Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Great Fallout 3 review from 2016

Neki

Scholar
Joined
Jul 30, 2016
Messages
145
the reason i endure this place's bigotry and outright racism is you guys have relatively great taste.

That is why i like this place.
Here is the only place when liberal fags, conservatives fags, homophopic fags, pseudo-nazi fags, and homosexual fags can discuss games in a:obviously: manner.

Come to think of it, the Codex is an perfect free-speech utopia
 

Doktor Best

Arcane
Joined
Feb 2, 2015
Messages
2,849
So you want safe spaces now or not? I'm always getting confused here on codex. Especially when it comes to politics and all that alt right fags who watch youtube dramaqueens bitch about sarkeesian/the liberal oppressives and hold dramatic speeches of the importance of free speech are losing their shit like babies with diarrhea as soon as they are opposed to an opinion that doesnt fit theirs.

Same here. Yes the Fallout3 fanboy stands out of the masses and his opinion is objectively wrong. But are you really afraid that his appearance here will change the codex consensus on the game? Are you so triggered by a sheep led astray? I see opportunity here to change his mind.

Doktor Best, you actually look like an adult. The interesting part is dungeons/vaults being superior. Don't get this at all. As I see it, there were practically no interesting dungeons and design was uninspiring (unless you go into DLC). The only interesting sort of dungeon I'd say where Western Vegas Ruins as they were inhabited by interesting enemies and it's the only place in the game that uses Z axis for gameplay reasons. Many dungeons are 1 room cave or something Meanwhile Fallout 3 dungeons are big and varied, environmental storytelling is much more evident there compared to New Vegas where the place is either explicitly part of the quest or just a cave. The most disappointing thing about FNV was they came up with a single good vault idea (democracy one) while even FO3 had couple of good ones (Visions, Gary, Artists).

Well, i digress. One of the very first dungeons in NV (the rocket base) is better than every dungeon i ever experienced in Fallout 3. Why? Because it told an intriguing story, with a well written story arch, giving the player the ability to have impact on its outcome. That dungeon alone is better constructed than the whole Fallout 3 mainplot. Now lets go on to all the vaults you find dull for some reason. They also told their little stories in a way far more advanced than Fallout 3. Remember Vault 11 for example? The videoclip in the end? When did you experience something like this in Fallout 3? As for the vertical leveldesign, there is a reason for that, its because the gamebryo engine and its AI is absolutely shit when it comes to those kinda situations. Did you watch the video posted earlier, the part when he clears the enclave base and all those soldiers just stand there to be put down without resistance because the AI couldnt handle the player being below them? Thats why there is less "verticality". I would say that on a visual level i'd agree when it comes to the open world, i missed a bit the verticality of the skyscrapers in ruins that gave Fallout 3 that additional layer of perspective. But its not like Bethesda did anything meaningful with it. There are like 2 or 3 high buildings in Fallout 3 you can climb. The rest is just background.

As for non-linear fashion - it's not a good thing on its own. Fallout 4 did that, would you call it a great game? And all those structured quests routinely highlighted negative effects of this complexity: numerour quests do not work properly and can't anticipate what player character would do. But yeah, in general FNV quests are better. Balance is completely broken unless you mean enemies are not as beefy as they become in the end of FO3, in other regards it's less balanced and more abusable. Karma system is broken in FNV too.

What? Fallout 4 was nowhere near the complexity of New Vegas, how can you possibly make an argument this false? And Fallout 4 is bugged as shit because Bethesda is lazy (because success was imminent anyways). You can play New Vegas in various ways without encountering many severe bugs. And no, its a good thing on its own. Its the most important good thing an rpg has to offer, its the meat of the fucking genre. Its literally the steak you get when you order a steak. Balance is better, even fanboys agree to that. Beefy enemies? The video already established that the difficulty curve in Fallout 3 is utter shit and explained very well why that is so.

