someone else
Arcane
His tastes are different, he wanted orange.
You worthless scumbag.CreamySpinach said:I think Fallout 3 was almost better than Fallout 1.
Honestly stop posting here. It's not, and as stupid as this forum is they understand that's not true by miles.I think Fallout 3 was almost better than Fallout 1.
Pigs pens are responsible for pigs.BLOBERT said:BROS DONT BLAME THE FAGBOX BLAME THE FAGS
BLOBERT said:SPINACH BRO YOU ARE HURTING MY HEART NOW YOU HAVE TO BE A TROLL
ALEX BRO YOUR SHIT SEEMS RIGHT ON I HAVENT PLAYED THE GAME EITHER BUT LOOKING FORWARD TO IT EVENTUYALLY
ANYWAYS I THINK LONG TERM THE FUTURE FOR THE TASTES OF MOST CODEX BROS IS IN INDIE SHIT
BROS YOU KNOW HOW DIRTY ASS HIPPUIES WITH STRUNG OUT SKANKS THAT SMEEL LIKE PATCHOUILLE CREAM THEMSELVESA FOR INDIE MOVIES IN TRENDY FAGGY CITTIES WELL WE ARE LIKE THEM WITH MORE OF A BO SMELL THAN PATCHOULLE IF THE GAME MARKET GROWS ENOUGH MORE MOTHERFUCKERS LIKE VOGEL WILL GET THERE SHIT ON WITH THINGS WE LIKE
kingcomrade said:I would like Fallout 3 better if the quests didn't all suck. new vegas is just so empty.
Honestly stop posting here. It's not, and as stupid as this forum is they understand that's not true by miles.I think Fallout 3 was almost better than Fallout 1.
BLOBERT said:ANYWAYS I THINK LONG TERM THE FUTURE FOR THE TASTES OF MOST CODEX BROS IS IN INDIE SHIT
Alex said:I don't know. I still haven't played New Vegas (saw it at a friend's house but still haven't gotten around getting time to play it), but this article basically complains about everything the Codex (or at least the old Codex, tastes seem to have changed around here) was asking in RPGs. I know it is the Codex way to complain, bitch and (if one is inspired and has nothing better to do in the afternoon) write a long post to explain why the article's writer is wrong, is a dumbfuck and should never write again.
But maybe the real issue here is that most people simply don't care so much about RPGs? Maybe what this writer is saying is: "Ok, Obsidian added all these features that lend themselves to a specific gaming style, but I really don't care about this style. I want the old Fallout 3's style which got me hooked up".
If I understood Obsidian's idea, this New Vegas game is trying to appeal to two different user bases, one being the people who liked Bethesda's Fallout 3 and the other being the people who liked Black Island's Fallout 2.And they actually seem to have succeeded in this endeavor. It seems that this game has sold a lot and, at the same time, seems to have been approved by most of the Codex. But is this really a sustainable situation? I mean, it seems to me that, if you have two different design priorities, then one will inevitably get in the way of the other.
Maybe I am just being stupid, I probably should play the game before commenting about it, but I do think it would be better for us if companies saw CRPGs as a niche genre separated from whatever Oblivion and Fallout 3 were. And I don't really mean to be elitist. It is just that this worked really well for indie PnP RPGs, and for the OSR movement, maybe it could work for us too?
So, what I am trying to say is that, maybe, it is a good thing this article appeared. And maybe it would be good if other articles pointing the differences in playstyle between FO3 and FO:NV appeared too. Because maybe then companies would see they can't simply make a game that muddles the differences between playstyles and cash in. Instead, they would be forced to cater to niches, with games that have a strong design philosophy.
Well, point 5. is valid and points 1. and 2. are matters of preference.
grotsnik said:I guess the biggest problem with Fallout New Vegas is the fact that you get to choose your enemies. Which is an interesting concept but goes against the purpose of the game–to shoot things.
More from the Editor laying a smackdown, all from the same post;
Makagulfazel, or whatever your name is – being that you obviously have to hide behind a pseudonym and, hell, you don’t even have the courage of your convictions enough to provide an email address (which I otherwise would happily have replied directly to thus allowing me to take you on personally).
the fact that you had to hide behind a pseudonym and provide no mail address says volumes about you as a (lame) individual.
On the site you’ll find a contact form. Mail me directly via that, my friend, let me take you on personally if you’re man enough (no mail address indicates you’re not, right?).
Makagulfazel – I expect you mail to me direct via the contact form. Let’s deal with this man to man, unless, of course, you wish to hide (as you have done here).
Makagulfazel – look forward to your mail, stop hiding, let’s talk.
Sounds like he really wants that email address.
"Train tickets, bitch!" six comments in...more proof that the site is the twisted shadow-twin of the Codex?
Alexandros said:BLOBERT said:ANYWAYS I THINK LONG TERM THE FUTURE FOR THE TASTES OF MOST CODEX BROS IS IN INDIE SHIT
Indeed. As years go by and the last of the Great Ones leave to join the others beyond the Rim, the only ones left behind will be the lesser races who grow up being taught to worship the Popamole. It will be up to the indies to carry the torch of incline.
CreamySpinach said:I think Fallout 3 was almost better than Fallout 1.
You have successfully added CreamySpinach to your ignore list.
CreamySpinach said:I think Fallout 3 was almost better than Fallout 1. But it was too short for a game that seemed so long. ( I thought Liberty Prime was only the beginning of an almost final fantasy 10 length game.
Fallout Tactics comes in second for being a rather marvelous take on Fallout. FOT only failed because of GameSpy Arcade not being as good as it is today. For a rushed and unfinished game it is probably the best.
Fallout 1 was the best in its time. Definitely a requirement but what we see in Fallout Tactics and Fallout 3 is undeniably a better path in many ways.
Fallout 2 came too late and wrongfully is thought as better than Tactics. Fallout 2 is good but it doesn't stretch like a sequel should. It felt lke Fallout 1 but with not fully realized additions. (yes I have played Killaps mod too)
New Vegas comes in last for me. It is what Fallout 3 should of been, minus the interesting settings. Reasons six and three illustrate what I mean.
It might be possible to put new Vegas in front of Fallout 3 if they release a true FOT like gameplay DLC. Unquestionably it would have to affect the main game in some ways too.
KUUUUURRRRRUURRRRRRURRRRRURWASerious_Business said:CreamySpinach said:I think Fallout 3 was almost better than Fallout 1. But it was too short for a game that seemed so long. ( I thought Liberty Prime was only the beginning of an almost final fantasy 10 length game.
Fallout Tactics comes in second for being a rather marvelous take on Fallout. FOT only failed because of GameSpy Arcade not being as good as it is today. For a rushed and unfinished game it is probably the best.
Fallout 1 was the best in its time. Definitely a requirement but what we see in Fallout Tactics and Fallout 3 is undeniably a better path in many ways.
Fallout 2 came too late and wrongfully is thought as better than Tactics. Fallout 2 is good but it doesn't stretch like a sequel should. It felt lke Fallout 1 but with not fully realized additions. (yes I have played Killaps mod too)
New Vegas comes in last for me. It is what Fallout 3 should of been, minus the interesting settings. Reasons six and three illustrate what I mean.
It might be possible to put new Vegas in front of Fallout 3 if they release a true FOT like gameplay DLC. Unquestionably it would have to affect the main game in some ways too.
Hell yeah my negroid, I support this good shit