Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Has Fallout 3 become a legitimate topic of discussion?

Mister Arkham

Scholar
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
763
Location
Not buried deep enough
I don't think that the Codex's general consensus about the game has changed, so much as that the couple of years between release and now has given more people the distance needed to talk about it and judge it without all of the initial bile coming back up.

Nobody seems to have changed their mind about the game. It's the difference between talking about the game by saying, "I HAYTE IT BECAUSE IT DUMB SHIT!" and talking about it by saying, "I didn't like the game because of this, this, and this; which I think are poor design decisions for the following reasons..." Maybe that's decline for you, but I'd much rather see reasoned discussion than the vitriolic hatestorms that the Codex has come to love.
 

Elzair

Cipher
Joined
Apr 7, 2009
Messages
2,254
Kalin said:
I think it is far more disturbing that so many of those who (rightfully) dislike Fallout 3 actually seem to think of New Vegas as a respectable game. Having played both, I really fail to see how one is better -or perhaps more aptly, less worse- than the other. They both suffer from scaled leveling, sub-par voice acting, simple and unintelligent dialogue options, cliché followers, lifeless towns, bland and unconvincing characters, a severe lack of proper background stories, boring combat and poorly made endings. The settings vary slightly, and some features have been tinkered with, but by and large, they are equally appalling.

What?! There does not seem to be any voice acting nearly as bad as Moira's. The dialogue options certainly seem to be on par with Fallout 1 & 2. Ditto with the followers. The towns certainly are not lifeless; most of them actually have a reason for being there; yes, sometimes they are a little deserted, but come on, it's a post-apocalyptic wasteland! I have not beaten it, but I assumed it has the standard Fallout ending. Plus, the game has a lot more content than the first two, and it has even more C&C. In many ways, Fallout: New Vegas is superior to Fallout 1 & 2.
 

Achilles

Arcane
Joined
Sep 5, 2009
Messages
3,425
Commissar Draco said:
Same reasons I liked AP: Dark Setting, intresting story, NPCs, C&C and fighting which was good for what it was.

Well that's the thing really, I've briefly played a couple of popamoles and it doesn't seem to me that ME2's combat was indeed good for what it was.

But anyway, the thread is about Fallout 3. It was better than Oblivion, had a decent amount of exploration (outside of DC) and a few really well-done quests. That's as far as I would go though, because the rest of the game is quite bad - especially combat.
 

1eyedking

Erudite
Joined
Dec 10, 2007
Messages
3,591
Location
Argentina
Kalin said:
I think it is far more disturbing that so many of those who (rightfully) dislike Fallout 3 actually seem to think of New Vegas as a respectable game. Having played both, I really fail to see how one is better -or perhaps more aptly, less worse- than the other. They both suffer from scaled leveling, sub-par voice acting, simple and unintelligent dialogue options, cliché followers, lifeless towns, bland and unconvincing characters, a severe lack of proper background stories, boring combat and poorly made endings. The settings vary slightly, and some features have been tinkered with, but by and large, they are equally appalling.

xemous said:
not only that "fallout" new vegas is considered a genuine fallout game



HAHHAHAHAHAAHAH !!
Amazing to find this kind of answers in the current state of these forums.

PS: that Vault Dweller review makes me die a little every time I see it.
 
Joined
May 6, 2009
Messages
1,876,055
Location
Glass Fields, Ruins of Old Iran
^Yeah, I wish there was more intelligent criticism like this

respectable game

less worse

sub-par

simple and unintelligent

cliché

lifeless

bland and unconvincing

severe lack of proper

boring

poorly made

equally appalling

genuine fallout game

HAHHAHAHAHAAHAH !!

oh god these strong arguments, I can almost taste the incline, uuuuuuungh

Serious_Business said:
Blackula said:
Fallout3_Thumb_04.jpg

Goddamn. This still cracks me up. I can just imagine the fat jaded codexer looking at this fuck's face that's screaming in absurd delight, and in turn quietly trembling in rage to type impotently their cold, hard dissaproval. This is great :lol:
 

1eyedking

Erudite
Joined
Dec 10, 2007
Messages
3,591
Location
Argentina
Elzair said:
What?! There does not seem to be any voice acting nearly as bad as Moira's. The dialogue options certainly seem to be on par with Fallout 1 & 2. Ditto with the followers. The towns certainly are not lifeless; most of them actually have a reason for being there; yes, sometimes they are a little deserted, but come on, it's a post-apocalyptic wasteland! I have not beaten it, but I assumed it has the standard Fallout ending. Plus, the game has a lot more content than the first two, and it has even more C&C. In many ways, Fallout: New Vegas is superior to Fallout 1 & 2.
Jesus F. Christ...

I still have trouble understanding how people can think of F3:NV as lively, or having voice acting *better* than F3. The mind boggles.
 

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
28,034
This is a very insensitive comment. How would YOU feel, Jaesun, if you've read an opinion that's different from yours?
 

Captain Shrek

Guest
An FO 3 topic. Great.

I have been meaning to give this game a try since I played FO: NV. I liked NV reasonably well. It wasn't as innovative as FO (well.... its a fucking sequel), but still was pretty enjoyable. Should I give FO 3 a try? I will if codex so recommended.
 

Jaesun

Fabulous Ex-Moderator
Patron
Joined
May 14, 2004
Messages
37,255
Location
Seattle, WA USA
MCA
Vault Dweller said:
This is a very insensitive comment. How would YOU feel, Jaesun, if you've read an opinion that's different from yours?

*GASP* I'd probably log out of the codex in pure rage and butthurt of course!

I was just curious what exact statement you stated in your review that makes 1eyedking sad.

Curious minds and all that....
 

Gord

Arcane
Joined
Feb 16, 2011
Messages
7,049
Mister Arkham said:
Nobody seems to have changed their mind about the game. It's the difference between talking about the game by saying, "I HAYTE IT BECAUSE IT DUMB SHIT!" and talking about it by saying, "I didn't like the game because of this, this, and this; which I think are poor design decisions for the following reasons..." Maybe that's decline for you, but I'd much rather see reasoned discussion than the vitriolic hatestorms that the Codex has come to love.

Wow, a voice of reason on the Codex! It's this rare moments that don't make me regret my registration. Or at least make me feel less dirty.
 

J_C

One Bit Studio
Patron
Developer
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Messages
16,947
Location
Pannonia
Project: Eternity Wasteland 2 Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag. Pathfinder: Wrath
1eyedking said:
I still have trouble understanding how people can think of F3:NV as lively, or having voice acting *better* than F3. The mind boggles.
Well your opinion is just as good as any other Codexer's. I feel the voiceacting is better in NV, you feel the opposite. It's a subjective thing.
 

Havoc

Cheerful Magician
Patron
Joined
Nov 1, 2009
Messages
5,520
Location
Poland
Grab the Codex by the pussy Insert Title Here RPG Wokedex Dead State Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Wasteland 2 Codex USB, 2014 Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 Pathfinder: Kingmaker Pathfinder: Wrath
J_C said:
1eyedking said:
I still have trouble understanding how people can think of F3:NV as lively, or having voice acting *better* than F3. The mind boggles.
Well your opinion is just as good as any other Codexer's. I feel the voiceacting is better in NV, you feel the opposite. It's a subjective thing.

House VA is great, also the radio guy.
 

sgc_meltdown

Arcane
Joined
May 8, 2003
Messages
6,000
Guys I didn't play DA2 so I don't know to what extent I would truly dislike it

hahahaha codex you will never know whether to hate my opinions on this issue
 

Commissar Draco

Codexia Comrade Colonel Commissar
Patron
Joined
Mar 6, 2011
Messages
20,856
Location
Привислинский край
Insert Title Here Strap Yourselves In Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2 Divinity: Original Sin 2
Captain Shrek said:
An FO 3 topic. Great.

I have been meaning to give this game a try since I played FO: NV. I liked NV reasonably well. It wasn't as innovative as FO (well.... its a fucking sequel), but still was pretty enjoyable. Should I give FO 3 a try? I will if codex so recommended.

For what reason? story? VA? dialogue? C&C? They're lot worse than in FNV. Horrible engine and sandbox experience are the same, only thing which is quite differend is setting, seeing capital of KWA desserted and in ruins is epic exspierence, but hardly worthy a playthrou so if you're that desperate play FNV again and send money to me. :salute:

and FNV is the good game, decent RPG and worthy replecment of FO3.
 

Captain Shrek

Guest
Commissar Draco said:
Captain Shrek said:
An FO 3 topic. Great.

I have been meaning to give this game a try since I played FO: NV. I liked NV reasonably well. It wasn't as innovative as FO (well.... its a fucking sequel), but still was pretty enjoyable. Should I give FO 3 a try? I will if codex so recommended.

For what reason? story? VA? dialogue? C&C? They're lot worse than in FNV. Horrible engine and sandbox experience are the same, only thing which is quite differend is setting, seeing capital of KWA desserted and in ruins is epic exspierence, but hardly worthy a playthrou so if you're that desperate play FNV again and send money to me. :salute:

and FNV is the good game, decent RPG and worthy replecment of FO3.

:salute: Great. Not playing FO 3.

Send money

As if I make donations to TPB.
 

Captain Shrek

Guest
Admiral jimbob said:
Might be too late, some sadist convinced him to play Mass Effect a couple of weeks ago.

Tears on my pillow. :( :(

Its such a relief that playing bad video games does not make one lose their heterosexuality.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom