Cappy
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2010
- Messages
- 1,625
- Reputation score
- 429
Re: Fallout 3 / Oblivion with Guns
The vote is getting quite close, I wonder how it will end.
Fallout 3 / Oblivion with Guns
- Thread starter Nunu
- Start date
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2008
- Messages
- 6,983
- Reputation score
- 434
Re: Fallout 3 / Oblivion with Guns
It will end how it will end. Despite whatever valid debates and arguments that will be thrown up, it will be very doubtful to change anyone's mind. Especially considering that most people will vote before even reading through the thread, as they will be stating their opinion.
Unknown Squid
Aurani's Wife
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2008
- Messages
- 3,256
- Reputation score
- 314
Re: Fallout 3 / Oblivion with Guns
I've not actually voted. It's not Oblivion with guns for me, but I also feel it could do a lot more to in the way of being "Fallout".
And I remembered what I was thinking regarding infinite money. They restock their cash every morning don't they? Considering you can just sleep in your house and then run back without penalty, you can pretty much consider it infinite, albeit with a value cap and forcing you to repeat a little cycle.
In F1/2 people you traded with didn't regenerate money. Can't remember for certain if some might have in F2, but if they did it wasn't every day, and waiting around for something like that would be a sure fire way to lose the game due to the time limit (measured in game days, not play time) before your vault/village died. The whole free form search under pressure of the time limit thing was kind of a central theme in Fallout, and one of the things I find strange they didn't use in F3. The original Fallout games could actually be speed run in 10 and 20 minutes if you knew the game well enough. There wasn't a definite mission structure you were forced to follow. You were given a goal, pretty much consisting of the name of the thing you were meant to find, a blank map to fill, and some crap advice. The rest you had to figure out yourself.
It's still quite unique even today, and before F3 came out I was already guessing and looking forward to seeing what kind of misguided urgent quest would be involved. Instead you end up looking for your dad, and it doesn't matter squat if you take five years doing it. :/
(Once again, Fallout 3 is an excellent game. Just not quite in all of the ways I had been hoping.)
I've not actually voted. It's not Oblivion with guns for me, but I also feel it could do a lot more to in the way of being "Fallout".
And I remembered what I was thinking regarding infinite money. They restock their cash every morning don't they? Considering you can just sleep in your house and then run back without penalty, you can pretty much consider it infinite, albeit with a value cap and forcing you to repeat a little cycle.
In F1/2 people you traded with didn't regenerate money. Can't remember for certain if some might have in F2, but if they did it wasn't every day, and waiting around for something like that would be a sure fire way to lose the game due to the time limit (measured in game days, not play time) before your vault/village died. The whole free form search under pressure of the time limit thing was kind of a central theme in Fallout, and one of the things I find strange they didn't use in F3. The original Fallout games could actually be speed run in 10 and 20 minutes if you knew the game well enough. There wasn't a definite mission structure you were forced to follow. You were given a goal, pretty much consisting of the name of the thing you were meant to find, a blank map to fill, and some crap advice. The rest you had to figure out yourself.
It's still quite unique even today, and before F3 came out I was already guessing and looking forward to seeing what kind of misguided urgent quest would be involved. Instead you end up looking for your dad, and it doesn't matter squat if you take five years doing it. :/
(Once again, Fallout 3 is an excellent game. Just not quite in all of the ways I had been hoping.)
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2008
- Messages
- 6,983
- Reputation score
- 434
Re: Fallout 3 / Oblivion with Guns
It would have been interesting to have a time limit on Fallout 3's main quest line. Though, it was interesting in that I accidentally negated half the missions by stumbling upon the place where dear ol dad was actually located. Those older quests wouldn't even start up.
It would have been interesting to have a time limit on Fallout 3's main quest line. Though, it was interesting in that I accidentally negated half the missions by stumbling upon the place where dear ol dad was actually located. Those older quests wouldn't even start up.
Incubus
Horn Dog
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2009
- Messages
- 2,938
- Reputation score
- 320
Re: Fallout 3 / Oblivion with Guns
Because the way you wield an axe in combat and the way you wield a mace or a warhammer are reasonably similar. Not identical, certainly, but close enough. Like most western weaponry of the era, it's designed for a fair bit of bludgeoning in mind simply because that was how you hurt people through armour.
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2008
- Messages
- 6,983
- Reputation score
- 434
Re: Fallout 3 / Oblivion with Guns
This is true. However, an axe had an edge, whereas hammers and maces could pretty much do the same amount of damage no matter which part of the weapon head struck the target.
