Fallout 3 - Review @ RPG Codex

[Hedek]

Perhaps it's just that good writers aren't attracted to games, or appreciated by people who make and play games. It's quite common to run into that attitude even here, like in crpgnut's post above -- "I don't play a game for the dialog, I play it for the gameplay, and to explore, and to develop my character."

You nailed it. Good writing never sold a game in millions. Awesome graphics and gameplay do.

 

[GothicGothicness]

What beats me, though, is how come so few such writers have emerged. The games industry has been around for quite long, and if anything, the quality of writing in games has declined. You'd think that the industry would train writers to understand games -- or game designers who understand writing.

I think it is quite easy. It is just not that important to the mainstream gamer.

Look at fallout 3 it got rave reviews and even RPG of the year at most places, did anyone care that much about the poorly written dialogue nope?


on the other hand both GTA IV and especially metal gear solid 3 had on a video game scale excellent dialogues, I think it is easier and more resources could be spent to make the dialogue for these kind of games. Especially MGS 3 since it is a lot like a movie.

Maybe it is just me but these days the dialogues in most movies are also not that good? I mean classic movies and romance movies have OK ones, but we have a lot of experiance with these.

I cannot even remmember the last time I heard a classic line. Probably when I watched the world is not enough,

Spoiler

"I thought christmas only came once every year"

that one was brilliant. People kept applauding and laughing after the movie was over, did not see that in a long time.

But the Bond movies went downhill, and so did most action movies, they do not have enough dialogue to satisfy anyone.

To sum up, it is darned hard to write good dialogue for RPG's in particular and there is not enough requirement or emphasiz placed on this by most players to make it worthwhile to choose this career. On top of that most game are moving away from a lot of dialogue since everything has to be voice-acted these days.

 

[DArtagnan]

my first playthrough was on hard the entire time and yeah it was mostly easy after a while. on very hard its never really easy that it doesn't take planning an thanks to being a steath character quite a bit of intial damage.

for those who played the game on normal--why would you expect diffuculty?
If there are 4 levels of difficulty and you pick number 2 with 1 being the easiest--you sure should be expecting a none-too-difficult game.

though of course the leveling is still way out of whack and in some cases you actually get more xp!

I don't think we see eye to eye regarding difficulty. First of all, it seems you're assuming this is about combat difficulty and nothing else, which it's not - at least not for me.

I don't think the way Bethesda (and MANY others) handle difficulty is good game design. It's good for commercial gain, as by making the average difficulty very lenient and forgiving - you're ensuring pretty much anyone who sits down can get through the thing. It's been standard practice for all AAA developers for quite a while.

I personally believe that there should be only one difficulty level - always - and that's the one the designers intended. They should balance it around what they personally find suitable. They can add whatever options they want for players to tweak, but by doing so you're introducing meta-gaming and people will never really know if they got the "pure" experience. Putting the game on "hard" in Fallout 3 - you're facing tougher fights but the rest of the game remains identical, which skews the balance of both itemization and character development. They haven't taken the time to do it right - but then not many do. Thief is a good example of how to implement difficulty levels if they must be there.

About what I mean with lenient difficulty levels, I'm especially referring to the way you can circumvent pretty much any obstacle by either taking drugs or reading books. Say you're a science guy - and you're into being this character with these limted skills. You come across a locked safe and you're SUPPOSED to say "damn, I wish I had high lockpicking - I will try that for my next character". But you don't say that in Fallout 3 - because you can just do drugs, or you can read enough books - or you can simply max out all important skills way before the end. That means there's little incentive to be experimental and creative with your build. It's TOO lenient. You level too fast, you gain too many skill points, skills are capped at 100, skills are directly related to damage output, and many other weak design concepts are responsible for the game's greatest weakness.

In that same way, they removed the initial traits from the Fallout system. There's no good reason for this, except to simplify character creation - which in turn is done EXCLUSIVELY to ensure the biggest audience possible. In the old Fallouts, it was a pleasure to experiment because no character could cover all the bases, and I loved messing with traits.

That was good game design.

I'm sorry, but Bethesda just aren't very talented game designers. That's my opinion and I stand by it. However, they're VERY good at selling their products and they know exactly how to impress the audience initially to get a hold of them. They've succeeded in doing that with me ever since Morrowind.

Daggerfall was impressive throughout - but sadly it was also horribly flawed. But I respected the design and the effort to be innovative. Arena was almost as impressive and held great promise. But that was with another lead person and before Beth became AAA heaven.

Battlespire was crap and Redguard was mediocre. I don't really remember who was in charge, but I imagine it could have been a transitionary phase. The Terminator game was also very buggy and didn't impress. I believe they did some car games as well, but I never tried them.

Fallout 3 is a rather weak imitation of its predecessors with great production values, surprisingly good level design, and decent combat mechanics. But they had a top-tier design to take from and as such it's not unreasonable to expect some improvements, rather than a weaker and less interesting system than what came before. If you take from the best and you can't even match it - I find it very hard to be impressed.

