Morning Discussion

Alright Shackers, feeling ready for this year's E3? The Shack staff will be working hard to cover things, and we've got a preview of events right here. It's kind of the calm before the storm, so how about those new XBL games this week? And don't forget our Guitar Hero: Aerosmith contest, unless you're air guitar-phobic of course.

From The Chatty
  • reply
    July 14, 2008 6:14 AM

    Fallout 3 is, in actual fact, Oblivion with guns -

    http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/888/888731p1.html

    Some quotes -

    "Fallout 3 is very much Oblivion in a post-apocalyptic world."

    "As improved as Fallout 3 is, it still feels like Oblivion in a lot of ways (even if you can't sprint -- though you do move faster if your weapon is holstered)"

    "Even the inventory system and interface is taken right out of the last Elder Scrolls, so there should be a high level of familiarity for returning players here."

    "To sum up, Fallout 3 looks and feels exactly what you'd expect a hybrid of Fallout 2 and Oblivion to look and feel like "

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 6:17 AM

      I think the combination of Oblivion, guns, and a post-apocalyptic world are a recipe for awesomeness. I never played the first two Fallouts (although I have been meaning to) so I'm not attached in anyway to the turn based gameplay that preceded this brave new world game.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 6:19 AM

        I played Fallout 1, 2 and Tactics when they were new. I loved them but the actual combat in 1 & 2 weren't fun.

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 6:17 AM

      Thanks for ruining Monday!

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 6:18 AM

      Good! Wouldn't want it any other way.

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 6:18 AM

      fuck this game

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 6:18 AM

      I have no problem with that.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 6:19 AM

        Most people probably won't. However those of us who you know....wanted a Fallout sequel kind of do.

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 6:20 AM

          We are getting a Fallout sequel with 2008 game play.

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 6:22 AM

            2008 2006

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 6:23 AM

            Yeah Oblivion felt so modern to me. How could I have been in the dark before? All games should have canned dungeons with no rewards, fetch quests, lifeless dialogue and a focus on action.

            • reply
              July 14, 2008 6:27 AM

              These are not the elements of Oblivion that the article refers to, though.

            • reply
              July 14, 2008 6:33 AM

              assuming you read the rest of the article you'd have noticed they have hand crafted everything and won't be using procedurally generated anything

              • reply
                July 14, 2008 6:37 AM

                No one mentioned Oblivion's prefabs in previews either. He also said he didn't play much of the game. In the first 5 hours of Oblivion I didn't notice it myself. Then I started dungeon crawling.

                • reply
                  July 14, 2008 6:39 AM

                  they explicitly mentioned there is no procedural generation in FO3 and its all hand crafted. If you want to selectively pick and choose which part of previews and press to believe we're not going to get very far with a discussion. I didn't like Morrowind or Oblivion at all for various reasons but that doesn't mean I'm just going to ignore the parts of the preview that sound amazing.

                  • reply
                    July 14, 2008 6:42 AM

                    Fine let's bet shall we? I'm willing to bet the dungeons will be just as canned as Oblivion. Let's wait and see who is right.

                    • reply
                      July 14, 2008 6:49 AM

                      Fallout 3 is about the little details, and they're everywhere. While much of Oblivion was generated procedurally using software designed to create a credible landscape, Bethesda's follow-up is a genuinely hand-made game, where every burned book, ruined home, and story told by the ruins themselves was carefully designed, as Istvan explains: "The art team went cell-by-cell. There's not a single piece of the game that hasn't been touched by hand. It's not procedurally generated - we didn't want to do that this time. Every rock you see, every tree, was placed by hand."

                      http://www.gamebanshee.com/news/static/EkEVAZpAAyLUBDSsde.php

                    • reply
                      July 14, 2008 6:50 AM

                      why would I make a bet against your arbitrary feelings which quite often hate what are otherwise well received games and which are already predisposed to hating this one?

                      • reply
                        July 14, 2008 6:52 AM

                        "quite often hate what are otherwise well received games"

                        Name some. I don't judge games based on their popularity, as many seem to do here by quoting metacritic to validate their claims. I judge based on quality.

                        • reply
                          July 14, 2008 6:54 AM

                          Point is: you're in the minority opinion re Oblivion/Bethesda. Most people considered Oblivion to be of extremely high quality, its many flaws notwithstanding.

                          • reply
                            July 14, 2008 6:59 AM

                            Ergo I'm wrong? So minority = wrong? I'm blown away by the fact that people will continue to quote Bethesda's success and mainstream appeal as reasons to praise Oblivion. You all blasted Meet the Spartans, but the majority of movie goers seemed to like it as it did quite well in theatres.

                            • reply
                              July 14, 2008 7:01 AM

                              No, once again reading things that aren't there. He said you're in the minority, not that you're wrong. You're more than welcome to not enjoy Oblivion or Bethesda games in general, but that puts you in a minority. There are a few million people who love their games and are willing to spend $60 on them, more than enough for Bethesda to cater to them rather than people like you who will hate their game before they've even shown any gameplay.

                            • reply
                              July 14, 2008 7:02 AM

                              No, you're not wrong, but you have to understand that lots of people will welcome a Fallout game that is Oblivion-like, since lots of people liked Oblivion. That's why they went that direction. To most people Fallout + Oblivion sounds like a recipe for success, not disaster.

                              • reply
                                July 14, 2008 10:14 AM

                                All I can say is if it has level scaling like Oblivion, I won't touch it with a 10 foot pole. What a horrible way to destroy any of the fun of exploring in a RPG. I mean I used to love everything that Bethesda produced (no matter how buggy it turned out), but Oblivion was a snooze fest in the long run (but admittedly I got at least 10-15 "interesting hours out of it, and 10-15 "not totally bored hours out of it).

                                • reply
                                  July 14, 2008 10:25 AM

                                  There. Is. No. Level. Scaling. This has been repeated multiple times.

                                  • reply
                                    July 14, 2008 11:12 AM

                                    I have not read previews, thats why I said if. I will reserve any judgment until its out and I read reviews. That being said, no scaling is certainly a good sign.

                    • reply
                      July 14, 2008 7:04 AM

                      You're wrong.

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 6:23 AM

            isnt fallout3 turnbased??

            • reply
              July 14, 2008 6:48 AM

              it's a turnbased/realtime hybrid kind of deal. I'm looking forward to it, since if there are little weak annoying enemies you can just blast 'em FPS style.

              • reply
                July 14, 2008 6:57 AM

                so that's very different gameplay compared to oblivion

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 6:32 AM

            Sadly Fallout is still more fun than nearly anything else in the last 10 years as far as RPGs go. So I'd prefer 1998 game play at this point.

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 10:54 AM

            There are still those of us who are waiting for Zelda to return to its roots as far as game play goes.

            "Don't mistake progress with perfection." - Arcadia, Tom Stoppard

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 6:21 AM

          Just because it's like Oblivion in some ways doesn't mean it won't feel like Fallout too.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 6:34 AM

        [deleted]

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 6:19 AM

      IGN...

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 6:29 AM

        The word of the day is "hyperbole". It's an open world game, but it's not Oblivion.

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 6:32 AM

          Yeah like you would know. Actually, your response is the only one in this thread thats worth reading ;)

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 6:33 AM

          Your posts always give me hope. =D

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 6:38 AM

          i think if anyone we should listen to this guy since he's the only one of us who has actually SEEN it

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 6:42 AM

        That's kind of what I'm thinking haha

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 7:19 AM

        Yeah, I wouldn't be surprised if he hasn't played more than 5 minutes of Fallout or Oblivion.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 8:18 AM

        Always liked the adage, you can't spell Ignorant without IGN.

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 6:20 AM

      [deleted]

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 6:20 AM

      works for me

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 6:20 AM

      fuck, i dislike elder scrolls

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 6:21 AM

        oh shi "So if you didn't like that game, or the series for that matter, then ignore everything I've said thus far and go read something else."

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 6:51 AM

          I guess you missed "or western RPGs in general."

          This author clearly loved oblivion and is expecting RPG fans to consider it a positive when he mentions it.

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 6:20 AM

      So, endless amount of randomized dungeons with the last main chest rewards you with half used torches? Nice!

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 6:23 AM

      "Even the inventory system and interface is taken right out of the last Elder Scrolls, so there should be a high level of familiarity for returning players here."

      am i the only one that thought the designers of the oblivion map interface and inventory deserved to get shot?

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 6:23 AM

        No, hence why I posted it.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 6:24 AM

        maybe it's not finalized?

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 6:27 AM

          the game comes out in like a month

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 6:28 AM

          doubt it, because its for the console folks. they had the chance to change it for oblivion too and didn't.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 6:34 AM

        I played it on pc but the interface was fine. I don't know if they screwed it up on the ps3 or 360 version.

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 6:24 AM

      Fuck.

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 6:25 AM

      I have never played a Fallout game :/
      Story wise, will I be ok starting with 3?

      On a related noted - for which platform will you be getting this?

      Unless I get a new PC, then 360 for me.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 6:25 AM

        Fallout's story is just the world and what happened to it. So no, you don't need to play the originals for that.

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 6:27 AM

          thanks, good to hear

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 2:37 PM

          I'm sure they'll explain the vault stuff in 3, but it would be sad to miss that stuff.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 6:26 AM

        noted note *

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 6:26 AM

        PC, definitely. Oblivion looks substantially better on PC, and multiplayer is not a factor.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 6:26 AM

        Story wise you should be fine, but you might not appricate the world as much. I'm getting the pc version. I'm tired of the 360 locking up all the time.

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 6:25 AM

      for a while the comments were perfectly alternating between "awesome" and "suck".

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 6:28 AM

      Ugh, I loathe the Elder Scrolls series. So far they've been one underwhelming bundle of disappointment after another. Always letting you know just how good they could have been and then failing to put together any sort of compelling narrative or enjoyable game play. They have their moments but nothing of Fallout's caliber. I just hope that last sentence is true, and there's more Fallout 2 than Oblivion in it. Otherwise it's going to seem really deep at first and then sink in how shallow it truly is about 5 hours in.

      But hey, some people like them. So at least they'll be getting something new. I just wished their favorite series wasn't wearing the skin of my favorite one this time. =(

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 6:32 AM

        Yep. I'm betting Fallout 3 will be amazing in terms of the look, feel and overall presentation in the first 3 hours. Then you'll start feeling the world lose it's charm as the prefabs become apparent and the environments get increasingly stale. After you finish the "dark brotherhood" equivalent questline you'll also realize it was one of the few highpoints.

        Only unlike Oblivion I probably won't have the energy to keep playing hoping it gets better.