Cappy
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2010
- Messages
- 1,625
- Reputation score
- 429
Re: Fallout 3 / Oblivion with Guns
Look's like it's more Fallout 3 than Oblivion with guns in general vote, but the general public can be wrong, I think there isn't much left to say about it though, unless somebody wants to cite enough people to get a good estimated percentage of the gamer population :3, any-who, It seems that it definitely isn't as similar or based off of the original fallouts as alot of fans had wanted, and that's unfortunate, especially when it had a fanbase.
But I guess there's not much else for me to say about it, but yeah... Fallout 3
Look's like it's more Fallout 3 than Oblivion with guns in general vote, but the general public can be wrong, I think there isn't much left to say about it though, unless somebody wants to cite enough people to get a good estimated percentage of the gamer population :3, any-who, It seems that it definitely isn't as similar or based off of the original fallouts as alot of fans had wanted, and that's unfortunate, especially when it had a fanbase.
But I guess there's not much else for me to say about it, but yeah... Fallout 3
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2008
- Messages
- 6,983
- Reputation score
- 434
Re: Fallout 3 / Oblivion with Guns
Of course it wasn't going to be the same. Different developers and a decade later.
Of course it wasn't going to be the same. Different developers and a decade later.
Cappy
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2010
- Messages
- 1,625
- Reputation score
- 429
Re: Fallout 3 / Oblivion with Guns
Well, what do you think they should have done then?
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2008
- Messages
- 6,983
- Reputation score
- 434
Re: Fallout 3 / Oblivion with Guns
I think they should have done what they did. I greatly enjoyed Fallout 3. I was simply pointing out that it wasn't going to be the same as the original two games, despite what the hardcore fans wanted, because so much time had passed and a different group of people were creating it. New people, new ideas.
I think they should have done what they did. I greatly enjoyed Fallout 3. I was simply pointing out that it wasn't going to be the same as the original two games, despite what the hardcore fans wanted, because so much time had passed and a different group of people were creating it. New people, new ideas.
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2008
- Messages
- 16,468
- Reputation score
- 430
Re: Fallout 3 / Oblivion with Guns
Things I wish they'd done differently for Fallout 3:
1) Make the story suck less. I know Bethesda stories generally aren't that great, but FO3 basically had the original Fallouts storyline only with significantly less reason for the main character to actually give a shit about what was going on.
2) Not make the weapons generic. "Assault Rifle" and "Chinese Assault Rifle" are not more interesting or more creative than M4 and AK47. The earlier games had real weapon names in them, why can't the new ones? Or, at the very least, could you have come up with convincing fake names or something?
3) Not make the hit detection crappy. When something gets hit with a giant hammer, I want it to flinch, not just slide back a little. When someone gets their arm broken, I want it to show visually, not just in how much damage they do when they whack me in the face with a crowbar. This is the 2000s, not the 1990s. If we can have flying body parts, I don't think damage models are much of stretch.
4) Used the Elder Scrolls character advancement system. It makes a hell of a lot more sense when you increase skills by using them than by using an arbitrary "level up after getting X experience points" mechanic that RPGs can't seem to get rid of.
5) Give me more options than shoot it in the face with the auto shotgun until it dies. I liked to be able to use stealth and unarmed/melee along with a pinch of diplomacy to complete my objectives in the earlier games, it added a nice touch of realism. Also, a little less black and white and a little more gray in the moral spectrum would be nice. This is Fallout, a post-apocalyptic survival RPG, we're supposed to be choosing the lesser of two evils at this point, not between cartoonish villainy and juvenile heroics. Save that crap for Fable and KotOR.
All minor issues really, and Fallout 3 was a pretty good game.
Things I wish they'd done differently for Fallout 3:
1) Make the story suck less. I know Bethesda stories generally aren't that great, but FO3 basically had the original Fallouts storyline only with significantly less reason for the main character to actually give a shit about what was going on.
2) Not make the weapons generic. "Assault Rifle" and "Chinese Assault Rifle" are not more interesting or more creative than M4 and AK47. The earlier games had real weapon names in them, why can't the new ones? Or, at the very least, could you have come up with convincing fake names or something?
3) Not make the hit detection crappy. When something gets hit with a giant hammer, I want it to flinch, not just slide back a little. When someone gets their arm broken, I want it to show visually, not just in how much damage they do when they whack me in the face with a crowbar. This is the 2000s, not the 1990s. If we can have flying body parts, I don't think damage models are much of stretch.
4) Used the Elder Scrolls character advancement system. It makes a hell of a lot more sense when you increase skills by using them than by using an arbitrary "level up after getting X experience points" mechanic that RPGs can't seem to get rid of.
