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?

Metro

Arcane
Beg Auditor
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
27,792
It's no less of an RPG than Witcher.

* Mediocre/poor combat? Check.
* Borderline non-existent itemization/gear progression? Check.
* Shallow character customization? Check.
* Lack of meaningful choice and consequence? Check.

:M
 

sea

inXile Entertainment
Developer
Joined
May 3, 2011
Messages
5,698
Metro said:
It's no less of an RPG than Witcher.

* Mediocre/poor combat? Check.
* Borderline non-existent itemization/gear progression? Check.
* Shallow character customization? Check.
* Lack of meaningful choice and consequence? Check.

:M
Maybe not, but it's a significantly better RPG, and certainly a better game. Not every RPG has to have the deepest skill systems, most reactive world ever, or aspire to be Planescape in order to be enjoyable.
 

Captain Shrek

Guest
Sceptic said:
Actually I'm not even sure I'd consider it to be of the same type. They might be if you play AP as a popamole shooter, but there's no reason to do that.

Alpha protocol need not be enjoyed as a shooter at all. The C and C + the story is good enough. I would have liked it even better if the "tones" would actually ALL were beneficial in some major way, and not just bedding women.
 

Morkar Left

Guest
FO3 is better than Oblivion but that isn't saying much. FO3 was a shit game with shit execution in almost every way especially with its nonsensical npcs and environments.
That aside with FWE and a couple of additional mods it became a modest running around and collecting loot sandbox survival arpg. But you should shut up your brain when you talk to npcs and don't ever try to make sense to the environment. It has the feel of a bad c-movie in that regard.
 

Gord

Arcane
Joined
Feb 16, 2011
Messages
7,049
OSK said:
-EXPERIENCE THE THRILL OF KILLING THE OWNER OF AN EXPENSIVE TOWER IN FRONT OF HIS GUARDS WITH NO CONSEQUENCES

Now let's do something unheard of and be fair:

In FO2 you could kill the fucking president by using the stupid super-stimpak exploit. Because yes, it's perfectly inconspicuous if someone dies after you repeatedly injected him with huge syringes.

I think Fallout 3's biggest problems (for me at least) are:
-It's done by different people whose interpretation of the setting is different from the original team
-It's using first person real-time mechanics, which is an inherently difficult system for rpgs.
-The setting is in some parts not making much sense (like e.g. Canterbury Commons, or the other vaults, where in some cases the destruction seems to have only happened a few months or at most years ago although it's supposed to be caused by the experiments conducted there 200 years ago)
-quality of writing is bad at times
-too many skill points make you jack-of-all-trades at high levels
-combat heavy gameplay and open world, freeplay approach brakes item progression (for much better solution see Gothic series)

What I did like:
All in all a nicely done world to explore (and much more believable than Oblivion)
Some very atmospheric locations
Some quests were actually good
This may not be Bethesdas doing, but it still helps: there are a lot of nice mods

But maybe I'm just easily amused.
 

Konjad

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Nov 3, 2007
Messages
17,906
Location
Potatoland
Strap Yourselves In Codex Year of the Donut Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2 Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
sea said:
Metro said:
It's no less of an RPG than Witcher.

* Mediocre/poor combat? Check.
* Borderline non-existent itemization/gear progression? Check.
* Shallow character customization? Check.

* Lack of meaningful choice and consequence? Check.

:M
Maybe not, but it's a significantly better RPG, and certainly a better game. Not every RPG has to have the deepest skill systems,most reactive world ever, or aspire to be Planescape in order to be enjoyable.

:smug:
 

Jasede

Arcane
Patron
Sad Loser
Joined
Jan 4, 2005
Messages
24,790
Insert Title Here RPG Wokedex Codex Year of the Donut I'm very into cock and ball torture
If you discuss FO3 and arrive at a positive opinion you're a dumbass.

If you discuss NV and arrive at a positive opinion while claiming constantly how terrible the engine is and how it could have been better, you're a good guy, though.

At least in my funny world.
 

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
27,941
Sceptic said:
To be fair your review was slightly schizophrenic. The main body goes into great detail about exactly what's wrong with every aspect of the game, with the only sign of anything good being with the quests...
I beg to differ.

I said that exploration and side quests are the strongest aspects of the game, which is pretty much the sandbox experience and the "good for what it is" part. As a Fallout-like game, Fallout 3 sucks. As a sandbox game with guns and actiony combat, it's fairly entertaining.

... but even there there's some odd statements, such as when you describe the first half of the MQ as "the best part", yet in the very same sentence you make an allusion to the "middle aged guy" bit
The main quest is retarded. Searching for your father, i.e. traveling to different locations, is the best part of the main quest because it plays to the game's strength - exploration. Asking if anyone's seen a middle aged guy is beyond retarded, but doesn't affect the exploration, does it?

And then the concluding remarks are that it's actually a "good and entertaining action RPG" if you can block out the Fallout bit. Wait what? you've just spent three long pages telling me in in-depth detail why it's in fact neither good nor particularly entertaining! But now it compares favorably with Two Worlds and Assassin's Creed, and Morrowind, and even Gothic (!)
Yes. Even Gothic (!). Gasp.

Now, I know that Codex loves its guilty pleasures with a passion of a fat kid who's just smelled his first pussy, but hear me out:

Gothic's best features are setting/atmosphere and choosing a faction. Unfortunately, these features are sitting atop an awful fucking "base" game with a crappy character system, atrocious inventory, mediocre combat, painful dialogues, no dialogue skills, fucked up (due to high stat requirements) and limited (no armor) item distribution which makes exploring less rewarding and somewhat pointless, and fondness for grinding.

What's even worse is that the features that make the game worth playing start falling apart fairly soon. Once the choice is made, it becomes irrelevant and the game turns into a dumb, linear, poorly designed action RPG that fails to give you any reason to keep playing the game (kinda like Risen does in the final chapters).
 

Daemongar

Arcane
Joined
Nov 21, 2010
Messages
4,462
Location
Wisconsin
Codex Year of the Donut
Gord said:
What I did like:
All in all a nicely done world to explore (and much more believable than Oblivion)
Some very atmospheric locations
Some quests were actually good
This may not be Bethesdas doing, but it still helps: there are a lot of nice mods

But maybe I'm just easily amused.
Well, as one who loves RPG's this game is kind of the rub where the real world meets Codex-land. Fallout 3 was a good game (obligatory stop reading here), not a good RPG. People I have spoken with who have no other RPG exposure than consoles, Zelda games, and all that liked Fallout 3. They liked it as a game, and it had a lot of fighting, exploration, stories, and quests in a very unique, well laid out setting. Someone walking in off the street without ever hearing of FO1/FO2 could enjoy FO3. That's how it is. That's reality.

It is not what the codex would want in a FO3, though. FO3 would have to have a better RPG engine, meaningful stats and choices, logical outcomes, some manner of integration with the original FO1/FO2 backstory, the ability to kill everything that moves including children on the ship, ability scaling, plus lots, lots more.

Some would argue strongly that the success of FO3 played a part in the design of DA2, with the dropping of RPG elements to jaw-dropping levels. The belief is that Bethesda/Bioware COULD make a mass market RPG which appeals to a broader market, but they choose not to. They chose to cater to casual and console gamers.

I am starting to understand the Codex point of view: People like me buying all Bioware games, and all Bethesda games, including all expansions are pissed off. FO3 is good, but my dollars were assumed. They paid lip service to my needs and worked heavily on broader appeal. Well, the Codex rebels. Core voters who are feeling alienated.
 

1eyedking

Erudite
Joined
Dec 10, 2007
Messages
3,591
Location
Argentina
Vault Dweller said:
1eyedking can't into reading?
I actually didn't read much of what Racofer posted, I just assumed it was the review from VD because of my over-developed intuitive skills.

Vault Dweller said:
I said that exploration and side quests are the strongest aspects of the game, which is pretty much the sandbox experience and the "good for what it is" part. As a Fallout-like game, Fallout 3 sucks. As a sandbox game with guns and actiony combat, it's fairly entertaining.
Which is pretty much what I attacked a couple of years ago. It sucks as an FPS since the mechanics are vastly inferior to other FPS, and it sucks as an exploration game since it lacks proper writing, atmosphere, art direction and combat challenge.

I know it's cool to be super-edgy and play the enlightened positivist role and find supposedly redeeming qualities in a game that the mob will probably blindly lynch so as to come off as edgy (as well), but fortunately some people are left in these forums who still have some memory and can remember good FPS mechanics (e.g.: Counter-Strike) and good exploration games (e.g.: the Gothics), which's designs cannot be found anywhere in F3.
 

sea

inXile Entertainment
Developer
Joined
May 3, 2011
Messages
5,698
Jasede said:
If you discuss FO3 and arrive at a positive opinion you're a dumbass.

If you discuss NV and arrive at a positive opinion while claiming constantly how terrible the engine is and how it could have been better, you're a good guy, though.

At least in my funny world.
The weird thing for me about New Vegas is that while it's a competent game (albeit on a crappy engine), I don't find it particularly memorable or excellent in any way. The world design is nice, there are some neat environments and weapons, but there's nothing about it that feels exceptional. Obsidian took Fallout 3, balanced it out, fixed the problems with story and world design, improved the skill system, etc., but New Vegas really didn't leave that "something" that made it stand out for me. It doesn't help that while some aspects of the game are quite good, others, like the endless fetch quests, boring characters with terrible phoned-in voice performances, clear loose ends left hanging due to lack of time etc. really drag it down for me. I honestly think Fallout 3 will end up staying in my mind far longer than New Vegas ever will, because at least Fallout 3 was different and stood out. New Vegas is just more of the same, and while a far better game in the end, it's also just sort of "meh".
 
