Something went wrong. Try again later
    Follow

    Fallout

    Franchise »

    The Fallout franchise is a post-apocalyptic series of role-playing and tactics games originally developed by Black Isle, and most recently, Bethesda Softworks and Obsidian Entertainment.

    I don't get all this Fallout hype...

    This topic is locked from further discussion.

    Avatar image for venekor
    Venekor

    177

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    Did anyone actually play Fallout 3?

    It was based on a horribly dated engine that was never good, it made for a highly buggy game, it crashed all the frigging time, the animations were like cardboard, there were loading screens to bloody go in anywhere and it looked terrible. I had to install a codec pack to stop it from crashing whenever I went through a door on my PC... wtf? It was a common issue, I'm guessing a sound card thing or a setting somewhere but it took years for it to get fixed, probably not even fixed by them but there being a new Windows. Why would you have loading screens to go through every building any ways? What was it the 90s?

    The story was THE WORST, it had a strong start and then ended about 4 hours later. I get that side quests are a big thing to do, but if there is going to be no main plot then I have nothing there to make me feel invested in the world. Bethesda games are always like this, fine give me lots to do, but give me a great story as well.

    The combat system was unbearable as well, you could stand point blank, shoot someone in the head and the game told you that you missed.... pft fuck off! I just don't understand how any one thinks that was fun, if you cannot do good real time first person combat then don't do it at all. The VATs system was fun for 5 mins, then it gets old and you want to skip it all the time, you cannot make that a main focus. Too many games get let off for having bad combat and control schemes even though they're the main part of the game, The Witcher 3 is another example of a game I cannot stand to play, it just controls so poorly. I'm here to play a game, not watch a movie, so you better get the control and combat part right, not have a weirdly dated floaty moon walk jump like Fallout 3.

    To top it all off there wasn't even any vehicles, people will make excuses but the only one I can think of is just because that engine was so bad. It really does feel like a relic from the 90s and not something form 2008 :\ I just don't get how people remember the game so fondly, it fucking sucked and all my friends at the time felt so as well, most of them gave up trying to play because it either didn't work or crashed all the time.

    Avatar image for adequatelyprepared
    AdequatelyPrepared

    2522

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    Some games are for some people.
    Some of them might not be for you.

    Avatar image for mvhvtmv
    MVHVTMV

    468

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #4  Edited By MVHVTMV

    It was janky, but it was fun so w/e, it's obviously not for you.

    EDIT: IIRC you couldn't just shoot someone in the head and miss? It wasn't just a 100% hitscan with a dice-roll at the end. Improving your skills improved accuracy, reduced spread etc., so that your shots would more reliably go in the direction you pointed them.

    I also never had any game-breaking bugs, just the odd physics glitch every 10 hours or so.

    Avatar image for humanity
    Humanity

    21858

    Forum Posts

    5738

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 40

    User Lists: 16

    I'm an old fogey that loved the first two games from 97/98 and could not stand the new ones for very much the exact reasons listed above. I always thought it was because I was a grumpy old man, but it's interesting to see others saw the exact same problems I did without the rose tinted glasses part of romanticizing the past. (Although those old games were phenomenal and had amazing writing compared to the Bethesda stuff)

    I just hope the new Fallout is a significant upgrade from F3/New Vegas.

    Avatar image for ramprat
    ramprat

    70

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    Yeah, it's definitely not for you.

    Avatar image for mike
    mike

    18011

    Forum Posts

    23067

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: -1

    User Lists: 6

    #7  Edited By mike

    @venekor: Moved to the Fallout franchise thread. Please try to use the appropriate game, franchise, or platform-specific forums.

    Fallout 3 is definitely one of the most loved games of the last generation. There is still an active modding community for the PC version to this day.

    Avatar image for 2headedninja
    2HeadedNinja

    2357

    Forum Posts

    85

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 2

    "Did anyone actually play Fallout 3" ... What?

    Avatar image for rongalaxy
    RonGalaxy

    4937

    Forum Posts

    48

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1

    User Lists: 1

    Its, undeniably, a game that is beloved by many people. That isn't an opinion, its a fact. Do you have to understand why people like it? No. Should you learn to accept the things that you dont understand? I dunno, probably. Makes life a little easier. You don't have to overthink the things you don't like/understand when you can just learn to accept them and move on.

    Avatar image for ajamafalous
    ajamafalous

    13992

    Forum Posts

    905

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 9

    #10  Edited By ajamafalous

    Can we lock this thread? I actively dislike Fallout, but this thread is purely flamebait.

    Avatar image for danteveli
    Danteveli

    1441

    Forum Posts

    735

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 7

    User Lists: 30

    And why people wouldn't be hyped about it. Last two games did pretty well and gained huge numbers of people.

    I know I will be disappointed by it but I'm still hyped. It may not be my Fallout (that ship has sailed long time ago with Van Buren) but its nice to see people getting hyped for Deathclaws, Vaults, S.P.E.C.I.A.L. and Brotherhood of Steel.

    Avatar image for pierre42
    Pierre42

    458

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    @venekor said:

    Did anyone actually play Fallout 3?

    It was based on a horribly dated engine that was never good, it made for a highly buggy game, it crashed all the frigging time, the animations were like cardboard, there were loading screens to bloody go in anywhere and it looked terrible. I had to install a codec pack to stop it from crashing whenever I went through a door on my PC... wtf? It was a common issue, I'm guessing a sound card thing or a setting somewhere but it took years for it to get fixed, probably not even fixed by them but there being a new Windows. Why would you have loading screens to go through every building any ways? What was it the 90s?

    Worked alright for me? Lots of Open world games are buggy and crash and share the same issues? It's part and parcel of the Bethesda open world experience, Skyrim had plenty of loading screens everywhere as well.

    @venekor said:

    The story was THE WORST, it had a strong start and then ended about 4 hours later. I get that side quests are a big thing to do, but if there is going to be no main plot then I have nothing there to make me feel invested in the world. Bethesda games are always like this, fine give me lots to do, but give me a great story as well.

    The story might have been short but so? It's memorable for what it does, I can remember most of the big set pieces and it takes you to some really interesting places (the VR vault being especially cool). Longer story does not necessarily equal a better story for example To the Moon.

    Of course this is all opinion based, if you are resolute that the time a plot takes is integral to the quality of the plot then that's your decision but I'd advise you give To the Moon a shot anyway. In fact everyone should play to the Moon.

    @venekor said:

    The combat system was unbearable as well, you could stand point blank, shoot someone in the head and the game told you that you missed.... pft fuck off! I just don't understand how any one thinks that was fun, if you cannot do good real time first person combat then don't do it at all. The VATs system was fun for 5 mins, then it gets old and you want to skip it all the time, you cannot make that a main focus. Too many games get let off for having bad combat and control schemes even though they're the main part of the game, The Witcher 3 is another example of a game I cannot stand to play, it just controls so poorly. I'm here to play a game, not watch a movie, so you better get the control and combat part right, not have a weirdly dated floaty moon walk jump like Fallout 3.

    If you say so? I actually remember using corners to force people to stand point blank so I could kill them easily with Vats. You pop out, hit someone a few times, duck back in and wait for the Super Mutant to run around the corner right into 3 or 4 VAT assisted Combat Shotgun blasts to the face. Worked like a treat. The VATs system never really got old for me, especially with some of the better perks for it later on.

    I guess the game at it's core is an RPG, if you rely on VATS then yes, aiming at the head point blank will still incur a roll of the dice if there's anything other than 100% chance. Least it's not XCOM, I hear that game just outright lies about it's probability to hit things.

    @venekor said:

    To top it all off there wasn't even any vehicles, people will make excuses but the only one I can think of is just because that engine was so bad. It really does feel like a relic from the 90s and not something form 2008 :\ I just don't get how people remember the game so fondly, it fucking sucked and all my friends at the time felt so as well, most of them gave up trying to play because it either didn't work or crashed all the time.

    Huh that's strange I remember tonnes of vehicles...burnt out...strewn on the side of the road...damaged and broken...scrapped for parts...dismantled and used to build shelters. Yeah tonnes of vehicles in that game.

    However I guess you are saying since "people will make excuses" that the "everything outside the vaults got nuked the crap out of," doesn't quite make a believable excuse for you.

    An alternative question: Does a game NEED vehicles to be a good game?

    For me the answer is no, indeed there's many games where the inclusion of vehicles only culminates in a small turret sequence of some form and plenty of games do fine without them. It's not a Mad Max apocalypse, which was caused by the economy crashing apparently, stuff was destroyed in the process of Fallout's apocalypse. It makes sense for things not to work. If you have an issue about traversal of the land then you have a fast travel system. If you have an issue about having to visit somewhere to fast travel to it then I guess the game might just not be for you, part of the joy was just the exploration of the world.

    Each new town brought it's own characters and storylines, some of which are really unique and memorable. The random events you got from just wandering around were the stuff you would tell your friends about the next day saying "Yeah this time an alien ship crashed while I was wandering around and I got a sweet blaster!". What's more the game rewards exploration with XP and it's unique storylines and items. All the little skill and stat boosting bobbleheads, all the little parts that can be used to make absurd weapons, there's plenty to find if you just take the time to wander. Plus for me it created such a wonderful atmosphere, just wandering the wasteland seeing the destruction of man under the night sky alone. It's something that didn't come across in New Vegas as much for me because the place was less destroyed and civilisation was much more abundant.

    I guess it's just not for you *shrug* but your issues seem to be:

    1) The game doesn't meet your personal standards for performance and graphics

    2) You don't like a short story as it makes a bad game in your eyes, even if there is value in the sidequests you feel less anchored to the world as a result

    3)The Combat and VATs system did not meet your standards.

    4) The game needs vehicles and you see this as inexcusable.

    I'd say while I share some of your concerns (I remember disliking the combat system at times) the pros far outweigh the cons for me.

    Avatar image for jesus_phish
    Jesus_Phish

    4118

    Forum Posts

    3307

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    Fallout 1 and 2 are two of the best isometric RPGs of all time. Fallout 3 was a decent attempt at moving the franchise into a new direction and with a new way of playing it and Bethesda did a pretty good job considering what they had to live up to. VATs was an attempt at making a first person shooter have Fallout 1 and 2's turn based combat, were you had action points and different actions required different amounts of points and aiming at specific body parts gave better chances to hit the target but could do less damage.

    A lot of people who got to play Fallout 3 may have never played the first two. Fallout New Vegas is the actual Fallout 3 because it's closer in tone to the first two than Fallout 3 ever will be.

    I love me some post apocalyptic story worlds. It's one of my favourite thematic settings.

    All Bethesdas main plot stories suck. They make some pretty good side stories though and some great worlds to just go explore in.

    The game obviously isn't to your taste, but a tonne of people love Fallout.

    Avatar image for viking_funeral
    viking_funeral

    2881

    Forum Posts

    57

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 6

    User Lists: 5

    Different people like different things.

    And this is okay.

    Avatar image for crembaw
    Crembaw

    894

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    Every time a sequel comes out there's one of these threads.

    Fallout 3 sold 4.7 million units. It's fine if you didn't like the game, but it was undeniably one of the most-played singleplayer games last generation.

    Avatar image for thomasnash
    thomasnash

    1106

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 1

    @humanity said:

    I'm an old fogey that loved the first two games from 97/98 and could not stand the new ones for very much the exact reasons listed above. I always thought it was because I was a grumpy old man, but it's interesting to see others saw the exact same problems I did without the rose tinted glasses part of romanticizing the past. (Although those old games were phenomenal and had amazing writing compared to the Bethesda stuff)

    I just hope the new Fallout is a significant upgrade from F3/New Vegas.

    I'm pretty much the same way, but I just wanted to ask whether you played/what you thought of New Vegas? It really improved a lot on those negative things from Fallout 3. The writing was way better, they managed to make the shooting feel a lot more satisfying imo (I think just adding iron sights helped a lot), it fit a lot more naturally into the canon, etc etc.

    I'm not massively excited about a new story by Bethesda (I've only played Fallout 3 and Skyrim, and thought the stories in both were pretty dire), but if they have the sense to include some of the gameplay changes from NV, it might be a game worth playing.

    Avatar image for civid
    civid

    872

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 1

    I could never get into Fallout 2 of all of the games. Fallout 1 had issues but was still fantastic and I'm quite proud to say I beat that game. Still think Fallout 3 and ESPECIALLY Fallout New Vegas are way better games than the two original games, but of course it all comes down to taste and what you first expierenced.

    Avatar image for tobbrobb
    TobbRobb

    6616

    Forum Posts

    49

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 13

    I'm saving my hype for Fallout 4:New Vegas

    Avatar image for chaser324
    chaser324

    9415

    Forum Posts

    14945

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1

    User Lists: 15

    #20  Edited By chaser324  Moderator

    I'm just going to go ahead and lock this. The OP is total flamebait.

    I appreciate that you didn't like Fallout 3, and that's totally fine to express that opinion. However, your post comes off as largely just being incredulous that anyone even could like it - which for the record is a sizable group of people and yes they did actually play it and did in fact enjoy it. There's nothing wrong with people getting hyped for the Fallout 4 reveal.

    This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

    Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

    Comment and Save

    Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.