Print

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

[Sean Mirrsen]

Btw, the game's final prerelease version for XBox360 was leaked not too long ago, and is currently being distributed through various p2p nets. As reported by AG.ru. Some people said they've already played for a while. Impressions are mixed, though they're few and can't be used to base an opinion on.

[Asehujiko]

If I, as a newcomer to this topic may ask a question:
Why are we talking about EA's buisness practices instead of Fallout 3?

[Sean Mirrsen]

Because apart from the leakage of the X360 version, and the derived pirate-y version impressions, there's really nothing to discuss. The game ain't out yet. We do now know it's going to be the same Oblivion, but with guns and nukes, and the remains of Fallout's RPG and combat systems. Why do the developers dislike crossing genres so much? What would they lose, had they made it a top-down RPG on the Oblivion engine, with optional FPS mode for walking around or fighting? OPTIONAL. It's more or less a finer rendition of STALKER now, without the Zone and the anomalies, but in pretty much the same setting.

[Asehujiko]

Because apart from the leakage of the X360 version, and the derived pirate-y version impressions, there's really nothing to discuss. The game ain't out yet. We do now know it's going to be the same Oblivion, but with guns and nukes, and the remains of Fallout's RPG and combat systems. Why do the developers dislike crossing genres so much? What would they lose, had they made it a top-down RPG on the Oblivion engine, with optional FPS mode for walking around or fighting? OPTIONAL. It's more or less a finer rendition of STALKER now, without the Zone and the anomalies, but in pretty much the same setting.

Why exactly are reviews based on free versions of the game invalid? The time that pirates had more bugs then legal costumers has been over for a good 10 years.

And where did the idea come from that if the first few games of a series are in one genre, the rest of the world is banned forever from making a different genre game in the same setting? Will you also shoot down a mechwarrior like game based on supreme commander simply for not being an rts? And is a rtt game set in the half life universe an immediate no too because hl used to consist of fps games?

[Sean Mirrsen]

Well, no. See, it's all fine and good if, amidst abundance of similar games in the setting, someone goes and makes a game of a different genre in it. A SupCom mech sim (or actually, Battlefield ripoff) would be great, because the game is still new as we know it, and it has not been forgotten for ten years. If someone were to make a Total Annihilation mech simulator now, people would like only the setting (if it was preserved), and still say "They should have made an RTS". Same here. If they made a classic-style isometric RPG, in the same setting with modern graphics and a new plot, people would love it. Those who played the originals would buy it without questions. Those who didn't would read reviews of the first two and still buy it. Now, all that's left of the game is the setting, and we say: "They should have made an isometric RPG".

[Mech#4]

Previously I didn't know anything about this game, just viewed two trailers for it.

I liked the advertisment style trailer, the old, cheesy 1930's (?) retro look made me laugh, as well as the cheery optimism. "Sit tight, happily underground while all hell breaks loose outside!" 

The gameplay trailer. I really like the stop-style combat. The choice to freeze combat, choose where to aim and what at, then watch your shots hit the enemy all cinimatic style looks awesome, couple to that you can blow peoples heads, legs and arms off and that just makes it even more carnagific.

I liked the touches like the bot roaming down the street playing marching themes, the world looks nice and open ( I think he was on a freeway?)  for exploring and from clips shown there seems to be a variety of areas.

I think I might get this game, looks good for a laugh and explore. I haven't played either of the previous Fallout games, so I'll have to read up on the background.

[A_Fey_Dwarf]

I think i am in the same boat as you. I am looking forward to fallout 3, I couldn't really get into the previous two as they were a bit confusing. This one however looks a lot more accessible.

[Skyrage]

You mean that you're happy that it's a fragfest game just like any other mediocre game today?

Fallout 1/2 was anything but just blowing stuff to smithereens.

[Sean Mirrsen]

If anything, the new Fallout reminds me of a "STALKER meets Oblivion" scenario. Since I consider both games to be quite sub-par, this is not a compliment. If I want to play a decent shoot-em-up, I have many to choose from. Of the isometric variety, only Neverwinter Nights and the various "Diablo killer" contenders, including the third instance of Diablo itself, are holding up the genre, and even then, the D-Killers are not RPGs per se.

[Tormy]

I'm gonna skip this game. This new Fallout is an FPS with RPG elements. This game has nothing in common with the old Fallout games, except the theme itself. What a shame. 

[Dude_Jebawe]

You people are insane. I've played the original fallout, and this looks like a perfectly acceptable continuation of the franchise.

Glittering gems of hatred, indeed.

[Gambler]

IIRC, I picked up Fallout in 2002. I first played it properly in 2007. Haven't noticed anything confusing or complex about it. Nostalgia? Bullshit, it's not about nostalgia. Not for the people like me, anyway.

I see now that the clashes around games like Fallout 3 aren't really between fans of the original series and the "new generation", they are between people who have some standards and people can't stand any standards at all.

[Sean Mirrsen]

Well, I guess we can wait to see (and get our hands on) the game, but I don't think basing Fallout on Oblivion (and by much the same devs, to boot) is a spectacularly good idea. What I have seen of the game literally looks like STALKER on Oblivion's engine, plus the "bullettime replacement" aiming. I think Hellgate London proved that mixing RPG with FPS is hardly a viable mechanic. You either get a ridiculous FPS where your hit/miss and damage are determined by your stats, or a lousy RPG that's more of a FPS "with elements".

Really, it's not that I don't like people trying to mix genres, but these people are trying to mask a possible game design failure ("possible" as in they are not sure whether it's a failure or not) with a well-known name and setting. They could make a new name and make their game all they like, but "Fallout" is a classic, and especially "Fallout 3", with nothing else, would indicate it's a continuation of the genre. There were examples of games switching genres, but then they had sub-names to indicate that. CnC:Renegade wasn't called "CnC 3" because it was not continuing the original game. Were Bethesda at least to name the game "Fallout:Decontamination" or something, I think people would take it better. I mean, really, what if Blizzard were to announce that Diablo 3 would be played from 3rd person, or StarCraft 2 will become turn-based?

[Skyrage]

Well, I guess we can wait to see (and get our hands on) the game, but I don't think basing Fallout on Oblivion (and by much the same devs, to boot) is a spectacularly good idea. What I have seen of the game literally looks like STALKER on Oblivion's engine, plus the "bullettime replacement" aiming. I think Hellgate London proved that mixing RPG with FPS is hardly a viable mechanic. You either get a ridiculous FPS where your hit/miss and damage are determined by your stats, or a lousy RPG that's more of a FPS "with elements".

Really, it's not that I don't like people trying to mix genres, but these people are trying to mask a possible game design failure ("possible" as in they are not sure whether it's a failure or not) with a well-known name and setting. They could make a new name and make their game all they like, but "Fallout" is a classic, and especially "Fallout 3", with nothing else, would indicate it's a continuation of the genre. There were examples of games switching genres, but then they had sub-names to indicate that. CnC:Renegade wasn't called "CnC 3" because it was not continuing the original game. Were Bethesda at least to name the game "Fallout:Decontamination" or something, I think people would take it better. I mean, really, what if Blizzard were to announce that Diablo 3 would be played from 3rd person, or StarCraft 2 will become turn-based?

I don't agree that mixing RPG with FPS is impossible. It's rather that game devs tend to mix it all with traditional RPG elements which makes it all look bad in the end. If I were to make an RPG then I would choose a first person perspective for several reasons. However I would definitely not choose the traditional approach of shaping it from a "combat oriented" design.

[Croquantes]

The original Fallout was pretty awful. I don't know why people insist on calling it a 'classic'. Fallout 2 was much better, but really, both games had their flaws (you get real acquainted with the flaws when trying to get the best ending for each town >< Lots of saving and reloading).

What's wrong with Fallout 3 being a little bit different? What's with the real-time hatred? Personally, I don't think I could stand to play another turn based Fallout. Maybe it's just me, but real-time just feels more natural.

And really, all this anti-oblivion hate. Does it stem from the fact that oblivion was a successful, popular and good game? There's no way in hell that Oblivion can be thought of as "awful" or sub-par. It really set the standard for the next generation of games. So if you feel that Bethesda makes sub-par games, then well, you should stop playing games then.

... why am I bothering defending Fallout 3 when the thread is titled the way it is. ^^;;;