Joined
May 6, 2009
Messages
1,874,408
Location
Glass Fields, Ruins of Old Iran
1eyedking said:
I know it's cool to be super-edgy and play the enlightened positivist role and find supposedly redeeming qualities in a game

smug.jpg


You know you're in the Codex when being somewhat positive qualifies as super-edgy
 

Sceptic

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Mar 2, 2010
Messages
10,824
Divinity: Original Sin
Captain Shrek said:
I would have liked it even better if the "tones" would actually ALL were beneficial in some major way, and not just bedding women.
Well they unlock two additional endings, allow you to skip some boss fights, make one other boss fight easier, can lead to the loss of some of your handlers (along with their bonus)... it's definitely not just for romances.

Vault Dweller said:
The main quest is retarded. Searching for your father, i.e. traveling to different locations, is the best part of the main quest because it plays to the game's strength - exploration. Asking if anyone's seen a middle aged guy is beyond retarded, but doesn't affect the exploration, does it?
Fair enough, I now see what you mean. I'm not sure I agree, as I didn't find the exploration to be good enough due to many locations just not being interesting enough to explore (and on this particular point Morrowind exploration was an order of magnitude better), but I didn't play the game as much as you did so I won't argue this particular point.

1eyedking said:
it sucks as an exploration game since it lacks proper writing
wat
 

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
27,941
1eyedking said:
Vault Dweller said:
1eyedking can't into reading?
I actually didn't read much of what Racofer posted, I just assumed it was the review from VD because of my over-developed intuitive skills.
http://rpgcodex.net/phpBB/viewtopic.php ... 33#1644633
This? Now you're just being mean.

Which is pretty much what I attacked a couple of years ago. It sucks as an FPS since the mechanics are vastly inferior to other FPS, and it sucks as an exploration game since it lacks proper writing, atmosphere, art direction and combat challenge.
I disagree that it sucks as a sandbox game. It's definitely not the best, but it's far from the worst. It does exploration much better than New Vegas, for example.

I know it's cool to be super-edgy and play the enlightened positivist role...
On the Codex? Imagine that.

... and find supposedly redeeming qualities in a game that the mob will probably blindly lynch so as to come off as edgy (as well), but fortunately some people are left in these forums who still have some memory and can remember good FPS mechanics (e.g.: Counter-Strike) and good exploration games (e.g.: the Gothics), which's designs cannot be found anywhere in F3.
How fortunate indeed.
 

Jasede

Arcane
Patron
Sad Loser
Joined
Jan 4, 2005
Messages
24,790
Insert Title Here RPG Wokedex Codex Year of the Donut I'm very into cock and ball torture
sea said:
Jasede said:
If you discuss FO3 and arrive at a positive opinion you're a dumbass.

If you discuss NV and arrive at a positive opinion while claiming constantly how terrible the engine is and how it could have been better, you're a good guy, though.

At least in my funny world.
The weird thing for me about New Vegas is that while it's a competent game (albeit on a crappy engine), I don't find it particularly memorable or excellent in any way. The world design is nice, there are some neat environments and weapons, but there's nothing about it that feels exceptional. Obsidian took Fallout 3, balanced it out, fixed the problems with story and world design, improved the skill system, etc., but New Vegas really didn't leave that "something" that made it stand out for me. It doesn't help that while some aspects of the game are quite good, others, like the endless fetch quests, boring characters with terrible phoned-in voice performances, clear loose ends left hanging due to lack of time etc. really drag it down for me. I honestly think Fallout 3 will end up staying in my mind far longer than New Vegas ever will, because at least Fallout 3 was different and stood out. New Vegas is just more of the same, and while a far better game in the end, it's also just sort of "meh".

I think you get it.

It's a good game.
It's not memorable, though. And while the writing is definitely competent, it won't stay with me like KOTOR 2 or Mask of the Betrayer or Planescape will.

Still, it's "good"- and of how many RPGs can this be said these days? I'm so desperate for a good one I'm considering getting Drakensang: River of Time!
 

1eyedking

Erudite
Joined
Dec 10, 2007
Messages
3,591
Location
Argentina
Vault Dweller said:
I disagree that it sucks as a sandbox game. It's definitely not the best, but it's far from the worst. It does exploration much better than New Vegas, for example.
Mmm, no, to be honest, no. I can't recall a single location or character that had memorable design or dialogue. Megaton is a piece of shit when compared to Shady Sands (which is pretty shitty but at least it's coherent, i.e.: it makes exploration pleasurable since it constructs verisimilitude), and no place like The Glow is to be found.

