I think Oblivion could've done much more. It was just...empty. Faces were terrible, voices...ugh...music...sucked after the first hour because you heard everything already. Not going to be picking this up because it's probably going to be overrated like Oblivion by most US reviewers and overhyped like Oblivion as well.
The absolute ignorance on both sides of this blow my mind.
There are people that love the first two Fallout games. There are also people who like Oblivion. There are even people who like the games before Oblivion in the Elder Scrolls series in a way that I may find unhealthy, and hate everything they will make forever after those games. Similarly, misguided Fallout fans are so far up their own asses that the light on the other side is shaded by the angle that they stick their noses up.
PEOPLE LIKE DIFFERENT THINGS
AND TIMES CHANGE
Wow, that is so difficult to understand.
I, myself, got really pissed off at Oblivion, and Morrowind before it. I just don't like Bethesda's way of doing things. Yet, somehow I don't go into every forum where a fan of those games might exist and attempt to piss them off for no reason.
If they aren't making the game you want in your head, then they aren't making it for you. Find another game. There are plenty.
I read the first GTA 4 review in a magazine a few days before the ign review."
That's crazy. Do they pay money to get the exclusive or is it just chance? Or like, they get the game a few days earlier because they got to keep their deadline in terms of printing?
But it's true all right: saw the magazine on store shelves today. Too bad it's all covered in plastic so I couldn't check the non-translated review and what it actually said.
"Actually no, not completely wrong. You and a certain very small minority may wish things stayed the same throughout, but they've already evolved from then, game devs know this, reviewers know this. If this wasn't true almost every RPG made recently would still have turn based combat and random encounters. Its like saying FPS games should of never evolved to a crosshair and full X and Y axis movement. I'm done posting in this thread, its pointless- the review isn't credible at all, and your statement shows you would actually take this review seriously."
You call adapting the Elder's Scrolls ruleset evolution? Cus its been around longer than turn based combat, hero. You need to learn the difference between stepping forward and stepping to the side. Building on the franchise's foundation to make it fresh is moving forward. Doing something completely unlike the previous games is a sidestep. Replacing one archaic battle system related to the franchise with another archaic battle system takes a step back, and to the side."
Fallout 3 does not use an Elder Scrolls ruleset.
It uses the SPECIAL system, just like Fallout and Fallout 2. It can also be played real-time, or turnbased.
Just because it looks similar to Oblivion, doesn't mean it plays anything like Oblivion. I was very skeptical at first when I heard about Fallout 3, but from everything I've seen it looks like Bethesda has gone out of their way to make the game as true to the source material as possible.
Play it before you bash it for not being Fallout 2. You may actually like it."
I liked it a lot more before I found out limb targeting(which I even made a page for, because conceptually this sounded really fun) was much less than it appeared on the surface. I doubt I'll love this game's gameplay, but I think the foundation's enough for the eventual gameplay fixing mod some fan makes to be pretty good. That's one thing about these games, the SDK gives it serious legs. So I'll almost certainly still buy it, but for PC, and only after the SDK is out.
Log in to comment