Axier

Meh, I guess you are right... But I just kinda get tired of the same thing... Of course, there is an entire forum. I guess I'll just harass the rest of the board. I've been so excited with the announcement of this I just kinda glued myself to this particular thread. Still hoping for a Solar Scorcher...

Well, anyway, going OT again, Like I said Promethian, its going OT, and we all already know the issues with FO3, and I acknowledge them as important ones. I still like the game, but what game is perfect? Worrying about the same things over and over is like a dog gnawing at the raw patch, its just going to rot off in the long run. Stop bothering about FO3, and, God forbid, trust in Hines saying that Bethesda has Obsidian on a very lax watch on them, and treat this like an Obsidian project more than a Bethesda project. If its bad its bad, if its good, its good. Look to the post apocalyptic future, not the nuke of the past. And Bethesda so help me God if you treat Obsidian like crap I will put your company on the world map... As a giant, smoldering crater. Your on your honor, don't push it.

Stale thread is stale. The discussions here are getting OT consistantly, and always about how evil Bethesda is... What about Interplay? I mean, they agreed to selling it right? Its like... Hmm, Nevermind. I would prolly anger people with my best analogy. Anyway, this is all going over the same issues with FO3, and very little to do with Vegas as a concept. Almost every post talks about the same FO3 problems. I think we get the idea, VATS, Lack of depth, not as fun, whoopdidodadalllydipsticksyndrom... WE GET IT!!! If you hate Bethesda and Fallout 3, you're not going to change anyone into hating the game, just like I cant make you like it. Can we talk about how awesome Vegas will be? Maybe stir up a little fanfic ideas? Gang wars, violence, concepts of BOS involvement, new weapons, the ability to make molotovs and burn things down, wants, needs, concepts!!! Stop talking about other games aspects on what you dislike about them, its kinda pointless at this point IMHO. Yakuza resurgence FTW!

I do beg your pardon for my ignorance on such matters, but, "OT", means what exactly? Off topic... Yea Im stupid.

Well, this is all going to be based on the general reception of the game. I also find your sense of alterior motives to be quite, how should I say..., cynical? If the game sucks, FO4 will likely have a similar problem, however, at current estimates, 2011/2012 will be the presumed release of any FO4, Bethesda or no. By then almost every problem here will prolly be fixed because the engine they use will be likely a perfection of their current system. You have to remember, most of these problems isn't exactly their fault, they're only doing what they can with their software, and making new software isn't exactly going to help when it comes to release dates. I mean, hell, the work they did on the engine before Fallout 3 after Oblivion was actually well done. A lot of issues with Oblivion's core where resolved in FO3. I figure they will likely have a fantastic engine by the time TES:V comes out, so Fallout 4 will likely be fantastic. Of course, they still should have re-balanced the game. V.A.T.S. I love, but if it didn't boost Crit chance, and it's minor bugs were fixed, it would balance the game much better... Ammo weight, stimpak rarity, and more NPC interaction would have made it perfect, if you take into account the limitations of the software and hardware itself.

@cronicler I read and I agree. Love Fallout 3, cant stop playing it. Exceptional IMHO, but exactly the best of what its trying to do. As for the bubble speech idea, Bethesda would never do it, they are obsessed with voice acting, and most "main stream" gamers are loosing the ability to read... Combat IS quirky, and isn't as good as Oblivion, witch is sad... I would have liked to see more of a tactical FPS approach to a Post Apoc survival, where if the fallout doesn't kill you, a couple bullets would. I would have liked to see the depth of Fallout 2 paired with the shooter mechanics of something like FarCry 2, witch, while the online play was almost impossible, the way story mode played in FC2 was great. Weapons degraded, and inevitably blew up in your face if you used them too much. The way you healed in that game would have been a great idea too, Stimpaks shouldn't be able to be injected in an instant, and you shouldn't be able to find that many! And using some pliers to pull out bullets and poking them through your arm with your finger is just kinda cool. And a whole bottle of Buffout should kill you from an OD... How the hell does Psycho boost bullets? Why does your 96345 5.56 rounds weigh less than your lunchbox!?! I feel FC2 had more combat FPS depth than Fallout 3, and more RPG depth would have been nice. Also, where the heck is the critical phailurez! -Caps Other than that, I still love and play FO3 like its crack.

You can in Mass Effect. I've never played Mass Effect... What's the draw for choosing to play a Sniper in that one? Sniper Rifles in Mass Effect are the single most powerful weapons when it comes to single shots. They take a bit of time to reload between each shot and overheat quickly, but, if upgraded properly and used with the proper talens, by the end of the game they're practically a fire-and-forget weapon. The game does include headshots, but due to the distances at which combat occurs, they're hard to get. The draw is in the ultimate rounds, High Explosive VIII, together with double Rail Extension VIII when using the Spectre Sniper Rifle. End result is, each shot overheats your rifle, but it's damage output is similiar to the Mako main cannon. So, it forces to be polite, professional and have a plan to kill everyone you meet. Plus, the sight of disintegrating enemies flying everywhere is amusing, to say the least. I prefered the shotgun with the explosive rounds. Boomstick FTW. I think Fallout 3, if it was made by BioWare might have actually been better if it played like Mass Effect. But either way, whoever does a game after its sold to a diffrent company and completely rethought people get angry... Its just like Halo Wars, just as pointless as Halo, but pisses off some of the fan base. lol Halo Fans, that is a joke in and of itself. It was the most fun I've had talking to people outside of being a Malk That was funny. I do think that broader interaction with NPCs would have helped Fallout 3, but I still enjoy the end product. I figure its kinda pointless saying how aweful Fallout 3 is because its not really changing, if you hate it, everyone knows why because people who hate it are saying the same things every time. Just like everyone who likes it just happens to like FPRPGS, or Bethesda. If you like it, you like it, if you don't, you don't... Can we stop saying the same things over and over and start random rumors about Vegas before it comes out like normal forum discussions on games that are no where near out? Or at least stop being so redundant when you try and talk about how they can improve by not doing what Fallout 3 did?

Okay, as for the Fallout 1&2 made you feel like it was big, it didn't... Also, as for the every office building is the same statement, you obviously don't actually look around and read the terminals, find the little letters, and really get a sense of what happened when the bombs dropped. Focusing the game in a tight area like the DC/Maryland area, instead of sprawling the west with few actual maps, allows you to build more focus, and more depth into one place. Fallout 3 captures the scope of a wasteland with its walking... And people who hate the constant walking obviously don't go sightseeing, try entering random buildings. Believe it or not, you can go do a lot more than just the main quest areas. Also, the size of the area is just fine. If you don't like quick travel, don't use it. I never tried not playing with quick travel... Hmm... I'm going to make a new character that doesn't quick travel. Great idea there.

I think the main problem people had with Oblivion is that it wasn't as big as Morrowind... The Irony with Fallout 3 is that I feel it was bigger than fallout 1 or 2. The main reason these games are so small compared to older games is that games like Morrowind for example, are obviously less visually intensive on data-space. I still <3 Oblivion just as much as Morrowind, mainly because it is the stepping stone to the, will obviously be better TESV. So, Im hoping that Fallout: New Vegas and Fallout 3 will combine the experience of FPRPG Fallout into the obviously will be better Fallout 4! (Here's hoping to be crawling through Manhattan's broken carcass is 2012.)

Okay, read enough of the last topic to figure out whats what... Here is what I came out of it thinking... There are a lot of Beth haters. I would disagree with them, but that's just personal opinion, hopefully we are civil enough to agree to disagree. As with the Beth haters, some people don't seem to like Fallout 3. Understandable! I stepped in to Fallout 3 after playing both 1 and 2 with a grain of salt. (Okay, more like a pint of EverClear and a pound of salt.) The game is a complete rethought, and I, personally liked it! I do admit, I also entered Fallout 3 after Oblivion, witch for some odd reason, people don't like here either, to each his own right? Ive loved Bethesda and Obsidian both. Anyway, this will most certainly help with any Financial issues, as some of you here may have jumped off the Fallout bandwagon with 3, Fallout 3 introduced a lot of people to the game that would NEVER play an Isometric RPG, or never knew about Fallout. Also, a lot of Oblivion players liked it as well. Since all of them know about it, and I'm sure some of you hardcore Obsidian fans (KOTOR & NWN FTW!) will buy it, even if you don't like it, Obsidian is about to get helladolla from it... And I'm sure, that it is likely using the Fallout engine, witch I like. Also, I R NUB!!!!1!11!!1!!11!!!!11!!1!0n3!!!