Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[MorleyDev]

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Seriously. "Oh no you can't save him, he's already instantly dead from the radiation." "Well that was retarded of him, at least the colonel is dead then" nope.jpg

This one gets kinda maybe explained.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

If you watch, the colonel injects himself as he goes down. Still kinda bullshit and never really brought up again, especially since something that can save you from that kind of radiation would have come in useful...say when trying to get into the magically more radioactive than ground zero of a nuke Vault, or the ending of the game >.<

Why wouldn't he have more on him when you kill him? Why wouldn't you be able to find some during your rampage through the Enclave base?

It's yet another Voodoo shark, an attempt to plug a plot hole that creates another plot hole...

[Trapezohedron]

It should be noted (probably public knowledge now, I mean, it's a few years after NV's release after all) that NV borrows heavily from the plot of the original Fallout 3, Van Buren. So it gains points for plot, because yeah.

I don't know, I can't accept Fallout 3 as part of the canon. Feels so out-of-place when put side-by-side with its sequel and prequel brothers.

[MorleyDev]

It should be noted (probably public knowledge now, I mean, it's a few years after NV's release after all) that NV borrows heavily from the plot of the original Fallout 3, Van Buren. So it gains points for plot, because yeah.

Well Van Buren and New Vegas both had Chris Avellone as a designer, and John Sawley was a designer for Van Buren and Project Lead for New Vegas. New Vegas was their chance to put right what went wrong with Van Buren being cancelled

Personally I'm looking forward for Wasteland 2 more than any potential Fallout 4...even gave my $15 to the Kickstarter. So many of the key figures from Black Isles back together working on the sequel to the game that the Fallout series was a spiritual successor to? Shut up and take my money.

[MasterFancyPants]

Personally my problem with Fallout 3 was just the story. The bullshit that happens with your father's retarded actions that serve no purpose due to some strange contradictory logic just ruined the story for me.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Seriously. "Oh no you can't save him, he's already instantly dead from the radiation." "Well that was retarded of him, at least the colonel is dead then" nope.jpg

This reminds me of my first play through. War

I got to the end. I will summarize what happened: !WARNING MAJOR SPOILERS!

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Lyons: "Oh noes! Purity is going to explode for some reason that doesn't quite make sense if one of us doesn't go type in teh codes!"
Me: "Uh? What? Well whatever, I got this."
Lyon: "Whoever goes in will DIE!!!"
Me: "Ha. Yeah, right. Step back 'lil lady, let the MAN handle this!"
*Slips on Advanced Rad Suit and pops like 20 RadX*
*Walks in and enters code*
*Sudden Rad spike* "Meh, whatever" *starts eating Rad-Away (No worries, you should have a few hundred at this point)*
*Walks back to the door, the airlock won't cycle* "WHAT?!?"
*Runs around for 5 minutes looking for a way out until I run out of Rad-Away and die...*

Lyons must have been VERY upset about those derogatory comments. 

Also, when using Broken Steel, you can send Fwakes (who is immune to radiation) in, but if you do... You get a bad ending. That right, you get a bad ending just because you didn't FUCKING KILL YOURSELF. Bullshit, sacrifice without a reason isn't noble, it's stupid.

[MorleyDev]

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Also, when using Broken Steel, you can send Fwakes (who is immune to radiation) in, but if you do... You get a bad ending. That right, you get a bad ending just because you didn't FUCKING KILL YOURSELF. Bullshit, sacrifice without a reason isn't noble, it's stupid.

The bad ending in that situation was solely because they couldn't get Ron Perlman back to record a new ending. They should of just cut the voice-over out entirely, but oh well.

[DarkerDark]

I liked Fallout 3. Each of the settlements were memorable, if not practical. The game's art directors deserve some kudos for the work they did on the various outfits and such. I especially liked the look of the Super Mutants, the exposed sneering teeth and patchwork armor gave them a lot of character. I liked a lot of the characters in the game, characters like Butch, Moira, Mr. Burk, Jericho, Fawkes, Cerberus, and that one ghoul running the shop in Underworld who's all sexy at first until she turns around and reveals her grotesquely mutated face. They're all memorable characters.

