Fallout 3


Video Games

1 to 50 of 206 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Sovereign Court

I'm surprised no one is talking about this game. Fallout 1 and 2 were great post apocalyptic rpgs and although black isle went under, Beathesda (maker of the elder scrolls games) has taken over I'm extremely optimistic. Check out the tubes for various trailers.

I'm excited . . . what about you?

Scarab Sages

Guy Humual wrote:

I'm surprised no one is talking about this game. Fallout 1 and 2 were great post apocalyptic rpgs and although black isle went under, Beathesda (maker of the elder scrolls games) has taken over I'm extremely optimistic. Check out the tubes for various trailers.

I'm excited . . . what about you?

Touchy subject for me. I LOVE the Fallout games. I must have played 1 and 2 almost 2 dozen times combined (no exageration, I reinstall each roughly every christmas. Its kind of a tradition)

Bethesda could have made Fallout as an updated and improved version of the original series - kept the turn based isometric feel, even if they went 3d and real time. 3d models with pausable realtime play would have been a decent compromise. Yet they chose to make the game into essentially a 1st person clone of Oblivion. In many ways it looks like Oblivion with new skins. When you read the promo material they talk excitedly about destructible environments, eye candy, etc, just like a 1st person shooter. To me, the break with the game's spirit in feel and play style, is pretty disappointing.

The worst part from my perspective is that they inherited a workable engine and a half finished game (Van Buren) when they bought the rights from Interplay. I will most likely buy the game when released, but I am not as optimistic as you. I hope I am wrong.

Take a look at No mutants allowed for a relatively positive community, or duckandcover.cx for a community that is equally split between supporters and enemies.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
underling wrote:

Touchy subject for me. I LOVE the Fallout games. I must have played 1 and 2 almost 2 dozen times combined (no exageration, I reinstall each roughly every christmas. Its kind of a tradition)

Bethesda could have made Fallout as an updated and improved version of the original series - kept the turn based isometric feel, even if they went 3d and real time. 3d models with pausable realtime play would have been a decent compromise. Yet they chose to make the game into essentially a 1st person clone of Oblivion. In many ways it looks like Oblivion with new skins. When you read the promo material they talk excitedly about destructible environments, eye candy, etc, just like a 1st person shooter. To me, the break with the game's spirit in feel and play style, is pretty disappointing.

The worst part from my perspective is that they inherited a workable engine and a half finished game (Van Buren) when they bought the rights from Interplay. I will most likely buy the game when released, but I am not as optimistic as you. I hope I am wrong.

Take a look at No mutants allowed for a relatively positive community, or duckandcover.cx for a community that is equally split between supporters and enemies.

It is actually First Person..or Third Person..

And it has a Unique Combat thing going on that allows you to pause the action aim where you attacking the do the attack..

On the RPG side... well they have not said much about that yet..I expect it to be like Oblivion..

They did an Interview at E3, You can check out the Walkthrough here

you can also download the same video on Xbox Live

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

I do my best to ignore the "reimagining" and "modification" of yet another fond childhood memory. Sorry, but Bethesda is not a company i believe has any business touching that franchise, and frankly lack the ability to even come close to what has been before. Maybe history will prove me wrong, but when there was some hope for the 4th Edition (and it was not as bad as i feared, honestly), i really doubt that will happen in this case.

RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16

I love fallout 2, but fallout tactics really didn't do it for me. I would like to believe this is going to rock, but I am not sure it will.

Scarab Sages

Dragnmoon wrote:
underling wrote:

Touchy subject for me. I LOVE the Fallout games. I must have played 1 and 2 almost 2 dozen times combined (no exageration, I reinstall each roughly every christmas. Its kind of a tradition)

Bethesda could have made Fallout as an updated and improved version of the original series - kept the turn based isometric feel, even if they went 3d and real time. 3d models with pausable realtime play would have been a decent compromise. Yet they chose to make the game into essentially a 1st person clone of Oblivion. In many ways it looks like Oblivion with new skins. When you read the promo material they talk excitedly about destructible environments, eye candy, etc, just like a 1st person shooter. To me, the break with the game's spirit in feel and play style, is pretty disappointing.

The worst part from my perspective is that they inherited a workable engine and a half finished game (Van Buren) when they bought the rights from Interplay. I will most likely buy the game when released, but I am not as optimistic as you. I hope I am wrong.

Take a look at No mutants allowed for a relatively positive community, or duckandcover.cx for a community that is equally split between supporters and enemies.

It is actually First Person..or Third Person..

And it has a Unique Combat thing going on that allows you to pause the action aim where you attacking the do the attack..

On the RPG side... well they have not said much about that yet..I expect it to be like Oblivion..

They did an Interview at E3, You can check out the Walkthrough here

you can also download the same video on Xbox Live

Well, as i said in my post above, I hope the optimists are right. These really were some of my absolute favorite games of all time. I've played Bethesda's Elder scroll offerings from the get go, and I end up disappointed within weeks of each purchase. If Bethesda had looked at the franchise and said "Ok, lets build a game that matches (or extends) the old games" That would be one thing. It just looks to me like they said, "Oh, we can do this. Lets reskin all the crap from oblivion, make the fireballs nuclear pistols, and turn the ogre models into supermutants."