But it's still a good game.

 

[rune_74]

So who in your opinion is a talented game programmer?

 

[curious]

i agree the skill caps are also out of wack. of course you can also somewhat solve that problem by self "gimping" yourself. for instance on my 2nd playthrough i put no points ever into speech, barter, bigguns, or unarmed. i also had extremely low charasma (1?) and something else low too. another step you can take is on the perk level. for instance i "wasted" 3 perks on the thief perk simply to fit with character even though those types of perks are rather useless.

of course this wouldn't apply to a first playthrough necessarily, though i did it somewhat, and for those who only play a game once it could be a bane to their experience. but bethesda seems to be a developer that puts their efforts towards those who do play it more than once.

on the otherhand though there is the argument for the "powergamer" which as far as exploration is concerned is me. i care less about exploring combat/magic skills than i do the living world both flora/fauna in addition to as many quests and dialogues as possible. with the amount of games to choose from these days, unlike a decade ago, developers also have to account that many people will not play the game twice or possibly even finish it. this of course means the urge to give the player access to as much of the "good stuff" as quick as possible and as much of it as possible without having to play again. this is of course much more applicapble to large developers as it make the most economic sense--can you really expect something else? this is why i myself play just as many if not more small developer games since their focus can be more niche and often much more creative, though they to are often flawed in some eyes for bugs, graphics, translational issues etc.

gothicgothicness- you think metal gear solid 4 and grand theft auto 4 are the pinnacles of game writing but you hated the witcher? are you sure you're not talking about good voice acting? to me good writing/dialgoue are not even close to the same. the games you mentioned are based on movie writing, while games like the witcher are based on books. i prefer writing that spawns thought or understanding, which is also why i got burned out on movies a few years ago and rarely see them anymore. i probably would have loved those games a decade ago or even sooner--but "modern action" never really works for me as its like someone putting on a santa suit --"no this isn't how the world really works, nor do i wish that it did so why would i escape there"
fanasty, history, or future-sci-fi is more than enough for my plate.

 

[DArtagnan]

So who in your opinion is a talented game programmer?

I'm not talking about programmers - I'm talking about game design.

Personally, I tend to favor those who stick to a vision without obvious compromise. In my opinion, the perfect art (most pure) is the art made from a fully subjective perspective. Such art can probably never exist in this industry - because it's a business as well as a creative space, but the ideal is easy enough to understand.

In our current market, I'm not seeing many who would qualify as great designers, but a few examples of recent games I consider better than merely good or average:

The Witcher
Company of Heroes
Lord of the Rings Online
Hellgate London

None of the above are free from commercial compromise, but in my opinion they all do something special that deserves extra credit and respect. It's clear to me that those in charge of the designs of those games are passionate about what they do, and had an ambitious vision that went beyond simply cashing in.

You don't have to agree of course.

If you want names of the truly great companies, I can list a few:

Looking Glass
SimTex
Gollop Brothers
New World Computing

There are great companies that are still in existence, but they're no longer living up to their name and have pretty much all succumbed to favor profit over art. That's to say they think it's more important to maximise profit than maximise the creative quality. Companies like Bioware and Blizzard are prominent in this category.

 

[DArtagnan]

this is of course much more applicapble to large developers as it make the most economic sense--can you really expect something else?

I don't expect anything else, what makes you think I do?

It's not about expecting anything or feeling I'm owed something. I'm merely saying what I think about their game. I was actually pleasantly surprised by Fallout 3 - and it was significantly better than I expected.

 

[GothicGothicness]

curious - you think metal gear solid 4 and grand theft auto 4 are the pinnacles of game writing but you hated the witcher? are you sure you're not talking about good voice acting? to me good writing/dialgoue are not even close to the same. the games you mentioned are based on movie writing, while games like the witcher are based on books. i prefer writing that spawns thought or understanding, which is also why i got burned out on movies a few years ago and rarely see them anymore. i probably would have loved those games a decade ago or even sooner--but "modern action" never really works for me as its like someone putting on a santa suit --"no this isn't how the world really works, nor do i wish that it did so why would i escape there"
fanasty, history, or future-sci-fi is more than enough for my plate.

People always misunderstand me about the witcherer, I had said in all threads about the witcherer that I loved the setting, I loved the graphics, and I also enjoyed the writing and dialgoues. Note that we were discussing dialogues in particular more than writing.

What I really disliked was the combat system, and most other things related to gameplay, the poker dice was fixed in the latest version I heard.

are you sure you're not talking about good voice acting?

I also liked the voice acting in the witcherer, even if it has problems sometimes.

If a dialogue is voice acted, it also matters how it is delivered to the player, what is the impression of the character, how does he say the line ? in MGS4 these things were there, to deliver a good dialogue and made the characters feel alive. But they also had good written lines of dialogue to act out.

No matter how good the voice actor, if they are giving a bad dialgoue it will still not turn out to something good.

