to compare F3 and Stalker to anything you want, even Transport Tycoon (what a piece of shit, no dialogue at all, only some bullshit trains and trucks), to show how awesome it is.

I was told by a few posters that as an action game, FO3 was inferior to the bigger name action titles. I pointed out why this was not the case. Or did you not read much of the thread before posting?

But if any of the retards here will even dare to compare F3 to F1 to show how F3 sucks balls, they are completely wrong!

No, pretty much most comparisons to F1 have been spot-on. But as has been pointed out about three thousand times, F3 is not a Fallout game. We've been talking about it on its own merits - or as an action game like HL2, in case you'd already forgotten.

Thanks for the comedy, Twinfalls

You're too kind, Mr Hope.

 

[Hamster]

I am forced to agree with skyway

when RPGs can't even meet your standards!

Of all standards Codex RPG standards are at their lowest right now.

Damn, you are actually right, i just discovered that to be good a RPG, game must have more roleplaying elements than Half-Life 2 .

 

[Hamster]

I was told by a few posters that as an action game, FO3 was inferior to the bigger name action titles.

In context of HL2, "action game" means shooting stuff, nothing more. It's hard to imagine F3 beating HL2 in this department.

 

[Twinfalls]

I think reading comprehension has been the single greatest decline factor. A good action game, today, needs to break away from railroading.

There's plenty that HL2 does better than FO3. The physics puzzles are a terrific realisation of Trespasser's original ideas. The game is slicker overall, has some better (from what I've seen so-far) set-piece battles, and there's the vehicle sections which are fun, if repetitive. But it's the overall experience of FO3's action which so far trumps it. And this is due to the context in which the action is set. The fact that you know you have so many different options, different paths to leave or circumvent, this is what makes it all better, even as far as action goes. But anyway, I'm sure a million people will jump on me tonight and tell me how great Crysis is.

 

[Shannow]

I am forced to agree with skyway

when RPGs can't even meet your standards!

Of all standards Codex RPG standards are at their lowest right now.

Damn, you are actually right, i just discovered that to be good a RPG, game must have more roleplaying elements than Half-Life 2 .

Oh noes. FO1 had more RPG elements than HL2!

EDIT:

True.

Tell me about it. Does it have skill-checks like this one? I note a 'lack of polish' is complained about FO3 in this thread. Is Stalker super-polished?

To be frank, yes, it is more polished. I had a lot less fun with Stalker (invisible enemies, useless sidequests, respawning enemies) and it is no RPG and thus has no skill checks.
As an free roaming action game it certainly felt more polished (super-polished: does such a game exist?) than FO3. If exploration + good gameplay is what you are looking for (and RPG elements aren't as important) you might want to give it a try.

 

[Edward_R_Murrow]

So, Andyman (locue?), planning on paying Bethesda any money for giving you a game you played right through to the end?

Morality squad go! Beat that dead horse and de-rail this shitfest more.

And illogical as hell arguments coming on through.

As an action game it's miles better than the two biggies that get cited

Interesting claim.

Half Life 2, because it is not railroaded like that game - you can roam anywhere around the place

So it's a better action game....because it's a better sandbox RPG? Odd qualifications, no?

I have far more options available to deal with fights

Shoot, sneak, run. Sort of. But I'm sure you mean all the oh so different weapons, right? Because a small graphically change and some tweaked stats are totally better than a pure FPS with a highly varied arsenal.

with far more consequences for my decisions (eg changing weapons can take a serious chunk of time, depending on the weapon. No insta-arming of a rocket launcher)

Uh I'm pretty sure most modern shooters have varied ready and reload times for weapons. I mean, fucking Halo does for crying out loud. But I'm sure this is another revolutionary feature by Bethesda.

there are not the endless convenient-and-spookily-appropriate weapons caches

Uh....that's contrary to what I'm hearing. I've heard ammo is all over the place, but that it's the weapon degradation that tends to be a limiting factor. But feel free to ignore this and rail on a design feature that is essentially a necessary evil for most FPS unless you go the Halo route.

the characters have real dialogues with options, and the setting and especially characters are better

Wow.....this is totally a qualification for a good action game. I mean....I couldn't talk to Doku with dialog trees in Ninja Gaiden nor use diplomacy on the Many in System Shock 2 so they must be shitty action games. Forget both of the aforementioned having tight action, adrenaline pumping fight sequences, and rewarding combat....nope those don't matter when judging something as an action game...it's features from other genres. It's a good thing people think like you, so that the mark of a good RPG now is real-time combat and mediocre first-person shooter combat.

