GameBanshee Forums

I installed it yesterday, played for 10 hours+ and so far my only complaint is that I miss the good ole' isometric view. Apart from that, it's the best friggin RPG since... Granted, my expectations were low, but this is simply a great game.

Moonbiter wrote:I installed it yesterday, played for 10 hours+ and so far my only complaint is that I miss the good ole' isometric view. Apart from that, it's the best friggin RPG since... Granted, my expectations were low, but this is simply a great game.

Have to agree with that.
As I said in the review I posted in blog, if Fallout 3 must be made in FP style, it should be made in the way Bethesda did. And yes, my expectations was under the low as well

Here's my take on your list, after 35 hours and 90% complete (not finishing, because when you complete the main quest line, the game just ends.).I found your predictions to be very accurate (Played FO1 when I was 22 I think, 37 now, so it's been awhile from that one) My answers in bold.

1. F3 has shown an altogether different take on the IP, as they bought the license and refused cooperation with any former BlackIsle employee.

True.

2. F3 is an Action RPG. S.P.E.C.I.A.L. mainly serves V.A.T.S. and actual roleplay elements in quests or dialogue affected by it is found to be as superfluous as in Oblivion.

Very very true. Your stats mean nothing in fps mode except how much you can carry, your health and when enemies appear on your radar. There were all of like 5 stat checks for me in the entire game, you can use a Missile Launcher with your starting skill and a strength of 4. Speech checks in dialogue can be save/loaded and amount to nothing besides saving/gaining a few caps, most times.

3. People who are looking for a fast Shoot-Em-Up experience are disappointed due to the weak AI. People who are looking for a GURPS experience are disappointed per definition, as this game isn't aimed at them. So what's left? This game might appeal to a smaller audience than you might expect.

Pre-sales ftw. FO3 had the equivalent to a big first weekend box office. It made the money it needed to, but yeah, it failed on both counts.

4. Since the dialogue is spoken again, the sentences again have to fit inside one window. This favors simplistic Oblivion-style dialogue over well written Morrowind-ish text.

They break it up, but it doesn't matter, since it looks like it was written for 10-year-olds, by 10-year-olds. It's simplistic in the extreme.

5. Gameplay Devolution. Morrowind didn't improve over Daggerfall. Oblivion didn't improve over Morrowind. F3 is again something along these lines.

Bingo. Very true here. Some nice art, and some good work in GUI, tepid voice acting and atrocious writing/scripting.

6. F3 characters continue to look awkward as we further explore the Uncanny Valley and leave less room for our atrophied sense of imagination ( -> grandpa Tricky complaining)

It's very awkward, people have no facial expressions to speak of at all, FO2 had better NPC dialogue animation. That's pretty sad.

7. F3 adds little in the way of new popculture references, other than the ones Bethsoft chose to revive from the old games. And honestly, who has both grown up in the past decade, seen A Boy And His Dog and remembers Mel Gibson for being an incredibly awesome Australian?

Meh, there are some new ones, most notably a superhero one and an HP Lovecraft themed area, but even those instances are fewer and further between, and in the Lovecraft one, not even finished properly (poor writing, no ending, bad scripting, no branches or choices).


Additions, 9-29

8. There seems to be a fear in the industry both from mainstream developers and consumers that difficulty and complexity are now suddenly bad things. For all its claims of depth, Fallout 3 is no departure from this trend.

Very true, everything feels dumbed down. But that might be because everything outside the starting area feels unfinished.

9. Like Oblivion there are about six music tracks total which play non-stop. There is no breathing space, or scarce situational use of it.

Sorta/not really. You can turn the radio off (which does only play like 6-8 songs) and just have some low-key atmospheric stuff which is decent. The radio does occasionally update with your exploits, good or bad, which is a nice touch, but it all loops, and after a half hour or so, is boring again.

10. Fans will likely have to improve the gameplay themselves again. Don't count on the patches fixing anything everybody is complaining about.

Seems true, but to be fair, give Beth a bit of time, game just released.

11. Among the heap of licensed software, Bethsoft made this tiny thing called radiant-ai themselves, advertised it, but it wasn't much to speak of. Not much of a track record, but VATS has more or less been marketed the same way.

VATS has issues, balance-wise, but it's not all bad. Radiant is pretty dumb once you figure out what it's bad at, which is circle-strafing. On the other hand, the VATS vs FPS mode is a whole thread, can't do it justice here.

12. There is the odd NPC's that will follow you and join you in combat, but contrary to the old fallouts you can't control their VATS or switch to their inventory screen.

False/True. You can access their weapon inventory through dialogue, and you can drop armor in their inventory and they'll usually put it on (no way to tell what they like for armor, etc). Other than that, true, you don't control them at all in combat.

13. There are many lore inconsistencies. Some of them have already been made clear by the premise of the game.

True, go to NMA for more, they spend days at this stuff.

14. The collective press response will be by in large stupendous.

Ha. Right on. Mainly because the first areas are well-fleshed out, and that's all they got to play. After 15 more hours, the game reveals how empty it is.

15. The AI isn't likely to be impressive, what with Bethsoft's track record. But then, it wasn't for the original Fallouts either. However, they did choose to delve into the FPS genre and the game is already being held high amongst titles like Fear and Stalker.

AI sucks. But I think AI for fps is always exploitable anyway, no matter what the title.

16. The amount of endings isn't something they should boast, especially since they faithfully adopted this style from the earlier Fallouts. You have a dozen locations with 2-3 endings each, that's 24-36 endings for both those games. But if you count each combination as a unique ending, the number increases exponentially. It remains to be seen whether these endings will be as reactive to player choice as they were in the previous games.

They aren't. There are only 2 endings, with checks on like 3-4 things you do in the game. I don't know why they bragged otherwise, because there's all sorts of things that the game doesn't look like it checks for. The most someone has reported getting is like 5 different endings.

17. The cinematic kill-effects (next to VATS bullettime) likely cannot be disabled, just like you can't disable fast travel or the spoiler compass, or radiant AI etc. You will like it. It's Bethsoft, *****!

False. You can opt to never open vats, in which case you never get cinematic kill effects.

18. Strong AI or intricate combat isn't something that Bethsoft is known for. Difficulty in combat is measured by the amount of enemies you face at a single time, not by the tactics that you and your enemies employ.

True, though there are some set encounters with enemies in fortified positions, behind landmines, or in sniper nests that do require some planning. It just doesn't happen often.

19. Facegen adds beards. The nature of Facegen (watch the product demo at facegen.com) however doesn't (yet) easily make a 'fixed' beard or a moustache look good on *any* head, which is probably why they were nothing more than textures in Oblivion. They are seen on pre-designed NPCs, but the player likely can't add anything other than some stubble to his (or her?) face.

Don't know, char not bearded.

20. There may be some re-uses of Oblivion animation sequences (though likely not the models themselves). This isn't based on released gameplay footage, but only on screenshots that show some creatures (zombies etc) kinda take after their Oblivion counterparts.

Don't know, didn't play enough Oblivion. Beth sure does like people who decorate their homes with dead bodies though. It's like Hannibal Lectorland out there, and somehow we've re-invented the medieval man-cage for crossroads, I'm guessing they just ported that over from somewhere.

21. As always you become too powerful, too fast. When done wrongly, level scaling doesn't take into account levelling non-combat skills. I levelled non-combat skills in Oblivion and all of the sudden I actually couldn't move forward in the game because I was "high" level, yet couldn't do enough damage to the increasingly stronger enemies before they could kill me. Even if there are ways to get out of some encounters without the use of violence, the game as a whole isn't geared toward that kind of gameplay.

True/False. Level scaling not an issue here, no stoppers, but you do become too powerful, or rather some enemies seem far too weak.

22. Every indoor location in Oblivion, no matter how small is loaded separately from the outdoor world. Yet in Fallout there's a lot of continuity going on between houses, fights spilling out on the street, people sniping at you through windows, etc. While enemies can follow you through loading zones, it's not quite the same. We have seen nothing to suggest F3 will improve over Oblivion in this matter.

False/True. There are plenty of small buildings that you can run into and fight out of without loading (they're more like ruins, but still, they have rooms and stairs), but every consequential indoor location is a separate load in and stuff does not transit between the two (except you, naturally). Nothing really carries over here, you fight in the street, that's where you stay, you fight in a dungeon you stay there, unless you zone out and run.

DesR85 wrote:What I'm saying is that this Dogmeat is a copycat of Fable 2's dog. Very unoriginal and yet they never even mentioned that Fable 2's dog was their inspiration or what not.

Dogmeat was in the first 2 Fallouts, predating Fable by like, what, 15 years?

And in turn, Dogmeat is a reference to the movie "A boy and his dog" and Mad Max's dog in "Road Warrior", going back another 10 years. The dialogue options seem to be similar to what I remember from the earlier titles, with the addition of a few new Lassie-like fetch commands.

Or do you mean specifically a copy in terms of artwork? Dogmeat looks sorta like he did in FO2 which was 10 years ago now, he looked like a wolfish half-breed... how many ways can you render that dog in this engine?

Feels weird defending FOO (Fallout: Oblivion), I'm gonna shower now.

deadsanta wrote: And in turn, Dogmeat is a reference to the movie "A boy and his dog" and Mad Max's dog in "Road Warrior", going back another 10 years. The dialogue options seem to be similar to what I remember from the earlier titles, with the addition of a few new Lassie-like fetch commands.

Or do you mean specifically a copy in terms of artwork? Dogmeat looks sorta like he did in FO2 which was 10 years ago now, he looked like a wolfish half-breed... how many ways can you render that dog in this engine?

Was I even referring to the design of the dog? If you read the earlier posts in this thread, I mentioned that this Dogmeat have actions similar to that of Fable 2's dog. Search for hidden stuff, aid you in battle and help spot enemies to name a few.

Not to mention that when Peter Molyneux, the creator of Fable 2, revealed the game's dog and demonstrated its abilities, within a few weeks, Bethseda revealed Dogmeat as a companion in Fallout 3 and mentioned it doing things similar to Fable 2's dog. Coincidence? It got some people, including me, wondering if Bethseda was copycatting Fable 2's dog ideas.

So far I haven't got any NPCs to join my group. The has been one possibility, but my karma was too high. But then again, I can't remember that were able to control your party NPCs in old Fallouts either. You got to their inventory in for bartering purpose, and was able to determine in some extend what weapons and armors they use, and could change the general behaviour type, but you couldn't actually control them. Perhaps you are thinking Fallout: Tactics in this matter?

I'm actually having trouble remembering this myself. Might have to scrap that one unless someone else can confirm it.

DesR85 wrote:Was I even referring to the design of the dog? If you read the earlier posts in this thread, I mentioned that this Dogmeat have actions similar to that of Fable 2's dog. Search for hidden stuff, aid you in battle and help spot enemies to name a few.

Not to mention that when Peter Molyneux, the creator of Fable 2, revealed the game's dog and demonstrated its abilities, within a few weeks, Bethseda revealed Dogmeat as a companion in Fallout 3 and mentioned it doing things similar to Fable 2's dog. Coincidence? It got some people, including me, wondering if Bethseda was copycatting Fable 2's dog ideas.

Are you seriously suggesting that Beth wouldn't have had Dogmeat in a FO game? I mean that would have just pissed fans off to the max. Anyway, the only new thing that Dogmeat does is find nearby food or ammo, everything else, down to his dialogue interface is pretty much faithful to the original Fallout game.

Dogmeat always fought for you, followed and spotted enemies for you, going on 12 years now. I'm more inclined to just say that it's just coincidence, and a pretty normal roundup of any NPC dog's abilities: Follow, point, bark, fetch, fight.

That's what all dogs do. Mine shakes hands, too.

deadsanta wrote:I'm more inclined to just say that it's just coincidence, and a pretty normal roundup of any NPC dog's abilities: Follow, point, bark, fetch, fight

.. but all unprecedented in the Fallout series, and as far as I know any game period. I think that's his point.

Oblivion NPC's were able to look for weapons in their surroundings, so I think it's actually a pretty minor tweak to turn it into a command. Maybe they got the idea from Fable, maybe not, but I can't imagine a lot of thought going behind it either way.

Tricky wrote:.. but all unprecedented in the Fallout series, and as far as I know any game period. I think that's his point.

Oblivion NPC's were able to look for weapons in their surroundings, so I think it's actually a pretty minor tweak to turn it into a command. Maybe they got the idea from Fable, maybe not, but I can't imagine a lot of thought going behind it either way.

It sounds like they copied one skill from Fable: Fetch. All the rest was already in previous games, and it doesn't take much to see both designers doing the same thing independently (Unless Fable literally had the exact fetch command or something unlikely)

I guess I just don't see the big deal, Dogmeat was an established FO character and all of these games are ultimately derivative of a few precursors in gaming or literature; To accuse video games of plagiarizing each other seems redundant.

Could someone else go through the list? I want a pretty good picture so I can come to some kind of conclusion (about us as much as the game).

deadsanta wrote:Are you seriously suggesting that Beth wouldn't have had Dogmeat in a FO game? I mean that would have just pissed fans off to the max. Anyway, the only new thing that Dogmeat does is find nearby food or ammo, everything else, down to his dialogue interface is pretty much faithful to the original Fallout game.

Are you sure about this? Most of my friends who have played Fallout 1 and 2 have stated that the choice of including Dogmeat was bad decission from Bethesda. Dogmeat existed in Fallout 1. In Fallout 2, dogmeat was just a easter egg, and you found him from a plac which contained other "characters" from Fallout 1. That was 80 years in gametime after Fallout 1. Now, 30 years on top of that, and Dogmeat should still exist, and even in other side of USA? One of the poorest decission Bethesda made.

Oh, and just to clarify, I belong to those small but frenzy group of "Hardcore Fallout Fans"

Tricky wrote:Could someone else go through the list? I want a pretty good picture so I can come to some kind of conclusion (about us as much as the game).

(quoting myself as to not let the question drop off the length of the page)

Well, here's my take on it, as someone who really liked the game despite its flaws. It's far from perfect, but it's fun and I think that future mods and expansions will sort out a lot of issues.

1. F3 has shown an altogether different take on the IP, as they bought the license and refused cooperation with any former BlackIsle employee.

Don't really know about the behind the scenes stuff.

2. F3 is an Action RPG. S.P.E.C.I.A.L. mainly serves V.A.T.S. and actual roleplay elements in quests or dialogue affected by it is found to be as superfluous as in Oblivion.

The dialogue system in FO3 is way better than Oblivion's, but it's still lacking in some places. Lots of skills, perks and stats will get you unique dialogue options, though generally they seem to be just good, impartial, bad. I can deal with that personally, because it's no worse than most rpgs out there.

When it comes to combat, SPECIAL does mainly serve VATS, which is a shame, but some weapons (such as the sniper rifle) I found to be more useful in fps. And VATS is pretty fun anyway.

3. People who are looking for a fast Shoot-Em-Up experience are disappointed due to the weak AI. People who are looking for a GURPS experience are disappointed per definition, as this game isn't aimed at them. So what's left? This game might appeal to a smaller audience than you might expect.

The game is more than fps/rpg, there are other appealing elements. Though from a marketing perspective, that's about all they've got. But I don't think they've outright alienated anyone other than hardcore Fallout fans, who only make up a small percentage of people who are going to buy the game. And in the end, most of them bought the game anyway right?

4. Since the dialogue is spoken again, the sentences again have to fit inside one window. This favors simplistic Oblivion-style dialogue over well written Morrowind-ish text.

Voice acted dialogue seems to be a necessary evil in most modern rpgs. In many ways it adds to immersion, but at the cost of depth. For instance, you'd never see a game like Planescape Torment in this day and age, at least not from a major developer. It's just not cost effective for an npc to go on a several page long soliloquy when it's all voice acted, but then again, brevity is the soul of wit. Good voiced dialogue can be done, but I find it's rare. KOTOR 2 and Vampire Bloodlines are two prime examples that I can think of, but I think to hold future games to such standards will only lead to disappointment. Still, all things considered I wasn't too disappointed with FO3's dialogue, I don't think it's as shallow as a lot of people are saying, but it certainly could have been better. It's somewhere in the middle.

5. Gameplay Devolution. Morrowind didn't improve over Daggerfall. Oblivion didn't improve over Morrowind. F3 is again something along these lines.

