FO3 pirated in less than 24 hours after gold

[Tigranes]

How can we trust all of the criticism when some folks clearly had an agenda the very moment Bethesda announced the game.

 

You can't. Just like you can't trust all of the "journalists" harping on with 10/10, 100% and five gold stars. You have to be aware of the possible bias in either and wade through. Which is just like any other controversy, but I guess a bit more obvious.

 

I don't think it makes a lot of sense for folks to go out of their way to attack the game simply on the basis that they hate Bethesda, but it's downright stupid to attack the game because you're a fan and hate seeing the license go to anyone other than Troika or Black Isle Studios.

 

What the hey? Who does that, though? I mean, I've seen a lot of people who have come to hate Bethesda because of the decisions Bethesda has made regarding Fallout. But there are hardly any people who simply went; "Bethesda? I HATE THEM. I hate everything they and will do and say".

[Aristes]

I don't know. I wasn't around here when the news of Fallout 3 hit the newstand. However, where I was it was almost exactly the way you characterize it.

 

"I've seen a lot of people who have come to hate Bethesda because of the decisions Bethesda has made regarding Fallout."

 

However, there were some who hated Oblivion and therefore, they added their Fallout fanaticism to their hatred of Bethesda and it sounded like

 

"'Bethesda? I HATE THEM. I hate everything they and will do and say'" with "They had the audacity to buy the Fallout license."

 

Sorry, Tigranes, I hate to see someone who's been more or less sane forced to defend undeserving people. That's your choice, though. The fact remains that Fallout fanaticism has a reputation, not just here but in the gaming industry as a whole, and the fanbase did not get that reputation without going a long way to earn it. The response to Fallout 3 was and is remarkable. No, not unique. Yes, we have to do be discerning about anything we hear or read, but to trivialize it as if it's the same thing as, say, "Mirror's Edge" or any other game coming out just doesn't make sense.

 

I've been lurking through this thread for a while and only recently decided to comment. So I'm really a latecomer to this debate, if it's a debate in the first place. I'm happy to leave my statements as is, but the whole Fallout 3 phenomenon is not your run of the mill scenario.

[Dark_Raven]

I don't have a problem with Bethy for the most part, Oblivion and Morrowind were good games. I do have a problem with them for making F3. They have no business making it. They had nothing to do with the creation of the originals. It would be like saying, "Ok Mr. Lucas you're not going to make Return of the Jedi, we're going to pawn it off onto another studio with different writers and director."

[newc0253]

I've seen a lot of people who have come to hate Bethesda because of the decisions Bethesda has made regarding Fallout. But there are hardly any people who simply went; "Bethesda? I HATE THEM. I hate everything they and will do and say".

sorry dude but Aristes is right. the moment Bethesda got the rights to Fallout, there was a howl of incoherent rage from the NMA-crowd and it's continued ever since, swelling into the crescendo of pre-release hate we're seeing now.

 

as fan of Fallouts 1 & 2 who has played both Morrowind and Oblivion, i can well-understand folks' initial fears about Bethesda. Bethesda are good at building wide-open worlds with fantastic visuals and atmosphere, but they fairly suck at things like writing, characterisation and combat, things which were at the core of Fallouts 1 & 2.

 

but, despite their past failings, i've been moderately impressed by what i've seen of Fallout 3 so far. it seems to me that Bethesda have made a genuine effort to get the Fallout world and keep it relatively faithful, at least in terms of tone. although i doubt it will be anywhere as great as Fallouts 1 & 2, i'm at least willing to give them the benefit of that doubt. it may well end up sucking but i'm at least gonna wait until i've played it before i declare it. and i certainly ain't gonna damn the game straight to hell simply because it's not turn-based isometric or because i saw someone's frakking walkthrough on youtube.

Edited October 17, 2008 by newc0253

[Hell Kitty]

I've seen a lot of people who have come to hate Bethesda because of the decisions Bethesda has made regarding Fallout.

 

The decision that started it all was the decision to buy the rights to Fallout. The hate began when the only information about the game was who was making it.

 

Anyway, when reviews come out the anti-fans will see positive ones as being dishonest, proof that journalists have been paid for by the industry or that they are gullible or simply retards, and they will see negative reviews as being honest and brave. Nothing will change.

[Slowtrain]

The game world needs more love. And a System Shock sequel.

 

 

mmmm. System Shock 3.

 

By Bethesda?

 

 

*faints*

Bioshock was alegedly the System Shock sequel, but I don't think it lived up to the idea.

 

 

Bioshock was the condensed EZ-reader version of System Shock. For those who prefer large print, short words, and pretty pictures.