(Alyx and her father are two people I'd love to shoot for their insufferable goody-goodiness, but cannot. I am trapped with them the whole fucking way).

No argument here.

But I've played Far Cry and that was very poor. A tech demo with utterly feeble story mechanics. I don't expect the latest to be all that different, but I'm sure that poster earlier in this thread just loves the animations.

And here's where you pretty much show your hand. Here's what it runs down to;

Either

-You have shit taste in action games.
-You have shit-all idea what defines an action game.
-You judge how well a game fits into one genre by how much it takes from others.
-All of the above.

See, based on your qualifications for why Fallout 3 is a fantastic action game things get goofy.

You say;

-No railroading
-Multiple solutions
-Consequences for your actions
-No immersion-breaking ammo caches
-Dialog trees
-Good characters
-Robust story

make a good action game. This would mean Fallout is a great action game. Morrowind could also fit in here. And Arcanum. Fact is, you're judging somethings merit in one area by it's merit in another area. You're basically pulling the same shit journos pull when they 10/10 stuff like Oblivion and call it a great RPG for all the action elements and ignore poor RPG elements. If you claim something to be a good action game, don't defend it by listing how well it does on RPG elements.

I can believe that Fallout 3 could be a moderately entertaining sandbox romp with some light RPG elements and a deep coating of Bethesda's idiotic writing and moronic design choices based on stuff from VD and others. Maybe worth my time if my insider connection can get me a free 360 copy (so I can blow the rest on booze to help with the "it's not Fallout" mental block), but a great action game? Please.

Also in before Codex old-guard circle-jerk committee likely comes in to your defense.

Edit:

A good action game, today, needs to break away from railroading.

No disagreement here, but it needs the fundamentals first. And I don't think you play enough action games to understand them.

 

[kris]

with far more consequences for my decisions (eg changing weapons can take a serious chunk of time, depending on the weapon. No insta-arming of a rocket launcher) there are not the endless convenient-and-spookily-appropriate weapons caches,

Let me begin with saying I have no clue in how you can say the game is fantastic taking in all the flaws it do have. I take it you don't care about writing to begin with.

As for for weapon caches. They are everywhere in F3, everywhere. It makes sense that raiders have a cache at their base. But ammo in every base/house/subway(!) just lying around?

Consequences for actions ain't much. Not with insta-heal and a failed AI. Generally you can just hide behind a tree and change weapons. Corners are game winners.

 

[Chefe]

I just had a few more hours worth of fun in Fallout 3. I managed to escape that subway tunnel I was in before. It took a few times because there were raiders on the surface who were pretty quick to notice me if I came up.

I popped up and caught the attention of one of them. Thankfully, all three were pretty well spread out, so he decided to investigate on his own. I crouched and waited in the corner of the stairwell, and gave him four shots to the right arm when he turned the corner. He dropped his shot gun, and I was able to finish him off.

I went and picked up the shotgun off of his corpse. The gunfight had alerted the other raiders, so can you guess what I did? Shotguns are very effective at dealing with raider skulls.

Well, I ran out of ammo on that, so when I emerged I took off like a rabbit just incase any other raiders were hanging out. All of a sudden... I hear a BOOM and a flash of light.

One raider was hanging around with a rocket launcher.

I high tailed it to Megaton, needless to say.

Of course, this was all made even more difficult seeing as how I only had radiated food to regain some health, the few bullets I had were picked off of dead raiders, and both my legs were crippled. Ouch.

 

[Imbecile]

By the sound of things its not as good an action game as the better action games, and not as a good an rpg as the better rpgs. No surprise there. The question is, does the mixing of genres make it more than the sum of its parts or less?