Liberty's Edge

This month's PC gamer has an article about it. One of their reviewers got to sit down and play the thing. It sounds like it's pretty solid. I'm very much looking forward to this thing. I'd love it if they cleaned up and released Van Buren too, but that's a pipe dream and I know it. It's also not oblivion with new skins from what I can tell. Apparently that VATS system does a really good job of preserving the old-school feel while still letting you play basically in real-time. I've liked a lot of similar games (in this case, I'm referring to S.T.A.L.K.E.R. and Hellgate: London) though, so I'm probably guaranteed to like it.

However, the thing I can't help but wonder though is why making something turn-based is such a pariah of game design these days. Even 4x games (with the notable exceptions of Civ IV and Galactic Civilizations II) are trending real-time. Why?! What's wrong with giving the player time to think and act with precision?

Scarab Sages

Timespike wrote:

This month's PC gamer has an article about it. One of their reviewers got to sit down and play the thing. It sounds like it's pretty solid. I'm very much looking forward to this thing. I'd love it if they cleaned up and released Van Buren too, but that's a pipe dream and I know it. It's also not oblivion with new skins from what I can tell. Apparently that VATS system does a really good job of preserving the old-school feel while still letting you play basically in real-time. I've liked a lot of similar games (in this case, I'm referring to S.T.A.L.K.E.R. and Hellgate: London) though, so I'm probably guaranteed to like it.

However, the thing I can't help but wonder though is why making something turn-based is such a pariah of game design these days. Even 4x games (with the notable exceptions of Civ IV and Galactic Civilizations II) are trending real-time. Why?! What's wrong with giving the player time to think and act with precision?

Its sad really, but the reasons for the death of turn based gaming aren't that hard to see.

1- All of the studio closings and publisher mergers have resulted in the
closing of almost every studio that focused on this type of gaming.

2- Most of the survivors are places like EA whose bread and butter are console based franchises.

3- Building off point 2, that means they prefer to have any release be able to be ported to the console as well. turn based on consoles really doesn't exist.

4- Finally, the designers who work for the surviving design houses tend to have far more real time experience than not, and build what they know.

The only hope for alternative game styles today, are the indy studios that are not beholden to big publishers and self-distribute. Unfortunately, for many the games still feel amateurish and lack polish. I can only hope that as the PC is abandoned by the big boys, more disgruntled designers go the direct distribution indy route.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
underling wrote:

Well, as i said in my post above, I hope the optimists are right. These really were some of my absolute favorite games of all time. I've played Bethesda's Elder scroll offerings from the get go, and I end up disappointed within weeks of each purchase. If Bethesda had looked at the franchise and said "Ok, lets...

What I hated about Oblivion and made me put it down, was that it scaled to you level.

In other words if you go in to one area at a low level but have problems and come back later at a higher level everything scales to match your level.

That seriously pissed me off, and I had to put the game down.

Sovereign Court

I think there are some valid concerns here, I was thinking the same things when I heard that Beathesda had bought the rights to the project, but one thing I'm pleased with, from what I've seen, is the fact that Beathesda is trying to keep the feel and setting of the game . . . even if they are reworking it into a FPS. At it's heart Fallout was a truly awesome RPG, with an incredible setting, environment, and mythology. I'm really happy to explore this world again . . . even if it's not in it's familiar style.

I'd have liked to have seen the original fallout 3 (like most of the fans I suspect), and I miss the old turn based game, but I think Fallout: Tactics has shown us that even turn based games, by the original designer, in the fallout setting, can still suck. If the story is solid, and the new designers have done their homework, I think this game has the potential to be a relaunch of the series. And who knows . . . in a few years we might actually get to play fallout with your friends online.

Also, completely unrelated turn based game question: Has anyone here played Jagged Alliance? Any word on that franchise?

Sovereign Court

Dragnmoon wrote:


What I hated about Oblivion and made me put it down, was that it scaled to you level.

In other words if you go in to one area at a low level but have problems and come back later at a higher level everything scales to match your level.

That seriously pissed me off, and I had to put the game down.

Agreed! Oblivion could have been awesome, it was beautiful, had an interesting story, tons of things to do, but this one decision by the designers basically ruins all that hard work. Everything is essentially at your level. You never have to fear running into something truly out of your league and likewise, no matter how powerful you become, you never get to lord over enemies with that might. A terrible decision by the designers.

One of the great things about the Fallout world was there were things that could kill you with such ease . . . avoiding deathclaws and enclave forces early in the game were essential to survival, many times running away was the best option . . . which was sort of like Bethesda's earlier game Morrowind (which was my favorite of the elder scroll games).

Scarab Sages

Guy Humual wrote:


Also, completely unrelated turn based game question: Has anyone here played Jagged Alliance? Any word on that franchise?

Nothing new for JA that I know of. Well, except for Gog.com

The folks who made the Witcher (awesome game!) are connected with a soon to open webstore where older games will be sold without DRM of any sort, with a license that allows installs on multiple machines, and fully compatible with XP and vista. The JA games look to be on their release list, so that would be nice.

