Poll: The Fallout Series

[Baelor]

So, a few weeks ago I LEPT into 2005 and bought an X-Box and two games, Assassin's Creed and Fallout 3, I returned Assassin's Creed shortly after.. For those of you who don't want to read through all this I'll leave a simple list of the questions i'm asking at the bottom.

Fallout 3 I fell in love with and am playing at the moment as I type this. I have discovered though that most Fallout fans think its horrid, or that its a clone of Oblivion. It IS a clone of Oblivion, but what's wrong with that? I mean Oblivion was a good game if not for the voice acting and story, but the GAMEPLAY was good and that is what they imported over. I would also like to say that Fallout one and two are exactly the same as well.

So, I went around and finally found Fallout's one and two, I figured if they were really that good I should try them. From pictures I imagined some sort of gameplay like Diablo, but no, i'm instantly slogging through turnbased combat. What is the appeal of Turn-Based combat anyways? To me Turn-Based gameplay isn't gameplay at all but rather an excuse to have your entire game be a cinematic. Now i'll be the first to admit i'd get a bit angry if they ruined something from my childhood (Ex:Warcraft), but I really don't see the problem with the story, it seemed to be a really good story to me. Did they really screw up the Fallout story that badly?

1): What's wrong with the gameplay being like Oblivion's gameplay?
2): What's the appeal of turnbased combat?
3): Did Bethesda really screw up the Fallout story?

 

[oliveira8]

1): What's wrong with the gameplay being like Oblivion's gameplay? Nothing wrong.
2): What's the appeal of turnbased combat? Depends if its done correctly or not.
3): Did Bethesda really screw up the Fallout story? No.

 

[B0BX]

I feel that while this game does have a similar feel to Oblivion, the only time they felt like the same game was when I was using a melee weapon. Other than that, it does have similarities in other aspects but not enough to call them the same games.

 

[Edible Cyanide]

1. Nothing
2. It's for pussys, your mom and lazy pricks
3. No

 

[More Fun To Compute]

Not bought Fallout 3 yet so can't get into specifics. Blame a huge backlog of other games I would rather play.

1. What's wrong with it? It's not so bad, could be a lot worse. An other question is, what's so right about it that it some people kick and scream when any other alternative is put forward?

2. Appeal of turn-based. You are jumping into a complex argument. Simply put, turn-based combat is easier to control meaning that strategy gameplay can flow better and designers can make gameplay more complex and nuanced without overwhelming the player.

3. No idea!

 

[Somthing]

I played oblivion and didnt get taken in to it i even kinda tried to love oblivion but it didnt do it for me but fallout rocks. i can see where someone may draw likenesses but i just think fallout is waaaaay much better.

 

[Mr_spamamam]

i thought it was quite good. but i found that there wasn't much to do as previous games. that and the level cap really hacked me off. once you reach level 20 then there was no point in exploring anymore and you might as well get on with the story. so yeah, dissapointed with the level cap, but thats all really.

 

[jimduckie]

if they fixed all the bugs in the ps3 version and dropped the f'n xp cap maybe i would say great game but that is not going to be , it's a good game but to add insult to ps3 ers no dlc that's pathetic

 

[dekkarax]

1)nothing, but I feel that it waters down the role playing aspect
2)more strategic, gives you time to think, better role playing I suppose
3)F1&2 were much funnier

 

[Sparrow]

It's not a clone of Oblivion. I hate it when people say that.

Alot of people are just to ignorant to realise that it only uses the same engine to run it. You could say COD 5 is a clone of COD 3.

Plus, the fact that Oblivion was extremely boring. For me anyway, I can see how others would love it.

 

[Valiance]

So, a few weeks ago I LEPT into 2005 and bought an X-Box and two games, Assassin's Creed and Fallout 3, I returned Assassin's Creed shortly after.. For those of you who don't want to read through all this I'll leave a simple list of the questions i'm asking at the bottom.

Fallout 3 I fell in love with and am playing at the moment as I type this. I have discovered though that most Fallout fans think its horrid, or that its a clone of Oblivion. It IS a clone of Oblivion, but what's wrong with that? I mean Oblivion was a good game if not for the voice acting and story, but the GAMEPLAY was good and that is what they imported over. I would also like to say that Fallout one and two are exactly the same as well.

So, I went around and finally found Fallout's one and two, I figured if they were really that good I should try them. From pictures I imagined some sort of gameplay like Diablo, but no, i'm instantly slogging through turnbased combat. What is the appeal of Turn-Based combat anyways? To me Turn-Based gameplay isn't gameplay at all but rather an excuse to have your entire game be a cinematic. Now i'll be the first to admit i'd get a bit angry if they ruined something from my childhood (Ex:Warcraft), but I really don't see the problem with the story, it seemed to be a really good story to me. Did they really screw up the Fallout story that badly?

1): What's wrong with the gameplay being like Oblivion's gameplay?
2): What's the appeal of turnbased combat?
3): Did Bethesda really screw up the Fallout story?

God, this is flame-bait if I ever saw it.

1: Click-spam sure is fun.
2: Honestly, I don't know, but I remember it being really damn fun when I played Fallout 2. The whole game isn't turn-based anyway, only the combat, which never takes that long, so I don't know what you're complaining about. I remember it taking some strategy, planning, and I just liked my character being so customizable when it came to skills, traits, and perks. Turn based combat -generally- is better in strategy and tactics games than single-unit control RPGs, but I enjoyed it here anyway.
3: Yes, horrifically, especially the Enclave moving to Washington D.C. and Harold, and other dozens of inconsistencies

I would go into this if I really wanted to, but I don't care enough.

I voted "not as good as previous games" because, well, it's not. There's nothing REALLY wrong with it really aside from the ending, which isn't as bad as most people say it is, but still sucks.

I really loved Fallout 3, but only because they captured the atmosphere very well, and the world was very well-done. The problem with the combat is that the game is painfully, disturbingly easy, when you can simply line-of-sight around pillars or walls, and how stupid the AI is ("WHERE?" NOW I'VE GOT YOU!" "Hm, guess it was nothing..."). Ammo is everywhere, and you don't even need it since if you know how the hell to move, you can kill most melee creatures with melee weapons without being hit...

And I'll stop there. And "To me Turn-Based gameplay isn't gameplay at all but rather an excuse to have your entire game be a cinematic." is a very...stupid thing to say, for lack of a better term.

 

[MarsProbe]

1): What's wrong with the gameplay being like Oblivion's gameplay?
2): What's the appeal of turnbased combat?
3): Did Bethesda really screw up the Fallout story?

1. I enjoyed Oblivion, so have no issues with another game being somewhat similar.
2. Some people like strategy in their gaming, even if it's not an actual strategy game. Myself included, sometimes .
3. Haven't played the previous Fallout games, so can't compare it to them. The story was alright but when you think about it, the overall goal wasn't particularly dramatic. Activating a water purifier? Thrilling. The journey was fairly worth it though, more than the destination.

 

[ProfessorLayton]

I liked Fallout 3. It was pretty fun, and you know what? I DIDN'T like Fallout 1. I thought that Fallout 3 was much much better.

 

[Axolotl]

1): What's wrong with the gameplay being like Oblivion's gameplay?
2): What's the appeal of turnbased combat?
3): Did Bethesda really screw up the Fallout story?

1)For any game, nothing. For a Fallout game it makes it fast-paced and it means that you can use any weapon effectively even with no points in the relevant skill.
2)It allows a more strategic element. It increases roleplaying. The slow more thoughtful nature of Turn-based combat compliments Fallout's bleak feel and works to help build the setting and style.
3)Yes, primarily because they simplified it, took out the depth of previous games, made a much less believable world and worst of all, in my opinion, made it far too optimistic and cheerful.

 

[Deathsong17]

Well, Fallout 3 is my favourate game at the moment, and I want to get Fallout 2 (Not Fallout 1 though, I hate time limits in games.
1) If the gameplay's done well, why not?
2) Adds strategy to game.
3) No idea.

 

[blarggles]

See I loved the Fallout 1 and 2. I also liked Fallout 3.

The thing is fallout 3 seems to be too much about right or wrong. The choices are immediately obvious when you take them. They are either good or bad. Fallout 2 allowed you to sit in that grey area or say and do something, without first realising the consequences. Which is what made it so good. The combat wasn't great, however at the time it was fun.

The story in the first 2 games was just so much better in my opinion. However I am not going to judge fallout 3 until I have played all the downloadable content since the level cap is getting increase and we are going to see more of the story I will not give my view of the final story.

It is still a seriously enjoyable game. I have managed to put 150+ hours into it. It has been a long, long time since I played a game anywhere near that much. I sat and played for 10 hours straight one day. I have not done that in years. I also didn't really like oblivion. Overall I think they did a good job with fallout3. Although give me fallout 2 with the F3 looks and it would be perfect.

And deathsong...the time limit isn't an issue. It can be extended by various quests in the game in fallout 1. Makes it half the fun. The patch also increased the limit.

 

[Dmatix]

See I loved the Fallout 1 and 2. I also liked Fallout 3.

The thing is fallout 3 seems to be too much about right or wrong. The choices are immediately obvious when you take them. They are either good or bad. Fallout 2 allowed you to sit in that grey area or say and do something, without first realising the consequences. Which is what made it so good. The combat wasn't great, however at the time it was fun.

The story in the first 2 games was just so much better in my opinion. However I am not going to judge fallout 3 until I have played all the downloadable content since the level cap is getting increase and we are going to see more of the story I will not give my view of the final story.

It is still a seriously enjoyable game. I have managed to put 150+ hours into it. It has been a long, long time since I played a game anywhere near that much. I sat and played for 10 hours straight one day. I have not done that in years. I also didn't really like oblivion. Overall I think they did a good job with fallout3. Although give me fallout 2 with the F3 looks and it would be perfect.

And deathsong...the time limit isn't an issue. It can be extended by various quests in the game in fallout 1. Makes it half the fun. The patch also increased the limit.

second. just because Fallout 3 is different from 1&2 doesn't mean its bad. it does need a little more humor IMO though.

 

[Ph0t0n1c Ph34r]

1): What's wrong with the gameplay being like Oblivion's gameplay?
2): What's the appeal of turnbased combat?
3): Did Bethesda really screw up the Fallout story?

1)For any game, nothing. For a Fallout game it makes it fast-paced and it means that you can use any weapon effectively even with no points in the relevant skill.
2)It allows a more strategic element. It increases roleplaying. The slow more thoughtful nature of Turn-based combat compliments Fallout's bleak feel and works to help build the setting and style.
3)Yes, primarily because they simplified it, took out the depth of previous games, made a much less believable world and worst of all, in my opinion, made it far too optimistic and cheerful.

Are you honestly going to tell me Fallout 3 was cheerful? I do agree with you on the maater of depht though. They dumbed it down way to much, not combat wise, but to do with how your statistics affect your character.