Fallout 3 was on sale on steam for half price, and since i thought the commercials for it were funny, I decided to buy it. To my surprise, it's a really good game and is taking up a good portion of my time. Does anyone else here play it?
Edited by Ricky
-
Assault Andy Administrator
I make other people create vaporware
Registered 29/07/2002
Points 5686
11th July, 2009 at 09:43:28 -
I bought it when it first came out for Xbox 360. I loved it so much! But I haven't played it in a few months. I got distracted with the side quests and I haven't completed much of the main quest. There's not as much to do once you reach level 20. Although I haven't looked into any of the expansion packs that increase the limit to level 25.
I always thought the Bethesda games lacked depth... it's got a massive scope, but no depth. Felt the same about Fallout 3. Yeah, it takes up a lot of time and has a very detailed world, but the world sort of felt fake to me. I dunno.. the 'cities' are too small, and there's just waaaaaaaay too many raiders. It's as if post-apocalyptic people decided that being a raider was the only way to survive, even when there's nothing to raid.
The VATS is good fun, though, but it gets a little boring after a few hours. Yeah, overall, it's a good game, about as fun as Dungeon Siege.
Disclaimer: Any sarcasm in my posts will not be mentioned as that would ruin the purpose. It is assumed that the reader is intelligent enough to tell the difference between what is sarcasm and what is not.
I bloody love it, bought it earlier last year during the Steam half price sale (Bioshock, L4D, HL1 and all its expansions and Fallout 3 for ~£40±). Not had the time to really dive into it though. I was supposed to go to some radio mast but I ended up just spending hours exploring the landscape.
My girlfriend is massively into it though. She has the collectors edition one with a bobblehead Pipboy .
I just randomly found a crashed alien on my way to vault 92. And it had a really good gun.
I don't know about the game not having depth. I saw a ghoul try to get into Tenpenny tower and immediately decided to help that ghoul take over the tower. After I found out what jerks the people were in the tower, i teamed up with the ghouls and killed every single one of them. And that was all my own choice, no arbitrary restrictions.
I do agree that there are a lot more raiders than people to raid. Oh well, games can't be perfect.
I got it for Christmas and played it through a couple of times, once I tried to stay neutral/good, and the second time I had fun being a complete shit to everyone. The virtual reality town was one of my favourite bits, it was just so mental.
On a kinda sidenote, I thought Terminator Salivation sometimes looked like a film version of Fallout 3.
I don't know about the game not having depth. I saw a ghoul try to get into Tenpenny tower and immediately decided to help that ghoul take over the tower. After I found out what jerks the people were in the tower, i teamed up with the ghouls and killed every single one of them. And that was all my own choice, no arbitrary restrictions.
Ohhhh.. if you call that depth, you haven't played the other Fallout games. Or KOTOR. Or Baldur's Gate. Or pretty much a lot of other true RPGs. And late in the game, you get what I mean by it having no depth.. the side quests are the best part of the game, there's not much else to it. The good/evil thing is rather shallow. Do the right thing and save the town from destruction or do the evil thing and blow up the nuke? And a bunch of other things I don't want to spoil, but you might as well have an good/evil switch.
Anyway, I think that's enough complaining, don't want to spoil anyone's enjoyment. Fallout 3 is probably the most controversial game out there, aside from Halo and Guitar Hero. But IMHO, what really sucks is everyone agrees it's great at the beginning, and I haven't met one person who liked the ending. There's still one scene between that that's the most awesome in any game, so that covers up for a lot. Those of you guys who haven't won it yet should
Disclaimer: Any sarcasm in my posts will not be mentioned as that would ruin the purpose. It is assumed that the reader is intelligent enough to tell the difference between what is sarcasm and what is not.
Halo - "The best 1st person shooter ever!" - no it wasn't, it was simply Microsoft's crown jewel on XBox. The single-player was not that special (repetitive set pieces and locations) and it was only saved by the multiplayer. Which is good, but only because the of the amount of support it receives from the developer and the community. Underneath the game and design isn't that much better than being generic.
Guitar Hero - everyone thinks it's a guitar game. If you play GH, you can learn the guitar - bollox! I am getting pretty good at GH but i suck at real guitars and it'd take me bloody years to be able to put anything together on a real 6-string, yet i can get good at a GH game fairly quickly since i am familiar with the 5-button control system. Also, it's controversial what with the countless versions of the game, the biggest rip-off being GH: Greatest Hits. £40 for 40 songs already released? Damn...
BTW, these are just my opinions, i still love you Dr. James!
Never played Fallout 3, though i am a huge fan of Bethesda (Terminator: Future Shock, Morrowind, Oblivion) and am looking forward to playing F3 when i get round to buying it. I still have Mirror's Edge, Gears of War and NASCAR 2009 on my 360 that i haven't even switched on yet!
Originally Posted by Dr. James Muz, you have a very strange take on what makes a controversial game. Halo, Guitar Hero... Really?
Well, see any gaming forum. Fallout 3, Halo, Guitar Hero have like 30 pages of threads. My favorite forum has TWO massive threads on Fallout 3, one to discuss how it's the worst game ever made, the other to discuss how it's an epic creation.