EDIT: There are also some Linux/open source remakes and mods in the works for JA2. I forget the sites, but you can find them if you use google. Another game to check out is UFO:AI - a free remake of the old UFO games that is getting pretty close to release status.

Liberty's Edge RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16

Count me in the group that loved Fallout 1 and 2, but basically has no hopes of Fallout 3 being a game I'd want to play. Not only gutting the turn based nature of the game, and the fact that it looks like Oblivion after the bomb, but the final nail in the coffin for me was that you can literally shoot mini-nukes and blow up nuclear cars in combat to make mini-mushroom clouds. There goes any sense of realism for me (that an using a Barbie plastic doll head as a weapon).

Liberty's Edge

Dragnmoon wrote:
underling wrote:

Well, as i said in my post above, I hope the optimists are right. These really were some of my absolute favorite games of all time. I've played Bethesda's Elder scroll offerings from the get go, and I end up disappointed within weeks of each purchase. If Bethesda had looked at the franchise and said "Ok, lets...

What I hated about Oblivion and made me put it down, was that it scaled to you level.

In other words if you go in to one area at a low level but have problems and come back later at a higher level everything scales to match your level.

That seriously pissed me off, and I had to put the game down.

They have specifically said that they are NOT doing this with Fallout 3.

Liberty's Edge

JoelF847 wrote:
Count me in the group that loved Fallout 1 and 2, but basically has no hopes of Fallout 3 being a game I'd want to play. Not only gutting the turn based nature of the game, and the fact that it looks like Oblivion after the bomb, but the final nail in the coffin for me was that you can literally shoot mini-nukes and blow up nuclear cars in combat to make mini-mushroom clouds. There goes any sense of realism for me (that an using a Barbie plastic doll head as a weapon).

The fallout games have never been the most realistic thing out there. Or do you play a version that doesn't have ghouls, deathclaws, brahmin, energy weapons, supermutants, etc.?

Sovereign Court

Fallout 3 is in a precarious position. Too many people will judge it compared to the previous games, whereas it has the right to be judged on its own. Thus, even if it's a good game, everyone will hate on it because it's not as good as the previous entries. The game is walking in the footsteps of giants.

There is almost no conceivable way that this game will be able to match up to its predecessors (some of, if not the best RPGs of all time), especially when you consider the nostalgia factor many people will be taking with them when they boot it up for the first time.

That said, it'll sell like hotcakes for sure.

I'm almost positive that it won't be as good as Fallouts 1 & 2, but I will still most likely buy this game (or at least rent it if reviews are that bad) for two reasons:

1) If I decided to play a game based on whether or not it's as good as Fallout 1 & 2, I would probably have played a grand total of 5 or so games in my life.

2) Even if it's not Fallout-calibre, that doesn't mean it's bad, there is a lot of room between "Fallout" and "Crap." Frankly, there's a lot of room between "Fallout" and "Great!"

Maybe Bethesda can make a really good game. Who knows? Maybe they'll make a worthy successor to Fallout. Either way, I wouldn't want to miss out on it, just because they changed it to a third-person view.

Scarab Sages

Timespike wrote:
JoelF847 wrote:
Count me in the group that loved Fallout 1 and 2, but basically has no hopes of Fallout 3 being a game I'd want to play. Not only gutting the turn based nature of the game, and the fact that it looks like Oblivion after the bomb, but the final nail in the coffin for me was that you can literally shoot mini-nukes and blow up nuclear cars in combat to make mini-mushroom clouds. There goes any sense of realism for me (that an using a Barbie plastic doll head as a weapon).
The fallout games have never been the most realistic thing out there. Or do you play a version that doesn't have ghouls, deathclaws, brahmin, energy weapons, supermutants, etc.?

Ok, allow me to rephrase JoelF847's statement: "There goes any sense of taste for me." I did mention that some of us are testy about this, right?

From the promo material I've seen (and I have watched this closely - nothing you've said is new to me), most of the claims you are repeating appear to be suspect marketing BS by Bethesda. The same sort of BS that was stated before Oblivion's release and then didn't pan out in actual gameplay. From my perspective, Bethesda turns out soulless FP Shooters that masquerade as RPGs.

As I stated before, some of us are quite sensitive about Elder Scrolls: fallout. I hope I am wrong, but from watching Bethesda's track record, i know it to be a forlorn hope.

Liberty's Edge RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16

Timespike wrote:
JoelF847 wrote:
Count me in the group that loved Fallout 1 and 2, but basically has no hopes of Fallout 3 being a game I'd want to play. Not only gutting the turn based nature of the game, and the fact that it looks like Oblivion after the bomb, but the final nail in the coffin for me was that you can literally shoot mini-nukes and blow up nuclear cars in combat to make mini-mushroom clouds. There goes any sense of realism for me (that an using a Barbie plastic doll head as a weapon).
The fallout games have never been the most realistic thing out there. Or do you play a version that doesn't have ghouls, deathclaws, brahmin, energy weapons, supermutants, etc.?