What I didn't like about Fallout 3 was the story. It wasn't engaging at all, in fact, I barely remember any of the quests in the game other than the stuff I did in the Republic of Dave. For an RPG, that's bad. I enjoyed the game up until the point the game put the old plot chains on me and tried to force me to give a damn about the water purification plant and all my father's hard work. I didn't really care for the people of Capital Wasteland, and was sorely disappointed when I couldn't interact with the Enclave in any way other than killing them. I wanted to hear their take on things.

I never did end up completing the game, as I had more fun installing mods and running amok in the wasteland with my buddy Jericho than I did with following the main questline. I guess it's because none of the lore/fluff in Fallout 3 seemed like it was thought out. Whereas New Vegas' story and quests felt like they actually had some thought put into it. It made it interesting. Kudos to a game where I can actually see some reason behind the main villain's actions, even if it goes against my ideals. Also, New Vegas' main quest hooked me once I realized that I could actually influence the story with my actions. It made me feel like I was actually part of the world, rather than just an observer being guided along by an unseen hand.

As for Fallout 1. I ended up beating the game with an assault rifle and combat armor, and I loved it. I enjoyed Fallout 2 as well, but it seemed to go a little crazy with the powerful enemies (Wanamingos, aliens, deathclaws EVERYWHERE, power armored murder teams, etc.). It felt like you were forced to equip yourself with the best power armor and gauss weaponry you could find, and that sort of killed it for me.

[nenjin]

It should be noted (probably public knowledge now, I mean, it's a few years after NV's release after all) that NV borrows heavily from the plot of the original Fallout 3, Van Buren. So it gains points for plot, because yeah.

Well Van Buren and New Vegas both had Chris Avellone as a designer, and John Sawley was a designer for Van Buren and Project Lead for New Vegas. New Vegas was their chance to put right what went wrong with Van Buren being cancelled

Personally I'm looking forward for Wasteland 2 more than any potential Fallout 4...even gave my $15 to the Kickstarter. So many of the key figures from Black Isles back together working on the sequel to the game that the Fallout series was a spiritual successor to? Shut up and take my money.

I've read the NV devs defend the game by saying they got around 9 months to work on it after Bethesda gave them access to their tools. Not surprised really. They did an alright job with the time they had, but generally NV felt like FO3++. The story and the locations got a little more refined, but it was still weighed down by all the BS Bethesda shoveled into FO3. Not even hardcore mode (and I use the term hardcore very loosely) could make up for it.

[MorleyDev]

Yeah, Obsidian really need to get somebody in their company who can negotiate. As is they let themselves get bullied and stuck in these horrible situations. 9 months to work on New Vegas, 6 months for KotoR 2. Damnit Obsidian, backbone -_-

[Johuotar]

Kotor 2 in 6 months? Well that explains few things.

[mainiac]

I've read the NV devs defend the game by saying they got around 9 months to work on it after Bethesda gave them access to their tools. Not surprised really. They did an alright job with the time they had, but generally NV felt like FO3++. The story and the locations got a little more refined, but it was still weighed down by all the BS Bethesda shoveled into FO3. Not even hardcore mode (and I use the term hardcore very loosely) could make up for it.

I thought the story and setting were the only things holding FO3 back.  The core game engine wasn't exactly earth shattering but it was decently suited to the game and the setting.

What was FO:NV missing that more time would have solved?  I certainly wouldn't expect them to redo the engine or the like.

[DarkerDark]

I've read the NV devs defend the game by saying they got around 9 months to work on it after Bethesda gave them access to their tools. Not surprised really. They did an alright job with the time they had, but generally NV felt like FO3++. The story and the locations got a little more refined, but it was still weighed down by all the BS Bethesda shoveled into FO3. Not even hardcore mode (and I use the term hardcore very loosely) could make up for it.

I thought the story and setting were the only things holding FO3 back.  The core game engine wasn't exactly earth shattering but it was decently suited to the game and the setting.

What was FO:NV missing that more time would have solved?  I certainly wouldn't expect them to redo the engine or the like.

The whole area surrounding the strip felt unfinished to me.

[dizzyelk]

I liked Fallout 3. Each of the settlements were memorable, if not practical. The game's art directors deserve some kudos for the work they did on the various outfits and such. I especially liked the look of the Super Mutants, the exposed sneering teeth and patchwork armor gave them a lot of character. I liked a lot of the characters in the game, characters like Butch, Moira, Mr. Burk, Jericho, Fawkes, Cerberus, and that one ghoul running the shop in Underworld who's all sexy at first until she turns around and reveals her grotesquely mutated face. They're all memorable characters.

See, I completely disagree. Well, not the art team bit, they did pretty damn good. However, the characters in the game were all forgettable to me. Boring NPCs that look like crap, spouting boring nonsense I didn't care to listen to. Except Wadsworth. And his one saving grace was his jokes. Cause they were exactly the types of jokes I'd expect from a robot. And I do remember the settlements, I remember them making no damn sense whatsoever. Little Lamplight shoulda been wiped out by super mutants or raiders forever ago. Big Town shoulda had some kids running around in it. The idiots on the freeway overpass... yeah, I just didn't like them. The Republic of Dave was about the only settlement in the game that I really cared for. But as to remembering the settlements for the characters in them? Nope. For the wonderfully engaging sidequests? Nope. For the moral quandry, as I wondered what my character would do in this situation? Nope.

I've read the NV devs defend the game by saying they got around 9 months to work on it after Bethesda gave them access to their tools. Not surprised really. They did an alright job with the time they had, but generally NV felt like FO3++. The story and the locations got a little more refined, but it was still weighed down by all the BS Bethesda shoveled into FO3. Not even hardcore mode (and I use the term hardcore very loosely) could make up for it.

I thought the story and setting were the only things holding FO3 back.  The core game engine wasn't exactly earth shattering but it was decently suited to the game and the setting.

What was FO:NV missing that more time would have solved?  I certainly wouldn't expect them to redo the engine or the like.

See, I thought the engine was a big problem. They took one of the greatest RPG series of all times, relaunched the genre back when the first came out, and shoehorned it into a game that ended up a poor FPS with skills. Plus, if they had created a new engine from scratch, I would have been able to overlook most of the rest of my complaints about the game. But, since they didn't have to create a whole new engine, they could have afforded to spend more time coming up with characters that give you some reason to care about them, settlements and settings that make sense, and a plot that didn't seem so stupid.

[nenjin]

I've read the NV devs defend the game by saying they got around 9 months to work on it after Bethesda gave them access to their tools. Not surprised really. They did an alright job with the time they had, but generally NV felt like FO3++. The story and the locations got a little more refined, but it was still weighed down by all the BS Bethesda shoveled into FO3. Not even hardcore mode (and I use the term hardcore very loosely) could make up for it.

I thought the story and setting were the only things holding FO3 back.  The core game engine wasn't exactly earth shattering but it was decently suited to the game and the setting.

What was FO:NV missing that more time would have solved?  I certainly wouldn't expect them to redo the engine or the like.

Balance. That is and has always been my biggest issue with Bethesda's Fallouts. Food? Stupidly handled and poorly designed. Drinkables? Same story. Way too much ammo. Body damage? Laughable.

It's always been a thumb in my eye that Bethesda bothered to put 10 different kinds of food in the game....then slapped a pathetic HP+5 on all of it. It's shameful for someone who enjoys survival RPGs. NV made a token effort at making that stuff more meaningful, but it still took modders to really do the job. And even in Skyrim, I'm singing the same refrain. "You guys put food and drink in here like it's supposed to matter but NEVER FUCKING FOLLOW THROUGH ON IT."

So yeah. Dotting their I's and crossing their T's would have done a lot for my overall appreciation of both games.

[Tellemurius]

Wow looks like im the only one going to defend F2. Problems with the sequel was Black Isle was going down the toilet then and they needed to push everything out the door now and unfortunately the game wasn't completed there was alot of unused data in the game that the devs had to cutout due to timing. I will say this the game really did when more linear than F1 but the stories were still good for me to play. Also, there has been a mod floating around in the NMA forums for years called the F2 Restoration Project, a guy brought back all of the cutout stuff and stuck them back into the game with full on story. That mod itself brought back at least 12 more hours into that game and i highly suggest it to anyone.

[GlyphGryph]

Fallout 2 is the core of the best MMO I've ever played. So if I could only keep one of them, it would be that one.

Also, other people are important to me in RPGs, and FO2 had a larger and wider variety of interesting folks that would travel with you.

One of the main advantages Fallout 1 had, in my opinion, was that it felt finished. Which is... not exactly something FO2 managed to pull off. FO1 also had a better main story, but I think FO2 had some better local stories.

I liked the references, callbacks, and light hearted stuff, though, especially since they never actually played a role in the story.

I haven't gotten the chance to play NV, but from what I've heard I'd prefer it to FO3 (which I never finished).