Fallout 3 Is Garbage, And Here's Why

[Carabas]

Name the things Fallout 3 does well. It sure isn't the gameplay, since the combat mechanics are completely awful and the enemy AI is so stupid they present no real challenge at all. It's not the worldbuilding. It's not the writing. It's not the storytelling. It's not exploration, because there really isn't any since the objective markers tell you exactly were to go for everything. It's not the game's presentation, since it's so ugly. It's not characters, because it doesn't have any interesting ones from both a writing and a design standpoint. What are these things in the game that make it, what did laughably call it, one of the best games of its generation? It should at least be doing something really good if we're going to be slapping that label on it.

Before you were saying games have copied Fallout 3, what are they? You said there were many of them, but I can't think of one. Can you not think on one either, is that why you seemingly dropped that train of thought on it being good or somethings?

If the new style was actually good, I wouldn't really give much of a ****. If this FPS Fallout was even kind of a good FPS, that would have been great. I like FPS games quite a bit. I'm going to let you in on a little secret, back in '98, after playing Outwars, I was like: I could go for a third person shooter Fallout, I'd love to see all those description text things actually play out in full 3D in real-time. You know what's odd, games actually have the power now to render out all that descriptor text stuff, but none of the 3D Fallout games do that. Forget cool little weird things like growing an extra toe because of radiation, they can't even be bother to do the combat ones; which is actually kind of weird since combat is the focus of the new ones, and that would only make the visuals of the combat look more interesting. Half of what seems to be the fun of Fallout 3 (and 4) are these stupid death animations that are just terrible in a unintentionally funny way. Not only are they completely stupid looking, they aren't even half as interesting as the combat description stuff from the old games, or as cool looking as the different death animations the 2D games had. I mean, I guess you could say it would be hard to do cool stuff like that in 3D, so the laughably bad **** Fallout 3 does is ok for reasons; but then it's like, wait, Soldier of Fortune 1 and 2 were doing better stuff back in 2000 & 2002. Those Soldier of Forute games are also just all around better first person shooters, with better controls and better enemy AI. Enemy AI seemingly not even really being a thing that Fallout 3 has.

No negative Metacritic reviews? It sounds like you're trying to say video game reviewers don't know jack about video games. I mean, how on Earth could an ugly buggy FPS with some of the worst gameplay of any major FPS not have one bad review? Doesn't it strike you as odd that something so mediocre wouldn't have one bad review? Can you imagine some other random shitty looking FPS that plays as badly as Fallout 3 reviewing so well? A look at some of those reviews are like god damn crazy town, it makes you wonder if any of the reviewers have actually played a game that does anything Fallout 3 tries it's hand at. Most of the "fun" of the game I'd say comes from how bad it is, and it being funny. Like, it's "fun" (funny) abusing the VATS melee system to teleport across rooms to punch stuff. It's "fun" when the dead bodies start dancing around the room because the game is a huge mess.

All of this is still simply "I personally do not like any of this stuff". You're not giving reasons.
Also, the game is not made for or aimed at people who demand perfect FPS game mechanics. That's not Bethesda's target audience.

[Shawn Hopkins]

All of this is still simply "I personally do not like any of this stuff". You're not giving reasons.
Also, the game is not made for or aimed at people who demand perfect FPS game mechanics. That's not Bethesda's target audience.

I know, right? I don't know how to debate when the criticism is that it's "not good." Just yell "Is too?"

[MikeP]

People like Dark Souls because it's a fantastic video game. Mechanically it's one of the best hack and slash games ever made. Unlike, say, an Elder Scrolls game, Dark Souls actually has good gameplay, and that's where the fun and enjoyment of playing the game comes from. Dark Souls isn't some punishingly hard game either, even if that's how the marketing started selling the game. It just isn't some mindless game where you don't have to pay any attention to things that are happening.

You completely missed the point. I"m happy you like the game. I don't. And no amount of screaming and stamping your foot is going to change anyone's mind.

[Conn Seanery]

You mean a humorous moment? An over-exaggeration for humorous effect about something that is objectively bad was the step too far? Well, ok I guess.

Going just off what you said there, it kind of does sound like you're coming at it from that angle. Maybe not about the ending of the game specifically, but about liking the game in general. I mean, you're talking about them going too far about an aspect of the game you don't even remember.

I don't have to remember the ending to not appreciate the "humor" of him telling anyone who disagrees with him they're wrong and that they need to shut up. I don't care if he's exaggerating, it's still arrogant.

I gave him 2 minutes. Then I gave him another 3 to fact check a claim you made. Aside from the video's length, which was pretty much a deal breaker to begin with, I was not impressed enough with it to continue. That's not an agenda, that's just me not liking it and avoiding wasting my time.

[Gryphon]

If you don't like the current fallout games and like fallout 1 and 2, you need to check out wasteland 2. Its basically fallout 3 if it were done by the creators of the fallout series

[simbob4000]

I have heard if these. Aren't they supposed to be funny?

It was funny. It is funny.

Dude, you totally can send in the Super Mutant in the ending. They fixed that ages ago.

Duuude. That don't matter. Thing were are talking about from the video is the person that made the video looking a REVIEWS FOR THE GAME AT THE TIME OF RELEASE. One part he was looking at is a reviewer that was talking about the ending being so good they didn't want to spoil it, which is funny, because the ending is objectively garbage, it was also so hated that it was changed.

Well, obviously not everyone hated it. You are not the world.

What, the ending? Yes, that stupid horrible ending that didn't make any sense at all was so loved that even the makers of the game patched in a fix. But the world is full of people with terrible taste, so I'm sure there was at least one person that loved being forced into two choices in a game about choice even if they had ways that should logically get them around those two choices.

SOME people like Dark Souls. I personally do not see the attraction.

Well, the attraction of that video game is the gameplay. Some people like playing games like Skyrim where they simply walk up to an enemy and press the attack button mindless, where the combat is so simple that there's really no point to it; other people like actually having to think about how they're engaging the things screen. The fun of the game is that it actually presents a challenge, as you learn the game you're able to overcome these challenges, it's like the basic fun of playing a game.

The game isn't even like gruelingly hard or cheap. It's also, interestingly enough, like the best horror game ever made. The games instills a since of dread into the player when going into new areas because you don't know what's there, and you don't want to die because than you'll lose the points you use to upgrade; (this would be different from say, BioShock, where dying is meaningless because there's not punishment for it) so the game forces you to slow down, think about your surroundings, think about how you approach enemies.

[simbob4000]

I don't have to remember the ending to not appreciate the "humor" of him telling anyone who disagrees with him they're wrong and that they need to shut up. I don't care if he's exaggerating, it's still arrogant.

I gave him 2 minutes. Then I gave him another 3 to fact check a claim you made. Aside from the video's length, which was pretty much a deal breaker to begin with, I was not impressed enough with it to continue. That's not an agenda, that's just me not liking it and avoiding wasting my time.

But who cares, it's funny. It seems like you're taking that funny bit of the video very personally, you don't need to be offended for those that liked the ending (for some odd reason) and might take offense.

[simbob4000]

You completely missed the point. I"m happy you like the game. I don't. And no amount of screaming and stamping your foot is going to change anyone's mind.

I'll have you know I was quietly laying down when I wrote that. I also didn't even kind of try to tell you to like the game, so your reaction there is a bit weird.

[Conn Seanery]

But who cares, it's funny. It seems like you're taking that funny bit of the video very personally, you don't need to be offended for those that liked the ending (for some odd reason) and might take offense.

You understand how opinions work, right? You think it's funny, I don't. It doesn't mean you're right and I'm wrong, it just means we disagree.

And don't misread me, nothing about that video made me angry or offended. I just have better things to do than waste my time listening to someone like that.

[simbob4000]

All of this is still simply "I personally do not like any of this stuff". You're not giving reasons.
Also, the game is not made for or aimed at people who demand perfect FPS game mechanics. That's not Bethesda's target audience.

Yeah, Beathesda taped into the perfect demo, those that don't care the FPS they're playing is bad because it was marketed as an RPG. Just imagine if Beathesda actually made their FPS play well? Think of how interesting that would be.

I also didn't just say I personally don't like something. Like, saying the shooting mechanics are bad because you cant hit things you're aiming at sometimes isnt a personal preference things. That's pretty clearly saying why the shooting mechanics are bad, and combat is the thing the whole game is build around. After all, you should be able to hit the thing you're aiming at in a FPS. Saying the exploration is bad because the marker systems removes any need to actual explore since you know exactly were to go is kind of specific.

But hey, what does the game do well? Then let's compare and contrast with games that have done exactly the same things. It might be a fun game to play while we wait on that list of many games that have copied Fallout 3 that Shawn Hopkins teased us with. I'm still waiting to see what those are, because I still can't think of even one that isn't directly linked to Fallout 3.

[Shawn Hopkins]

If you don't like the current fallout games and like fallout 1 and 2, you need to check out wasteland 2. Its basically fallout 3 if it were done by the creators of the fallout series

Or Pillars of Eternity. Or the new Shadowrun Games. Or Divinity: Original Sin. Or the upcoming Torment: Tides of Numera. There's an embarrassment of riches.

[Carabas]

Yeah, Beathesda taped into the perfect demo, those that don't care the FPS they're playing is bad because it was marketed as an RPG.

Well, that's just, like, your opinion, that Fallout 3-4 are FPS games, an opinion that isn't shared by the creators and fans of the games.