Edited October 17, 2008 by CrashGirl

[Tigranes]

The decision that started it all was the decision to buy the rights to Fallout. The hate began when the only information about the game was who was making it.

 

True, sort of. Huge number of people went OMFG NO when Beth got the license, but there was a sizable portion of people saying "well, let's wait and see what they do with it first". Since then, many people in the latter camp has said, "well, I've seen what they've done and I don't like it, NOW i'm going OMFG NO." And even with the former, most of that OMFG NO was based on predictions - i.e. the prediction that because of the type of games Beth makes, FO3 will turn out a certain way. It's like me going OMFG NO if George Bush suddenly decided to be the president of New Zealand. He's never done it before, but I've seen what he's done with US and I don't want it.

 

Anyway. That's not to deny your point. There were, and are, idiots who just hate for hate's sake and just rubbish something because it's Bethesda. And certainly, even in the most reasonable of FO3 doubters, there is a lingering whiff of predisposition and prejudice (don't we all?). And it does suck. But by no means, not by a long shot, does it disqualify the doubts/criticisms about/of FO3, or the old-time detractors as a whole. Certainly, they've provided an interesting alternative to that X-Play guy going WOOOOAHHHH COOOOL at everything. Both biased, but hey. That's life.

[random n00b]

They have no business making it.

Funny you'd use that particular word, because business is what the game industry is all about. They outbid Troika or Obsidz or whoever was also interested in the license, and that's that. It's all about biz...

 

 

It would be like saying, "Ok Mr. Lucas you're not going to make Return of the Jedi, we're going to pawn it off onto another studio with different writers and director."

What, you mean how Lucas didn't direct ESB and it turned out better than anything he's done before or since?

 

And for the record, he didn't direct ROTJ either...

[Nick_i_am]

Shhh, gabs doesn't know what a producer is, don't spoil it for her.

[Hell Kitty]

Certainly, they've provided an interesting alternative to that X-Play guy going WOOOOAHHHH COOOOL at everything.

 

Personally I find the BOOOOOOO HISSSSSSSSS worse than the WOOOOAHHHH COOOOL. I can't really fault people for being happy and positive, and even the most obnoxiously happy isn't as bad as someone constantly whining about something they insist they don't care about.

 

Honestly, I think most of the people who claim they aren't interested but keep absorbing every little bit of information that comes out do so because they are looking to justify their initial hatred/annoying/crybabywhininess. "I always said it was going to be Oblivion with Guns and look the animations are just like Oblivion I was right all along take that Bethesda!"

 

Actual criticism is nice, it's just that there is far more whining than actual criticism, which is true of everything I suppose. Stuff like constantly claiming Bethesda is wrong for Fallout or the game is Oblivion with Guns or that the videos look just like a modded Oblivion or every positive preview of the game is just a regurgitation of the press release or personal attacks on Todd Howard and Pete Hines or how it should use a subtitle instead of a number or how it's not a true Fallout game... don't make for interesting criticism.

Edited October 17, 2008 by Hell Kitty

[Tigranes]

Personally I find the BOOOOOOO HISSSSSSSSS worse than the WOOOOAHHHH COOOOL.

 

I can see what you mean, but I approach it from a different angle. See, I am committed to games not only in the sense that I like playing some of them, but also in the sense that I want the medium to do well and develop ('do well' being 'do well' by my standards). That means I have a keen interest in what is becoming popular, what is becoming accepted/acceptable, and of course the role journalists and major sites play in setting public opinion. Little by little, Adam Sessler(?) acting like a pig on crack or random idiotic journalists harping about how TB or isometric is "obsolete" (that's a completely separate argument from FO3) affects that kind of stuff. So for me, going WOAAAH COOL at certain things can be just as bad, if not worse, than BOO HISS.

 

Stuff like constantly claiming Bethesda is wrong for Fallout or the game is Oblivion with Guns or that the videos look just like a modded Oblivion or every positive preview of the game is just a regurgitation of the press release or personal attacks on Todd Howard and Pete Hines or how it should use a subtitle instead of a number or how it's not a true Fallout game... don't make for interesting criticism.

 

Heh. It's curious isn't it? I was reading this, and I was agreeing with your general argument, but when I read the bit "videos look jsust like modded Oblivion"... well.. actually, that's what it looks like to me. Like, really. I didn't think about it at first, but when I saw the videos it really struck me. So in my head, that would actually be one of the few legitimate points of analysis (although not necessary a point of criticism). But I've had people swear they don't get any of that, so heh.

[newc0253]

[see, I am committed to games not only in the sense that I like playing some of them, but also in the sense that I want the medium to do well and develop ('do well' being 'do well' by my standards). That means I have a keen interest in what is becoming popular, what is becoming accepted/acceptable, and of course the role journalists and major sites play in setting public opinion.

yes, i think we all want the medium to do well.

 

but i very much doubt that all of us want Fallout 3 to do well, and i find it interesting that many of those who claim to have the medium's best interests at heart are actually suprisingly keen for FO3 to crash and burn like a gigantic flaming turd.

 

and the fact that so many folk seem to want Fallout 3 to fail so epically (yes, i know it's not a word) is yet more proof of a Fallout fanbase that hates Bethesda to its core. people who like Fallout flatter themselves that they have good taste in games. they feel very strongly that Bethesda simply lack the talent to make a sequel to Fallout and they're prepared to highlight every single decision as a misstep and yet more proof that Bethesda just don't 'get' Fallout the way that they do.

 

most of all, they don't want Bethesda's Fallout to be accepted by the world at large as the 'real' Fallout. that's why Fallout 3 just has to be Oblivion With Guns or Fallout In Name Only. because if the world at large thinks of Fallout 3 as actually Fallout, their tiny little world might crumble.

 

me, i have nothing invested in Fallout 3. it could turn out to be great, it could suck balls. at the moment, i tend to think i will enjoy it but that's probably because my expectations of the story have been set sufficiently low - i know not to expect too much from Bethesda in the writing department.

 

i think that's the fundamental difference in our approaches to Fallout 3. i'm willing to suffer a substandard Fallout because i like the Fallout series in general, and even an inferior Fallout game promises to be better than many games out there at the moment and certainly better than no Fallout at all. (also, i applaud Bethesda for refusing to pay homage to the idiots who think all CRPGs have to be isometric and turn-based, otherwise they're not CRPGs). whereas other people would prefer to see Rome burn than have it fall into the hands of the barbarians. Fallout 3 has become a gamer's gestalt, a so-called purity test of not only how much you like Fallout but how much you'd be willing to sacrifice in order to keep it pure. and that's just a little silly, no?

[random n00b]

I think there's a good chance that the Fallout fanbase will expand greatly with F3. Which means that "hardcore" (read: rabid) fans will be even more insignificant in proportion and their voices will be drowned in the inevitable tide of "WOOOOAHHHH COOOOL".

 

Yes, that's a good thing.

[Hurlshort]

The chances of Fallout 3 failing in sales are pretty slim. At the least, it will sell as well as Oblivion.

[jaguars4ever]

So, any unbiased reviews out on this thing then?

[newc0253]

So, any unbiased reviews out on this thing then?

everyone has their biases. the best you can hope for is a review from someone who shares yours.

 

but no reviews yet AFAIK.

[Starwars]

Copypaste from this thread: http://www.bethsoft.com/bgsforums/index.php?showtopic=886083

 

PC Gamer France, 93% - Good variety of quests, lots of replayability

PC Gamer Sweden, 81% - VATS is nice, but there is too much content in a game world that is too small, NPCs feel lifeless

GMC Italy, 9/10 - Good atmosphere and turn-based combat, lackluster AI and mini-games

OXM 10/10 - details unknown as yet

Click! 8.75/10 - * Gameplay - 9.25 (Playability: 9.5, Longevity: 9.5, Variety: 9, AI: 9); * Graphics - 8.25 (Appearance: 8.5, Animations: 8 ); * Sound - 9.5 (Music: 9.5, Effects: 9.5); * Technical quality - 7.38 (Fluency: 7, Loading times: 8.5)

 

So it's gotten good grades so far. Worth noting is that the Swedish PC Gamer guy is an old-school Fallout/RPG fan who have been writing for the mag a very long time if I recall correctly.

 

There was also a very negative preview from a French mag that was supposed to be a review, but he changed it to a preview for now since he didn't like the conditions for writing the review. I thought what he wrote fit exactly with what I saw in the stream I watched, but I'm one of those angry and unreasonable Fallout fans and I think he is as well.

 

The bit about the condition was pretty weird and not something I knew. He said that the journalists basically got 16 hours with the game in a hotel, and were supposed to write a review from that (and the material had to be verified by I guess Bethesda guys).

[GreasyDogMeat]

[see, I am committed to games not only in the sense that I like playing some of them, but also in the sense that I want the medium to do well and develop ('do well' being 'do well' by my standards). That means I have a keen interest in what is becoming popular, what is becoming accepted/acceptable, and of course the role journalists and major sites play in setting public opinion.

yes, i think we all want the medium to do well.

 

but i very much doubt that all of us want Fallout 3 to do well, and i find it interesting that many of those who claim to have the medium's best interests at heart are actually suprisingly keen for FO3 to crash and burn like a gigantic flaming turd.

 

and the fact that so many folk seem to want Fallout 3 to fail so epically (yes, i know it's not a word) is yet more proof of a Fallout fanbase that hates Bethesda to its core. people who like Fallout flatter themselves that they have good taste in games. they feel very strongly that Bethesda simply lack the talent to make a sequel to Fallout and they're prepared to highlight every single decision as a misstep and yet more proof that Bethesda just don't 'get' Fallout the way that they do.

 

most of all, they don't want Bethesda's Fallout to be accepted by the world at large as the 'real' Fallout. that's why Fallout 3 just has to be Oblivion With Guns or Fallout In Name Only. because if the world at large thinks of Fallout 3 as actually Fallout, their tiny little world might crumble.

 

me, i have nothing invested in Fallout 3. it could turn out to be great, it could suck balls. at the moment, i tend to think i will enjoy it but that's probably because my expectations of the story have been set sufficiently low - i know not to expect too much from Bethesda in the writing department.

 

i think that's the fundamental difference in our approaches to Fallout 3. i'm willing to suffer a substandard Fallout because i like the Fallout series in general, and even an inferior Fallout game promises to be better than many games out there at the moment and certainly better than no Fallout at all. (also, i applaud Bethesda for refusing to pay homage to the idiots who think all CRPGs have to be isometric and turn-based, otherwise they're not CRPGs). whereas other people would prefer to see Rome burn than have it fall into the hands of the barbarians. Fallout 3 has become a gamer's gestalt, a so-called purity test of not only how much you like Fallout but how much you'd be willing to sacrifice in order to keep it pure. and that's just a little silly, no?

 

I think you pretty much hit the nail on the head. I personally have a love hate relationship with Fallout 3 in the sense I think it is going to turn out to be a fun game that I'm going to spend many hours on, but there are going to be a few terrible Bethesda things about it. Such as some bad writing, some bad voice acting (as seen in some of the leaked youtube vids) and a few other annoyances. They have fixed at least one of the major annoyances of Oblivion: enemies leveling with you. They've also taken a more Black Isle/Bioware/Obsidian approach to dialogue with full sentences instead of single words: Rumors etc. Overall I'm optimistic. I'll be especially happy if Bethesda releases modding tools. Think it would be sweet to see a remake of a previous Fallout in 3's engine.

 

I honestly don't mind the switch to a FPS perspective, as I've often though a Fallout RPG in that perspective could be very cool.

[alanschu]

Just for the record, newc and I are agreeing so obviously this is big **** and we are obviously correct

[Slowtrain]

Its amusing to hear people who whine endlessly about drm whine endlessly about whining fallout fans.

 

lolz. whining is in.

 

edit: a had a moment after making this post when the word "whine" for a moment didn't make sense to me anymore. I hate it when words do that.

 

*whines*

Edited October 17, 2008 by CrashGirl

[newc0253]

Its amusing to hear people who whine endlessly about drm whine endlessly about whining fallout fans.

i don't whine about drm. i sometimes whine about drm whiners though.

 

it's one big whiny feedback loop.

 

of whining.

[Slowtrain]

Internet: If you're not whining, then you're not doing it right!

[Tigranes]

but i very much doubt that all of us want Fallout 3 to do well, and i find it interesting that many of those who claim to have the medium's best interests at heart are actually suprisingly keen for FO3 to crash and burn like a gigantic flaming turd....

 

Well, yes. As I implied in the previous post, I don't really think I disagree with you. I don't think your observations are off. I was just making it clear that the kind of people you describe exist, but there are more 'reasonable' critiques and detractors out there and it shouldn't serve to stereotype or belittle them.

 

i'm willing to suffer a substandard Fallout because i like the Fallout series in general, and even an inferior Fallout game promises to be better than many games out there at the moment and certainly better than no Fallout at all.

 

Oh, honestly, I would prefer a Bethesda FO3 to no FO3 at all. But yes, I know that there are people out there who would prefer the franchise to be dead. I can definitely iunderstand why they might say/think that though. Already, journalists and consumers are rewriting Fallout history (heh, remember "Todd Howard, mastermind behind the Fallout series"?). I expect FO3 to sell as well as Oblivion and generally be as well received, so it will make it much more likely that FO4 is more like FO3 than FO2/1, too. So I can understand that. I don't agree with the sentiment, but it does make sense.

 

Don't think I 'disagree' with you or stand on the 'opposite camp' though, well, not anymore - I think that would mean splitting the atoms of hairs. Just pointin' things out.

[jaguars4ever]

I don't have the courage to pre-order FO3 as Bethesda have yet to produce a game I like overall (though a couple have been good in parts), but that vault-tec lunchbox, pip-boy clock, bottle-cap opener, and BoS action figure do look pretty sick!

[Llyranor]

You're better off getting CoD5!