Harold is now a fucking talking tree, The Enclave mainframe is nowhere near as interesting as The Master, nor do you anywhere find someone who instills as much hatred as First Bitchizen Lynette. So if there's nothing interesting to explore, it's a good exploration game because you hike a lot of empty locations? If that's good gaming material then Todd Howard is a goddamn genius.

Also don't get me started on level-scaling, combat and VATS.

Jasede said:
F3:NV is a good game.
I wouldn't say good, but OK. Not memorable means exactly that. I know it's kind of harsh since the guys at Obsidian were probably trying their best, but the end result just doesn't get anywhere near a good RPG's feet.
 

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
27,941
Fallout was not an exploration game.
 

1eyedking

Erudite
Joined
Dec 10, 2007
Messages
3,591
Location
Argentina
So exploration game = hiking simulator? OK, then.

As far as I know the only good 'exploration' game out there is Gothic 2, and part of what made it great was this sense of dread the wilderness had (which was tied in to character progression and difficult combat). In F3 you could kill minigun-wielding super-mutants, centaurs and behemoths at level 1, so that kills that kind of immersion right there (G3 suffers from something similar, for the record).

There was also this 'stories-bones-tell' factor that was awesome as well: props and locations arranged in a way that told a story of what may have happened there a long time ago. F3 had something of the sort but it was merely 'cool stuff' littered around that had no sense of belonging to the bigger picture of the game.

And since exploration is *all* about immersion (the good kind), that leaves us with a game that is utterly deficient at pulling the discerning gamer into its universe.
 

Gord

Arcane
Joined
Feb 16, 2011
Messages
7,049
Daemongar said:
Well, as one who loves RPG's this game is kind of the rub where the real world meets Codex-land. Fallout 3 was a good game (obligatory stop reading here), not a good RPG. People I have spoken with who have no other RPG exposure than consoles, Zelda games, and all that liked Fallout 3. They liked it as a game, and it had a lot of fighting, exploration, stories, and quests in a very unique, well laid out setting. Someone walking in off the street without ever hearing of FO1/FO2 could enjoy FO3. That's how it is. That's reality.

It is not what the codex would want in a FO3, though. FO3 would have to have a better RPG engine, meaningful stats and choices, logical outcomes, some manner of integration with the original FO1/FO2 backstory, the ability to kill everything that moves including children on the ship, ability scaling, plus lots, lots more.

Oh; I fully agree with that. FO3 isn't much of a rpg. Probably after Morrowind (if they ever had) Bethesda stopped doing proper rpgs. They are doing action-adventure-hiking-games with stats. Or something.
But I had fun with their games nevertheless.

I had played FO1/2, too. Somehow I still never felt as betrayed or let down by Bethesdas version of Fallout as others did.

Btw.: I liked Megaton. Should have been the major quest hub IMHO.
 

Jack_Deth

Augur
Patron
Joined
Dec 13, 2002
Messages
264
Insert Title Here
Oblivion was more of a hiking and spelunking simulator than Fallout 3 was.

Enjoyed Fallout 3 but I didn't have too high of expectations going into it as others did. Having played Oblivion, how could anyone expect Fallout 1 or 2? The main quest was a joke - Project Purity my ass. New Vegas is far superior though still comes with its problems.
 

shihonage

Subscribe to my OnlyFans
Patron
Joined
Jan 10, 2008
Messages
7,157
Location
location, location
Bubbles In Memoria
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.

I'm in the same boat. Somehow Fallout 3 dipped the expectations so low that Fallout:NV is now considered a "good game". It's like people forget how much both of them are missing.

The funniest thing to me is that all the Fallout 3 noobs usually end up praising the plot/setting/features that were aped directly from the original game, which is really a testament to the strength of the original vision that managed to survive being grinded through a reboot by a mediocre team.

Also 1eyedking you're fighting the good fight :salute:
 

ZbojLamignat

Educated
Joined
Apr 29, 2010
Messages
382
Clockwork Knight said:
FO2 had better writing, but in terms of derpness it is a tie
Don't know what you're smoking, but F3 had NPCs (Moira, 3dog) and quests (survival guide, emo vampires) that were more derp than whole derp stuff in F2 x 145678. And that's excluding the fact that the whole world did not make any goddamn sense and it was basically the game equivalent of Terminator 4 - nonsense overdrive.

As soon as I've seen the early build of this game in early 2008 (I was working at a local game localization/distribution company that does bethesda titles) I got the impression that it is simply a trolling attempt and a big fuck you to the gamers and industry.
 

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