I believe you're taking a quote out of context. Tsk tsk tsk.

 

EDIT: Apparently I had not been to the page for quite some time, but this was directed at Hades who quoted specifically "I don't give a ****" from Shadowstrider.

 

Of course I did. How else could I keep this unreasonable argument going? It's unimportant if you win or lose, for it is the argument that counts!

You're an even worse debater than you are werewolf slayer.

You're an even worse debater than you are werewolf slayer.

 

Yes. Yes, I am.

So, do you want hairy and sentient deathclaws or not? Cuz you're sending mixed signals. Make up your mind so I can go talk to my boss about this right away!

 

Oh yeah tell him to do Turn-Based combat and isometric view.

 

That's what I want!

 

Oh but let's be realists no wiki-dialogue al'a Morroblivion please.

And no FPP

I have Quake for Deathmatches.

 

and for the god's sake tell your bosses to give us some hope at least...

Edited February 5, 200718 yr by Dagon

There is no hope. RIP Fallout.

I would have to disagree with one point. This die hard fan happens to think Tactics is alright. I know it's not a sequel to the first two games. It happens to take place in that game world, nothing more.

 

IIRC, the main issues about FO:T, among hardcore fans, were that: a) it wasn't FO3 b) it disregarded Fallout canon in many aspects (i.e. furry Deathclaws, fossil fuel powered vehicles, BOS portrayed as a bunch of extremists...etc.) despite taking place in the same setting. Save for that, a lot of people thought that FO:T was a fun game in its own right (and genre).

 

I like to consider myself a hardcore fan, a fanatic. I never paid much attention to the Deathclaws biology, sexual mating practices, eating habits or any other thing about them. The concern for me is they could kick ass and were hard to kill.

Sure that fallout tactics was fun game not perfect but good.

And it has some faults

But the furry deathclaws wasn't the biggest one

For me the biggest problems were:

 

The lack of 50's feeling, no retrofuture. <--- MOST IMPORTANT

The militaristic BOS

Talking deathclaws before the experiments of Enclave? (WTF?)

Too much futuristic BATMAN-like power armor

Advanced Power Armor before being invented by Enclave (WTF?2)

the stupid look of Supermutants and Ghouls

Vault 0 which i don't know why was not the part of vault experiment

Yeah, great brotherhood recruiting Deathclaws, Ghouls and S. MUTANTS

Edited February 6, 200718 yr by Dagon

I didn't like the idea of the Brotherhood recruiting inferiors like ghouls, deathclaws and stupid (super) mutants.

Why not?

The Brotherhood is about perserving, saving humanity, which would omit the abominations and freaks.

Edited February 6, 200718 yr by Dark_Raven

Been a while since I played any of the FO games, so I don't remember that.

The Brotherhood is about perserving, saving humanity, which would omit the abominations and freaks.

General Barnaky would agree with you. Unfortunately, I splattered his brains all over the place.

Edited February 6, 200718 yr by 213374U

But pointing out that the appearance of fully-functioning fossil fuel powered vehicles and installations doesn't exactly jive well in a setting where the world went to war because there was no fossil fuel to go around isn't exactly vague,

Um, it's been some time since I played Tactics, so I may be wrong but, did they explicitly state that their vehicles were powered by fossil fuels? I always assumed they used "micro-fusion cells" or something along those lines.

 

 

and neither is pointing out that Deathclaws were a highly mutated form of chamaleons and not a furry amalgam of different species which could be mind-controlled by wasteland beastmen.

Aside from the fur thing, Deathclaws weren't mind-controlled by the Beastlords; they worked for them willfully so they didn't kill Mother. And since the Master himself showed some kind of psionic abilities, I don't see how the Beastlords mind-control is in any way inconsistent with the setting.

 

I'm surprised there is so much debate over the Deathclaws' fur, and nobody has mentioned how ridiculous (and different) Supermutants look in Tactics.

 

 

And it's their decision to take those non-cannon situations as they want to. I'm sure there are some who take it upon themselves to not let those poorly handled elements affect their enjoyment of the game (ie, bask upon the glory of CrashGirl's kindergarten-styled "lolz furry!" dismissal of that particular point), but gamers who enjoyed Fallout for its (mostly) well developed and internally coherent setting probably won't be as accepting.

Non-canon...? Well... since none of those supporting these alleged breaches of canon are actually officially accredited spokespersons for whoever owns the FO IP, I'd say canon contradicts them. Which automatically makes them wrong. It's like Star Wars canon. A lot of the EU went down the drain when Lucas went and did the prequels.

 

I'm not dismissing anything, though. I just haven't found any of the typical complaints and arguments about Tactics irreconcilably contrary to the canon established in FO and FO2.

M...Mo...Morrowind was.... broken?

 

I not only disagree, but henceforth deny you the privilege of having an opinion.

 

Morrowind was equally as poorly balanced as Oblivion in many respects, the difference was that Oblivion makes an attempt to compensate that is even more stupid than Morrowind. Morrowind takes a whopping 3-4 hours for me to get to the 'massacre anything in the world' stage- as in utterly no threat from anything anymore. However, at least Morrowind makes the world feel appropriate by having hard monsters in remote areas and making sure that there is a good reward for exploring hard areas. Oblivion demolished this aspect and destroyed any risk/reward for exploration.

 

But I do agree with anyone who says that Oblivion managed to do things even worse than Morrowind.

 

Edit: In the end if I had a choice between two failures at balancing, Morrowind where you were overpowered after a certain point, or Oblivion where levelling ends up punishing the player: I would take Morrowind very easily.

Edited February 6, 200718 yr by Aegeri

So you do want hairy deathclaws and sentient ones, because they were in FO:T and FO2, respectively. Got it.

 

FOT is not with continuity. If you actually read my posts the continuity I am looking for is FO1 to FO2 to FO3. Man, do you need everything explained to you or are you just being thick on purpose?

 

Yes. Continuity isn

I was going to write a long, thoroughly mocking post about the stupidity of even noticing that one Deathclaw has scales, another hair and the third feathers.. when I suddenly remembered how pissed I was when I found out that they completely changed the look, shape and canon of the orcs in Gothic 3.

 

I'll just crawl back under my rock now

Yes. Continuity isn

Hades, repeating to yourself that 2+2=5 ad nauseam won't change the fact that 2+2=4.

 

Sorry bub, but Tactics is part of the continuity until the owner of the IP says otherwise. No, that isn't you.

The owner of the IP is a dead company and what Herve Caen says is irrelevant.

Edited February 6, 200718 yr by Sand

The owner of the IP is a dead company

 

Bethesda is not dead.

I was refering to Interplay, Alan. I thought that was pretty clear. They are the ones who made and hold the licenses to FO1, FO2, FOT, and FOPOS, as well as their designers at the time stated that FOT and FOPOS were alternate versions of the setting and not to be considered canon.

Interplay is not dead either...

Close enough, Volourn. Its only Herve and his touchy feely rats.

Edited February 6, 200718 yr by Sand

Look, seriously, even in regards to FO, there are bigger things to worry about than if the Deathclaws have hair

 

Give me TB combat and you can make deathclaws into Wookies

Edited February 6, 200718 yr by kumquatq3

Yes, but that is just one detail out of thousands that needs to be right. No wookie deathclaws.

 

We don't need someone to come up with the "Goris" defense.

Edited February 6, 200718 yr by Sand