Ok, sure, none of it is realistic, but there's a big range between "works within the world" and "I guess if you were drunk you might find it funny, even though it makes no sense at all, even withing the basic concepts of the world."

For me personally, I draw the line at thinking that a) even a small nuclear explosion wouldn't instantly kill it's target, and b) that even that small nuclear explosion wouldn't cause serious harm to everything that would be in range of a typical combat in a computer game.

If that concept works for you, that's great, and I hope you like the game. However, just because a game has something not REAL, doesn't mean that it's unrealistic. I don't have a problem believing that after serious radiation/mutagenic viruses, and hundreds of years, using a certain set of Gamma World/sci-fi conventions, that you could have creatures like ghouls, supermutants, and deathclaws, and we already today have energy weapons, even if they're not "blasters" - I don't doubt that at some point in our future, there probably will be the ability to have more destructive energy weapons.

Sovereign Court

underling wrote:


From the promo material I've seen (and I have watched this closely - nothing you've said is new to me), most of the claims you are repeating appear to be suspect marketing BS by Bethesda. The same sort of BS that was stated before Oblivion's release and then didn't pan out in actual gameplay. From my perspective, Bethesda turns out soulless FP Shooters that masquerade as RPGs.

As I stated before, some of us are quite sensitive about Elder Scrolls: fallout. I hope I am wrong, but from watching Bethesda's track record, i know it to be a forlorn hope.

I sort of like the elder scrolls series, they're not to everyone's tastes for sure, and although I didn't care for their latest (oblivion) calling their games soulless seems a bit harsh. I totally get the concerns though: Fallout is one of the truly great RPGs, and seeing someone ruin that legacy would be quite unbearable.

I'm still optimistic though, even though it's now a FPS, and even if they're adding their own touches to the story. They've kept the art, the 50's nostalgia, the world looks pretty dark and gloomy, and as far as I can see it still populated by ghouls, deathclaws, supermutants, and the enclave. This could be a return to the world we once knew . . . albeit from a different perspective.

Sovereign Court

JA was one of my favorite turn based games. I'd love to see a JA3 in the works. Fallout and Jagged alliance are sort of similar in many ways. I just wish JA had gotten a bigger fan base. I didn't even see wildfire on store shelves around here.

I've seen some of the community mods, they're not bad, but I'd love for interplay (the rights still belong to interplay right?) do something major with the series. More mercenaries, more missions, and maybe better equipment (with deadlier guns).

Sovereign Court

Guy Humual wrote:

JA was one of my favorite turn based games. I'd love to see a JA3 in the works. Fallout and Jagged alliance are sort of similar in many ways. I just wish JA had gotten a bigger fan base. I didn't even see wildfire on store shelves around here.

I've seen some of the community mods, they're not bad, but I'd love for interplay (the rights still belong to interplay right?) do something major with the series. More mercenaries, more missions, and maybe better equipment (with deadlier guns).

I thought I saw some screenshots of a JA3 in development a few months back. It was in 3d, but had the same viewing aspect as the classic JA games. Maybe it disappeared since then? I'm going to try to find it...


I'm not expecting much from this upcoming action-shooter with the Fallout logo slapped on it. Initial previews have been mixed, but quite a few people who played it said that it definitely is an Oblivion with guns, right down to the identical NPC dialogue and long load times when you enter buildings. However, the hacking, lockpicking, Pipboy3000, item construction and multiple endings all sound great, so who knows.

underling wrote:
Take a look at No mutants allowed for a relatively positive community, or duckandcover.cx for a community that is equally split between supporters and enemies.

Hahahahahahaahaa...gasp for air...hahaahahaahaa! :D

Say something nice about Fallout 3 at duckandcover and you're liable to be fishing goatse out of your mailbox in short order.

Liberty's Edge

underling wrote:
Guy Humual wrote:


Also, completely unrelated turn based game question: Has anyone here played Jagged Alliance? Any word on that franchise?

Nothing new for JA that I know of. Well, except for Gog.com

The folks who made the Witcher (awesome game!) are connected with a soon to open webstore where older games will be sold without DRM of any sort, with a license that allows installs on multiple machines, and fully compatible with XP and vista. The JA games look to be on their release list, so that would be nice.

EDIT: There are also some Linux/open source remakes and mods in the works for JA2. I forget the sites, but you can find them if you use google. Another game to check out is UFO:AI - a free remake of the old UFO games that is getting pretty close to release status.

I know you didn't post this for my benefit, but thanks for posting it anyway. Here's hoping the old Quest for Glory series winds up on there...

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

Guy Humual wrote:
I sort of like the elder scrolls series, they're not to everyone's tastes for sure, and although I didn't care for their latest (oblivion) calling their games soulless seems a bit harsh. I totally get the concerns though: Fallout is one of the truly great RPGs, and seeing someone ruin that legacy would be quite unbearable.

I find "soulless" to be the only really apt way to describe "Oblivion". It is cut down to the least common denominator to such a degree there is nothing that really gives it appeal. Nothing matters. You can ignore the demonic invasion, and besides a few chatlines changing, nothing ever happens because of it. Nothing you do has any meaning. Each Storyline is so hedged in from any other that there is no reason not to be the dark master of the assassins guild, the archmage of the academy, master of a holy order of knights and demon prince of madness - at the same time, with none wondering how that perfect split came to be.

The automatic monster difficulty scaling ensures that there is never any challenge you can not beat, and that there is actually no point whatsoever in improving your character - after all, roadside bandits level with you, and before long become your main source of income by selling their magic weapons and armor. You will not be able to make your game easier by leveling up, but you might make it harder if you level up a lot, and don't keep up your equipment. This, sadly, is a very fleething effect, since you are stuffed with "free loot" on the one hand, and i have the nagging feeling difficulty scales back down on another if you look like you might run into trouble.

Worse still, the game corners itself into FPS - Mode once you venture outside a settlement. Anyone you meet on the open road is out to get you, with the possible exception of the imperial rangers - who will be out to get you more often than not due to AI bugs.

Which brings me to one of my pet peeves: The much-lauded AI. Sorry, if you hype the interactivity and power of your AI up to the clouds, please... pretty please... don't make the NPCs ignore an assassination going on right before their eyes if they can't see the assassin. Don't have them continue dinner if someone stomps over their table, and tosses all the plates across the room. I can live with "deco objects" perfectly well, but if you provide such a detailed world, please make sure it works.

Systems.. yeah... don't get me started on this. So we have alchemy which gives you a good chance of your recipies no longer working as well once you know more about it. "Sorry, ma'am. I used to be able to brew that healing potion, but now that i know both ingredients can be toxic, You'll be poisoned whenever you drink one. I still have a few from before i found that out, though - these should be fine." We have several schools of magic that can be roughly broken down into "Fireball", "selfbuff + heal", "making other skills obsolete", and "totally useless". Each of these requires you spend a lot of time casting spells into thin air, though... otherwise, you will never see the more advanced spells in their realm, which (ta-da!) are not going to do much more than their predecessors, except be able to tackle monsters if you are somewhat higher level. Then we have schools for weapons and armor. I never really found out what these did, because "one step forward, hit, one step back" was enough to win even the "toughest" fights. Alternatively you can also use "run backwards in circles and fire your bow", or "run backwards in circles and fire off energy bolts". Finally, there are skills that are beyond useless. "Sneak" gives you a "free shot" at someone's back at the start of a fight, and is otherwise close to useless. Lockpicking can be made obsolete by doing a very simple quest. Speechcraft becomes useless by BOTH spells and the massive amounts of gold you can spend on bribes, and the list goes on.

All in all i will not doubt Bethesda spend a lot of time and energy on the game. However, just because "you tried hard" does not mean your end result is very good. I loved fallout. Now there was effort that really paid off. Open paths but still lots of consequences, sometimes unexpected consequences, even.

On an unrelated sidenote, i would really have loved they kept the original junktown ending, where the sleazy casino owner actually brought prosperity to the town, and the nice sociable sheriff was its doom, by strangling trade through it, despite the best of intentions.

Sovereign Court

I have no objections to your Oblivion critic, it was beautiful to look at, but not much more then that. I think most people were disappointed with that game. I agree with all the problems you point out, but I thought the game had great potential, despite the flaws, and I think the game might have been saved with a few changes. However, as is, the game is only suitable for casual play as long term immersion is impossible for the reasons you've pointed out.

What I objected to was your sweeping generalization of all Bethesda games. Bethesda has been around for a long time (maybe 20 years now) and in that time has produced more then elder scrolls games. Calling their entire body of work soulless seems a tad spiteful. I didn't care for oblivion, but the original elder scrolls game (arena) has to be one of my favourite sword and sorcery RPGs of the early 90s. It was fun, innovative, and gave me a massive world to explore. The other fun thing is, unlike most RPGs, I wasn't truly tied to the story. Sure there was a quest and a story, but if I just wanted to run around and explore I could do that without being hassled. I even sort of enjoyed daggerfall, despite the thousands of glitches. I'm not even going to mention Redguard . . . if you thought Oblivion was bad . . .

Morrowind was wonderful. Probably my favourite game of the series.

The point I want to stress is don't judge a company or a series based on one game. Oblivion was bad, I don't think you'll find too many arguments on that front, but that doesn't mean that fallout 3 will suck. Heck Black Isle even released some stinkers. Icewinddale was horrible. There are things that I see in oblivion that I think will be incredible in fallout. Think scavenging, I did this all the time in fallout, I wanted to find everything . . . in oblivion had great potential here. Every house and building was lovingly laid out, knives plates, and food on the tables, knick knacks on shelves and desks, and in the wilds fauna you could collect. The vistas and landscapes were completely explorable. You could see cities in the distance from mountain passes and you could eventually travel to them. I think Bethesda might be the best choice for rendering the charred landscape of fallout. I don't doubt for a second that the world will be absolutely stunning and filled with odd bobs and ends . . . like most people here I have some concerns, but I think that as of right now I remain optimistic.