I also didn't just say I personally don't like something. Like, saying the shooting mechanics are bad because you cant hit things you're aiming at

I've never experienced trouble with that. I can hit what I'm aiming at just fine.

After all, you should be able to hit the thing you're aiming at in a FPS. Saying the exploration is bad because the marker systems removes any need to actual explore since you know exactly were to go is kind of specific.

Wouldn't know. I don't use this option. Was somewhat annoying in ES:Oblivion, but Bethesda took notes on that for Fallout 3.
Besides, who in his right mind plays a Bethesda game and goes anywhere near where he's supposed to go? That's just not normal.

[Shawn Hopkins]

Yeah, Beathesda taped into the perfect demo, those that don't care the FPS they're playing is bad because it was marketed as an RPG. Just imagine if Beathesda actually made their FPS play well? Think of how interesting that would be.

I also didn't just say I personally don't like something. Like, saying the shooting mechanics are bad because you cant hit things you're aiming at sometimes isnt a personal preference things. That's pretty clearly saying why the shooting mechanics are bad, and combat is the thing the whole game is build around. After all, you should be able to hit the thing you're aiming at in a FPS. Saying the exploration is bad because the marker systems removes any need to actual explore since you know exactly were to go is kind of specific.

But hey, what does the game do well? Then let's compare and contrast with games that have done exactly the same things. It might be a fun game to play while we wait on that list of many games that have copied Fallout 3 that Shawn Hopkins teased us with. I'm still waiting to see what those are, because I still can't think of even one that isn't directly linked to Fallout 3.

You don't always hit because it's not an FPS. It's an RPG, and weapon skills, stats and condition are factored.

I know you have never actually played this game. You're completely ignorant of it, except for what you've learned from videos on YouTube. Christ, you think it's spelled "Beathesda." That's on the box.

[simbob4000]

Well, that's just, like, your opinion, that Fallout 3-4 are FPS games, an opinion that isn't shared by the creators and fans of the games.

Yeah, I'm sure the creators of the game don't know that the game they made where you shoot stuff in a first person view is a first person shooter.

I've never experienced trouble with that. I can hit what I'm aiming at just fine.


Wouldn't know. I don't use this option. Was somewhat annoying in ES:Oblivion, but Bethesda took notes on that for Fallout 3.
Besides, who in his right mind plays a Bethesda game and goes anywhere near where he's supposed to go? That's just not normal.

Well, if you never used the option of shooting thing than you're probably not going to experience trouble in hitting things.

Unless you're saying you don't actually do anything to advance the game in this game you say is good? They also didn't take notes on the waypoint system. It's just like Oblivion, they just give you a mark on the map and you go directly to it. You can't really turn it off because the game isn't designed to work without it.

You don't always hit because it's not an FPS. It's an RPG, and weapon skills, stats and condition are factored.

I know you have never actually played this game. You're completely ignorant of it, except for what you've learned from videos on YouTube. Christ, you think it's spelled "Beathesda." That's on the box.

Fallout 3 isn't Morrowind. Have you actually played the game we're talking about? Your stats don't affect if you actually hit anything in real-time, that works just like any other FPS, your weapon skills just change your damage output in real-time.

If it did work like you think it does, like Morrowind does, than the control scheme they've picked is incredibly stupid. If you don't have actually control over what you hit, if it was a stat based thing, (and it's not) just having a lock-on system is what you'd want...because pointing an aiming reticle at something and than not having your shot go there is dumb. This would be a lesson I'm sure Bethesda learned after Morrowind, because they've used a normal FPS system ever since.

[Shawn Hopkins]

Yeah, I'm sure the creators of the game don't know that the game they made where you shoot stuff in a first person view is a first person shooter.



Well, if you never used the option of shooting thing than you're probably not going to experience trouble in hitting things.

Unless you're saying you don't actually do anything to advance the game in this game you say is good? They also didn't take notes on the waypoint system. It's just like Oblivion, they just give you a mark on the map and you go directly to it. You can't really turn it off because the game isn't designed to work without it.



Fallout 3 isn't Morrowind. Have you actually played the game we're talking about? Your stats don't affect if you actually hit anything in real-time, that works just like any other FPS, your weapon skills just change your damage output in real-time.

If it did work like you think it does, like Morrowind does, than the control scheme they've picked is incredibly stupid. If you don't have actually control over what you hit, if it was a stat based thing, (and it's not) just having a lock-on system is what you'd want...because pointing an aiming reticle at something and than not having your shot go there is dumb. This would be a lesson I'm sure Bethesda learned after Morrowind, because they've used a normal FPS system ever since.

It does in fact work that way. That's how I can tell you've never played it, you'd be able to tell that there are factors that can improve or degrade how straight you shoot. You'd have to notice.

http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Weapons_spread#cite_ref-0