      • Ebu legacy 10 years legacy 20 years
        reply
        July 14, 2008 6:39 AM

        Yes, the Elder Scrolls has been "one underwhelming bundle of disappointment after another."

        That's why I, and many others, have sunk over a hundred hours into each installment.

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 7:00 AM

          Right, which is why I put the last sentence about some people liking them. And you investment of time doesn't make it a good game for me. Some people spend hundreds of hours scrap booking, doesn't mean I want to. As far as I'm concerned they gave my favorite series to the best damn scrap booking company there is. What they do they do rather well people tell me - but I don't like what they do and I don't particularly get it either.

          To me TES has consistently over promised and under delivered. The ideas are there but they lack the polish and execution to make them work. While a lot of people still enjoyed them, I did not. However, while I quit every TES game early on because of how uncompelling I find them, I'm still playing Fallout 2 ten years later. Hell, I never finish that game because I'm having too good of a time. Every little quest has character, and I'm still uncovering interesting stuff in the world. Every town feels different, and has a different personality. Every character has a defined personality. The game is just damn charming.

          This is where TES fails for me. It lacks personality, charm, and most of all enjoyable game play. It's a great sandbox, but I never find myself wanting to be in that sandbox for more than a few hours (I've reinstalled it Oblivion three or four times trying to love it, and Morrowind about as many).

          So you can see my apprehension in taking what is in my mind one of the most personality laden, charmed, and enjoyable games ever and putting in the hands of a dev who has reached for awesome each time and has always come up short, leaving their games a feeling a bit like a husk of what could have been. They say my concerns have been addressed. And the stuff lplasmatron says is very, very encouraging, but I have my reservations for sure.

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 6:44 PM

            and here I was trying to sum up how I felt about TES, and you did it all for me.

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 6:33 AM

      I'm really excited for this game. Oblivion made me skip class for a week straight during my last semester of college, and I hope Fallout 3 has the same effect (just, you know... without the skipping work part).

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 6:35 AM

      [deleted]

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 6:37 AM

        [deleted]

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 6:39 AM

          not really. All the time the devs have said "its not oblivion guys, its fallout!" and now the first previews are saying the exact opposite....

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 6:40 AM

            says the preview that played the game for a couple hours and scratched a self described 1% of the game

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 6:43 AM

            [deleted]

            • reply
              July 14, 2008 6:45 AM

              Yeah I was real happy for that new Leisure Suit Larry game too. I should just be happy no matter what sequel they throw my way right? Who cares if the original team is involved.

              • reply
                July 14, 2008 6:48 AM

                how do you propose we get the FO2 team working on FO3? Since that's not possible you'd rather NO ONE try to make FO3? Because its impossible for anyone but the FO2 team to make a good Fallout game?

                • reply
                  July 14, 2008 6:51 AM

                  You got it. Just as I wouldn't want a King's Quest made by John Carmack. Also I laugh at the fact that you think Bethesda is the only ones who could do Fallout justice. Hell Bioware could do a better job, or CD Projekt.

                  Bethesda just had the most cash.

                  • reply
                    July 14, 2008 6:54 AM

                    where did I say I think Bethesda is the only one who could do Fallout justice? Do you just read whatever you want to see? because that's what you're making it look like

                    • reply
                      July 14, 2008 6:55 AM

                      Then why do you say I'd rather there be no Fallout 3? As if Bethesda saved the day by grabbing the IP? It sounded to me like you meant it's Bethesda or the highway for a sequel.

                      • reply
                        July 14, 2008 6:59 AM

                        I said in lieu of the original team doing it you'd rather never see another Fallout game? that was the question, it was pretty straight forward. Your answer is yes, that's fine, but I'd rather see someone try and potentially get another great game in a franchise I love and I'm not going to shit all over it before even seeing a gameplay video or playing it myself.

                        • reply
                          July 14, 2008 7:02 AM

                          Fair enough, but it seems some people are already fawning over it given the same information that makes me cringe. Thats all. I don't understand why people flip out and pull out the "fanboy" term when I'm simply taking the opposite standpoint they are. It's like it's only ok to be irrationally optimistic.

                          • reply
                            July 14, 2008 7:04 AM

                            There are plenty of people with tempered enthusiasm here. There are plenty of people who loved the shit out of both Fallout and Oblivion so the combination to them sounds amazing. There is simply not enough information, even second hand, to be relentlessly shitting on the game. If you can't find any positive things in that preview to make you excited then I don't know what to tell you.

            • reply
              July 14, 2008 6:45 AM

              People seem to be mad that Fallout 3 is not Fallout 2.

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 6:41 AM

          We can't be as optimistic as the Oblivion fanboys now can we?

          • Ebu legacy 10 years legacy 20 years
            reply
            July 14, 2008 7:54 AM

            Seriously, dude, what is your fucking problem?

            Just ignore the game. You've obviously decided that you're not going to like it (no matter what) so just stop reading about it and FOR GOD'S SAKE stop posting about it.

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 1:06 PM

            You're only allowed to hate Uwe Boll and Sony on the Shack, everything else you have to love or you're just a troll.

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 6:41 AM

          I'm not a Fallout Fanboy I am someone who strongly dislikes Oblivion.

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 6:54 AM

          Well look, I consider Fallout 2 _the_ best RPG ever. One of the best games in general ever, if not the best. It's not only the script, the world and the characters, it's also the near-perfect gameplay it had, both in and out of combat.

          On the other hand, I _hate_ just about everything about Oblivion. It's pretty, but the controls, the limitations of the engine (especially regarding combat) and much more of it just summarizes what I don't like to see in an RPG game.

          Bottom line, I think it was a HUGE mistake (talking about product quality here, not about profits) moving the FO franchise to the Oblivion engine, or whatever it is called. I see no way in hell they can pull off even half the game that FO2 was with an engine with the limitations or rulesets that this engine has.

          Maybe, just maybe, I'll be positively surprised when I get to play it, but the small chance of that happening won't stop me from discussing my opinions on the decisions they've made with the game so far.

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 6:58 AM

            I love Fallout as much as anyone, I waited years for the original after reading a preview in PCGamer, but if you think it had near-perfect gameplay in and out of combat you're just romanticizing the memory to yourself. Combat was horribly balanced and a chore in large fights. Numerous weapons were overpowered. Stats were horribly unbalanced with agility being massively more important than any other and things like luck being largely useless. There were huge swaths of skills that were useless for anything but gimmick builds or had no reason to exist (first aid vs doctor, throwing weapons, outdoorsman became useless with the car, etc). Perks and traits weren't balanced either (every person took Gifted). Plus the thing was riddled with bugs from cars disappearing, NPCs constantly bursting into your back with SMGs to a million other things (and Fallout 1 had plenty of problems with things like NPCs blocking doorways and no moving or being moveable).

            • reply
              July 14, 2008 7:49 AM

              Still better than Oblivion though, because everything had a purpose and a soul in Fallout (well nearly).

            • reply
              July 15, 2008 1:22 AM

              Well it's not "a memory" as I still play FO2 at least once a year for several days. I just don't agree with you on the statements about combat. I like having "futile" skills and perks in a game, there's nothing like a good gimmick build to test out. Sure there were bugs, plenty of them, but never said there weren't. Didn't hinder game play 99% of time.

              I don't think a single player game needs to be balanced. It needs to be fun. Fallout 2 was fun, Oblivion was anything but.

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 1:50 PM

            I have no idea what you're talking about regarding limitations in the engine and rulesets. Do you honestly think that stuff can't be changed from how it was in oblivion just because they're using some of the same programming? That kind of stuff can probably be changed by a simple mod, nevermind by the actual developer.

            • reply
              July 15, 2008 1:25 AM

              I could have been a bit more careful with my selection of terms. Short version of what I meant:

              I don't see them pulling off even remotely the same kind of game play with the same kind of feeling with the oblivion engine that they did with the old FO2 engine.

              If they do, it will be one-of-a-kind achievement. But based on the previews, they have not even tried. Hence my disappointment.

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 7:16 AM

          Just ask this, would the Oblivion/TES fans be freaking out if the old Black Isle crew was making the next TES game? I think they would, and with good reason.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 6:39 AM

        Like that will ever happen.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 9:04 AM

        Yea, seriously, a lot of these posts are really really REALLY silly.

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 6:39 AM

      my precious....

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 6:40 AM

      "Even the inventory system and interface is taken right out of the last Elder Scrolls, so there should be a high level of familiarity for returning players here."

      ugggggghhhhhhhh

      The only inventory system I liked less than Oblivion was Bioshock. Even STALKER's wonky system was superior to Oblivion.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 6:42 AM

        It was better than Mass Effect's inventory system.

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 6:42 AM

          Was it? This I gotta see...

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 6:43 AM

          Actually it's exactly the same - a text list.

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 6:44 AM

          [deleted]

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 6:47 AM

            And the least powerful items were always on the bottom because of the default sorting, so when your inventory became maxed out, and you wanted to sell off your least useful junk, you had to scroll through several hundred items to get to the bottom to sell an item, and then it would reload the list and put the cursor on the top again, forcing you to do it all over.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 6:43 AM

        Oh wait. Invisible War's inventory system still wins as the worst ever.

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 6:41 AM

      FUCK. I hope this is not true. Oblivion I think has too many flaws to be considered a great game.

      Chief among them the world feeling like it was stretched WAY too fucking thin to compensate for scope and scale. So you get the 100th elven ruins or dungeon, oblivion wasteland/gate, or the millionth time you hear the same voice actor in a city repeating the same lines. Secondly, the level scaling and loot system was pure shite. You never really felt that RPG hook - feeling like your character progresses and becomes stronger as relative to their environment. It was all arbitrary...you could take on an oblivion gate right at the beginning and arguably it would make it easier. Stupid. That game was less of an RPG and more of a moving illusion dressed up with a decent story.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 6:47 AM

        the world of FO3 is smaller than Oblivion's but has more content and its all hand crafted rather than procedurally generated. The level scaling is gone. Your concerns have now been alleviated.

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 6:48 AM

          All true.

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 6:49 AM

          Actually apparently it scales when you enter. Just like Mass Effect. In other words you can and will be stronger than enemies as you level, but only if you leave the area or level up right then and there. If thats true then really, it's not much different than Oblivion.

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 7:03 AM

            Not sure where you read that.

            • reply
              July 14, 2008 7:04 AM

              If I'm wrong then I'm glad, and thanks for saying so.

            • reply
              July 14, 2008 9:16 AM

              is there still any scaling at all?