Scarab Sages

Krypter wrote:


Hahahahahahaahaa...gasp for air...hahaahahaahaa! :D

Say something nice about Fallout 3 at duckandcover and you're liable to be fishing goatse out of your mailbox in short order.

Wait, that doesn't count as a positive review of Fallout 3 ;)

Seriously, that's why I love those guys.

Liberty's Edge RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16

Guy Humual wrote:
Heck Black Isle even released some stinkers. Icewinddale was horrible.

I'm going to have to disagree with you on that. IWD and IWD2 were both fun and entertaining. True, neither lived up to the high standards of the Baldur's Gate series, but they were still fun, and while not my favorites by a long stretch, I'd play them over any RPG that's come out in the last 2 years without a second thought.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

Guy Humual wrote:
The point I want to stress is don't judge a company or a series based on one game. Oblivion was bad, I don't think you'll find too many arguments on that front, but that doesn't mean that fallout 3 will suck. Heck Black Isle even released some stinkers. Icewinddale was horrible. There are things that I see in oblivion that I think will be incredible in fallout. [...]

I have little choice but to judge them on Oblivion, since Morrowind was so buggy that it never really got to a playable state on my machine. I admit, that may have made my views of Bethesda a little harsher still ;)

Seriously, though: Interplay slipped up badly with Brotherhood of Steel, so "shitty Fallout game" will not be unprecedented, sadly. However, i am a bit sad that a company which has a track record of colossal failure (games i pay for which do not run count as that in my book) to major failure gets to handle the "resurrection" of one of my favorite CRPGs. Call me a hopelessly old-school lunatic, but i really felt as if in Fallout 2, you could play a consistent character without having to constantly rationalize "Yeah, i clicked X, because that is the only answer the game accepts to achieve what i want, but i really wanted to do Y to get here"

Icewind Dale was good for dungeon crawling fun, but the story really was paper thin. I think it was pretty much a money grab when Interplay first got into rougher waters financially. As it turned out, it didn't really help.

Liberty's Edge

JoelF847 wrote:
Guy Humual wrote:
Heck Black Isle even released some stinkers. Icewinddale was horrible.
I'm going to have to disagree with you on that. IWD and IWD2 were both fun and entertaining. True, neither lived up to the high standards of the Baldur's Gate series, but they were still fun, and while not my favorites by a long stretch, I'd play them over any RPG that's come out in the last 2 years without a second thought.

The Witcher is pretty good. It's LONG, though. I've poured a lot of hours into that thing and I'm nowhere near finished. It's also extremely morally ambiguous. Even if you want to be as virtuous as possible, it's hard to tell how you'd do that.

Scarab Sages

Timespike wrote:


The Witcher is pretty good. It's LONG, though. I've poured a lot of hours into that thing and I'm nowhere near finished. It's also extremely morally ambiguous. Even if you want to be as virtuous as possible, it's hard to tell how you'd do that.

The moral ambiguity is what i love about the Witcher. heck, it reminds me a little of Fallout 2.

I love the end of scene one in the village. Everyone is guilty. you just have to decide what is the lesser of two evils. That was a major theme of the book(s) and the game carried it out flawlessly.


JoelF847 wrote:
I'm going to have to disagree with you on that. IWD and IWD2 were both fun and entertaining. True, neither lived up to the high standards of the Baldur's Gate series, but they were still fun, and while not my favorites by a long stretch, I'd play them over any RPG that's come out in the last 2 years without a second thought.

I'm with Joel. Icewind Dale may not be high art, but it has great atmosphere, superb music, a very interesting locale (I love frozen landscapes) and some pretty damn cool monsters and magic items. Sure, it was mostly hack-n-slash with a thin story draped over it, but it was honest about it and very well crafted. I found it more memorable than most of the Final Fantasies I've played.

Sovereign Court

Krypter wrote:
JoelF847 wrote:
I'm going to have to disagree with you on that. IWD and IWD2 were both fun and entertaining. True, neither lived up to the high standards of the Baldur's Gate series, but they were still fun, and while not my favorites by a long stretch, I'd play them over any RPG that's come out in the last 2 years without a second thought.
I'm with Joel. Icewind Dale may not be high art, but it has great atmosphere, superb music, a very interesting locale (I love frozen landscapes) and some pretty damn cool monsters and magic items. Sure, it was mostly hack-n-slash with a thin story draped over it, but it was honest about it and very well crafted. I found it more memorable than most of the Final Fantasies I've played.

Your mileage may very, I couldn't play more then twenty minutes of it, but perhaps it got more interesting as the game progressed? I never even bothered with IWD2 so I have no comments on that game, but the first one I found to be bland and uninteresting. I'll agree with Joel that they were no Baldur's Gate. Perhaps if I'd played IWD first I might have looked more favorably on it, but after BG, IWD was a poor shadow of a comparison.

The point I'm trying to stress is even good companies make bad games. Oblivion was bad, not completely unplayable in my mind, but certainly not something that I wanted to devote any serious time to. Believing the entire company is incompetent based on one game would be overreacting.