See, FNV is a better game, but now you're praising the things that were actually broken in FNV and not in FO3. Same goes for reactivity: if you perceive it as something else than getting a line of dialog confirming that game noticed your action, FO3 had just as much reactivity, if not more, only it wasn't put in a context of realistic setting. FO3 allowed you to lose biggest quest hub with numerous merchants and unique loot and you don't call it reactivity? FNV does similar thing with tutorial town but the landscape itself does not change and you aren't supposed to visit this town anymore anyway. FO3 has actual living world so you can see factions interact - and yeah, even Tunnel Snakes are infinitely dumb but they are better faction than any Morrowind infokiosk questgivers are, cause they're actually involved in the world and may end up in any different situations.

EDIT: The point it you exagerrate the difference. Gameplay in FNV is no better. Story is. So FNV is as good as Fallout 3 + good book, if you're able to ignore cheesy stuff. But if you've played FO2 then you probably can ignore cheesy stuff, because FO2 was worse about it.

Ah come on. What impact did blowing up shitty nuketown have to the game? I mean actual meaningful impact? It was a shitty quest hub and as already stated the only quest worth playing can be played either way. Its windowdressing choice and consequence, because nuke town is the tutorial town of the game (and sadly also the biggest one), but you will never go back there for story progression, neither does it play any role whatsoever in the plot. So how the fuck is its fate important in any way?

In New Vegas you have way more reactivity than "a line of dialogue", thats just a silly argument that tells me you didnt play New Vegas at all or you played it mindlessly like playing a Bethesda game. Faction system alone or bennys fate has a hundred times more impact on the story than fucking nuketown.

Fallout 2 also had cheesy stuff, yes, but the writing itself was much much more consistent and thematized much deeper sociological, philosophical and political themes than the vomit of a 13 years old who was drunk for the first time that is called Fallout 3 writing.

Fallout 2 was critizised for the cheesy pop culture references, but they were only an addition that some people found distracting. Fallout 3 writing is 100% consisting of those references or of references to the game series that were done in a way that made clear the fucking writers didnt fucking understand a fucking single thing about Fallout. Fucking GECK was an actual functioning machine in Fallout 3! That is so absolutely stunningly fucking stupid that it doesnt need any further explanation why the writing of Fallout 3 is an abomination from hell that must be ignored or ridicouled at all costs.
 

ilitarist

Learned
Illiterate Village Idiot
Joined
Oct 17, 2016
Messages
857
Same here. Yes the Fallout3 fanboy stands out of the masses and his opinion is objectively wrong. But are you really afraid that his appearance here will change the codex consensus on the game? Are you so triggered by a sheep led astray? I see opportunity here to change his mind.

Well said, even though I'm not a fanboy and would play FNV any day over F3.

About dungeons - well, you have more specific definition of a dungeon than I thought. True, things like Rocket park are good, as well as Vault 11 which I myself mentioned previously. But those are very few, while FO3 fills every inch of the world with some storytelling. And there were more than couple high buildings in F3, there were numerous bridges, ramps, two-store houses, hills. I think Obsidian had really dropped the ball here: they said Mojave is too flat fro that kind of things but they have hills and buildings, only they don't use it in the same way to provide more interesting shooting.

>It was a shitty quest hub and as already stated the only quest worth playing can be played either way.

This, I feel, is the weakest part of your argument. When FO3 and FNV do the same things you react in a different way. "Who cares you can play as Legion, they're just dumb factions with almost no quests." You'll now start arguing Legion has better quests than Megaton, but that's besides the point: it all comes down to the story and you allow a better story to redeem basically the same or sometimes worse game. It means the story is much more important for you. But for me, F3 story (which is shit and I wouldn't watch movie or read a book like that) is one component of the game, just as FNV story (which is less shit and maybe I'd read or watch in non-game version if I was infinitely bored) is the other. Story is good enough to make good game like F3 better, but you'd need a damned Shakespear to redeem a real shitty game. Go look at Two Worlds or Pool of Radiance 2 or Gothic 3 or Brotherhood of Steel. Those are shit games and no story change can redeem them. If FO3 was made better without changing gameplay beyond what mod can do then it never was a bad game.
 

HoboForEternity

sunset tequila
Patron
Joined
Mar 27, 2016
Messages
9,170
Location
Disco Elysium
Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
the reason i endure this place's bigotry and outright racism is you guys have relatively great taste.

That is why i like this place.
Here is the only place when liberal fags, conservatives fags, homophopic fags, pseudo-nazi fags, and homosexual fags can discuss games in a:obviously: manner.

Come to think of it, the Codex is an perfect free-speech utopia
I do respect the no censorship rule here.

I hate racists and bigots but they should be allowed to speak too, not censor them like in most places.

Speaking doesnt hurt people, especially when it is within the confines of internet anonymity. codex the draws the line when you start leaking personal information such as real names, adress, etc that potentially hurt someone IRL, or outright illegal material such as child pornography and such. and that's how it should be done. some places like reddit present themselves as "bastion of free speech" when the system itself are rigged to show less of unpopular opinion. hell, the space between my gargantuan butt cheeks has more freedom than on reddit.

anyway i still think people who defends fallout 3 are dumb and should not be taken seriously
 

Akratus

Self-loathing fascist drunken misogynist asshole
Patron
Joined
May 7, 2013
Messages
0
Location
The Netherlands
Codex 2016 - The Age of Grimoire Make the Codex Great Again! Grab the Codex by the pussy Insert Title Here Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
jeebus, why isnt fallout 3 apologist outright banned here.

i mean i go to this place to escape gamefaqs retardness because oh great scott bethesda retards and consolefags are very numerous there.

i thought i could go to a place where fallout 3 vs new vegas discussion would be met with synonimous "fallout 3 is shit" decision.
:bro:

yet there are still retards even here. the reason i endure this place's bigotry and outright racism is you guys have relatively great taste.
:rpgcodex:
 

undecaf

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
3,517
Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2
Was the game really that relevant that it needed a "review" still on this day on how utterly fucked up it was instead of letting it fade into obscurity where it belongs?
 

tormund

Arcane
Joined
Aug 15, 2015
Messages
2,282
Location
Penetrating the underrail
It's good you were able to took off rose tinted glasses though, many people continue to praise games they've played around that age, being it Ultima, M&M, Fallout, Baldur's Gate, Morrowind, KotOR, Oblivion, Dragon Age or something else. Curiously those people think that all the best games where created in a several years when they were in their mid-late teens.
How I loathe this "argument"... I loathe how many people view it is a valid or even discussion-killer too.
I actually meant to start a thread, more than once, dedicated to its debunking and to people numbering all the classic they played long after their release and yet still viewed them as some of the best in their genres.

Another annoying thing is how "rose tinted" BS is seemingly aimed only specific period by some sort of uspooken agreement. For example, you'll never see FO4 apologists accusing those who think it disappointing comparing to FO3, which many of them played as kids or teens, of viewing FO3 trough "rose tinted glasses". Like there is an unspoken agreement about what that "argument" is to be used for...
 

Hirato

Purse-Owner
Patron
Joined
Oct 16, 2010
Messages
3,934
Location
Australia
Codex 2012 Codex USB, 2014 Shadorwun: Hong Kong
say what you want but I really enjoyed President Eden's speeches

Malcolm McDowell was the ONLY person who did any VA work for that game which didn't make me want to blow my brains out while listening to them talk.


- FO3's physics? Out.
- FO3's graphics? Out.

These aspects should be considered, and Oblivion should be the benchmark to compare it to.
I don't know how they did it, but the graphics and the physics are way worse than they were in Oblivion.

In oblivion they could actually be arsed to do a fairly okay lighting model - it's not great but it's serviceable - and they regularly used colours other than shit brown and puke green.
And as for physics, the iteration of Havok used in both are fairly similar, but they could actually be bothered to put proper collision meshes on most of the things in oblivion.
Not to mention, the game's graphics are much worse than the average PS2 game as well.






Also, whose alt is the ilitarist ?
 

Mastermind

Cognito Elite Material
Patron
Bethestard
Joined
Apr 15, 2010
Messages
21,144
Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
I enjoyed a game until I came on the codex and they told me I'm not supposed to like what I liked at which point I grew up by just liking what I was told to like by a horde of basement dwelling losers. Man is it great to be an adult.
 

Mastermind

Cognito Elite Material
Patron
Bethestard
Joined
Apr 15, 2010
Messages
21,144
Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
It's good you were able to took off rose tinted glasses though, many people continue to praise games they've played around that age, being it Ultima, M&M, Fallout, Baldur's Gate, Morrowind, KotOR, Oblivion, Dragon Age or something else. Curiously those people think that all the best games where created in a several years when they were in their mid-late teens.
How I loathe this "argument"... I loathe how many people view it is a valid or even discussion-killer too.
I actually meant to start a thread, more than once, dedicated to its debunking and to people numbering all the classic they played long after their release and yet still viewed them as some of the best in their genres.

Another annoying thing is how "rose tinted" BS is seemingly aimed only specific period by some sort of uspooken agreement. For example, you'll never see FO4 apologists accusing those who think it disappointing comparing to FO3, which many of them played as kids or teens, of viewing FO3 trough "rose tinted glasses". Like there is an unspoken agreement about what that "argument" is to be used for...

let me be the first person to accuse those who like FO3 but not 4 of viewing 3 through rose tinted glasses then. I liked 3 at the time, and I liked it better than NV. And 4 shits all over it. I uninstalled both 3 and NV after getting 4 and never felt the slightest urge to touch them. The combat is just too shitty in that engine.
 

Black Angel

Arcane
Joined
Jun 23, 2016
Messages
2,910
Location
Wonderland
I liked 3 at the time, and I liked it better than NV. And 4 shits all over it.
bethestard.png
,
bethestard.png
never changes™
 

Sigourn

uooh afficionado
Joined
Feb 6, 2016
Messages
5,623
- FO3's physics? Out.
- FO3's graphics? Out.

These aspects should be considered, and Oblivion should be the benchmark to compare it to.

Well, you can compare them with Oblivion, but certainly not Morrowind.

Also, FO3 had much better character models than Oblivion. At least face-wise. Oblivion's characters look so stupid, Dunmer are literally grey people with long ears.

Whereas if Morrowind's Dunmer were designed today, they would look more like these, which definitely look more ayy lmao.

latest
 

Sykar

Arcane
Joined
Dec 2, 2014
Messages
11,297
Location
Turn right after Alpha Centauri
jeebus, why isnt fallout 3 apologist outright banned here.

i mean i go to this place to escape gamefaqs retardness because oh great scott bethesda retards and consolefags are very numerous there.

i thought i could go to a place where fallout 3 vs new vegas discussion would be met with synonimous "fallout 3 is shit" decision.

yet there are still retards even here. the reason i endure this place's bigotry and outright racism is you guys have relatively great taste.

No one should be banned newfag. This is a exceptionally tolerant forum equally for :obviously: posters as well as for :decline: posters.

Was the game really that relevant that it needed a "review" still on this day on how utterly fucked up it was instead of letting it fade into obscurity where it belongs?

It has far too many fantards who will defend it's retardation until death will us part.
 

typical user

Arbiter
Joined
Nov 30, 2015
Messages
957
Was the game really that relevant that it needed a "review" still on this day on how utterly fucked up it was instead of letting it fade into obscurity where it belongs?

People still say it was a good game and how Fallout 4 is bad because 3 was "so good" and "old school". So I guess that's why the subject pops up from time to time to educate those morons.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom