Our Friend Emil (LGS) on Fallout 3.. - by Garrettwannabe
WingedKagouti on 24/10/2008 at 18:52
Quote Posted by Malf
You have no idea how much the average Fallout fan sees that in one day, let alone 3 years.
Maybe because they actually need to hear it and not go "Lalalalalala! Can't hear you! I've seen a screenshot and didn't like it!" whenever someone suggests the game might be decent (or even good).
Preemptively disliking something only makes you look stupid.
And the True Fallout Sequel is never the same thing if you speak to two different Fallout "fans".
MorbusG on 24/10/2008 at 19:42
Quote Posted by faetal
I don't understand how further production of a game franchise *spoils* anything.
You can still play the old games - Bethesda isn't touching them.
Sometimes I think people would just prefer it if NOTHING was made.
If you want to hang onto your purism - simple, just don't play it. Complaining that it exists just smacks of elitism.
Why not just keep playing the old games and STFU? Will it incense you if people buy and enjoy the new game?
Well no, but it hurts inside to think that a game franchise took the (in your gut feeling) wrong turn. Example for me is the Rainbow Six -franchise; the vegas games are in my opinion the "wrong turn".
The_Raven on 24/10/2008 at 20:25
Quote:
*stuff faetal said*
Just look at the reaction from this community about tiny tidbits of Deus Ex 3. Is it really that hard to imagine that people might be upset about certain iterations and turns in a franchise? New iterations may not damage the existing elements of a franchise, but it can retroactively damage them in the mind's eye. There's numerous examples of franchises that I've lost interest in after some really terrible downturns: Star Wars, Aliens, Predator, Star Trek, The Matrix, etc... I don't think I can articulate this any better than Simon Pegg:
Quote Posted by Simon Pegg
I don't know about doing a sequel. I think you can retroactively damage a product by adding to it. If you look at "Jaws" even, I think that "Jaws" is one of the greatest films ever made but you can't help but think about "Jaws 4," which is dreadful. Even as you watch the original you think about the characters, “Oh she ends up in the Caribbean with Michael Caine.” If you watch Alien, this all started with AVP: Whoever won, we left.
june gloom on 24/10/2008 at 21:36
The problem is we're a bunch of elitist pricks who insist that a sequel to a game conform to very exacting standards: our own. And unfortunately one guy's standards differ from another's, and so nobody is ever going to be completely happy.
There's just no fucking point in trying. The best you can do is make a game that stands on its own merits while keeping as true to the original without being too esoteric- this is especially true when the last game was more than a few years ago.
Zygoptera on 24/10/2008 at 21:51
Quote Posted by Brethren
Might be better to reserve your judgment on this until, oh I don't know, maybe when the game actually is released?
No need to, so much is known about it already and you can watch plenty of in game footage from the leaked x360 version. It's post-apoc Oblivion With Guns with a few cosmetic changes and genre shift to allow the drool dispenser demographic to play it as a shooter without having to run puling to mummy for comfort because the game's too hard.
And plenty of people will like it for that.
fett on 25/10/2008 at 05:00
I heard there was someone speaking ill of Emil in this thread so I came to kick their virtual ass. :o ;)
gunsmoke on 25/10/2008 at 05:53
Quote Posted by Zygoptera
. It's post-apoc Oblivion With Guns
STALKER was actually PROUD of this statement. The devs used that exact phrase to describe their game, and it was a compliment in their (and my) eyes. Consequently, STALKER was a resounding success IMHO. I still don't see how the CREATORS of Oblivion could make a shitty "Oblivion w/guns" if a damn-near 3rd world developer can make one fabulous.
Quote:
"Oblivion with guns" was the tantalising soundbite that squirted from Patrick Garratt's word-teat following his trip to the reactor, and it's easy to see why. Vast, open landscapes await you, with story missions and side quests approachable in any order you fancy. Well, almost. One of the first things you realise is that, as always, the lofty ideal of non-linear gaming doesn't quite match the reality. There's a story to be told, and stories need structure. While you can piddle about, admiring the scenery and gathering items for as long as you like, the game does subtly herd you in certain directions whenever the narrative needs to be advanced. It's never crude or intrusive though and as you get to choose when this herding will take place, it's hard to resent the presence of a little formal
mothra on 25/10/2008 at 11:43
because GSC got talent and vision in spades, they just lack the will to see it all through to the end and make it foolproof. betheseda never start with a big picture and shave off or stop in the middle, they seem to start with a skeleton and just patch stuff ontop of it. look at FC2, nice game but can't hold a candle to the scope of STALKER in terms of content and gameplay and A-life (and they have AI bugs galore as well)
Rogue Keeper on 27/10/2008 at 09:48
Quote Posted by Malf
You don't seem to understand; the further Bethesda pushes Fallout 3 into being a mainstream blockbuster title, the less chance we get of seeing a true Fallout sequel, and the more we see the RPG genre defined by action titles. Bethesda are helping to kill off a genre.
You don't tell me that F1-F2 weren't mainstream titles, judging by their quick popularity. F2 has been criticized in it's time for bringing nothing really innovative, they just multiplied features people liked and threw it on the market - size of the world, weapons, random encounters, sex jokes... But most fans overlooked it, thinking "if it works good, don't change it". Now 10 years later it certainly wouldn't work.
These die-hard fans have image of "TRUE FALLOUT SEQUEL" on their mind, but lord knows what it is, because from one fan to another, everyone has different image of true fallout sequel on his mind. I realize it's extremely difficult to make sequels for picky people like these, no matter what geniuses of design you get for the job.
Action RPGs are reality for few years now. You can't blame just Bethesda for starting the trend. This is a highly professional title with big money put into it. It's sad but it's the curent state of business. Blame the business. Or why don't you blame Interplay for selling the license in the first place.