5) Give me more options than shoot it in the face with the auto shotgun until it dies. I liked to be able to use stealth and unarmed/melee along with a pinch of diplomacy to complete my objectives in the earlier games, it added a nice touch of realism. Also, a little less black and white and a little more gray in the moral spectrum would be nice. This is Fallout, a post-apocalyptic survival RPG, we're supposed to be choosing the lesser of two evils at this point, not between cartoonish villainy and juvenile heroics. Save that crap for Fable and KotOR.
All minor issues really, and Fallout 3 was a pretty good game.
Re: Fallout 3 / Oblivion with Guns
It would be interesting to see FO1 rebuilt using the FO3 engine to compare and contrast where each game shines and falls short at. (or conversely, someone making FO3 in an FO1 engine.)
FO3 had a much stronger feeling of trying to save the entire population once you got towards endgame and realized your final objectives. The problem, of course, being that early game you were left with such a vague "go find daddy" plot that no one really gave a shit about, you ended up going through the paces just to get it out of the way when you ran out of sidequests.
FO1 had a strong starting quest and really drove in your urgency to get going and help the vault, but kinda dwindled on the second half. You were told a bit about your general objective, but by then, it really felt more like simply enjoying the world and finishing off side quests, rather than the other way around.
Ultimately, what made FO1 have so many fans is the same thing that makes FO3 have so many fans. A fun game, in a unique setting, that's just complex enough to make it hard to get that perfect character, but just easy enough that everyone should be able to beat it.
Biggest reason why I say it's not just oblivion with guns... Oblivion is too complicated at times (specifically character creation). You start toying with every possible option, and before you know it, you're 4 hours into the game and haven't even left the creation screen, because you're still "tweaking" that character, and by compare, FO3 is just dive in and go (even if you do toy around with the creator forever getting your look "just right" and min/maxing your stats).
Agree with most of those, except #4. If you'd done that, it really would be nothing but oblivion with guns. The leveling system in fallout has always been a core mechanic of it (although FO3 did break down a bit if you were willing to spend the time to twink out).
It would be interesting to see FO1 rebuilt using the FO3 engine to compare and contrast where each game shines and falls short at. (or conversely, someone making FO3 in an FO1 engine.)
FO3 had a much stronger feeling of trying to save the entire population once you got towards endgame and realized your final objectives. The problem, of course, being that early game you were left with such a vague "go find daddy" plot that no one really gave a shit about, you ended up going through the paces just to get it out of the way when you ran out of sidequests.
FO1 had a strong starting quest and really drove in your urgency to get going and help the vault, but kinda dwindled on the second half. You were told a bit about your general objective, but by then, it really felt more like simply enjoying the world and finishing off side quests, rather than the other way around.
Ultimately, what made FO1 have so many fans is the same thing that makes FO3 have so many fans. A fun game, in a unique setting, that's just complex enough to make it hard to get that perfect character, but just easy enough that everyone should be able to beat it.
Biggest reason why I say it's not just oblivion with guns... Oblivion is too complicated at times (specifically character creation). You start toying with every possible option, and before you know it, you're 4 hours into the game and haven't even left the creation screen, because you're still "tweaking" that character, and by compare, FO3 is just dive in and go (even if you do toy around with the creator forever getting your look "just right" and min/maxing your stats).
Cappy
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2010
- Messages
- 1,625
- Reputation score
- 429
Re: Fallout 3 / Oblivion with Guns
*Gloats over fallout 3s victory*, I'm a man of simple pleasure, even if a few people never read through the thread before they voted, either way it had been voted Fallout 3, and I doubt it'll change. *Gloat Gloat Gloat* :3
Well, still, it doesn't prove anything, it's just a matter of personal opinion so, this thread was just discussion anyways, a pointless victory, and an empty one, but a victory none-the-less! *Gloat*
*Gloats over fallout 3s victory*, I'm a man of simple pleasure, even if a few people never read through the thread before they voted, either way it had been voted Fallout 3, and I doubt it'll change. *Gloat Gloat Gloat* :3
Well, still, it doesn't prove anything, it's just a matter of personal opinion so, this thread was just discussion anyways, a pointless victory, and an empty one, but a victory none-the-less! *Gloat*
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2008
- Messages
- 6,983
- Reputation score
- 434
Re: Fallout 3 / Oblivion with Guns
Gotta agree with ya Kathy on pretty much every point... except that I didn't spent too much time tinkering with my character in Oblivion. I actually spent more time in the Fallout 3 creation because I could not find a damn hair style I liked. (I eventually went with the pony-tail thing in dark but very noticeable green, inspired by one of my favorite characters from the good 'ol Deathlands series: Hunaker)
Also, I think the Elder Scrolls style of having someone use a skill to level up, rather than simply killing things, is my favorite way of gaining levels and experience in any RPG. Hell, you could level up just from talking, sneaking, and repairing your kit. However though, as Kathy said, putting that in Fallout 3 really would have made it Oblivion with guns, and separated even more so from the original Fallout games.