But I'll just say that if you love the Bethesda games and you love the post-apocalyptic setting, you'd find Fallout 3 to be the best game ever made .
Disclaimer: Any sarcasm in my posts will not be mentioned as that would ruin the purpose. It is assumed that the reader is intelligent enough to tell the difference between what is sarcasm and what is not.
Ah I see what you mean. But I think that's just down to the fans, Halo and Guitar Hero themselves aren't exactly controversial subjects. My First FPS and a rhythm game aren't exactly GTA or Saint's Row.
But yea I need to play this properly. Might give it a try on the Xbox now so I can sit back in 46" 1080p than playing on my 13" Macbook . And haven't they released Elder Scrolls 2 as freeware?
Originally Posted by Dr. James My girlfriend is massively into it though. She has the collectors edition one with a bobblehead Pipboy .
I have that edition, the bobblehead is pretty neat. The art book is ace too but I haven't got round to watching the making of DVD that came with it...
I love the game. I got engrossed in it far more readily than Oblivion, although I suppose that's because I'm more of a futuristic nut than a fantasy fan. It kept the humour and general feel of the originals to the best of its ability, which is a rare thing. Also the karma system seemed far more fluid than the usual "do this really good thing or this really bad thing" (InFamous, I'm looking at you).
Not to say it didn't have flaws. Anyone who takes a look at the Fallout 3 wiki can see it's got potentially game killing bugs up to the armpits, although thankfully I never encountered any of those. The VATS system became less of an option and more of a necessity since any weapon did far, far less damage with pitiful accuracy outside of it.
I'm looking forward to the new DLC packs though. Particularly the one that sees you get abducted by the alien mothership .
There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary and those who don't.
Have they? I'd love to play that, just to see the scale of it for myself. The gameworld was supposed to be the same size as 2 Great Britains put together... holy sh*t!!
The different opinions come from Halo, Guitar Hero and F3 being big games; one ith lots of attention, big media drive, lots of players. The bigger the audience, the more varying the opinion. I'm not convinced they are innately controversial games, like Manhunt and GTA.
Originally Posted by Muz
Originally Posted by Dr. Ricky (An Optometrist)
I don't know about the game not having depth. I saw a ghoul try to get into Tenpenny tower and immediately decided to help that ghoul take over the tower. After I found out what jerks the people were in the tower, i teamed up with the ghouls and killed every single one of them. And that was all my own choice, no arbitrary restrictions.
Ohhhh.. if you call that depth, you haven't played the other Fallout games. Or KOTOR. Or Baldur's Gate. Or pretty much a lot of other true RPGs. And late in the game, you get what I mean by it having no depth.. the side quests are the best part of the game, there's not much else to it. The good/evil thing is rather shallow. Do the right thing and save the town from destruction or do the evil thing and blow up the nuke? And a bunch of other things I don't want to spoil, but you might as well have an good/evil switch.
That's one mission of many, and there are many moral dilemmas in the game, as anyone who's reached Oasis, danced with vampires or played The Pitt will tell you. Most of the side stories aren't black and white at all, and the outcomes are frequently uncertain so you're not quite sure what action to perform. I'd say Fallout has an amazing amount of depth. It's not just in the game's 'features' (of which there are many) but the exploration and discovery, and the fear of staying alive in those early character levels. I remember coming across a half-bombed house and, after going through the drawers for scraps, entering a bedroom with two skeletons entwined on the bed, one of them with a gun in their lap. In another place, I found one in a corner, shielding its eyes, drink bottles scattered about the floor. I dunno, they've given us a world of destitution, cannabilism, roaming fiends and robotic servants, irradiated mutant outcasts, a 'common man' radio station, shells of white picket fence suburbs and household junk with which to fashion new weapons, and a levelling system that means you need never have the same character skills (and therefore game experience) again. I've played the previous Fallout's and the content of F3 is just as compelling and varied as they are, if not more. And just setting off to the horizon with nothing more than a teddy bear and a sledgehammer never gets old.
But then like the word 'gameplay', I find the word depth pretty inadequate anyway, so maybe I'm not getting it.
Originally Posted by Rob Rule That's one mission of ... maybe I'm not getting it.
Amen. What really, really did it for me was reaching level 20, getting the Explorer perk and feeling compelled to visit every single place on the map, just to find what could be found. The Dunwich Tower being a prime example. Nothing to do with the plot or any side-missions, but just a brilliant little foray into someone else's experiences.
There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary and those who don't.
I grew pretty tired of exploring. Move to location, find out what it has to offer, leave, repeat - no real drive to go anywhere or do anything, especially since I wasn't a fan of how they did the combat. I had a lot more fun with Far Cry 2, certain situations really put the pressure on you, and could be deciding factors of where you go and what you explore, and all the options you have when put in an intense situation - I didn't get that sense of true danger and flexibility in Fallout 3. Restriction is just as important a tool as Freedom in game design.
In fact, Spelunky is much better, maybe the best game I've ever played.
Advertisement
Post Reply
Edited by Ricky
I didn't know there was a limit, I need to be more careful where I assign my stats
.
.
