I did enjoy Fallout 1 & 2. And I did enjoy Fallout 3, but not for the same reasons. Personally I like the whole style and feeling of the first two games better than that of 3. It's complicated to describe, it's just that I think that 3 - to me - felt more like a FPS in the Fallout Universe, and not so much like a RPG. It was certainly not bad, and I still drop in for a bit more wasteland wackyness, but it just wasn't a "real" successor in my mind to the first 2 games.
Poll: "Fallout 3": Why Do Fans of the First Two Dislike It?
- Thread starter Austin Howe
- Start date
Recommended Videos
That's a pretty darn one-sided view, Oblivion was too dumbed down overall but I did enjoy the combat. Also Morrowind DID have fast-travel, it wasn't just presented to you on a silver platter, not to mention the boots of blinding speed. I likely sound like a fanboy, but I hate people writing off games cuz they're lazy or just don't care.Zaik said:It's pretty much the same as Morrowind loyalists, this sums it up better than I ever could.
I liked Fallout 1 and 3 and haven't actually played 2, but I've heard good things. I think most fans of the first 2 would write off 3 because they wanted more of the original style, and instead got something much more modern. I assume they didn't like 3 for legitimate reasons(less likely) or they just wrote it off because it wasn't in the style of the first 2 (more likely).
I think:
Its as if the fans of the original 2 had a couple of great games that they love. Love the way they look and play ect.
Then all of a sudden, Bethesda come along and change most of it.
I know its litterally a change of perspective and pace (and some smaller things), but maybe the overhead view was what sold it to some of the fans? I dont know?
Personally I like all of them.
Its as if the fans of the original 2 had a couple of great games that they love. Love the way they look and play ect.
Then all of a sudden, Bethesda come along and change most of it.
I know its litterally a change of perspective and pace (and some smaller things), but maybe the overhead view was what sold it to some of the fans? I dont know?
Personally I like all of them.
as usual it's not fallout 3 i didn't like(it was not as good as 1 and 2 but i played those as a kid and nothing will ever measure up to the stuff you do as a kid) but rather the way people lifted it up on this pedestal of awesomeness in complete ignorance of it's legacy. When i hear people complain that there is no back story given for the NCR it just makes my skin crawl and fills me with righteous fury(i know this is a NV example but still).
This is like asking someone who plays football(soccer) why they aren't interested in foosball. There is a similarity in theme, but they are two completely different games, and liking one does not automatically require liking the other.
Personally, I like both, but I don't really consider Fallout 3 to be Fallout. It's a fairly entertaining first person action RPG made by some guys that bought the rights to a game series I like.
Personally, I like both, but I don't really consider Fallout 3 to be Fallout. It's a fairly entertaining first person action RPG made by some guys that bought the rights to a game series I like.
There are two main reasons:
1. Because it's not very good. Bad combat system which involves a lot of running backwards from monsters who just rush you every time. Crap writing. Slightly dated graphics and completely horrendous animation (which was much improved in New Vegas however).
2. Because it totally ignores the established canon of the Fallout universe in a way that's almost insulting.
1. Because it's not very good. Bad combat system which involves a lot of running backwards from monsters who just rush you every time. Crap writing. Slightly dated graphics and completely horrendous animation (which was much improved in New Vegas however).
2. Because it totally ignores the established canon of the Fallout universe in a way that's almost insulting.
You know whats funny, up until around the announcement of New Vegas everyone here LOVED Fallout 3 and it's story. Personally I thought Fallout 3 was good but it lacked me wanting to stay once i beat everything.
I played Fallout 3 and have played some of New Vegas and thought both were amazing. After jumping into both Fallout 1 and 2, I think I have found it safe to say I could not get into either of them. The combat system in particular really bugs me.
I've only played 7 hours of Fallout 2 (which is mostly comprised of trying to get to San Fransisco, getting to Navarro, realizing that small guns suck balls after around 3 hours of playing, making a second character using energy weapons, and getting raped by Enclave patrols), but so far I'm having a great time with it. Fallout 3 introduced me to the Fallout series and I'm glad about it.
edit:
1. And the original Fallout combat system was so infinitely better. The old system is too awkward and arbitrary. Too many clicks and god help you if your enemy starts running away. It works, but it really could have been streamlined. I'll agree that writing wasn't all too great, but I never found it bad enough to actually dislike the game because of it. As for graphics and animation, you do realize how big Fallout 3 and New Vegas are right? It would be a complete ***** on the processor if it they had tried to make it better.
2.Fallout: New vegas rolls with canon pretty well I find and Fallout 3 doesn't make too bad of a mockery. There are only two factions mentioned in Fallout 3 that were also back in the west: the Enclave and the Brotherhood of Steel. What they do to the Enclave is pretty bad (that was not fucking advanced power armor mark II and how is the Enclave still around?!), but the inconsistencies with the Brotherhood are negligible I found. They openly say that they're different from the western Brotherhood anyway.
edit:
Well there's a couple of issues with that.Arlocke said:
1. And the original Fallout combat system was so infinitely better. The old system is too awkward and arbitrary. Too many clicks and god help you if your enemy starts running away. It works, but it really could have been streamlined. I'll agree that writing wasn't all too great, but I never found it bad enough to actually dislike the game because of it. As for graphics and animation, you do realize how big Fallout 3 and New Vegas are right? It would be a complete ***** on the processor if it they had tried to make it better.
2.Fallout: New vegas rolls with canon pretty well I find and Fallout 3 doesn't make too bad of a mockery. There are only two factions mentioned in Fallout 3 that were also back in the west: the Enclave and the Brotherhood of Steel. What they do to the Enclave is pretty bad (that was not fucking advanced power armor mark II and how is the Enclave still around?!), but the inconsistencies with the Brotherhood are negligible I found. They openly say that they're different from the western Brotherhood anyway.
I consider Fallout 3 to be a reboot of the series, and it's a damn good one in that regard.
People get so attached to something that they don't want things to change. This is unfortunate, as change that is handled well can revitalize a series. It's like the G1 Transformers fans who reacted with "TRUKK NOT MUNKY" when Beast Wars was announced. They couldn't let go of their nostalgia-laced memories and didn't approach the series with an open mind.
People get so attached to something that they don't want things to change. This is unfortunate, as change that is handled well can revitalize a series. It's like the G1 Transformers fans who reacted with "TRUKK NOT MUNKY" when Beast Wars was announced. They couldn't let go of their nostalgia-laced memories and didn't approach the series with an open mind.
It isn't the mechanics for me, I liked the FPS viewpoint in an RPG (Deus Ex and System Shock 2 work so yeah why not?). I would have liked to target the eyes and the groin like the originals though.
What was missing was depth, in Fallout 1 and 2 your conversation options change according to your intelligence. That has a huge impact on how you play the game. There is a clear-cut morality line for every action in F3 (except Tenpenny Tower, that was my favorite side-quest in F3). Tagging a skill is pretty pointless in F3, as they all progress at the same rate. There are great item descriptions in the original games and nothing in F3. The humour seems to be missing as well. The game is ridiculously easy, a lot of old fallout fans are disapointed in that. I fixed most of my problems with mods but I miss the "I no speak gud" dialogue option of the original games.
I don't hate Fallout 3, but I can't help be a little disapointed in it.
What was missing was depth, in Fallout 1 and 2 your conversation options change according to your intelligence. That has a huge impact on how you play the game. There is a clear-cut morality line for every action in F3 (except Tenpenny Tower, that was my favorite side-quest in F3). Tagging a skill is pretty pointless in F3, as they all progress at the same rate. There are great item descriptions in the original games and nothing in F3. The humour seems to be missing as well. The game is ridiculously easy, a lot of old fallout fans are disapointed in that. I fixed most of my problems with mods but I miss the "I no speak gud" dialogue option of the original games.
I don't hate Fallout 3, but I can't help be a little disapointed in it.
) meant that most of the people that prefer 1&2 are nostalgic but he/she prefers 3 and NV more. atleast thats what i think, he/she can always correct me.
mostly because Fallout 3 "fans" love to shit on the original ones and call them gay and stuff, which makes fans of the original ones rage the shit out of themselves, mostly because the first two games were their childhood (in most cases, remember)
as for me, I loved the original one, and I liked New Vegas and Fallout 3, but they just don't have the charisma the original ones had
the new ones kinda take themselves too seriously
as for me, I loved the original one, and I liked New Vegas and Fallout 3, but they just don't have the charisma the original ones had
the new ones kinda take themselves too seriously
Fallout 3 just felt like a waste of my time.
It was a FPS rather then an RPG, even more then TES:Oblivion already was. Seeing the game as an FPS it was simply mediocre and outdone by other apocalypse-FPS-games such as STALKER. The quests and the world were uninvolving, the terrain felt copy-pasted and littered with invisible walls of rubble. Even the perk system was uninspired with perks that simply gave you stat boosts rather then abilities or other gameplay changes.
It was simply not entertaining in my opinion and it puzzles me when people say it's one of their favourite games.
It was a FPS rather then an RPG, even more then TES:Oblivion already was. Seeing the game as an FPS it was simply mediocre and outdone by other apocalypse-FPS-games such as STALKER. The quests and the world were uninvolving, the terrain felt copy-pasted and littered with invisible walls of rubble. Even the perk system was uninspired with perks that simply gave you stat boosts rather then abilities or other gameplay changes.
It was simply not entertaining in my opinion and it puzzles me when people say it's one of their favourite games.
i couldn't agree with you more. as much as i loved FO3, it just seemed lacking to be a fallout game compared to 1&2. i'll never say FO3 is a bad game, but i love NV a hell of a lot more. and 1&2 will always be superior to me cause of their tone and setup of the series as a whole.Furburt said:
just remember guys, even if you dislike the first 2 you shouldn't bash on them too much because without them you'd never have play'd Fallout 3 or New Vegas or whatever else Bethesda has planed for the series.
I fall under option 6: "I've not played Fallout 1 and 2, and I still despise Fallout 3."
Why? It would take too long to explain, and I'm not much in the mood to get pissed off again.
Why? It would take too long to explain, and I'm not much in the mood to get pissed off again.
Short answer. Because they have never played Fallout Brotherhood of Steel.
If it wasn't for Bethesda this would have been the last Fallout game ever made. Now granted the story may not be as good as in the first 2 Fallouts, but at least they tried. And thanks to Fallout 3 the original Fallout makers where able to make New Vegas.
If it wasn't for Bethesda this would have been the last Fallout game ever made. Now granted the story may not be as good as in the first 2 Fallouts, but at least they tried. And thanks to Fallout 3 the original Fallout makers where able to make New Vegas.
You say that like that's not a legitimate reason to dislike a sequel. Okay, so the sort of fire and brimstone you are likely to see at NMA or RPG Codex might be a bit unwarranted when looking at it from a general gaming point of view. But look at it from the view of someone who deeply enjoys a type of gaming that has become more or less extinct, at least in commercial titles. Pure RPGs in the old school sense of the term are pretty damn rare. Even more so than space combat games. I can understand why someone might see this sort of bait & switch to be a slap in the face.bushwhacker2k said: