TwinkieGorilla

Great Job!

if this game is better than 3 it is because Obsidian developed it, not because "Bethesda learned from their mistakes" etc.

not sure why i keep taking the bait, but that's what one does when a thread is slow i suppose. * first, there was no 180. a 180 would suggest i went from hating the idea of a thing to loving the idea of a thing. i certainly don't love the idea of the red shield. i went from "hating" it to "meh". that's more like a 40 degree angle at best. * second, my feelings changed from "hate" to "meh" because Josh explained the red shield implementation in detail and i then had a better understanding of it. i had previously jumped to an unfair conclusion and admitted as much. * third, i never agreed that fo1 had hand-holding, so that had nothing to do with saying "oh. well, meh". i specifically said there still seems to be something less like hand-holding about the text-box.

April 20th 2009 registered users, :brofist:

i have never, ever argued that i am sane.

glass is half-empty: glass is half-full: at least most of us "rabid/joined after NV was announced" only contaminate one thread on your forum.

of course not, who would? since it was obviously only added so people could "look at themselves" and not as a game-play element. since many people prefer 3rd person though, i'd imagine this is why it's of interesting note to read that New Vegas is being tweaked to make 3rd person actually playable.

don't worry, it's not just here.

i hate having to constantly explain this to you: 1) i'm not really a gamer, but a Fallout obsessive. 2) i want another GOOD Fallout game. 3) the end.

how is there a "correct" here? there was something about the original games which gave me this "devotion" and reeled me in. those things, for the most part, are absent from Bethesda's version. those things (some more tangible and easily defined/explained than others) are things i want to return. that's as complex as the issue gets. it's not about right/wrong objectively speaking. 'least not from my perspective.

not really, no. but in hoping the next game is improved, you usually discuss the issues you have with the previous games, correct? so i talk about the things which Fallout 1 or 2 did to make me fans of the series, and what Fallout 3 did to make me not a fan of Bethesda's direction. not too hard to understand, even though devils advocates or Bethesda apologists like playing this card. it simply isn't true. the issues i tend to have with Fallout 1 or 2 get brought up, but just not as often as there not only weren't as many...but certainly not as game-breaking for me.

i tend to think it's both and that this is too subjective an argument. it's a bad choice which led to a perceived weakness as an RPG game, though many (if the Bethesda forum is any indication) would call it a good choice which led to a strong game (or at least the one they wanted to play). explosions in a next-gen, open-world, sandbox, larpy/simulator-type game in 2008 was obviously an incredibly smart choice...if selling copies was your goal, and an incredibly bad choice...if making a meaningful, character-driven RPG was your choice. i always protected Dogmeat above all else.

yes.

ah, that is hopeful, thanks for pointing it out; i've skimmed about as much regurgitation as i can stomach for today. i've said it since last april, but i really hope this game gives the science, stealth, diplomat characters a more meaningful set of choices. oh man. this just made me think...are we done with magic armor (+5 science lab coat!!!)? i thought that was a little much.

i don't, and you think i'm here for any other reason?

yeah. ugh. i really don't want another KOTOR2 in my collection. wasn't nonsense, was a perfectly good metaphor (though i can't take credit for it's original use). also i know your whole forum larp character has funny english habits but "gotta" is slang for "have to/got to", fyi.

i already addressed the actual issue. you however: haz not responded. *giggle*

yeah. this was something i always hated about the original Fallouts. being able to load/reload until you get something right. obviously sometimes you have an impossible "dice-roll" if you've not built up the skill enough, but still. FO3 seemed even worse with this in the speech checks, as if the dice-rolls weren't thought out or implemented correctly or something...conversely i did like that you couldn't even attempt to lock-pick certain things unless you built that skill up enough. too many skills though just seemed to sit there, useless.

um, yeah. but you're still not addressing the actual issue.

or even worse, those checks in FO3 where you could pass a speech/skill/SPECIAL check even if you had a very low build in that area. like a percentage check instead of a threshold check. i'm ALL for threshold checks. percentage checks are ****ing retarded though. if implemented poorly, it can render your character build completely worthless.

no, i'm referring to a quote. a quote from one of the original developers which i can't locate for the life of me right now. regardless, you missed what i actually said, then...didn't you? the point was about solving situations through diplomacy, stealth or violence. not whether or not every skill was worthwhile or balanced (though compared to FO3 the skills and S.P.E.C.I.A.L. had a much greater impact; i made a post detailing this last year. go dig it up.)

good. [intelligence] So you say skills were meaningful in Fallout 3? yet for no reason still look like ****ing orcs. good to see a new Fallout game following Cain's original Fallout ideology. let's just hope this applies to the entire game, not just the ending...as Cain said, all situations should be able to be handled through dialogue, stealth or violence. let's also hope these moments are not as idiotically vapid and arbitrarily written as convincing the computer to commit suicide. word. i always loved the geckos myself. yes, but how long must you polish a turd before it's not recognizably a turd anymore? Pete Hines? yeah. i'm not sure this is what role-playing games are all about, but it certainly sounds better than being once again...arbitrarily...forced to care about your father. always know your audience and cater directly to them! let's get some exploding cars, boys! cool story, bro. but we've already seen the screenshots. *sigh* ... these previews are basically the same regurgitated info we've been seeing for the past few months. *yawn*

ok, dude? you're missing the point. a spork isn't a very difficult metaphor to figure out without context. trust me, i'm an english major...i have to decipher things without meme-context all the time. it's pretty darn-tootin' obvious. i now petition you change your screen-name to Spork. especially after the whole spork debacle on the Bethsoft forums, yes. i lol'ed pretty hard and thought "if this be a coincidence, it be a very funny one." exactly.

don't put words in my mouth, partner. the meme obviously started because enough people got the very simple idea that a spork is a compromise of a spoon and a fork (i.e. FPS + RPG = compromise/spork). remember, calax, you're the one who kept digging through my posts like a treasure hunter looking for something to argue about. not me. and you did this after i admitted that i wasn't really bothered by the subject at hand after it was explained. as for your persistent question, you got it 3-4 pages ago in one of my first posts. remember, not liking/not satisfied with an answer is not synonymous with a poster not having given one. now, i have a final exam to take for the next 2 hours. color me done with this red shield conversation.