Gotta agree with ya Kathy on pretty much every point... except that I didn't spent too much time tinkering with my character in Oblivion. I actually spent more time in the Fallout 3 creation because I could not find a damn hair style I liked. (I eventually went with the pony-tail thing in dark but very noticeable green, inspired by one of my favorite characters from the good 'ol Deathlands series: Hunaker)
Also, I think the Elder Scrolls style of having someone use a skill to level up, rather than simply killing things, is my favorite way of gaining levels and experience in any RPG. Hell, you could level up just from talking, sneaking, and repairing your kit. However though, as Kathy said, putting that in Fallout 3 really would have made it Oblivion with guns, and separated even more so from the original Fallout games.
Unknown Squid
Aurani's Wife
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2008
- Messages
- 3,256
- Reputation score
- 314
Re: Fallout 3 / Oblivion with Guns
Done differently? Firstly...
One thing Fallout three did wrong and could have easily been taken from the earlier games instead is F3's black/white treatment of the karma/reputation score. It's in the same vein Tassadar was talking about. They turned reputation into a generic good or bad, light or dark side thing. They even present you with a "good house" and "evil house". My sister wanted to have a decidedly neutral character set firmly in the grey like they'd always played their traditional fallout character, but found it imposible. The game always steers you ruthlessly in one direction or another, blatant hero, or pointless ass hole. They ended up going the good route, but stealling every petty item around to stop their rep going too high. Not that they ever got caught, but for some reason ol Three Dog knew just how black their soul was anyway, and regularly proclaimed their evil nature before telling about their latest heroic deed. Makes no sense.
In the earlier games you had an individual reputation for each town and region, as well as an overall karma score. You could massacre the ghoul town for example, and still be welcomed as a hero in another. Rep might travel a little from town to town, but overall you were just another stranger in town. The big cities (as far as cities go in fallout) weren't going to throw a party for you just because you'd helped fix a well in some farm village. You had to prove yourself in ways that mattered to each settlement. Karma always kept a record of your true colours overall, and could have effects on the game, but it wasn't like you were walking around with a name badge displaying your score the way it is in F3.
Three Dog is awesome, and the radio itself was a nice touch, but I actually rather dislike the way he makes you some kind of strange celebrity. The speed information apparently travels in the F3 wasteland is scary. It's like the entire game world is built purely around you. Which of course it is, as are all game worlds, but it makes it too obvious. The first fallout games really gave you a sense of being an unknown stranger thrown into an unfamiliar wasteland, that the F3 world quickly loses with it's "Vault dweller" worship complex.
Done differently? Firstly...
One thing Fallout three did wrong and could have easily been taken from the earlier games instead is F3's black/white treatment of the karma/reputation score. It's in the same vein Tassadar was talking about. They turned reputation into a generic good or bad, light or dark side thing. They even present you with a "good house" and "evil house". My sister wanted to have a decidedly neutral character set firmly in the grey like they'd always played their traditional fallout character, but found it imposible. The game always steers you ruthlessly in one direction or another, blatant hero, or pointless ass hole. They ended up going the good route, but stealling every petty item around to stop their rep going too high. Not that they ever got caught, but for some reason ol Three Dog knew just how black their soul was anyway, and regularly proclaimed their evil nature before telling about their latest heroic deed. Makes no sense.
In the earlier games you had an individual reputation for each town and region, as well as an overall karma score. You could massacre the ghoul town for example, and still be welcomed as a hero in another. Rep might travel a little from town to town, but overall you were just another stranger in town. The big cities (as far as cities go in fallout) weren't going to throw a party for you just because you'd helped fix a well in some farm village. You had to prove yourself in ways that mattered to each settlement. Karma always kept a record of your true colours overall, and could have effects on the game, but it wasn't like you were walking around with a name badge displaying your score the way it is in F3.
Three Dog is awesome, and the radio itself was a nice touch, but I actually rather dislike the way he makes you some kind of strange celebrity. The speed information apparently travels in the F3 wasteland is scary. It's like the entire game world is built purely around you. Which of course it is, as are all game worlds, but it makes it too obvious. The first fallout games really gave you a sense of being an unknown stranger thrown into an unfamiliar wasteland, that the F3 world quickly loses with it's "Vault dweller" worship complex.