Is it normal to rage at Fallout 3 ??

[kingcom]

I honestly have very little idea as to what your trying to say so forgive me if i misintrepret this. Levelling and gear, the two most recognisable aspects of rpgs (though actually nothing to do with what an rpg is but justifyable as rpg elements)

RPGs dont have length requirements.

Dont know what you mean by actual RPG, do you mean turn based?

Does not matter, if your trying to outmaneover someone your sneak should be running that not your trigger finger.

Never played Legend of Dragoon, sounds like your talking about active reload stuff, find that incredibly boring and you appear to be betting me to play a game ive never heard of and not use a core mechanic of the game as it sounds like to beat it. Why would I do that? Seems like its stupid to not use something if have to play the game, doesnt mean I will like it.

No I did not say they rely on maths. All combat in games relys on maths. I said combat in an FPS is resolved by the player entirely and in an RPG its resolves as a result of the characters abilities (as a long term result of the players choices).

So now RPG's are about leveling and gear? You were trying to argue that RPG's were about using only math, stats, and strategy, with not reflexive skill, to play. By that definition there is no problem between RPG's and FPS's. Wait... Now you contradict that? If they are recognizable elements but not actually what RPG's are, then they aren't elements that make something an RPG. Rendering your argument illegitimate once again.

Well by your own definition an RPG must be purely turn based. You said that they rely on the Character, meaning the character's stats and damage output based purely on those, with absolutely no reliance on reflexes (like FPS's).
It relies on math, just showing these pixels relies on math, but in an FPS calculations are only done if you hit, hitting relies on reflexes and dexterity.

Active reload? It's not a shooter. Most RPG's these days use some sort of reflexive command or ATB putting more reliance on the reflexes of the player of the game than the stats of the characters. (and Legend of Dragoon is from the PS1 era)

"I said combat in an FPS is resolved by the player entirely and in an RPG its resolves as a result of the characters abilities (as a long term result of the players choices)."
So wait, once again there is not conflict between them.
In Fallout 3, the perks I choose and skills I level drastically influence how much damage I do, regardless of whether I use VATS or play it like an FPS.

No rpgs are not about levelling and gear, your trying to remove any distinction between rpg combat and what an rpg is. Stats, levelling, gear, they are elements of a classical rpg combat system, say something like Dungeons and Dragons but can be readily applied to anything they are simply a governing rule system. I never argued that math is what makes an rpg, most (if not all regardless of if they are displayed to you) use math, stats and strategy. I said it relies on the player's character, RNG is often the easiest way to simulate a person without actually creating an extremely complicated AI hence why it is so popular. Also elements =/= genre. Interactivity is an element of video games but it is also an element of board games or a quiz.

No actual rpgs dont have to be turn based, they dont even have to have combat at all. Deus Ex is an rpg, sure it has some reliance on reflexes but the vast majority of it depends on your character's skills and attributes. I accept that its not purely based on the character but i definitely believe it heavily depends on those decisions. Also FPS uses calculations regardless of whether you hit or not.

Sigh....I used Active Reload as an example to try and see if i was interpreting what you were saying, i.e. it is a timed button press, like active reloading. Or expressed differently, its an in game Quick Time Event.

Fallout is a FP-RPG. Perspective in an rpg is irrelevent.

 

[Monsieur E]

It's not the gameplay and bugs of Fallout 3 that confused me or amde me rage, it was the lore, writing, story and characters.

As for lore, there were some really weird and out of place things in Fallout 2. (Talking Deathclaws?) At least it expanded on it interesting ways, where 3 just kind of boiled it down to the most basic archetypes and went with it. The somewhat ambiguous Brotherhood became knights in shining armor, Super Mutants became generic orcs. It just seemed like the game was too black and white for a serious attempt at a Fallout game, but that's just me.

No, that isn't just you, I think that way too. Fallout 2 had some stupid things and those things were the inspiration for the Wild Wasteland trait in NV (a smart move).

Besides, who didn't love this guy?

Were you fails of the weak? There was someone named chupathingy

OT: I only raged a few times when i got fucked over by VATS and a few console freezes, but those got fixed when I installed the game on my 360. The only major-ish bug I've had in a fallout game was when I fell under the level in NV. But yeah, it is normal to to rage at Fallout 3

 

[Knocker]

i had the deathclaw gauntlet by level 4.....no reason to rage here. as for you, well...sometimes ya just gotta, right?

 

[Your Fearless Captain]

I have never had a single problem with any bugs or glitches in Fallout 3 on PC. No game breaking glitches, no save corruptions, no problems with numerous mods. Although I though it was weird when you walked into a cart it would fly 15ft.

 

[Chased]

I had this terrible glitch with the Bloody Mess perk on the PS3 where whenever there was supposed to be a "bloody mess" I got crazy amounts of graphical tearing like the geometry of the world was eating itself and turning red. It was an alright game/story in the end I guess.

 

[ChupathingyX]

Don't talk shit about Fawkes.

Fawkes is supossed to be an intelligent super mutant made from the same FEV that made th rest of the stupid Vault 87 super muatants, how is this explained? Apparently he learned his knowledge fromt he terminal in his cell;

1. How did he access it with his stubby fingers?
2. Why would a terminal in a holding cell hold so much information?
3. Why is there a terminal inside the holding cell in the first place?

Were you fails of the weak? There was someone named chupathingy

Hahahah, no that wasn't me, I don't have a Live account but I do love Rooster Teeth and Red vs Blue. However, my PSN account is ChumpathingyX.

 

[5t3v0]

For those of you who hate on it for being a "poor" sequel... just remember that the franchise went to shit for several games after Fallout 2, and bethesda actually brought it back to a tolerable and competent standard... and gave it a much needed redesign (Isometric Turn Based Rpgs do not age well).

People who rage about the bugs in F3, forget that F2 was a mess initially, and most of the game breaking bugs never got fixed by the official team.

You have no reason to rage at this game.

Oh for fucks sake, why is it that everytime an old fan rages on Fallout 3, one of the first things they think about is "Oh, its not turn based, they must think its crap because of that." Hell, most of these people probably liked the vision of fallout 3. One thing you guys have to realise is that older fans are very story and lore focused as it was a ROLE PLAYING GAME.

That said, we are all entitled to our opinions. But that works both ways dude. You are entitled to yours, but you can't go around saying "You have no reason to rage at this game". Its like with me, even though I experienced few bugs with New Vegas, I can't go around saying "There are no bugs in this game because I never had any". Its just plain wrong.

 

[Ragsnstitches]

For those of you who hate on it for being a "poor" sequel... just remember that the franchise went to shit for several games after Fallout 2, and bethesda actually brought it back to a tolerable and competent standard... and gave it a much needed redesign (Isometric Turn Based Rpgs do not age well).

People who rage about the bugs in F3, forget that F2 was a mess initially, and most of the game breaking bugs never got fixed by the official team.

You have no reason to rage at this game.

Oh for fucks sake, why is it that everytime an old fan rages on Fallout 3, one of the first things they think about is "Oh, its not turn based, they must think its crap because of that." Hell, most of these people probably liked the vision of fallout 3. One thing you guys have to realise is that older fans are very story and lore focused as it was a ROLE PLAYING GAME.

That said, we are all entitled to our opinions. But that works both ways dude. You are entitled to yours, but you can't go around saying "You have no reason to rage at this game". Its like with me, even though I experienced few bugs with New Vegas, I can't go around saying "There are no bugs in this game because I never had any". Its just plain wrong.

I'm confused as to what I said that has disgruntled you so. I put forward an opinion, you seemingly burst because of it... then tell me we are all entitled to an opinion? What in my comment, stated that my opinion was

Me saying "There is no reason for you to Rage" is not only opinion, but a recommendation... it's a game delivered by an industry. Not something you personally crafted, so it becoming something you had not envisioned is still no reason to rage at it. Boycott it by all means, but raging is pointless.

'Oh, its not turn based, they must think its crap because of that.' Hell, most of these people probably liked the vision of fallout 3. One thing you guys have to realise is that older fans are very story and lore focused as it was a ROLE PLAYING GAME.

I'm presuming this directed at this:

"just remember that the franchise went to shit for several games after Fallout 2, and bethesda actually brought it back to a tolerable and competent standard... and gave it a much needed redesign (Isometric Turn Based Rpgs do not age well)."

First of all, my point on it's Turn Based origins was a secondary opinion and not in any way a judgement of "old fans". Secondly I AM AN OLDER FAN... If you bothered to read comments beyond the first page, you might have noticed me say this:

I much prefer new vegas over 3, despite the state it was released in, but that's not in discussion now. Between the numbered sequels, 2 was my favourite.

Implying that both 1): I'm an old fan and 2): I'm one of those people you think I was slandering.