Any Fallout previews that aren't hype machines?

[Saxon1974]

I have read a few of the previews and its hard for me to believe that aren't any previewers that would take exception to some of the things Bethesda is doing with the game.

Its basically a brown nose fest, saying things like "Given Bethesda's track record, the fallout brand is in good hands" and stupid crap like that.

So, any out there that question not using turn based, or top down perspective?

Is the reason you dont see any of those because Bethesda has to give legal permission for them to preview and of course they would never allow anything done with an honest opinion to be printed?

 

[sheek]

A preview is a hype piece by definition. Beth shows the 'journalists' what it wants them to see, for them to pass on to us.

Anyway why do you care? We know it's not going to be turn-based or isometric, Pete Hiney proudly admitted it. Toddy decided on it, he's supposed to be 'head designer', and he can't deal with such difficult concepts - he'd have to admit he's a retard and pass the job on to someone else (the janitor would be a good choice). If you're somehow hoping to find a competent 'journalist' (aka someone who uses critical thought) you need to stop smoking whatever you're smoking.

 

[elander_]

Despite that idiot at gamespy that thinks all Fallout fans should disapear that site review has some interesting and positive clues about quests.

Howard commented, "We recognized that the Dark Brotherhood quest line is the best one in Oblivion, and we decided that since Emil did such a great job with the Dark Brotherhood, we're giving him all of Fallout 3 to play with."

Nice. And ...

Howard prefaced the demonstration by showing the amount of research and preproduction that went into Fallout 3, noting that Fallout was their target for tone and feel. He went on to comment, "Fallout 2 is also great, but it was a little too nod-nod-wink-wink in its jokes. Too many pop culture references, too much breaking of the fourth wall. The 'go ahead and kill me, I'll just reload and kill you' type of thing was a bit too far, and we prefer Fallout's still-funny, but toned-down humor in comparison." He also elaborated that Fallout 3 takes place thirty years after Fallout 2, but features a new protagonist in a new setting (Vault 101, a Vault underneath the ruins of Washington D.C.). He quickly added, "For our purposes, neither Fallout Tactics nor Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel happened."

And also ...

Hitting up the local bar, Pagliarulo initiates a conversation with a shifty-looking fellow named Burke. It seems that Burke really hates Megaton, considers it a blight on the landscape, and observes that the player has no ties, family or otherwise, to Megaton. He then makes a proposal: a significant sum of money if the player decides to install a device that will prime the inert bomb and therefore detonate it. Not only does Pagliarulo accept, but he tries the dialogue option that will use his Speech skill in an attempt to get even more money (he fails the roll).

Howard interjects to comment that this quest is another good example of player choice. Not only is the player choosing to either let the town stay intact and partake in whatever quests its denizens can give or wipe it out and lose any potential quest/karma opportunities, but the player can also play Simms and Burke against each other. "Emil could have gone back to Simms and say 'hey, this Burke guy just gave me a job to take this town out', or furthermore, after telling Simms, he can still go back to Burke and either say that the Sheriff is onto him, the quest is over, or pretend to work for Burke, but work for Simms in reality." Whew. But for demo purposes, Pagliarulo takes Burke's initial offer and heads down to the bomb itself to initiate part one of the quest.

 

[Darkflame]

Why don't you go ask this on their official forums and count how many seconds until your thread disappears without any explanation.

Then you'll know the answer.

 

[Saxon1974]

A preview is a hype piece by definition. Beth shows the 'journalists' what it wants them to see, for them to pass on to us.

Anyway why do you care? We know it's not going to be turn-based or isometric, Pete Hiney proudly admitted it. Toddy decided on it, he's supposed to be 'head designer', and he can't deal with such difficult concepts - he'd have to admit he's a retard and pass the job on to someone else (the janitor would be a good choice). If you're somehow hoping to find a competent 'journalist' (aka someone who uses critical thought) you need to stop smoking whatever you're smoking.

Well, I might still play it if its not a total FPS clickfest, havent decided yet. Ok, you cane flame me now...

Im hoping that it as least has some resemblance on an RPG.

 

[DarkUnderlord]

He went on to comment, "Fallout 2 is also great, but it was a little too nod-nod-wink-wink in its jokes. Too many pop culture references, too much breaking of the fourth wall. The 'go ahead and kill me, I'll just reload and kill you' type of thing was a bit too far, and we prefer Fallout's still-funny, but toned-down humor in comparison."

Yeah, jokes like NUCLEAR CATAPULTS and BARBIE HEAD TORPEDO TOASTER ROCK-ITS (Get it, "Rock it = rocket" did u c wut they did thar?) are much better.

Thanks Bethesda, U ROCK IT!!1 lulz

 

[elander_]

The Barby thing was a joke, i don't think you will find crates of Barby heads ammo in the game (i hope not). But what i wanted to highlight is "He quickly added, "For our purposes, neither Fallout Tactics nor Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel happened.".

 

[JarlFrank]

The Barby thing was a joke, i don't think you will find crates of Barby heads ammo in the game (i hope not). But what i wanted to highlight is "He quickly added, "For our purposes, neither Fallout Tactics nor Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel happened.".

He knows what the fans want to hear. It's all marketing and hype. Look at what they promised with Oblivion. All the previews and developer diaries looked so glorious. I found nothing of that in the real game. Remember the AI presentation? IT was a blatant lie.

I still don't trust anything they say.

 

[elander_]

I don't trust them either, they deserve the lack of trust. But it's still important they can acknowledge important issues and that we can crucify them later if they fail their promises.

 

[Jaime Lannister]

Somehow I doubt they'll let the Codex do a preview.

 

[kris]

The Barby thing was a joke, i don't think you will find crates of Barby heads ammo in the game (i hope not). But what i wanted to highlight is "He quickly added, "For our purposes, neither Fallout Tactics nor Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel happened.".

He knows what the fans want to hear. It's all marketing and hype. Look at what they promised with Oblivion. All the previews and developer diaries looked so glorious. I found nothing of that in the real game. Remember the AI presentation? IT was a blatant lie.

I still don't trust anything they say.

That quote most likely have nothing to do with them saying what anyone want to hear. I believe it is mostly about how it will tie in with the other games. Basically, what is canon. Also could be for story purposes.

 

[The_Nameless_Prick]

Guy's it's Bethesda, it should be obvious tizzle they is nuttin' but a giant hype machine with the gangsta shit that keeps ya hangin. Fiznuck, tha Jews hizzy they own bullshit 24/7 n NOBODY here complains `bout tizzle . Real niggas recognize the realness.. The real world is miznuch more important than a stupid video game . Ya fuck with us, we gots to fuck you up. Sure, Fallout was cool, when I was a kid with the S-N-double-O-P. The terrorists attacked tha WTC coz they see us as a Zionist state, whizzich is true. Wakes up upside yo head.

 

[AnalogKid]

Holy non-sequitur, batman! Thanks for the comprehensive and accurate geo-political analysis, TNP! :shock:

He knows what the fans want to hear. It's all marketing and hype. Look at what they promised with Oblivion. All the previews and developer diaries looked so glorious. I found nothing of that in the real game. Remember the AI presentation? IT was a blatant lie.

I still don't trust anything they say.

The "don't trust them" part is the most important thing everyone should always keep in mind in regards to Bethesda.

Having said that, let's say you've got two choices:

1) A lying, incompetent, marketing-driven company talks about a game who's description sucks
2)A lying, incompetent, marketing-driven company talks about a game who's description sounds promising

You're likely to get crap either way, but at least option 2 still has a teeeeeeny little bit of hope that they actually deliver what they describe, whereas option 1 is totally doomed.

From what I've seen in terms of quotes and preview info, I'd say Beth's description of Fallout3 is about 60% sucks and 40% sounds promising. Remember: you can't trust the "sounds promising" stuff to actually be in the game, but at least it's better than all suckage, all the time.

The key to happiness in life is lowered expectations. Just a little tip from your uncle lare...