Volourn Posted February 6, 2007 Share Posted February 6, 2007 Needs? I think you missed the point of K's post. I'd be happy if FO3 was fun. sadly, sicne I'm no fan of Betehsda, I'd be shocked to see a fun game. That's why I'll be waiting on it. You, on the other hand, LOVE Bethesda games, so you should be able to enjoy FO3 just fine if you get past your silliness. DWARVES IN PROJECT ETERNITY = VOLOURN HAS PLEDGED $250. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sand Posted February 6, 2007 Share Posted February 6, 2007 (edited) I think that love is a little too strong of a word, Volourn. Fallout needs to be Fallout, plain and simple. If Bethesda applies their usual design style as seen in the Elder Scrolls games it will not be Fallout. My expectations out of an Elder Scrolls game is completely and totally different from what I expect out of a Fallout game. Edited February 6, 2007 by Sand Murphy's Law of Computer Gaming: The listed minimum specifications written on the box by the publisher are not the minimum specifications of the game set by the developer. @\NightandtheShape/@ - "Because you're a bizzare strange deranged human?" Walsingham- "Sand - always rushing around, stirring up apathy." Joseph Bulock - "Another headache, courtesy of Sand" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Volourn Posted February 6, 2007 Share Posted February 6, 2007 Love, like, enjoy, whatever. It shouldn't matter really what the name is if it's fun to you. I'd buy a BG3 Action Adventure game set in the ES world if I thought it be fun. DWARVES IN PROJECT ETERNITY = VOLOURN HAS PLEDGED $250. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sand Posted February 6, 2007 Share Posted February 6, 2007 (edited) I think we have different definitions of what is fun, Volourn. I find a game that adheres to the rules system and setting that has been long established more fun than a game that tries to use the setting but uses a totally different rules set or try to fit a different genre. I like consistency and I find consistency in a game series more fun than inconsistancy. Edited February 6, 2007 by Sand Murphy's Law of Computer Gaming: The listed minimum specifications written on the box by the publisher are not the minimum specifications of the game set by the developer. @\NightandtheShape/@ - "Because you're a bizzare strange deranged human?" Walsingham- "Sand - always rushing around, stirring up apathy." Joseph Bulock - "Another headache, courtesy of Sand" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alanschu Posted February 6, 2007 Share Posted February 6, 2007 I was refering to Interplay, Alan. I thought that was pretty clear. Didn't Bethesda purchase the IP? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pop Posted February 6, 2007 Share Posted February 6, 2007 I was refering to Interplay, Alan. I thought that was pretty clear. Didn't Bethesda purchase the IP? Nah, they purchased the rights to make Fallouts 3, 4 and 5. If they had bought the IP outright, Herve wouldn't be blowing smoke about FOOL. Join me, and we shall make Production Beards a reality! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
213374U Posted February 6, 2007 Share Posted February 6, 2007 (edited) their designers at the time stated that FOT and FOPOS were alternate versions of the setting and not to be considered canon.Links. Yes, but that is just one detail out of thousands that needs to be right. No wookie deathclaws.A "thousand" details you have failed to point out. That's called bullshitting, and I'm calling you on it. Fallout needs to be Fallout, plain and simple. Translation: "Fallout needs to be what I want it to be or else I'll flood the boards with the same boring rants over and over until everyone can't resist the urge to kill themselves anymore". Edited February 6, 2007 by 213374U - When he is best, he is a little worse than a man, and when he is worst, he is little better than a beast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darque Posted February 6, 2007 Share Posted February 6, 2007 Closed due to size... and I'm not sure how much more that poor dead horse can take... Feel free to create a new Fallout 3 thread... preferably one that doesn't involve conflicts with personal tastes or dead horses and instead creates some sort of new-ish discussion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.jpg.ce846aae50e732dc4985eb712252381f.jpg)
Recommended Posts