            • reply
              July 14, 2008 11:52 AM

              I've seen it posted several places...I guess it was taken from some interview where the dude mentioned that each area has a level "range", but it's entirely possible it got completely misinterpreted.

              So, is there no scaling?

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 7:05 AM

            there is no level scaling, it has been stated numerous times by the developers (like the post above me for instance)

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 6:53 AM

        I never liked level scaling. A wolf should have the same hp at the beginning of the game as it has at the end.

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 6:41 AM

      You guys might be reading too much into this. The author is clearly a big Oblivion fan, so he thinks he's helping it by comparing the two. When he calls it a hybrid of the two, all you guys see is "oh no zomg Oblivion influence" but don't notice the Fallout 2 part so much. I mean, isn't that exactly what we've been hoping for ever since we knew what this game was? If you still haven't been able to swallow that it's 3D and played in first person then just go play fallout 2 again.

      Saying it's "like" oblivion or "feels like" oblivion means very little IMO when it's by the same developer using the same engine. I would expect a lot of traits to be there, actually. However what it does NOT tell me is all the important things:

      1. Did they get the atmosphere right?
      2. Is the hybrid combat good?
      3. Are the enemies and dungeons good?
      4. Is the voice acting a whole lot better and varied than oblivion?

      And so on. If the inventory system is just like Oblivion then that's probably the one negative for sure I see here.

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 6:49 AM

      Oblivion with guns ... AWESOME :D

    • gmd legacy 10 years legacy 20 years mercury mega
      reply
      July 14, 2008 6:49 AM

      good because Oblivion was awesome, I love all the fallout fanboys getting pissed over this it is great.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 6:53 AM

        The "fallout boys" as it were.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 6:54 AM

        Yeah it's funny, but really everybody should be a fallout fanboy. The games are too good. Some people though are expecting that this sequel is somehow going to be made to be just like Fallout 2.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 6:54 AM

        I more enjoy the Oblivion fanboys and non-rpg fans walking in and pretending they know how a Fallout sequel should be handled.

        • gmd legacy 10 years legacy 20 years mercury mega
          reply
          July 14, 2008 6:55 AM

          it is like when FPS games went from sprites to polygons, HOW DARE THEY

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 7:02 AM

          I don't think anybody is saying they know how the game should be made, except maybe for the vocal people who want it exactly like the other games.

          I personally just hope it's as much authentic Fallout as humanly possible. The big things (like being first person and undoubtedly an oblivion type of game) IMO are pointless to worry over and complain about at this point. They will never change, you get the game this way or you get nothing.

          I'm still holding out hope though that the stuff people liked the least about oblivion is gone, and the stuff people liked the most about Fallout is there. I think the stuff we do know (omgz no killing children!) is pretty minor.

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 7:04 AM

            "except maybe for the vocal people who want it exactly like the other games"

            No one wants this. Everyone knows it's first person and action based. However there are tons of first person action rpgs. It's just a shame that they chose TES to base it off of.

            • reply
              July 14, 2008 7:18 AM

              except they're not basing it off Oblivion, they're just using the same engine and learning from their previous experiences with RPGs. This is like complaining that Bioshock is using UE3 and therefore will be a shitty shooter devoid of any real story.

              • reply
                July 14, 2008 7:20 AM

                Thats what we assumed, however with each preview it's sounding more and more like Oblivion with guns despite the developer's claims to the contrary. The point of this thread was to show that unfortunately we have yet another preview which states it is in fact, Oblivion with guns.

            • reply
              July 14, 2008 7:22 AM

              I think most first person "action RPGs" would be far worse choices than Oblivion. TES IMO is one of the best matches. On a very basic level you have a big, open world with a lot of freedom. There are just a lot of little design choices they'll need to get right, or go in a different direction than they did with Oblivion, but on a high level I think it's alright.

              Though I don't know if it's right to say they're "basing it off of" TES. They're using the same technical resources, and of course a lot of designers and artists might be the same so I think we all expect to see some similarity, but it's not like the two are linked in any way other than sharing some (mostly technical) resources.

              I guess that's why the "it's like oblivion with guns!" stuff doesn't bother me so much. We've known it'll be oblivion style forever (as in what the world is like and how you exist in it) but what will make it an OK, crappy, or awesome sequel will be all the details we don't know about yet.

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 7:05 AM

            The thing that absolutely has to be there is the mood and the black humor of Fallout (particularly Fallout 2). There's no way to tell from previews whether Bethesda can get this right. The technical stuff about the engine bears on this not at all.

            • reply
              July 14, 2008 7:06 AM

              funny polygons take longer to rasterize

            • reply
              July 14, 2008 7:06 AM

              I'm more concerned with the fact that most screenshots depict action. There are a few exceptions that I like, but Bethesda should not be marketing that side of the game as the dominant one. Combat is not the only thing an RPG needs,

              • reply
                July 14, 2008 7:09 AM

                you can't capture character interaction in a screenshot. also, that gets you into spoiler territory

              • reply
                July 14, 2008 7:27 AM

                they can't please everyone. They put the game in first person and think 'oh god everyone is going to be pissed what can we do to alleviate some of their fears and show its just like an old fallout game?' so they show a super mutant getting his arm blown off in a bloody mess using a targeted turn based combat system. That shows a lot more of the similarity to Fallout than a single screenshot of a dialogue tree could.

            • reply
              July 14, 2008 7:23 AM

              Agreed 100%. This game is going to be really hard to get a feel for before playing it.

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 7:02 AM

          they don't, but you do!

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 9:06 AM

          hahahahahaha

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 10:59 AM

        This is not awesome. Why didn't they let a dev who wants to keep it like the other games and not mod their last game?

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 6:53 AM

      This makes me sad because there was so much wrong in Oblivion. I mean shit, the inventory system and interface similar to Oblivion? That was the worst part! :(

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 7:06 AM

        If they fix the stuff that was wrong with oblivion's world and get the Fallout stuff right, I don't care if I have to alt-tab and edit text files to manage my inventory. =(

        Not that they shouldn't put something together for PC. I'm just sayin, the inventory screen is like the 97th thing on my list of questions about this game.

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 7:05 AM

      Why is everyone shitting all over Oblivion now? Did we forget the daily dedicated chatties for 2+ weeks?

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 7:06 AM

        It's the shack, thats how it works. go all crazy for the game, then later on everyone decides it sucks and hates it.

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 8:26 AM

          true; although I think there's an explanation

          there were a lot of good elements in the game and I got about 30 hours out of it before becoming bored - that said it fails on so many levels as a game, from story, bad main quest line, to retarded enemy parity, generic dungeons, incredibly ugly character models, radiant AI fundamentally broken, and so on

          their task is to fix all those broken things and re-create the novelty that made Oblivion still a good game despite having so many horrible flaws

      • gmd legacy 10 years legacy 20 years mercury mega
        reply
        July 14, 2008 7:06 AM

        I think it is really only like 2-3 people bitching.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 7:12 AM

        Part of the problem is when you say Fallout 3, people got it in their heads that it must be an over head turn based game. People just don't like change. Look at the uproar with Diablo 3. People are pissed because they added a little color.

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 7:14 AM

          Haha. Yeah that's lols x50 compared with people worrying about Fallout changes.

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 7:17 AM

          Actually that has very little to do with it. People want a turnbased game, but everyone knew that wasn't going to happen as soon as the IP was sold. Therefore the hope is that it will be a good first person action rpg. However many people don't feel Oblivion is the pinnacle of first person rpgs.

          I enjoyed Oblivion myself, but I really don't want to see another RPG replicate it's flaws. I can barely even start the damn game anymore without being turned off by them. Maybe Fallout's setting and character interaction will win overall, but it seems to me most previews won't go into much detail here. I don't understand why.

          • Ebu legacy 10 years legacy 20 years
            reply
            July 14, 2008 8:25 AM

            Because surely they will learn nothing from Oblivion and will remake the game in FO3.

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 7:19 AM

          I'm getting really tired of hearing this from people who think they know what's going.

          Fallout created an immensely detailed, interesting, and living world around the player. Fallout was filled with character and soul, and that's why people loved it. These are all things Oblivion completely failed to do, even with 10 years of advancement in technology. Oblivion took place in a largely dead world with nothing of interest. This is what people think of when they're hear "it's just like Oblivion!" and rightly so -- what Oblivion missed the mark on the most is what gave Fallout much of its charm, and to think Bethesda would miss it again with FO3 is a huge disappointment.

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 7:41 AM

            I've been following Fallout when it was still a GURPS game. I know what is going on. . What gave Fallout its charm was its setting. There has been no indication that will be missing from Fallout 3.

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 7:49 AM

            I think 10 years of advancement in technology hurts the soulful living world thing, rather than helping it. When you're looking characters right in the eye and hearing their voice, you have to get a LOT more right and do a LOT more work on just that one moment as opposed to having a sprite just stand there on the screen and have a bunch of text for you to click through. Let's just hope they get it all right in any case.

            Then like I said elsewhere, in this article anyway the guy clearly likes oblivion. When he says it's like that it probably means something quite different than if a big critic says it.

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 7:44 AM

          I love you but that's such a shitty analogy.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 7:12 AM

        Because people love to point out when things are "flawed." They play for 50 hours straight then look back later and decide they in fact did not like it or something.

        Oblivion had some dumb things in it, like a lot of generic dungeons and out of the way areas, the fact that everybody had the same voice, the level-matched monsters, and other dumb stuff like that. But somehow this makes the entire rest of the game unworkable for some people.

        Or maybe people want something out of it that isn't there, like productive random dungeon crawling, etc.

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 7:16 AM

          I think mostly it's because people wanted a game that took advantage of the PC instead of the console, and the realized potential was never reached or even attempted. In the beginning, the fantastic graphics and atmosphere dazzled us, but the further into the game we got, the more we realized how much was missing, inferior, and what sacrifices were made to get the game out quickly on the Xbox 360.

          Oblivion could've been so much more, but wasn't. Now the prospect of Fallout 3 falling under the same trap is not an appealing idea.

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 7:17 AM

            ^^^ This

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 7:20 AM

            blaming Oblivions flaws on the fact that it came out for the 360 as well as PC is foolish and completely lacks merit. Level scaling wasn't for the console, procedurally generated environments weren't for the console, the same flat NPCs and AI that existed in Morrowind weren't for the console, the inventory system was as bad as Morrowind and wasn't for the console, so how exactly was the 360 the reason it was inferior?

            • reply
              July 14, 2008 7:53 AM

              There's been numerous interviews with Pete Hines and Todd Howard of Bethesda before and after the game came out that had them acknowledging that they made sacrifices, cut corners, and specifically wanted to "mainstream" the game.

              Numerous skills removed and consolidated, inventory interface with super-large font and incredibly inefficient for mouse use, simple combat system to make it easy on a gamepad, and that's on top of the numerous problems the game suffered from being rushed to meet the launch deadline of the Xbox 360 which made the game feel incomplete as you digged further in.

              • reply
                July 14, 2008 8:39 AM

                Maybe they decided those skills were superfluous and better left consolidated rather than make you grind out 4 skills to do simple stuff? Nothing about the combat makes me think it was bad because of the console, it was bad in Morrowind as well. The games just didn't have well designed combat systems. I'm sure some things were cut, but the vast majority of the game was there. It's not like they decided at the last minute to stop hand crafting things and switch to a procedural model. Or that they didn't write any NPC dialogue until the last 2 months and then suddenly had to rush it all. The game was what it was and if you don't like what was there blaming it on the 360 is just a silly scapegoat but I know you love using it.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 7:21 AM

        I always felt oblivion was somewhat mediocre - certain parts were OUTSTANDING (dark brotherhood, thieves' guild, etc.) but it was wrapped up in a shitload of very very mediocre filler. If as much care and creativity had gone into the rest of the game as those certain great aspects then I would have liked it much more.

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 7:22 AM

          I had the unfortunate luck of doing both those questlines only a few hours into the game. "This is definitely GOTY" I thought. However nothing even came close to this quality after that.

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 7:30 AM

            How quickly can you do those two? My first character had 80+ hours before the expansion and the Thieves' guild and Dark Brotherhood were his main existence. I'm sure I did a ton of side quests and some wandering though.

            But that's one of my hopes for Fallout 3. They were originally planning on a smaller world with more of the concentrated awesome like those things. I know they said the world ended up growing larger but I hope that's just because they needed more places for the awesome. =(

            The one thing that should definitely have been higher quality was the oblivion gates. Looking back, they pretty much mean nothing in my memory of the game. Just some of the situations I got into. I mean, I can deal with filler if it's some random cave in the countryside, it at least can feel real and random even if not making for the best gameplay, but the gates were central to the main story.

            But then again, we all know the side stuff was far better than the main story anyway.

            • reply
              July 14, 2008 7:34 AM

              I think I was an extremely low level, because stealing meant something. Every new item I stole I wore. I also *had* to hide from the guards because I was not physically able to fight back. So I'm pretty sure it was the first few hours of the game, as I hadn't yet touched anything else.

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 7:24 AM

          I still haven't done those quest lines (I played a good char) and I still loved the game and still love it when I fire it up.

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 7:27 AM

            That's fine, different people like different things :) Just how I felt!

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 7:32 AM

            You've gotta gear up for another playthrough then. Not only are those quest lines most people's favorite, but sneaking and stealing and assassinating is fun too.

            • reply
              July 14, 2008 7:34 AM

              Only 2 parts of the game worth a damn honestly. Everything else seemed to be there just to be there.

              • reply
                July 14, 2008 7:44 AM

                including all the other factions and the smaller side quests?

            • reply
              July 14, 2008 7:37 AM

              I never did those either. I keep meaning to go back and try but never do.

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 7:33 AM

          Go in to the exact same Hell level for the 7th time to get the same damn orb and kill the same damn enemies.

          I was so tired of the main quest by the time I got to the last Hell dimension I just had a invisibility spell I chain cast and avoided all enemies to get the orb.

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 7:35 AM

            The main quest in Oblivion was the weakest part of the game in my opinion. I think I did two gates and that was it.

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 7:37 AM

            Thats what I did until I got even more fed up and only did the main quest gates. I lost a lot of those gems, but fuck it just wasn't worth the monotony.

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 7:37 AM

          It didn't really keep me interested long enough to get that far. I just didn't enjoy the combat system, the inventory system was frustrating, I had no idea where to go, etc. Maybe if there was a better tutorial.

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 7:41 AM

            You didn't know where to go? But people complained and even made mods to remove the stuff where it pointed you to exactly where you needed to go! I guess it just goes to show you can't please everybody. =)

            I liked it FWIW. You could wander wherever you wanted looking for side shit to do, but if you wanted to get back to a particular quest you just selected it and you knew right where to head.


            I don't have much of an opinion on the combat, since I was usually hiding and picking people off, not doing any traditional fighting. I enjoyed that though. But the point of a game like this IMO almost doesn't even involve the combat at all, so I really doubt it could've hurt my enjoyment of it.

            • reply
              July 14, 2008 7:56 AM

              Well, maybe if the game was better, there wouldn't be a million mods required to make it playable.

              • reply
                July 14, 2008 1:55 PM

                Huh? You replied as if I said the opposite of what I said. You had a problem with not knowing where to go, where in fact the game tells you EXACTLY where to go. It was TOO helpful for some people, hence the modding.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 7:22 AM

        vocal minority of 5 people or so out of a couple hundred, rest of us know we enjoyed it and are tired of defending it years later.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 9:59 AM

        [deleted]

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 5:32 PM

        Oblivion is awesome, but it's not what we want Fallout 3 to be.

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 7:05 AM

      sounds fine to me

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 7:07 AM

      Sounds great to me.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 7:11 AM

        apart from "Even the inventory system and interface is taken right out of the last Elder Scrolls"

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 7:15 AM

        hi chazums. You missed out on some epic rockbanding!

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 7:26 AM

          I can only imagine :( Where are the pics?

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 7:09 AM

      I heard something that worried me - charisma and intelligence won't affect dialogue in the game?

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 7:13 AM

        Where'd you hear this?

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 7:18 AM

          i read that too but I don't remember where. Thats one thing I will miss. I loved playing a stupid persion in Fallout 1 & 2 (and Arcanum which was very much like Fallout 1 & 2 from the same developers) Gotta love wuests like: "GO TO BIG CAVE, GO KILL BAD GUY!"

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 7:35 AM

            I guess I wouldn't find it too hard to believe. If everything is voice acted, then I could see the decision to remove stuff that really complicates the dialog without really helping the game/story/quests. After all in Fallout it's just a few bytes of text.

            I'll only like it or agree with it though if they do it so they can make the rest awesome.

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 7:21 AM

          Well on NMA, but I can't find any evidence of it. ARe they just mad? They're probably just mad.

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 7:27 AM

            As long as we don't have that godawful conversation minigame from Oblivion.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 7:18 AM

        Wouldn't surprise me. Bethesda cut out many skills and character traits in Oblivion to make it more "mainstream".

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 7:24 AM

        I believe I heard you won't be able to have a grunting character with <3 INT (and who cares? it was funny for the first few minutes but its purely a gimmick in the previous Fallout games). There will surely be stats that influence dialogue, there's absolutely no reason they'd take that out.

        If you look at the design docs and interviews about the original Fallout 3 (ie Van Buren by Black Isle) you'll see they thought a lot about changing the way stats influence dialogue. In Fallout 1 and 2 there was very little for a smart or charismatic character to do. You had INT and CHA (and as far as I know CHA really didn't affect dialogue that much and its primary use was increasing the number of NPCs you could have at once) and Speech and Barter (the latter was totally one dimensional). Black Isle was going to remove speech and break it into Persuasion and Deception among other things. So it would be hard for Bethesda to have less than FO1+2 in FO3 in terms of speech skills.

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 7:31 AM

          Well as I see it the reason for it's existence is making sure only smarter characters can talk their way out of things. Chances are if you put your bonus stats into your conversation and intelligence skills then you probably aren't as strong as a bruiser. Thus you *need* to have some sort of advantage,

          If they allowed strong barbarians to talk their way out of fights the game wouldn't make much sense.

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 7:33 AM

          /In Fallout 1 and 2 there was very little for a smart or charismatic character to do.]/

          No that's NWN :p

          Fallout had the option to be either a stealth sneaker type guy or a charismatic talky guy. You could finish the damn game very well as a pacifist. No other major RPG release made that a more viable option than Fallout did. Seriously.

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 7:35 AM

            Can you finish the mutant area in Fallout 1 like this though? I tried to talk my way out of it but those assholes wouldn't listen. I ended up having to have a very difficult fight.

            • reply
              July 14, 2008 7:42 AM

              It's been a little while but I believe you could submit to them and the Lieutenant and get taken straight to the Master but I could be wrong. I do remember having a difficult time fighting the Lieutenant multiple times

              • reply
                July 14, 2008 7:43 AM

                That's how it works, though its not as simple as that, if you're not smart enough you just get dipped in the vats.

                • reply
                  July 14, 2008 7:46 AM

                  yeah, that's why I couldn't remember if it was possible, because I've definitely had that happen. Alternatively according to gamefaqs it looks like you could avoid him altogether, set the self destruct sequence in the base (assuming you had a high enough science skill) and get out of there. But then you don't get to talk to the lieutenant and he's got some sweet background on FEV and such

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 7:38 AM

            I meant from a skills/items type standpoint. A combat character had tons of stats, skills and items to play with. A diplomatic character had INT, CHA, Speech and Barter where really only Speech regularly came into play (CHA and Barter almost never). You had tons of options as a diplomatic character in ways to progress but little in terms of playing things differently than another diplomat. There was no way to specialize in intimidation vs. deception or lying constantly vs. negotiating in good faith in terms of stats or skills, only by dialogue options which were all opened up by the exact same skill (Speech). So in that sense it would be difficult for Bethesda to have any fewer skills that influence dialogue since Speech is in there and that's basically all FO1/2 had even though it enabled a whole lot.

            • reply
              July 14, 2008 7:42 AM

              Oh, yes, yes that's true. Though they did allow for a lot of stuff that non-coms could do in a wider sense. Computers, lockpicking, stealth etc...

              • reply
                July 14, 2008 7:48 AM

                yeah, it was just often a little too specialized. Computers and Science were each extremely useful at certain points in the game but very few others (and those certain points needed high levels of the skills). Likewise for stuff like Repair. Lockpicking always seemed only somewhat useful and 99% of the time was just used to open some locked crates for extra loot. As I said before, the skill system definitely wasn't all that balanced.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 7:24 AM

        ?! I hope that's not true. That's one of the best things about the FO games' gameplay. Being able to talk yourself out of situations, or taking a conversation hit if your guy is a moron.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 7:26 AM

        There was a Charisma stat shown in a recent screenshot so it's safe to assume it will affect what you can/can't do via conversations.

        What else would Charisma do?

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 7:28 AM

          Sorry, it's called Speech rather than Charisma:

          http://www.shacknews.com/screenshots.x?gallery=10190&game_id=4244&id=122003

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 7:32 AM

            That's the Speech skill. There's also a Charisma stat (the "C" in the "S.P.E.C.I.A.L." system).

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 7:29 AM

          in FO1+2 it was mostly used to carry more NPCs in your party at once. INT and to a much greater degree your Speech skill were pretty much what carried a diplomatic character. In any case yes FO3 uses the same SPECIAL system as FO1/2 so you've at the very least got those basic stats and then a new suite of skills as well.

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 7:16 AM

      You must be the sharp-shooter of Kvatch!

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 7:40 AM

        By Arroyo, By Arroyo, By Arroyo! It's the grand champion!

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 7:41 AM

          I hear the Slaver's Guild is recruiting. Good work, if you've got the Sulik for it.

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 7:21 AM

      Meh, this game fell off my radar a while back. I hope I'm pleasantly surprised by it, but it isn't really a must buy for me right now. Clear Skies is going to fill my post apocolyptic craving for this year it would seem.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 7:26 AM

        I love post apocalyptic stuff and am looking forward to Clear Skies but I also want a real RPG in that setting and STALKER is very far from a RPG.

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 7:31 AM

      No, what really makes Fallout 3's combat so badass is the creativity that Bethesda has worked into the battlefield. Take the Rock-it Launcher, for example. Though you can load it with explosive devices just as its name implies, you can also load it with just about anything else small enough to fit into it. One of the most enjoyable moments I had during the entire demo was stuffing the portable mortar with a bunch of stuffed teddy bears and decapitating angry mutants with them
      hah, I can't wait.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 7:37 AM

        Nice. Here's hoping there's awesome configurability and humor like that with a lot of the weapons.

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 7:35 AM

      I was hoping they'd take more cues from Vampire: Bloodlines.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 7:38 AM

        Playing through Arcanum and having finished Bloodlines I'm really pissed at what happened to Troika. :( If only they had better management and more QA they could have been so much more.

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 7:51 AM

          I haven't had a chance to play Arcanum, but Bloodlines is one of my favorite games of all time. Even though it was a FPS, it completely felt like it was made by the same team that made Fallout. From the way they handle characters, to the storyline and missions, it just feels similar for some reason.

          I think developing it on an incomplete engine that was constantly changing, and the subsequent early release that coincided with Halflife 2, pretty much sealed its fate and Troika's. I really do wish they were around still. I bet in this day and age of digital distribution, they would've done a bit better (hell, Bloodlines is still selling on Steam).

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 7:55 AM

            I loved Arcanum. Played through it 6 times. Never could get into Bloodlines.

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 7:56 AM

            Whoever decided to release Bloodlines around the same time as Half Life 2 really needs to be shot.

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 8:03 AM

            Arcanum has a metric shit-ton of flaws, but it's still a great game. I didn't play bloodlines, but I've been meaning to give it a try.

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 8:04 AM

            Yet, by many people's accounts here on Shacknews, you can't release a modern FPS RPG and have it function like Fallout. It "just wouldn't work".

            • reply
              July 14, 2008 8:09 AM

              what?

            • reply
              July 14, 2008 8:12 AM

              I think a lot of us had strong reservations about Oblivion, and are understandably cautious about seeing that game's mistakes getting repeated in our favorite franchise.

              Oblivion's biggest weakness, in my opinion, was a lack of atmosphere. Some people, not I, blame the first person perspective for part of that poor atmosphere. Fallout games are basically built entirely on atmosphere. It's easy to see how a company like Bethesda could repeat their mistakes from Oblivion on a new game like Fallout 3, and easy to see how people could latch on to specific qualities like perspective and go "SEE! SEE!"

              • reply
                July 14, 2008 8:18 AM

                See, I thought Oblivion did a great job with the atmosphere. It felt like it could be a real place, in part because the atmosphere was never really over the top or really heavy-handed.

                • reply
                  July 14, 2008 8:19 AM

                  For me a lot of that was generated by dialogue, universe fiction and so forth. In that regard Oblivion was horrible.

                  • reply
                    July 14, 2008 8:32 AM

                    Cyrrodil has huge quantities of universe fiction. For starters, every single book in the game has a story or bit of history or the like in it.

                    • reply
                      July 14, 2008 8:34 AM

                      And its all written horribly!

                      • reply
                        July 14, 2008 8:44 AM

                        Eh? Most of it seemed fine to me.

                    • reply
                      July 14, 2008 8:36 AM

                      the majority of the mythology shouldn't be communicated through silly books

                      • reply
                        July 14, 2008 8:41 AM

                        If most of it doesn't really matter to the completion of the story, why not? It's no different than the encyclopedia thing in Mass Effect or stumbling across computer records in Fallout. It's a way for people who are interested in the history of the world to learn about it without forcing it on the people who don't want to know, and without having NPCs constantly giving history lessons for no particularly good reason.

                        • reply
                          July 14, 2008 8:51 AM

                          its the ratio that I thought was off as well as how close they were to the main story. Fallout's tapes were few and far between and they were usually dense with a cool little subplot or history (and often were important to the story). Most of the atmosphere and mythology of Fallout was told through the gameplay, atmosphere, NPCs and dialogue. I didn't get that from Oblivion and then it means I have no desire to read through 1000s of books everywhere. Baldurs Gate 2 had those books everywhere and I loved BG2 but I'm still not going to waste time reading those books. Its sooo ancillary as to be uninteresting, where as Fallout was more like you've infiltrated some base and you want to know wtf and then you find some tapes of conversations between high ups revealing what the base is about. Oblivion's books were more 'history of the elvenkind' and it was just like fanfic for the super huge fans of the world but it was difficult to get to that level of fandom since I didn't think the world itself made me interested enough to read more.

                          • reply
                            July 14, 2008 8:58 AM

                            Oblivion definitely had a good number of "The History of Elvenkind"-type books, but it also had stuff more like the taped conversations. I've found diaries, fables, personal accounts, biographies, fiction, religious stories. I wasn't so much interested in the regular history books as all the other stuff.

                • reply
                  July 14, 2008 8:45 AM

                  I see where you're coming from, but I have to disagree. For me, every major dungeon type felt cool and atmospheric the first time, but once I started to see the patterns, they quickly became stale. There were some very memorable, atmospheric moments, but on the whole, I felt like I was descending into the same dungeons over and over again.

                  • reply
                    July 14, 2008 1:59 PM

                    Oblivion's atmosphere was to be found on the overworld and in the cities, not in the stupid dungeons.

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 10:06 AM

            I fucking loved Bloodlines. I have fond memories of playing my Malkavian who sported a huge fucking Cat in the Hat hat.

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 7:57 AM

      i heard they are working on Fallout 3.

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 8:04 AM

      I enjoyed Oblivion, I enjoyed Morrowind, but there are some seriously fucking stupid people in this thread. Everything good in Fallout is exactly what everything bad was in TES. These two games are essentially the antithesis from one another (as much as two western RPGs can be that), so why oh why can't you accept that some people are going to be a little worried about Fallout 3?

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 8:14 AM

        Everything good in Fallout is exactly what everything bad was in TES.

        I actually disagree with this somewhat. They both benefit from detailed worlds and histories. The primary areas Bethesda needs to improve on as compared to Fallout is a more compelling main story and better NPCs. It's something they're aware of and are working on. Since it's being directed by the guy in charge of the Dark Brotherhood quests, there's a pretty decent chance that they'll succeed.

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 8:24 AM

          I'm not sure there was much of a detailed history in Fallout, this was more conveyed through the main story line and one or two side quests( where as in TES you learn the history from books and dungeons and the main quest). I'd say if anything TES has the more detailed and consistent history.


        • reply
          July 14, 2008 8:24 AM

          Come again? Oblivion's environments were pretty, but the world itself lacked depth and character. After about five hours you realized everything was c/p'd n times to make it bigger than it should have been.

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 8:26 AM

          Since it's being directed by the guy in charge of the Dark Brotherhood quests

          I did not know this. That's hot.

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 8:05 AM

      So it has bland characters no one could ever give a shit about? I hope the guys who made the Thieves' Guild and Dark Brotherhood quests have a heavy hand in the quests for this game, because that was the only part of Oblivion I enjoyed.

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 8:11 AM

      Please please please put a better inventory system in!

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 8:12 AM

        I agree, since Fallout had a horrible inventory system see what I did there?

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 8:14 AM

          FO's system was bad but it was fuckin better on the PC then Oblivions.

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 8:24 AM

            Oblivion's inventory system sucked on consoles as well. It wasn't a PC vs console thing, it was a fucking terrible design thing.

            Putting everything into a huge list that you could only filter by 5 different types, in a game where playing naturally would leave you carrying literally hundreds of certain item types, was just dumb.

            A simple refinement would be to make it an inventory tree rather than flat lists, so you could at least collapse the sections you wanted to scroll past. Of course there are even better things that could be done to it with a bit more thought/work. I liked the idea someone on here had about letting people create their own filters.

            • reply
              July 14, 2008 8:29 AM

              What's wrong with a Diablo-esque inventory? http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/l-pirates5/diablo2.jpg

              I like being able to see what I'm equipping and where.

              Even World of Warcraft's inventory system is better.

              The problem is they have to make something that will work on consoles too. It's too bad they don't make a separate, more usable inventory system specifically for PC users that's not the dumbed down console version.

              • reply
                July 14, 2008 8:34 AM

                there's nothing preventing someone from doing an inventory like that on a console.

                • reply
                  July 14, 2008 8:37 AM

                  Yeah, RE4 had one didn't it? But that just proves why you can't - it's convoluted and cumbersome and crappy. It's not even fun on PC let alone on consoles.

                  Single slot icon inventories are the most optimal inventory system there is. Bar none.

                  • reply
                    July 14, 2008 8:40 AM

                    yeah, I agree, the problem that Morrowind and Oblivion had was those single slot icons were way too small and difficult to discern and there was far too much to sort through given the inefficient way to do it.

                    • reply
                      July 14, 2008 8:43 AM

                      Yeah, well the way you solve that is by just not fucking having that many items - I mean who wants to sort through that much shit no matter what the interface? Am I at work? Do I need to manage a spreadsheet? cRPGs are about making roleplaying immersive, they should be deep and complex and everything, but ultimately they should hide the numbers from you as much as possible.

                      • reply
                        July 14, 2008 8:46 AM

                        Are you saying that people shouldn't carry around so much shit, or are you complaining that the game let you pick up and carry too many things?

                        • reply
                          July 14, 2008 8:49 AM

                          I think one of the problems is that the game actually fed you shit. Randomized loot meant that you often opened up a treasure box and it was full of random crap, plates, forks, bread, whatever.

                          These items weren't even vendor trash, they were just regular trash, best to be discarded. Unfortunately, eventually people get tired of sifting through boxes for something good, and start using the "take all" button. This leads to inventory clutter.

                          If the loot was a little more streamlined, and I didn't have to worry about opening up a box full of medieval tupperwear, I don't think my inventory would've been so hard to manage.

                          • reply
                            July 14, 2008 9:05 AM

                            Based on what they've been saying, they're doing away with most or all the randomized stuff in Fallout 3. You may still find a lot of useless crap, but I don't think there's anything wrong with having a fictional world with a lot of the clutter you would find in the real world. It can give the world a more (formerly) lived in feeling, and might even be useful in a game with realistic physics.

                            In any case, I had more trouble dealing with all the potions that I made and never used than I did managing random clutter in boxes.

                            • reply
                              July 14, 2008 9:19 AM

                              I've heard the same things. I'm not saying I think fallout 3 is going to suck, I'm just saying there's a good reason for some of us to be more cautious than optimistic.

                        • reply
                          July 14, 2008 8:50 AM

                          I'm saying developers shouldn't design their games around the idea of players carrying hundreds of items. They should not expect that or encourage it.

                          • reply
                            July 14, 2008 2:10 PM

                            They shouldn't expect it? Isn't everybody complaining about how awful Oblivion's inventory system is when you get a lot of items? Isn't that just what would happen again?

                            If you're suggesting that devs should not allow players to pick up hundreds of items, fuck that. Being a packrat if you choose is just part of freeform RPGs.

              • reply
                July 14, 2008 8:37 AM

                Diablo or WoW systems don't take strength into account for carrying ability. Carrying capacity is often a significant benefit that can make a not-miserable strength score worthwhile even to non-brawlers.

                • reply
                  July 14, 2008 8:38 AM

                  That's why you unlock extra slots.

                • reply
                  July 14, 2008 9:35 AM

                  Use that inventory system but add a strength factor. Once you're full, you can't put more in. Pretty simple. I just don't want a stupid scroll list of my inventory.

              • reply
                July 14, 2008 10:35 AM

                That kind of inventory won't work if you need to be able to carry hundreds of objects.

                Maybe the fact you need to (well, not need to apart from a few keys, but I bet most of us ended up hoarding things like soul and energy crystals etc.) is what's wrong with Oblivion, rather than the inventory system?

                If they scale back the amount of shit you have to carry, or just let you mark stuff as "Keep" "Sell" and "Not looked at yet" and allow you to filter on that, that might be enough.

                • reply
                  July 14, 2008 12:42 PM

                  I never said scale back anything. Just have multiple tabs for the amount of stuff you're carrying. Just let me see it nice a big instead of a small line of text and an even tinier icon.

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 8:26 AM

            yeah, but I'd say that was partly due to the increased complexity in Oblivion. If Fallout had as many different equipable slots and usable items and was real time its inventory would be just as bad. Especially FO1.

            • reply
              July 14, 2008 8:36 AM

              What? No the reason Oblivions interface sucked is because doing even simple things like dropping an item was horribly unintuitive. In Fallout you just right clicked to get the menu and chose the drop icon. Oblivion was like a drag + hold down some key or something and if you got it wrong it would just put the item in your hand... god I don't even wanna fucking think about it. And that's a problem that's got nothing to do with complexity.

              convoluted I can handle, illogical design kills me man. Oblivion is just... it's a horror. It's a dick in this PC gamers eye.

              • reply
                July 14, 2008 8:53 AM

                it was horrible, but Fallout's was pretty bad too. A giant list you had to click through with no ability to organize anything. If Fallout had as many things as Oblivion it would be even worse but Fallout didn't require you to dig through your inventory nearly as often as Oblivion. But yes Oblivion definitely was worse, I just like that in these threads everyone always harps on how bad Oblivion's inventory was (myself included) and forgets that it wasn't exactly a strong suit of Fallout

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 8:16 AM

      Did you save your game in a brand new slot before posting this?

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 8:32 AM

      You know this is getting old.

      Not necessarily targeted at you, but:

      Whenever someone mentions how Fallout 3 is going to be Oblivion with guns, some folks (myself included) say, "No big deal; sounds fun." They are immediately attacked and disparaged by "true Fallout fans". That is bullshit.

      I played Fallout and Fallout 2 in 1997 and 1998. I still have the original discs. I have the original Vault Dweller's Guide manuals. I love Fallout, and this handoff to Bethesda is fine. I am not worried at all.

      I just don't like the insinuation that if you don't like this new iteration, it means you don't "appreciate" Fallout or you're not an old-school fan. Bull.

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 8:38 AM

      so basically it says the same map and inventory, but is different in most everything else? I can live with that... the combat sounds more interesting and I think they'll get a better atmosphere and more fun out of this then the ES. If they want like a million brownie points though they could actually fucking set the interface up for PC.

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 8:45 AM

      IT'S A FACT!

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 8:52 AM

      why is this bad? Oblivion was a great game that everyone here loved.

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 9:05 AM

      http://www.shacknews.com/laryn.x?id=17415376

      I'll still end up buying the damn game anyway.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 9:25 AM

        Oooh, I hadn't seen that trailer yet!

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 9:16 AM

      So, pretty much awesome?

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 9:17 AM

      Perfect!!

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 9:20 AM

      FUCK THE FALLOUT FANBOYS. BRING ON FALLOUT 3. Part of me almost hopes they totally screw it up, just so these fucking fallout fanboy faggots (FFFF for short) just off themselves.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 9:23 AM

        They won't off themselves. They'll just start shouting "I TOLD YOU SO".

        Actually, they'll do that even if Fallout 3 is pure awesome in liquid form.

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 9:45 AM

          Even though I'm hopeful, I don't think there's any way in hell Fallout 3 is going to be pure awesome in liquid form, as you say. As much as people like to hate on people pointing it out, the more its like Oblivion, the worse it gets. And as far as we can tell, it reeks of Oblivion the more we find out about it.

          The only thing I wanted from Oblivion in this Fallout was the open, detailed, first person world. That's IT. They could have ported Fallout 2 over from that for all I would have cared.

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 9:51 AM

            One of my favorite things in Fallout (and PS:T) was the descriptions given when investigating certain things in the world. They did a significant amount to add character and charm to the world, as well as give your character some personality beyond the cardboard cutout seen in most of these types of rpgs (including Oblivion). I'm absolutely positive these things won't be in FO3, and think the game will be much worse for it. :(

            • reply
              July 14, 2008 9:55 AM

              Then don't buy it, replay Fallout 2.

              • reply
                July 14, 2008 10:04 AM

                Hell, I'm buying it. I'm just sad at what could have been.

                • reply
                  July 14, 2008 10:10 AM

                  Same. I'm just sadden that my favorite part of those games is largely considered outdated because developers think graphics are "good enough." Graphics will never be "good enough" to add the sort of charm and character these descriptions did in Fallout and Torment. All you're left with is the lifeless and stale world of Oblivion.

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 2:13 PM

            Of course it won't. You've already decided it's shit. When you play it, any time something good happens you'll say "well it's SUPPOSED to be like that" and any time something happens that you don't like, you'll add another notch to the "GOD THIS IS HORRIBLE" meter.

            All you're really doing at the end of the day though is ruining the game for yourself before you've ever tried it.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 9:27 AM

        You're such an awesome shacker. Really, you are. I mean it. Totally not being sarcastic in any way.

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 9:32 AM

          Have you ever played Counterstrike Source with him?

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 9:35 AM

            No. My understanding is CS:S tends to amplify very specific "characteristics" of an individual. If the same is true here, I can only imagine...

            • reply
              July 14, 2008 1:25 PM

              aww you are so cute. I too enjoy almost every one of your posts, considering how fucking retarded they are 95% of the time. I guess we see something in each other:)

              • reply
                July 14, 2008 1:30 PM

                oh, I read some of your wonderful posts in this thread, no wonder you were so offended I coined the term FFFF, which apparently is starting to catch on farther down in the thread. You are one of those FFFF's hahaha oh man. Great, I hope you and your NMA buddies don't hire a hit man to come get me for not hating anything that isn't old junk.

                Yeah thats right, I just called fallout 1/2 old junk. In fact I played through both of them and thought they were both insanely over-rated, I had trouble even forcing myself to get past the first 10% of F2 it was so horrid. Jesus, Nostalgia turns some people into fucking morons.

                • reply
                  July 14, 2008 1:36 PM

                  "Yeah thats right, I just called fallout 1/2 old junk. In fact I played through both of them and thought they were both insanely over-rated, I had trouble even forcing myself to get past the first 10% of F2 it was so horrid. Jesus, Nostalgia turns some people into fucking morons."

                  Then why are you awaiting a third game in a series you don't even like, proceeding to mock fans of said original? Troll much?

                  • reply
                    July 14, 2008 1:55 PM

                    I enjoyed Oblivion quite a bit. If Fallout 3 is in fact Oblivion with guns, well then bring it on, ill be a happy camper. Especially not having to deal with two of the things that irked me the most about Fallout 1/2: Horrible graphics (and obviously this was a limitation of the technology) and turn based combat. The trailers for Fallout 3 look spectacular. And while that in itself doesn't mean it will be great, I have enough confidence in Bethesda to know that this is a game I will pick up and play for a whole bunch of hours.

                    I fail to see what wanting to play Fallout 3 even has to do with whether I consider Fallout 1 or 2 to be good games? I disliked the mechanics in those two games, the story and setting was still great though, why does that mean I can't enjoy the 3rd.

                    I honestly don't understand what some people are holding on to with Fallout 1/2. The complaining reminds me of a little guy being held at arms length by a much bigger guy and swinging wildly to no effect. At first its just sad and pathetic, then it becomes funny, and then its just downright played out. Nobody gives a damn what a very small, very vocal minority thinks.

                    And I think myself, and many other people who are looking forward to this game are getting tired of having every single article/interview/trailer/screenshot have a bunch of raving idiots following the news story around saying it can and will never live up to the original games. Well thank god. I hope it doesn't, because the original games (and this is my opinion) were crappy. Everything released so far IMO looks fucking outstanding, so its obnoxious to have some guy standing around going "no way man, that is garbage, it can never hold up to true story telling". Yeah, tell me once, okay I got, you disagree, follow the conversation spouting the same bullshit into every single screenshot/trailer/interview/whatever thread and now its just annoying. I guess thats why iv just stopped trying to write reasonable posts concerning fallout, its much easier to deal with it by fighting fire with fire.

                    I guess I could have made this my original post, but nobody would have read it. Its the shack, its much easier to get attention by typing in caps, calling someone a faggot, or claiming your a girl.

                    • reply
                      July 14, 2008 1:59 PM

                      Well if you want my personal opinion anyone who didn't enjoy Fallout 1 and 2 probably isn't a fan of the genre at all, and frankly it's very telling that you enjoyed Oblivion and the gameplay trailer for Fallout 3. Very telling.

                      You attack fans because they want a sequel that lives up the original games? Wow. So I guess it's okay if Splinter Cell 5 is a tactical strategy game right? Fuck the haters. Faggots. Let's all praise it because it's brand new right? Thats what you are doing.

                    • reply
                      July 14, 2008 2:07 PM

                      So... you're sitting there calling people idiots, faggots, fanboys, morons and whatever other insult you can not just without a clue as to where they're coming from, but without even bothering to read the cause for their caution? I don't think a single person here has cited turn-based combat as the cause for their apprehension, but instead the differences in environment presented by both Oblivion and Fallout.

                      Many of the concerns about Fallout 3 are based on Oblivion's obvious shortcomings coinciding with Fallout's greatest strengths. This has nothing to do with combat or graphics, and everything with environment, atmosphere, and charm. You cannot create a living, fluid world with thousands of NPCs and six voice actors each with a dozen lines of dialog. You cannot create an interesting, believable environment with a hundred different areas to explore and four tilesets. This is exactly what Oblivion attempted to do and failed, which is why people have reservations of Bethesda tackling the Fallout universe.

                      What it comes down to is this: if you want something visually stunning that's pinnacle of graphical fidelity, then Oblivion is reason enough to believe you'll be happy with Fallout 3. If you want something with the attention to detail, care, and breadth of a Fallout game, then Oblivion fills you with a sense of dread. This isn't to say Bethesda is up to the challenge, but their previous endeavors aren't exactly indicative of what should be expected by a Fallout game.

                      • reply
                        July 14, 2008 2:10 PM

                        I say just forget it. He's on the majority side unfortunately and people don't give a shit. Negative opinion about Bethesda/Fallout 3 = fanboy. Thats how it is.

                        • reply
                          July 14, 2008 2:13 PM

                          Yeah, I came to that conclusion when he started complaining about the graphics of a game released in 1997. Oh well.

                        • reply
                          July 14, 2008 3:04 PM

                          Its probably your best option. Your not going to convince me your right, and im not going to convince you that i'm right. You can say whatever you want about oblivions "short-comings" and fallouts "strengths" and all this other stuff I think is fanboy bullshit, and it doesn't really matter, because its your opinion.

                          Like I said my problem is not that I don't understand where you are coming from, or that I dont understand why you think Fallout 3 won't be great. Ive played as many or more RPG's than you have from every genre of RPGs and Ive thoroughly enjoyed most of them, fallout 1 and 2 were an exception. But if makes you feel better lumping me in with the "oh he just like flashy graphics and shallow story and gameplay" crowd then go ahead. I dont mind having to hear people voice their opinions on a game once or twice. Its the fact that i've had to hear you and others spout off about it nonstop, thats what makes you a fanboy. Its like you just won't let go, like if you continue to shit up every fallout 3 thread bethesda will magically be like "whoa wait a minute, these 250 angry guys over here are right, lets shut it all down and make the game they want". You want some truth, if the NMA people, and most of the other fallout fanboys got the exact game they wanted. IT WOULD FUCKING SUCK.

                • reply
                  July 14, 2008 1:43 PM

                  What the hell are you talking about?

                  At most I've expressed concern over whether or not Bethesda can accurately capture Fallout's character and atmosphere, given the overall lifeless world they created with Oblivion. In general I remain cautiously optimistic. How does this put me on par with the NMA people, and make me a "fucking fallout fanboy faggot?" Also, why exactly are you waiting for FO3 if you hated FO1 and 2 so much?

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 6:14 PM

        congratulations

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 9:22 AM

      that sounds fine to me since, just like oblivion, if some aspect of the game design is shitty a modder will come along and fix it.

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 9:24 AM

      I remain cautiously optimistic

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 9:38 AM

      I love the Elder Scrolls series as much as anyone. I've spent a lot of time studying the lore out of game, and even more time actually playing. The series is engrossing, and I can't wait for TES4 to be announced.

      That said, Fallout 3 shouldn't be TES4. Especially considering it's not even their IP to screw with. (I know they own it, doesn't make it theirs.) I understand that a game that plays exactly like the original Fallouts wouldn't sell well today except to hardcore fans, so the gameplay has to evolve... but evolving into post-apocalyptic Oblivion really isn't the direction I wanted to see (although I fully expected it, I just don't want to let go of hope).

      I still reserve the right to play it and make a final decision, but this is exactly the opposite of what I wanted to hear... even as a huge TES fan.

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 9:42 AM

      I don't care. It's shipping with a lunchbox and a bobble head. FUCK THE HATERS.

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 9:52 AM

      I wrote a Fallout 3 preview in the latest issue* of PlayStation: The Official Magazine! Go read it! /shill

      * There might be a newer issue on stands, now. Look for the one with the exclusive MGS4 review on the cover; it's in there.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 10:25 AM

        I don't suppose there's an online version somewhere?

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 9:57 AM

      IT'S THE HERO OF KLAMATH

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 10:05 AM

      It's gonna be great when this game comes out and the overwhelming majority of people, including those of us who enjoyed the first two Fallout games, are going to be enjoying the shit out of it while a small, angry community of uber-vocal "fans" bitch about everything possible. Hell, I'll even wade into the shitbog of NMA at that point, just to watch the crying.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 10:06 AM

        :D that is more or less my own thought process so far.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 10:10 AM

        Dude yeah I'll enjoy the shit out of it, but still I can see how people would be upset. It's like making a Planescape Torment sequel, except as a FPS with fantastic graphics and a quarter of the dialogue of the original. I'd say Bethesda is quite like the id Software or Crytek of RPGs, they push the boundaries on graphics/immersion but aren't always up to snuff on story, voice acting, etc. compared to some other RPG houses.

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 10:11 AM

          why don't we wait for the game to come out before we make analogies that involve 1/4 of the dialogue?

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 10:16 AM

            GOD, FINE. You win. Suck the joy right out of my life :<

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 10:11 AM

          Also, they tend to release their shit with a ton of bugs/crashes.

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 10:14 AM

          Re: voice acting

          FFS Bethesda is the worst about this. How many more voice actors could they have hired if they didn't have Patrick Stewart in for his six lines of dialog? Now they have Liam Neisen in Fallout 3? Ugg...

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 10:14 AM

        I'll bet that this is going to be the ugliest game release in gaming history, so far. And I'm not talking about the quality of the game. The level of hate and vitriol that is going to cut loose on the Internet is going to make people's heads spin like that kid in that horror movie.

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 10:48 AM

          It's like a Blizzard release, those games always seem to evoke some sort of roaring, unfocused hatred in the fanbase. I think you're right though, it'll be worse than a Blizzard release because Fallout fanboys are like Blizzard fanboys, but starved half to death.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 10:14 AM

        i bitch about it a lot and i fucking hated oblivion but i'll probably end up liking it. this seems like a dumb preview because this retard seems to think oblivion was the pinnacle of gaming

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 10:28 AM

          wow, you really HATED it?
          I never played any of the previous Elder Scrolls installments, but (flaws put aside) I find it hard to believe how anyone could go as far as hate it.
          Granted.. I've never played Fallout 1 + 2 either, but to me I'm pretty psyched about 3 after reading that preview.

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 10:32 AM

            Why is it so hard to believe?

            Oblivion had a good 5-10 hours of gameplay when everything was still "new." After that it was just a copy/paste fest of content. Three dungeons, four voice actors, an abortion of a NPC interaction system, boring loot, Oblivion gates, more fed-ex style missions, etc.

            • reply
              July 14, 2008 10:42 AM

              I guess we have different definitions of hate as far as a game goes

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 11:53 AM

        I like how it's okay to assume it's going to be the greatest thing since sliced bread and "hahahaha stoopid fanboys" but to do the reverse is unthinkable and "fanboyish". The hypocrisy amongst fans of bethesda is getting a little too hard to swallow you know that?

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 10:20 AM

      FFFF

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 10:20 AM

      will it have some type of multiplayer or co-op mode?

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 10:42 AM

        Nope. But these are the type of single-player games that give you bucketfuls of content and replayability, which makes up for not having a MP component.

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 11:01 AM

          I disagree with you ... I loved Morrowind, I would have been playing Morrowind for years later if I could simply pay with other people.

          The only major issue with these types of single-player games is the lack of ability to play with other people, or MP.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 11:14 AM

        Never, ever, They don't "believe" in multiplayer for their games.

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 10:25 AM

      Despite those quotes, and despite not really liking Oblivion, that preview really does have me excited for how this game is going to turn out. That and that interview that was posted a week or two ago make me really excited to pick this up.

      I just wish the preview went into more detail about character interaction.

      Also, stop bitching you fucking fools, all of you. I'm so ashamed to be a gamer after reading this thread that it makes me fucking sick to my stomach.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 10:30 AM

        You should hop off the internet if you can't handle differing opinions.

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 10:35 AM

          Differing opinions are okay, especially since I don't really fall into either camp as far as this game goes. I'm just turned off by some of the fanaticism I've seen here.

          Hopping off the internet IS a really excellent idea though.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 10:32 AM

        Also, I hope Bethesda does release mod tools for this game eventually, because a Classic Fallout mod could be the perfect middle ground between you yankees and confederates. Oh, that reminds me, is there slavery in F3? I do miss getting a shotgun wedding because I slept with a farmer's daughter, only to sell her off into slavery later because I'm poor.

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 10:27 AM

      i'm sorry, but this game doesn't have enough color and rainbows, i will start an interweb petition immediately!

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 10:27 AM

      Are people forgetting that people were saying oblivion sucked without user addons? Oblivion was a broken game when it shipped for the PC.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 10:37 AM

        I think everyone is forgetting the Oblivion Love Fest that was rampant here when it came out. Can't you guys remember the Oblivion chatty's for the first week of release?

        Short term memory here.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 10:46 AM

        How was it broken? That makes no sense. How did it get such good reviews.

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 10:55 AM

          AAA games always get good reviews.

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 11:00 AM

            oh please

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 11:01 AM

            Like Assassin's Creed and Kane & Lynch?