I disagree, as far as gameplay is concerned. Oblivion improved over Morrowind in a lot of ways, combat was more complicated, you had more moves you could pull off, spells could be cast while you had a weapon wielded etc. I don't think it's fair to compare FO3's gameplay to the Elder Scroll's series though, because FO3 is more fps based, pretty much all about ranged weapons (to the detriment of melee combat, which I think is a shame), while TES is more about swinging swords and casting spells. I did like that there's a set movement speed and jump height in FO3 though, that was one thing about TES I didn't like much. It was too weird.

6. F3 characters continue to look awkward as we further explore the Uncanny Valley and leave less room for our atrophied sense of imagination ( -> grandpa Tricky complaining)

They look infinitely better than Oblivion's characters. Many are a little off, but still, many look pretty damn good. Not perfect, but a vast improvement.

7. F3 adds little in the way of new popculture references, other than the ones Bethsoft chose to revive from the old games. And honestly, who has both grown up in the past decade, seen A Boy And His Dog and remembers Mel Gibson for being an incredibly awesome Australian?

Nope, there don't seem to be many at all. That's not really a bad thing though, to me. What's so great about pop culture references?

Additions, 9-29

8. There seems to be a fear in the industry both from mainstream developers and consumers that difficulty and complexity are now suddenly bad things. For all its claims of depth, Fallout 3 is no departure from this trend.

It really does seem that way doesn't it? My opinion is that the way technology is going right now, games are undergoing a kind of technical evolution. Graphics and physics are being advanced, to the detriment of other things. But I believe a plateau will be reached eventually, where development in those areas isn't as important and they'll finally be able to devote their efforts to making good stories again. That's not to say there isn't the odd gem out there, but I find it's true for most games. FO3 isn't one of those gems, but it's a good game that's fun to play. There is some depth - not as much as there could have been, but not as little as some are making out.

9. Like Oblivion there are about six music tracks total which play non-stop. There is no breathing space, or scarce situational use of it.

I find the radio station music really annoying after a little while, but the atmospheric music is good, not even really noticeable most of the time, it just adds to the ambience.

10. Fans will likely have to improve the gameplay themselves again. Don't count on the patches fixing anything everybody is complaining about.

Patches and expansions will fix things, I have no doubt, but mods will definitely do more.

11. Among the heap of licensed software, Bethsoft made this tiny thing called radiant-ai themselves, advertised it, but it wasn't much to speak of. Not much of a track record, but VATS has more or less been marketed the same way.

I found the radient AI in FO3 to be better than in Oblivion, but yeah it still kinda sucks. I have no problem with VATS though.

12. There is the odd NPC's that will follow you and join you in combat, but contrary to the old fallouts you can't control their VATS or switch to their inventory screen.

This is one of the main issues I have with FO3. I don't like not being able to have much control over what they're wielding and wearing, and I think I've also been spoiled by companion systems like in BG2 and KOTOR 2, where your companions have quests and you can actually talk to them about things. They have personalities in FO3, but no quests or dialogue to be had; they're basically just an extra few pounds of weight that can be carried and some fire support. Also, they can get in the way and actually ruin your tactics at times, which also sucks. My main gripe though is that nobody else notices them at all. It's pretty detrimental to immersion when I can bring Fawkes into the Citadel and nobody even bats an eyelid.

13. There are many lore inconsistencies. Some of them have already been made clear by the premise of the game.

I'm not a hardcore Fallout fan, and it's been years since I played the original games, so I'm probably not the best qualified to answer this one. However, someone else in this thread mentioned something about the BoS.

Also, Bethesda's background story of the Brotherhood kind of misses their xenophobic techno-centric nature and turns them into good guys "protecting innocents" instead, which points to some possible major mistreatment of lore.

The BoS in FO3 is kind of a splinter of the main group, they have concentrated on protecting innocents and such because of Owyn Lyons, who decided to lead his faction in that direction. The BoS Outcasts in the game are members who wanted to more closely follow their original ideals. So I see no mistreatment of lore there, only an expansion of it. And a good one at that imo.

14. The collective press response will be by in large stupendous.

It's a good game, so I don't think that the press giving it good reviews is an indictment on them in any way. It has its flaws of course, but overall it's an enjoyable way to kill some time. It's not for everyone, but I think a large part of the vitriolic hatred directed towards it by the 'fandom' is a result of plain old nerd-rage.

15. The AI isn't likely to be impressive, what with Bethsoft's track record. But then, it wasn't for the original Fallouts either. However, they did choose to delve into the FPS genre and the game is already being held high amongst titles like Fear and Stalker.

Yeah, enemies duck behind cover, and that's about the extent of their AI that I've noticed.

16. The amount of endings isn't something they should boast, especially since they faithfully adopted this style from the earlier Fallouts. You have a dozen locations with 2-3 endings each, that's 24-36 endings for both those games. But if you count each combination as a unique ending, the number increases exponentially. It remains to be seen whether these endings will be as reactive to player choice as they were in the previous games.

Personally, I'm not so fussed about the number of endings as much as the fact that the game ends when it ends. I liked that in Morrowind and Oblivion, when you finished the main quest you could go on to have other adventures. I've gotten 3 endings, but they all ended with the same result:

Spoiler

You die.

17. The cinematic kill-effects (next to VATS bullettime) likely cannot be disabled, just like you can't disable fast travel or the spoiler compass, or radiant AI etc. You will like it. It's Bethsoft, *****!

They can't be skipped, and it can be a little bit annoying when you've seen your thousandth head explode in slow motion, but it doesn't last long enough to be really frustrating.

18. Strong AI or intricate combat isn't something that Bethsoft is known for. Difficulty in combat is measured by the amount of enemies you face at a single time, not by the tactics that you and your enemies employ.

That's not the only difficulty, there's also their positioning. For instance, if you have just two enemies up in a building shooting at you from windows, it's more difficult than killing four enemies who are just in your line of fire. But this all goes back to the other issues with AI, which is pretty lacking.

19. Facegen adds beards. The nature of Facegen (watch the product demo at facegen.com) however doesn't (yet) easily make a 'fixed' beard or a moustache look good on *any* head, which is probably why they were nothing more than textures in Oblivion. They are seen on pre-designed NPCs, but the player likely can't add anything other than some stubble to his (or her?) face.

Noticed some npcs with beards, they don't look great, but aren't jarringly awful. Hair doesn't look very good in general though, it has no real texture for the most part, and is just like a blob of colour. Mods will fix this.

Oh and the eyes look terrible as well. They look glazed over and you can barely tell what colour they are, and even then only if you look real hard.

20. There may be some re-uses of Oblivion animation sequences (though likely not the models themselves). This isn't based on released gameplay footage, but only on screenshots that show some creatures (zombies etc) kinda take after their Oblivion counterparts.

Bethesda have continued their tradition of making terrible, terrible animations. Considering some of the excellent animation replacers there are for Oblivion, I can't help but think it really can't be that hard to make good ones. But oh well, it doesn't severly detract from the game, and again mods will fix this.

21. As always you become too powerful, too fast. When done wrongly, level scaling doesn't take into account levelling non-combat skills. I levelled non-combat skills in Oblivion and all of the sudden I actually couldn't move forward in the game because I was "high" level, yet couldn't do enough damage to the increasingly stronger enemies before they could kill me. Even if there are ways to get out of some encounters without the use of violence, the game as a whole isn't geared toward that kind of gameplay.

I've always given combat skills a higher priority, so this wasn't too much of an issue for me. Although some non combat skills can give you perks that help in combat. For example, repair gets your robotics expert, which is very useful.

22. Every indoor location in Oblivion, no matter how small is loaded separately from the outdoor world. Yet in Fallout there's a lot of continuity going on between houses, fights spilling out on the street, people sniping at you through windows, etc. While enemies can follow you through loading zones, it's not quite the same. We have seen nothing to suggest F3 will improve over Oblivion in this matter.

Fights don't continue through cells, which is a shame and I have no idea why they didn't impliment this. However, one great improvement they made over Oblivion is that external light actually affects internal light, so that during the day you'll have sunlight coming in through windows and cracks in walls, and during the night it's actually darker.

So in the end, there are a lot of valid arguments against FO3 here, and they do take points away from the game. But in my opinion, it's still left with enough to make me want to keep playing.