Why Fallout 3 sucks
pici.se/630214/?size=fullsizePosted Aug 18, 2010, 1:43 PM UTC
081
pici.se
he's.... really upset about those trees, isn't he?
10
Why does he even want trees? Was the original Fallout games about realism? I must have missed that.
I want it to be post apocalyptic and miserable, and it is. So what if nuclear bombs are not that terrible even after 200 years in real life, clearly the choices they made was to make it a good game with atmosphere, not a realistic one. I would not want the games I play any other way.
1
The problem is that keeping it "post-apocalyptic" AND setting it 200 years after the bombs ruins the immersion for some people. In my opinion, since they were moving the setting to the east coast, they should have just made it concurrent with the original Fallout. As it was, the illogical nature of the surroundings didn't ruin the game for me, but I did stop every once and awhile to think "this is still running 200 years later?"
1
You forget that the purpose is not to implement a nuclear fallout simulator. The entire premise is that things work as people believed they would in the 50s.
3
whoa hes angry.
7
The only real problem I had with this game was the terrible storyline, but if you have played any Bethseda game in the last decade, this shouldn't be a surprise.
7
Blown out of proportion. I enjoyed the game even with most of these annoyances. Of all of the things you mentioned, only the combat needs to be vastly improved, and even then, blowing a super mutant's head off at close range with a shotgun is satisfying as all fucking hell in slow motion.
7
I like the YouTube link in a picture. That was fun to type out.
6
rage rage rage ragerage McRage outrageous rage rage double rage all the way, it's so vivid. what does this mean?
signed,
mr. rage.
5
hey I have a really good counter-argument to that. I call it: "Why Fallout 3 is Good"
ready?
I played through the game and had fun doing so.
5
Here's another argument: I put nearly 100 hours into that game and enjoyed every bit of it.
3
About 210 here.. dont know where all the time went
1
Most of the "plotholes" are not even plotholes... many of them appeared in previous Fallout games, while some is explained. For example, cars explode because they used nuclear power. Shooting them causes a mini-nuclear explosion.
5
Loved this game so much I decided to try the original fallouts. Those sucked.
4
facepalm
4
Wow... then maybe you just like killing shit in 3d, and not really fallout. Just a thought.
2
I like games that are fun.
0
I'm sure you do. Unfortunately for all of us who really liked the old fallouts, we will never ever be able to play a new fallout that can in any way match them simply because Bethsoft has taken the games in a whole different, and probably irreversible direction. I waited for 10 years, and all I got was a mediocre FPS set in some wasteland with some very kitch 50s shit thrown in to make it more "fallouty". I am dissapoint.
1
I love how much you guys all cry when people point out the massive flaws in your shitty game
4
Do you have any placebo controlled double-blind peer-reviewed studies proving that Fallout 3 sucks? No? THEN IT DOESN'T SUCK, SCIENCE-HATER !!!
3
Comparing any game with the original Deus Ex is hardly fair, since that game is what every other FPS-RPG is trying to be.
3
No, Fallout 3 sucks because it won't fucking play on my Windows 7 x64 machine and I wasted my god damn money.
EDIT: Fine, downvote me. It's still a well known issue that's all over their support forums and Bethesda support refuses to acknowledge it.
3
Plays absolutely perfectly on my Windows 7 x64 machine
-1
That's nice, but it still doesn't for a lot of people.
3
There is only one question that determines whether a game sucks or not, and he barely touched on it. The question is: is it fun? That's it. If you enjoy playing it, it's a good game. It doesn't have to have the best story or graphics or even mechanics as long as somehow it creates an experience that is worth people's time and money.
Now, I don't know if Fallout 3 is fun, because I haven't played it yet (it's on my Steam backlog). But if it is, all of those other arguments he made don't matter.
3
Cool story bro.
Gonna click that down arrow now.
3
A lot of the problems you had with the game are just aspects of the game's design, as in, the team knew how'd they turn out, and wanted it that way. just because you didn't like something doesn't mean it's trash. it also seems like you just didn't understand some parts of FO3, case in point the NUCLEAR cars are not filled with high explosives. what makes all the other fps rgp's you mentioned so much better? more voice actors? yeah, that'll do it.
2
Everything he said is dead accurate.
2
I enjoyed the game, put a good few hours into it, but always had a number of gripes (the combat, the voices, the endless BROWN) - and he's nailed them all.
1
Why don't you and daysi go set up a pup-tent and fuck for a week?
-1
I loved it.
2
Valid arguments. I still love Fallout 3, simply because of the franchise itself. I'm a fanboi, I admit.
2
You can find something wrong with anything and everything. Fallout 3 doesn't suck. It's not perfect, but that doesn't take away from the enjoyability in my opinion. I spent hours and hours playing this game, and I honestly didn't think of any of the things in the OP while playing, even though I now realize that many of them are true. Why? Because they were able to provide enough good to actually make me not realize the bad or at least overlook it.
I think the guys main point is that it's nothing in the vein of Fallout 1/2. If the game had been called "Survivors of the wasteland" then who would care?
Fallout 3 sometimes feels like it was programmed by someone who played the first game and every time they got to a dialog scene they would go "blah blah blah, when do I get to shoot something?"
Still, I enjoyed Fallout 1 and 3 for what they are.
If that was his main point, then OP shouldn't have entitled the thread "Why Fallout 3 sucks." he should have entitled it "Why fallout 3 is inferior to the previous fallouts."
But alarmist sounding titles are much more fun than sensible ones.
hmm, that's a fair point.
I had fallout 3, I tried to like it but the shooting mechanics were horrible, had it been like metroid prime, i would've played the shit out of it.
Time to start stalker.
Funny enough, I loved Fallouts shooting mechanics and hated Metroid Prime's.
Problem is that the OP insulted Fallout 3 for things that were in Fallout 1 and 2.
He doesn't seem to understand that the game had a level of camp to it, and that the 1950's references were supposed to be amusing.
A lot of his complaints also touch the fallout series in general. The effects of a nuclear explosion are greatly overrated throughout the series.
Sounds like me playing a Bioware game. I'm sorry, but the story in almost any given game is B-movie bad and I just don't give a rats ass what some repetitive NPC has to say.
EDIT: Are you guys downvoting me because you disagree or because I'm right and you don't want to admit it?
Second one.
His main point was "This game is not Deus Ex or System Shock 2, so therefore it is bad. Games that are different make me scared that my beloved old games will become obsolete"
To me Bethesda makes 80% perfect games. The remaining 20% is fixed with mods. Fallout 3 + FWE + MMM + Fellout = immersion heaven!