            • reply
              July 14, 2008 11:32 AM

              Assassin's Creed was reviewed very well.

              I didn't think Kane & Lynch was considered "AAA."

              • reply
                July 14, 2008 11:36 AM

                Assassin's Creed had a weird pattern of reviews, both from players and review sites. Some people gave it really good scores (mid 8s to 9s). Others gave it very average scores (mid 7s).

                • reply
                  July 14, 2008 11:44 AM

                  Assassin's Creed was the ultimate "this game has extremely bland combat, poor story, pointless missions, and is extremely repetitive so we give it a 9.5" game. There was an obvious disconnect between the scores and the actual text of the reviews.

                  Maybe I should have said "scores" instead of "reviews," but I still contest "AAA" games still get an automatic 8.5+ review independent of quality.

                  • reply
                    July 14, 2008 11:48 AM

                    I think you're overstating the severity of the text of the reviews. A lot of people (myself included) thought the combat was good fun and enjoyed the story.

                    I agree that it's not a 9+ game, but I thought it was a solid 8-8.5.

                  • reply
                    July 14, 2008 2:34 PM

                    [deleted]

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 3:07 PM

            hahaha okay tin foil hat guy

            • reply
              July 14, 2008 5:01 PM

              hmm.. odd post as it is fairly obvious that the standards of video game reviews is appalling, outside of a few sources. That's why the hyper negative 'zero punctuation' exists and is so popular.

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 10:59 AM

          the damage system was all screwed up. That and I tried stealing in 3rd person for hours only to have a shacker tell me I couldn't because there isn't a stealth meter(iirc) in 3rd person.

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 11:11 AM

          Ummm... Lets see. If you go down to Hackdirt and Have the Brethren beat you senseless with weak ass clubs for ten minutes in a medium level armor your armor skill will skyrocket. This is because not only is your armor strong compared to the weak clubs its also because you're technically taking hits regardless of the damage.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 10:52 AM

        There were problems, but it was far from broken. It sure as hell wasn't improved by cheap hacks like OOO.

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 10:57 AM

          [deleted]

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 11:03 AM

            Completely unbalanced, palette-swapped "new" monsters, terrible difficulty scaling, grindy, etc. It's a lot of big changes sure, but they're all completely unpolished and amateurish.

            • reply
              July 14, 2008 11:07 AM

              [deleted]

              • reply
                July 14, 2008 11:16 AM

                I got owned how? By not having patience with terrible game design choices, derivative art, and superficial changes? If that's the case, then yes I got my ass chewed on. I have no patience for sloppy work targeted at tiny, hardcore demographics.

                • reply
                  July 14, 2008 11:33 AM

                  This is why I don't generally use "rebalance" mods in games. It's easier to assume that random dudes on the Internet don't know shit about balance and only use mods that cause minor changes rather than try various overhauls and hope one isn't retarded.

                • reply
                  July 14, 2008 5:05 PM

                  OOO made the game so much more fun. There became an actual point to exploring and adventuring, which it became clear was a worthless experience in Oblivion (unlike Morrowind though) after a while.

                  Balancing wasn't perfect by any means but it was a good attempt at fixing the huge issues Oblivion had.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 10:56 AM

        [deleted]

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 11:28 AM

        Worked great on 360.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 11:50 AM

        No it wasn't, it was a fucking blast. Mods made it better, sure, but it was far from broken.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 11:51 AM

        Maybe if your problems with the game were related to those fixes. Mine were not. (Granted I only read the changelogs regarding the major changes when I was interested in it, but it didn't sound like they addressed major complaints)

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 2:29 PM

        [deleted]

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 10:50 AM

      [deleted]

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 11:05 AM

      Now that just sounds freaking awesome :D

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 11:07 AM

      Is the PS3 version going to be released the same time as the 360 one? I couldn't find that info.

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 11:07 AM

      I hope they've learned from past mistakes and are hiring a bunch of voice actors to do all of the characters. I got tired of hearing the two voice actors they had for Oblivion (I think they were in Morrowind too). Seriously I would rather have each NPC/character have a distinct voice than having a big-name actor like Patrick Stewart or, in this case, Liam Neeson.

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 11:11 AM

      Of course they are going to invoke the name of a monster hit.

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 11:12 AM

      Oblivion with guns: Good
      Using the same shitty console interface: Bad.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 12:16 PM

        will that shit be moddable on the PC? The oblivion modders had the UI fixed inside of 2 hours of release.

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 12:21 PM

          they said no mod tools on release, but the oblivion mods weren't done via tools anyway.. using the same engine, so probably?

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 11:31 AM

      i just hope they hired someone who knows how to animate properly. Morrowing and Oblivion's animation was god awful.

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 12:11 PM

      Anyway after all the bitching and arguing, heres what the game looks like -

      http://www.gametrailers.com/player/36197.html

      Great combat, VATS does show potential. Of course I don't like that yet again they chose to showcase only combat. Spoilers blah blah yes - but show me something besides this. Right now it looks like Stalker, only without the real life guns.

      Not much to go on here, but I kept wondering why everything was firing at him without warning. Is this how you travel between cities?

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 1:41 PM

        I got even more psyched after that video thats for sure.

        A lot of questions left still yep, but so far so good

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 1:56 PM

        I haven't heard anything about 'fast travel' of some sort but I haven't read everything (don't want to read many spoilers). I know there aren't player controlled vehicles but if walking takes any significant amount of time they'll surely have a faster way to get across the landmass

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 2:01 PM

          If Oblivion could have horses, Fallout 3 should have motorcycles, dammit.

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 2:23 PM

            The reasoning I heard was that it worked in Oblivion because there were lots of wide open spaces where as Fallout is more compact and filled with stuff. Look at that 5 minute walkthrough from the conference and try to pick out how much of that terrain a motorcycle could handle. There are obstacles everywhere and the ground isn't even either.

            • reply
              July 14, 2008 2:31 PM

              oh well, maybe fallout 4

              • Ebu legacy 10 years legacy 20 years
                reply
                July 14, 2008 3:14 PM

                Every game is better with Motorcycles.

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 2:02 PM

          No vehicles? How will I live out my Mad Max fantasies?

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 3:00 PM

            You will need:

            1. Leather Jacket
            2. Dog
            3. Handcuffs
            4. Hacksaw
            5. Some dude that pissed you off.

            Let us know how it turns out.

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 2:44 PM

          there IS fast travel

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 5:52 PM

          There's fast travel similar to that in Oblivion.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 5:51 PM

        Re everyone shooting at him: The player did shoot first. The bandits (or maybe ghouls? or both?) were entirely justified in returning fire.

        And the guy near the turret dropped his weapon and ran for his worthless little life when the player shot at him with a laser rife. \m/

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 12:13 PM

      sounds good to me!

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 1:57 PM

      Well then, I want it.

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 2:21 PM

      oblivion's inventory interface kinda sucked though -- who gives a shit how familiar it is?

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 3:10 PM

      I think the game looks awesome. I am excited that the game is being made into a 3d environment, that it is being improved and updated, and that i will get to visit the fallout universe once again.

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 5:20 PM

      2 things - watch the HD trailer on the PS3 store! it looks MUCH better than the lowres version. its not nearly as bland as the lowres makes it out to be.

      ALSO - call 1-888-Vault-Tec!

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 5:34 PM

        is this same trailer on xbl

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 5:39 PM

      I've heard of a lot of whining about it, but I am pretty excited after the watching the videos. I think the combat looks better than Oblivion (although I did love that game to death). I'm not sure what people are expecting from it, but I put 100+ hours into Oblivion and I think they could do far worse than to use that as a basis for their future projects.

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 5:42 PM

        all the anger is based on the idea that it won't be the same as the games from the 80's right? I find it insane but meh. it's the internet

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 5:59 PM

          Yes, i try to ignore those guys. The fallout series had some brilliant moments, and great atmosphere, but especially Fallout 2 was a buggy piece of shit. They were getting some much grief on their forums that they shut them down to stop people from complaining at the time.

          Oblivion had its own fair share of bugs, but it was nothing game stopping and the game itself was so immense that I was somewhat willing to forgive those oversights.

          I hope those people who are really whining about it will give the new game and chance and find that it has something they like ...

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 6:02 PM

          There are two sources of anger.

          One is just stupid "wahhh, it'll be different" anger. Yes, it will be different, but this is pretty much the only shot the franchise and game world has at a worthwhile resurrection. Prior to this, the franchise was dead as a doornail. Every indication is that people at Bethesda care about and believe in Fallout, and will do their very best to create a worthwhile successor.

          The other is a valid concern that some of the things that made Fallout great - particularly the characters and story - won't be handled well by Bethesda. BethSoft is good at creating wide open worlds for the player to wander, explore, and quest in. They're also very good at creating believable world history (how good they are at conveying that history varies depending on who you ask). They have not, historically, done particularly well with characterization and story writing for the main plot.

          There's reason to be optimistic, though. They have been aware of the flaws in Oblivion that I mentioned above since early in development, and vowed to correct them. They have far fewer NPCs in Fallout 3, and they are all supposed to be uniquely and individually voice acted. Also, the man who designed the Dark Brotherhood quest line in Oblivion is in charge of designing the main plot and such for Fallout 3.

          • reply
            July 14, 2008 6:16 PM

            that makes sense to me. but I don't have any stake in this.

            I'll wait for a shack review or 8 before getting it

        • reply
          July 14, 2008 6:17 PM

          from the 80's l o l

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 5:59 PM

      No shit

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 6:02 PM

      [deleted]

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 6:16 PM

      well, this is just the way things are going. it's really sad to see games become so console-ified :(

      • reply
        July 14, 2008 6:21 PM

        ugh. :( i can't stop watching and feeling bad. this looks like post-apoc oblivion if oblivion were made for consoles as the lead platform

    • reply
      July 14, 2008 6:52 PM

      It looks like Deus Ex combat. This is a good thing for me cause I like Deus Ex combat, but I can understand why people would be disappointed. Every time someone does that sort of thing there's a big chance that upgrading your combat skills means little, because with enough gaming ability you can just play the game like an FPS and use your own skills to compensate for whatever handicap the game might give you - it's true of DX, it's true of System Shock 2 and it was even true of Vampire BLoodlines, which tried to overcome that problem.

      And once you do that, you're no longer roleplaying.

      Ultimately though I don't care, I like real time combat, I don't care about simulating something that I can do myself very well and most importantly it seems that this utterly redundant and useless VATS system is not necessary for getting the bloody mess effects. If I can blow peoples skulls apart Fallout style by myself then yee fuckin haw.

Hello, Meet Lola