Poll: Has Fallout fallen out?

[RhombusHatesYou]

Although I'll admit, Fallout Tatics definatly delved into the more crazy of the Fallout universe, but the cries of pissed off fanboys and the open mockery the developers gave them as their precious canon was ruined was priceless.

A lot of Tactic's issues were direct consequences of InterPlay shitfuckery. That MicroForte got anything out the door in time was a credit to them considering the 2 major hurdles they had - a short (nine months if memory serves) dev time and almost no access to pre-existing assets (which InterPlay claimed to have 'lost'). They also kept up unofficial support long after InterPlay had stopped official support and it was the hostile attitude of the fanbase that finally ended that unofficial support (and the final 'fuck you' note that went with the final patch was a joy to read).

 

[Ritter315]

I dont think its besthdas fault entirely. Afterall, they're just the publisher, and not entirely the creators. Although we CAn blame besthda for releasing the game with massive bugs we cant blame the creators for that, afterall they'd make tbe perfect game if time and money wasnt the issue.

 

[parasyteFMA]

New Vegas definitely missed the bar. Fallout 3 was good and all, but I want another traditional Fallout game.

 

[Amishdemon]

I thoroughly enjoyed both 3 and NV and can't wait for the next installment. Bethseda has created a very interesting universe with their games.hope that the next game will take a mass effect route and have player choices from previous games effect it (i.e. who you side with in NV)All i can say for sure is that bethseda can do great thing with the word they made or they can do terrible terrible things with it

 

[Jazoni89]

Did you explore all the vaults? Most of those had entire narratives just built into the scenery. Specifically, I mean the one with the guns and the one with the democracy; if you've seen those, you'll know what I mean, but if you haven't I don't want to ruin the surprise. If that still doesn't do it for you...well, I don't know what.

Point is, there are some spots in New Vegas that use the enviromental storytelling method just as well as (or even better than) FO3--they simply have to be looked for.

My bad... yes I did explore the Vaults and they were amazing, especially Vault 11 and it's heartbreaking backstory. Vault 22 was awesome too in how put a new twist on things.

There are some spots for sure, I stand corrected. But there are far less of these kind of areas, which is fine for some people as they prefer the questing aspect of NV, but for me Fallout 3 is still the king for rewarding exploration.

Most of the locations in Fallout 3 where just there for the sake of being there and nothing else. Where as in Fallout NV it is more focused on the locations themselves, and the fact that their was less of them made them more memorable and unique than say, generic corridor 170, or generic subway tunnel 22, that was in Fallout 3.

 

[AlternatePFG]

There was a Fallout 3? I thought the Fallout series was Fallout 1, 2, New Vegas and then that quirky Tactics game. What's this Fallout 3 shit? I've never heard of it.

This is pretty much my opinion of it.

Fallout 3 was a fun game, but it was not a good Fallout game.

 

[KuwaSanjuro]

I think there needs to be a bigger break before releasing another Fallout game because they deserve much more focus than New Vegas, which I really think began life as an expansion and was randomly chosen to be the next game after Fallout 3.

 

[Wondermint13]

Vegas Kinda killed it. Sorry. Glitzy flashy bling bling bling sexed-up Vegas is the last place I want to see glinting in the horizon when I'm trying to enjoy a post-nuclear enviroment.

Yes America.. Vegas is great, thanks for reminding us of that. Now get back to restoring the world!

 

[psivamp]

If anything, New Vegas was an improvement over 3. And if you want to say the series is dead, you have to say it happened when they made the console games. Stop. Don't jump down my throat because I said something about consoles. I own a 360 and PS3. There are great console games, but Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel for the Xbox and PS2 was crap. Fallout 3 doesn't portray the humor and atmosphere that I expected from a Fallout title. New Vegas is so much closer to that atmosphere and wit.

I won't say that the next Fallout game will be awesome, or even good, but I don't think the series is dead.

 

[AlternatePFG]

I didn't like Fallout 3 personally. First playthrough I had fun, but every time I played it again I noticed more inconsistences with the story and the dialogue, and as an RPG personally I felt let down by it.

New Vegas was better in that aspect for me. Not to mention they actually made the factions like they were in the previous games, unlike 3.

I'm not too keen on buying the next Fallout game if Bethesda is developing it.

 

[MiracleOfSound]

Most of the locations in Fallout 3 where just there for the sake of being there and nothing else. Where as in Fallout NV it is more focused on the locations themselves, and the fact that their was less of them made them more memorable and unique than say, generic corridor 170, or generic subway tunnel 22, that was in Fallout 3.

I disagree with that, the locations in Fallout had a lot of cool hidden stuff and a lot more thought put into their design than the ones in New Vegas.

I gave examples earlier in the thread, I'm sure you can find them if you want to.

 

[JenSeven]

The main problem I have with FallOut 3, is that it ISN'T FallOut!!!

FallOut 1 and 2 were top down RPGs with insane humour, colourful presentation and a great story.
They were fun, and because they were top-down RPGs the levelling system is something that just goes with it and belongs with it. Characters were interesting and really belonged there and who you could atleast sympathise with, or if you're feeling like an ass, completely screw around with.

FallOut 3 is a serious, depressing, bland, generic, completely unfunny, Grey-Brownish FPS with an out of place levelling system, and a contrived story with characters that are as bland as their environment.

It's certainly NOT FallOut, what the hell it IS, I don't know.
Past-Apocalyptic Halo?
Modern Warfare Post-Apocalyptica?

I'd say, FallOut 3 would have been much better is they used an engine from let's say, Neverwinter Nights 2 or something instead of the Unreal Engine, or whatever they were using.
There first two FallOut games were RPGs, I can see no valid reason (except trying to get the Halo fanboys to buy this) to not have FallOut 3 be an RPG too instead of the 10th bazillionth generic FPS that it has become.

 

[xXGeckoXx]

While playing the recently released sequel, Fallout: New Vegas, I wondered if the fallout series has any life in it. Its a very well done game, but it feels like an expansion to 3 to me. The only sequels I can imagine could either be more expansions set in the same period but with new locations, some wasteland future different from how we know it, a heavily multitplayer based game, or some form of prequel before the nuclear wars. So I'm asking if you think the series has much more staying power (and in no way am I denying that at least one more game is probable due to the large fanbase, including me)

Remember NV was obsidian. Bethesda softworks small team in chage of fallout 3 was the key to it's success. It was all about bethesda. Most of new vegas was build by obsidian so it's not so original. Can't wait for fallout 4.

 

[xXGeckoXx]

Did you explore all the vaults? Most of those had entire narratives just built into the scenery. Specifically, I mean the one with the guns and the one with the democracy; if you've seen those, you'll know what I mean, but if you haven't I don't want to ruin the surprise. If that still doesn't do it for you...well, I don't know what.

Point is, there are some spots in New Vegas that use the enviromental storytelling method just as well as (or even better than) FO3--they simply have to be looked for.

My bad... yes I did explore the Vaults and they were amazing, especially Vault 11 and it's heartbreaking backstory. Vault 22 was awesome too in how put a new twist on things.

There are some spots for sure, I stand corrected. But there are far less of these kind of areas, which is fine for some people as they prefer the questing aspect of NV, but for me Fallout 3 is still the king for rewarding exploration.

This made my day. Even the wastes in fallout could be satisfying especially when you enter the northern satcomm arrays. And Fort Constantine. The mall. Everything had an indepth story and cool loot to boot. My problem with new vegas is that a dangerous place like cave full of deathclaws could have no reward. Fallout 3 always made it worth your while especially because of the bobble heads.

 

[akibawall95]

It will live on. Of all the Fallout games (including NV) Fallout 3 was the best it was very dark (which I enjoyed, it set the mood of Fallout very well) but with its own sense of humor also it was much more polished than NV. I mean Obsidian/Interplay did great with the first two but when Bethesda handed the engine over to them for NV I do not think they knew just what to do with it. My dream would be if they put all the new weapons and stuff from NV and it in Fallout 3. I am glad Bethesda will be doing the rest of the Fallout games.

 

[Savagezion]

New Vegas felt like an expansion to 3? Really? I felt it was a great way to revisit 1 and 2 on the new engine/vantage point. 3 really fucked with the lore pretty hardcore and was set clear across the country. The capital wasteland held way more potential, creatively, than Bethesda bothered to put into it. What Bethesda mostly did was bring East coast and West Coast together as if the nation were as small as England or something. (Super Mutants as 1 example) Forget the couple thousand of miles between the two places and the wasteland and horrors that separate them, I guess.

At any rate, I think the Fallout series has a lot of potential still in it. Hell, I will even go so far as to say that I think that if done right, the best is still yet to come.

 

[MAUSZX]

Bethesda is a GREAT COMPANY, but they need time to develop a game, and more if we are talking about fallout or elder scrolls. Just to make an example.
Elder Scrolls IV was great but it takes them like 2 or 3 years to finished the game.
FallOut 3 I think they took also like 2 or 3 years.
Now fallout new vegas was so quickly announced and launch, that they didn't have time to correct some bugs or anything, but still people say its an awesome game, just a little buggy.
Elder Scrolls V, the company is working in that game A LOT of time. Like 2 or 3 years LOL

 

[Benmonkey7]

I thought the Super Mutants on the east were created from the FEV virus that was in that area, not the remains of the Master's army? Sorry if I'm wrong, I haven't read the Fallout Bible yet.

Anyway, the Fallout series is by far my favorite series. I played Fallout 3 first, then got Fallout 1, 2, and Tactics, then New Vegas. I would say that it all depends on preference. Some people prefer the original Fallout games to the recent Bethesda and Obsidian made ones. Others prefer the bleak atmosphere from Fallout 3 than to the much more vibrant (yet still bleak) setting of New Vegas. So, it all depends on what you like. Just one thing is for sure, and that's that this universe is anything but dead.