As to the 'bugs' in Bethesda's games complaint, it's a fair cop, but the original Fallout games had bugs. At certain points in those games they even felt incomplete, like they had intended to add more or there was scripting missing, but even with those flaws Fallout was amazing. Without a doubt the best RPG in it's genre. If everything else is good small mistakes won't matter (or even be noticed).

Liberty's Edge

underling wrote:
Guy Humual wrote:


Also, completely unrelated turn based game question: Has anyone here played Jagged Alliance? Any word on that franchise?

Nothing new for JA that I know of. Well, except for Gog.com

The folks who made the Witcher (awesome game!) are connected with a soon to open webstore where older games will be sold without DRM of any sort, with a license that allows installs on multiple machines, and fully compatible with XP and vista. The JA games look to be on their release list, so that would be nice.

EDIT: There are also some Linux/open source remakes and mods in the works for JA2. I forget the sites, but you can find them if you use google. Another game to check out is UFO:AI - a free remake of the old UFO games that is getting pretty close to release status.

JA3 is apparently being based on the Silent Storm engine and will (they say) be released sometime in 2010. That would be fine with me, by the way. I love the Silent Storm engine. I think if they married that engine up to JA's AP tracking system they'd have something really fun, if not graphically stunning. (And really, the older I get, the less I care about graphics) However, truthfully, I think it is, and probably always will be, vaporware. I seriously doubt that series will ever continue, which is a crying shame.

I have to say, the new four-faction system could work or not, but one of the things that I thought made JA2 so good was that by the time you were in Balime, you HATED Deidranna. I don't think I've loathed an enemy that much since Metzger the slaver (who I killed with a flamethrower, by the way). She was absolutely despicable. They really pulled no punches showing the depths of her wickedness.

Sovereign Court

Timespike wrote:


JA3 is apparently being based on the Silent Storm engine and will (they say) be released sometime in 2010. That would be fine with me, by the way. I love the Silent Storm engine. I think if they married that engine up to JA's AP tracking system they'd have something really fun, if not graphically stunning. (And really, the older I get, the less I care about graphics) However, truthfully, I think it is, and probably always will be, vaporware. I seriously doubt that series will ever continue, which is a crying shame.

I have to say, the new four-faction system could work or not, but one of the things that I thought made JA2 so good was that by the time you were in Balime, you HATED Deidranna. I don't think I've loathed an enemy that much since Metzger the slaver (who I killed with a flamethrower, by the way). She was absolutely despicable. They really pulled no punches showing the depths of her wickedness.

We should totally start a new thread devoted to JA.

I'm not familiar with Silent Storm or the engine bearing it's name but I am excited to get more JA news. 2010 doesn't seem so far away, odd that I haven't seen very much news about the game. I did a quick search (love goggle) and found the site complete with some screen shots. Looks interesting. I hope they bring back some of the characters and voice actors from the first 4 games. (Ivan was may favorite BTW).

I also just discovered (like this afternoon) that a new mod "JA 2 v1.13" has been build by the JA community! I've been testing it out and it looks awesome! It's basically the original campaign with tons of new guns and equipment + the four new mercs from JA: unfinished business. I'd highly recommend it.


I've only played Daggerfall and Morrowind by Bethesda, neither of them all the way through and I would put myself in the "hesitant to say the least" category for Fallout 3.

The freeform nature of the games Bethesda's made until now has left me a bit cold. It's possible to put so much to do into the game (guilds, quests, exploration) that things like plot, characterization and fun gameplay fall by the wayside and I've felt that was what happened with the Elder Scrolls games. There are miles to explore and a lot of quests, but ultimately every enemy either runs straight at you with a sword or runs away from you while throwing spells. Lots of quests, but they don't really effect each other nor does anyone in the game world care that much when you complete them. There's something stupid about becoming head of every guild and the chosen one of the storyline (after starting in a dungeon or a slave ship for god's sake) with the only person really caring about it being you. Add in a practically classless system that demands you devote hours upon hours to building up skills you don't even use in order to make an effective character and the game just isn't fun enough or engaging enough to merit all the time you have to spend on it.

I am a sucker for Fallout, though and the trailer looks really good (with the faux 1950s commercial) so I'm going to keep an eye on the reviews when it comes out before I decide to buy the game (and the system, really). It also makes me nervous about really being Fallout when all you see in any trailer or gameplay video is combat, combat, combat. What about the often hilarious, smart dialogue?


James Keegan wrote:
isn't fun enough or engaging enough to merit all the time you have to spend on it.

That was exactly my impression of the Elder Scrolls series as well. It's just too open-ended with cookie-cutter quests and NPCs and poor dialogue. I suspect Fallout 3 will be similar. The trailer gets the atmosphere just right, but the gameplay seems to be focused purely on shooting. I'm hoping the RPG elements are much stronger than what was shown in the trailer.

James Keegan wrote:
What about the often hilarious, smart dialogue?

That's definitely not Bethesda's speciality.

Sovereign Court

The first reviews are out and it received a 10/10 from OXM . . . whoever they are. I'm still optimistic, but we won't know for sure till sometime next week.


Well, that's certainly a good start. They're handing out a lot of nines and tens in the video game criticism circles this season (Dead Space, Fable 2 early reviews) but I also think this is shaping up to be a particularly good fall.

It looks like it could be pretty good. They're using SPECIAL at least and letting you directly purchase skills at level up, which handles the number one gripe I had with the Elder Scrolls.


Here in Australia PC Powerplay gave it a score of 9/10. Sounds like a winner.

Dark Archive

Turn based or First person -it doesn't really matter, as long as I am the guy holding the gun.

Coming from a gamer who loved the original Wasteland and who played Gamma World from the 80's on, if it has violent mutants, bombed out cities and powered armor I could give two sh**s on the perspective. PA gaming has been poorly represented as a genre and this scav will take anything out there available.

The game looks fantastic, plus you don't really have too many other PA games in that format. I say it's a win and i'm as happy Radioactivist in a contaminated reactor core.

Sovereign Court

Ok, Fallout 3 came out today. I'd like to hear what my fellow Paizoians think of it. If you've gotten it and played it I (and I'm sure others) eagerly await your reviews and opinions.

Scarab Sages

Guy Humual wrote:
Ok, Fallout 3 came out today. I'd like to hear what my fellow Paizoians think of it. If you've gotten it and played it I (and I'm sure others) eagerly await your reviews and opinions.

I bought it today - unfortunatly my day is quite packed, so I cannot play ist until tomorrow - I will post my early impressions as soon as possible.

Liberty's Edge

I think Fallout 3 is a winner, myself. Combat is a big part of the game, but it is definitely not the only part of the game, and it doesn't have to be a big part if you want your character to operate differently. Things don't scale to you at all, which is nice, and you can create a character who's number one choice in combat is 'run away'! Heck, there's an entire area, Georgetown, the actual remnants of D.C., that you probably shouldn't wander into until you're at least level 7 or 8, unless you really want to die, or have a lot of Stealth Boys.

As for smart, humorous dialogue, some of that is present. For example, when I asked my robotic butler Wadsworth to tell me a joke, he responded with this gem: "Photons have mass? I didn't even know they were Catholic!"

Any game that comes up with this is good in my book. ;)

Dark Archive RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32

Is it out for PC as well? Or just PS3/Xbox 360?

Scarab Sages

Fatespinner wrote:
Is it out for PC as well? Or just PS3/Xbox 360?

I bought the PC Version. So at least it's out in germany.

Dark Archive RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32

feytharn wrote:
Fatespinner wrote:
Is it out for PC as well? Or just PS3/Xbox 360?

I bought the PC Version. So at least it's out in germany.

Yeah, I just checked on Newegg.com. Looks like it's out here as well.

Scarab Sages

Ok - I played through the Tutorial (Vault 101) and fought my way through a ruined suburb to the first town of Megaton...
I like the game but here there be more detail:
- the german version is censored (it seems none of the gory fight scenes from the US version are left, so I can't comment on those
- grafics remind of oblivion. it seems that there are more individual models, but still it looks much alike
- less skills and extras than in fallout 2 - not sure if I like that, but at least I guess there won't be any extras that are of no use in the whole game, the rest of the rpg engine seems to be the same as in fallout 2 (S.P.E.C.I.A.L)
- 2 options of fighting, you can fight real time, much like in oblivion or you can stop the game, chose a hit area and hope for the best - both work quite well and the second one brings in a lot of the old Fallout feeling.
- Enemies fit in the Fallout mood (Human Raiders look like they come from Mad Max 2, mutant cockroaches, mutant ants, etc.)
- the few NPC's I've met are well done
- Tutorial is brilliant, though I would't have minded a few more "childhood scenes" for character selections instead of the final multiple choice exam at school - still, brilliant.
Obviously this fallout isn't for those who don't like 1st Person RPGs as it plays like a Fallout/Oblivion Hybrid - still the rpg engine reminds more of the old fallout games than it does of Oblivion.
- the mood, build through npcs, story, dialoge and grafics seems exellent and feels like Fallout. It's fun to crawl through the rubble that is left of the world, and the game has enough items hidden to make exploring worthwhile.
I experienced no technical problems while installing or playing the game - which is more than I can say about some of the later RPGs I purchased and playes (Gothic 3, Sacred 2, Witcher, Two Worlds oh, did I mention Gothic 3?)
So - as I said I didn't have the time to play mor than just 1-2 hours, but as far as this the game seems like a solid A.

Sovereign Court

Thanks feytharn. I think I'm going to get a copy for myself.


This plus Dead Space, Mass Effect, Fable 2 and (assuming it isn't dropped for being racist) Resident Evil 5 may finally push me to buy an Xbox 360.

Scarab Sages

James Keegan wrote:
This plus Dead Space, Mass Effect, Fable 2 and (assuming it isn't dropped for being racist) Resident Evil 5 may finally push me to buy an Xbox 360.

Playing Fable 2 right now and I can't see how anyone could view it as racist except for the the lack of any people of color.

1 to 50 of 206 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Entertainment / Video Games / Fallout 3 All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.