Posted January 30, 2009
Posted February 03, 2009
Well, as someone who just 'enjoys' fallout games, and is not a crazy fan of any of them...I think Fallout 3 is a decent game. I also thought Fallout 1 and 2 where decent games, though not the best ever made (they WERE buggy as hell, after all).
But Fallout 3 got boring for me way faster than Fallout 2 did. Just kinda felt like...I ran out of stuff to do. By the time I was done with the short main story, I had most of the weapons, crazy power armor...I could blow away any badg guy in the game easily. Hopefully the bonus packs or whatever they're called will help with that, and they'll make it more difficult when they raise the level cap.
One more thing; I've noticed that whenever a post apocalyptic movie or game is updated, the new version just doesn't have that special feeling of the old one. I noticed this when I was watching 'Death Race', an update to the old 'Death Race 2000'. For all intents and purposes I should have enjoyed the new one better; it had better effects, plenty of violence, acting and storyline at least on par with the original. But I didn't. It just didn't 'do it' for me.
And I think that's because, no matter how much they tried to gritty it up, it still looked polished. No matter what they do to it otherwise, it's still a slick and polished effort, not a dirty and grimy one.
But Fallout 3 got boring for me way faster than Fallout 2 did. Just kinda felt like...I ran out of stuff to do. By the time I was done with the short main story, I had most of the weapons, crazy power armor...I could blow away any badg guy in the game easily. Hopefully the bonus packs or whatever they're called will help with that, and they'll make it more difficult when they raise the level cap.
One more thing; I've noticed that whenever a post apocalyptic movie or game is updated, the new version just doesn't have that special feeling of the old one. I noticed this when I was watching 'Death Race', an update to the old 'Death Race 2000'. For all intents and purposes I should have enjoyed the new one better; it had better effects, plenty of violence, acting and storyline at least on par with the original. But I didn't. It just didn't 'do it' for me.
And I think that's because, no matter how much they tried to gritty it up, it still looked polished. No matter what they do to it otherwise, it's still a slick and polished effort, not a dirty and grimy one.
Posted February 03, 2009
I am disappointed with F3. It is not that it is a bad game. It is just that I can't play any game in 1st person mode or 3rd person mode (if zoom in too much) more than ~ 5 minutes. I will get motion sickness and I hate that feeling. Honestly, I haven't play any FPS games before due to this reason.
I wish it was released in the same mode like in NWV I & II, Diablo I, II & III, or BG I & II, to name a few.
I wish it was released in the same mode like in NWV I & II, Diablo I, II & III, or BG I & II, to name a few.
Posted February 03, 2009
The absolute worst part of Fallout 3?
The dialogue.
At it's best, it doesn't make you flinch. As it's worst, it is horrendous and looks like somebody just threw outputs from RandomSentenceGenerator.exe around.
In addition, the dialogue for many of the skillchecks have answers that don't even make sense, or are just plain retarded. Case in point:
Three Dog: I fight the good fight with my voice!
Player: [Intelligence] Ah, so you fight the good fight with your voice, eh?
Three Dog: I can see that you are very smart.
@_@
The dialogue.
At it's best, it doesn't make you flinch. As it's worst, it is horrendous and looks like somebody just threw outputs from RandomSentenceGenerator.exe around.
In addition, the dialogue for many of the skillchecks have answers that don't even make sense, or are just plain retarded. Case in point:
Three Dog: I fight the good fight with my voice!
Player: [Intelligence] Ah, so you fight the good fight with your voice, eh?
Three Dog: I can see that you are very smart.
@_@
Posted February 04, 2009
Posted February 04, 2009
aye, they did better than Oblivion that's for sure, but they could still make a lot of improvements and maybe even get some decent story/quests in the next fallout, pity i'm a pessimist
They need to hire better writers. Some of the dialogue is...........well..........lacking in depth so to say.
Posted February 05, 2009
At the behest of my co-workers, I obtained Fallout Tactics this week. I have never played a Fallout game before, so this is my first experience with the game. I played the first campaign mission, and have only been doing multiplayer with my roommate since then. My understanding is that FoT is sort of non-canonical when it comes to the Fallout games. How does it compare to Fo3 in this regard? What are major criticisms of the game? Is anyone else completely enthralled by the character point-based multiplayer system?
Since my primary interest is multiplayer, I guess I don't really care about dialogue or story or explorable regions or any of that... I'm not actually a Fallout fan, am I?
Since my primary interest is multiplayer, I guess I don't really care about dialogue or story or explorable regions or any of that... I'm not actually a Fallout fan, am I?
Posted February 05, 2009
I don't have FOT, but AFAIK, FOT is a strategy game that takes place in the Fallout universe. It'd be better to compare, well, Fallout 1 with Fallout 3 for better basis
Since you stated you have no interest in story/dialogue, then I guess you won't be interested in the first 2 Fallouts. Fallout 3 may spark something, since it's more of an offline MMORPG like Oblivion was, than a true RPG that Fallout 1 and 2 were
Since you stated you have no interest in story/dialogue, then I guess you won't be interested in the first 2 Fallouts. Fallout 3 may spark something, since it's more of an offline MMORPG like Oblivion was, than a true RPG that Fallout 1 and 2 were
Posted February 05, 2009
The multiplayer mechanism in FoT is the biggest draw for me. Actually, I am starting to find that the ONLY reason I play games any more is in contribution to my existing real-world relationships, so any game that does not incorporate LAN or Internet play is falling by the wayside. Tribes 2, Left 4 Dead, Supreme Commander, and now Fallout Tactics all fulfill this, and Fallout is the most intriguing to me at this juncture.
What's the point of doing battle in a post-apocalyptic wasteland unless you are battling someone you know? NPC's can't compliment you on an excellent tactical maneuver, then turn around and use it against you. They definitely can't meet you by the water-cooler at work and slap you on the back and talk about it for months to come. That is what I like about FoT.
What's the point of doing battle in a post-apocalyptic wasteland unless you are battling someone you know? NPC's can't compliment you on an excellent tactical maneuver, then turn around and use it against you. They definitely can't meet you by the water-cooler at work and slap you on the back and talk about it for months to come. That is what I like about FoT.
Posted February 05, 2009
but they don't call you a "ZOMG! H4X0R!" or "LOL NUB", and usually have a readable grammar and spelling, well if we don't consider Fallout 3 /kidding
i don't blame you for not liking singleplayer games, but sometimes i just want to relax or blow some steam off, and usually i don't want someone around; i just want to immerse myself in a well written story or have a nice challenge. don't get me wrong i like multiplayer games too (i'm quite fond of Team Fortress 2, and i'm consider gettin Left for dead too), it's just that some games work best in singleplayer and some not.
Also there are rumors that Interplay will bring out a MMORPG version of fallout, so maybe you're more appealed by that one