 

[Alrik Fassbauer]

What beats me, though, is how come so few such writers have emerged. The games industry has been around for quite long, and if anything, the quality of writing in games has declined. You'd think that the industry would train writers to understand games -- or game designers who understand writing.

I personally believe that this is highly logical so - a decline of writers in an age where the technics of a game is most important factor of a game is to me nothing but a logical result.

 

[Dusk]

I showed my suspicion about writing in Bethesda forum even before the release of the game and, well, still haven't touched FO3 since no reviews assured that my suspicion was baseless. The only game I played last year is the Witcher and, although I am quite happy with the game, I don't say the dialogues are perfect even in the Enhanced Edition.

Now I wonder if it is mere wishful thinking of mine to expect some talented scenario writers may come to the game industry from the film one since they share some technologies and will hopefully share human resources. At the moment, I keep one of my eyes on Alpha Protocol while still remembering what happened to Vampire the Masquerade: Bloodlines.

 

[JemyM]

Despite not being able to live up to absurd expectations, F3 was still one of the best RPG's in years. If that tells you something about the game or the market is up to you to decide. Had I wanted more? Sure. The greatest issue is that you cap your level far to quickly and it's far to easy to get 100% with the best weapon in the game, but if I recall it correctly, Fallout 1 had a similar problem. Also, F3 lacks the philosophical depth of RPG's like Mask of the Betrayer and Planescape Torment, but that didn't reduce my joy with the game.

 

[Dusk]

Despite not being able to live up to absurd expectations, F3 was still one of the best RPG's in years. If that tells you something about the game or the market is up to you to decide. Had I wanted more? Sure. The greatest issue is that you cap your level far to quickly and it's far to easy to get 100% with the best weapon in the game, but if I recall it correctly, Fallout 1 had a similar problem. But that didn't reduce my joy with the game.

At least, my expectation about the dialog of F3 has never been at absurd level. That said, I have read quite a lot of reviews of F3 and I know Bethesda means business. It is just for some people including myself, dialog is important part of Fallout series, which is, just in case you missed some comments above me. Unfortunately for us, the majority doesn't appear to think in the same way. However, if you can enjoy the game, I'd simply say, Lucky you.

 

[JemyM]

At least, my expectation about the dialog of F3 has never been at absurd level. That said, I have read quite a lot of reviews of F3 and I know Bethesda means business. It is just for some people including myself, dialog is important part of Fallout series, which is, just in case you missed some comments above me. Unfortunately for us, the majority doesn't appear to think in the same way. However, if you can enjoy the game, I'd simply say, Lucky you.

The dialogue is better than Oblivion for sure, but it isn't equal to the "classics" such as Fallout 1/2, Arcanum, Planescape Torment or Mask of the Betrayer. However, considering that even Mass Effect was a major step down, it appears as if the era of good dialogue is over.

 

[n1]

I don't generally read my games, I play them.

You're comparing oranges and apples. To bring it down to a common denominator your line should read: "I don't generally read my games, instead I type on my keyboard and click mouse buttons". Text and specifically dialogs are part of the gameplay - the part that's best at conveying much of the setting and background information. Yeah, cutscenes do the same, but unlike dialogs they aren't interactive and thus loose the "game" part of gameplay.

So basically your argument against writing in games is "I don't like to read" which is all nice and dandy, but that doesn't make F3's dialogs any better.

Anyway, I like how most criticizing the review here fail to bring in any arguments besides "it's opinion so you're wrong!!1". The review is well written and well analyzed. The only opinion there are his conclusions where he describes how he feels about the facts he named beforehand - and those conclusions, while truly being just opinions, aren't as baseless as most posts made in this thread.

 

[Benedict]

You nailed it. Good writing never sold a game in millions. Awesome graphics and gameplay do.

The cost of developing awesome graphics and endlessly play testing and fine tuning gameplay must be vastly in excess of the costs of getting some good writing.

It's not as if all of the writing has to be cutting edge brilliant for a game to leave fond memories of the writing. So long as there's a few good, well written and engaging side quests and a decent main story arc the filler and the less frequently selected conversation options can be half arsed without anyone caring.

 

[Benedict]

The dialogue is better than Oblivion for sure, but it isn't equal to the "classics" such as Fallout 1/2, Arcanum, Planescape Torment or Mask of the Betrayer. However, considering that even Mass Effect was a major step down, it appears as if the era of good dialogue is over.

Based on the whole two releases that might have good dialogue that have come out since the witcher & mask of the betrayer? It's hardly been an era since them.

 

[JemyM]

Based on the whole two releases that might have good dialogue that have come out since the witcher & mask of the betrayer? It's hardly been an era since them.

Of which one is an expansion pack. How many games like that can you mention lately that had that kind of quality? Both are 2 years old.

 

[rune_74]

Can we have it so people have to register before making posts? Alot of people hide behind the fact they cannot be held accountable for what they write by using a guest account.

Anyways...to say all the writing in the game was horrible is not telling the truth...the truth is its inconsistant, I think maybe because of the style change of the game ie open world vs strict defined boundries. Some would have you believe the whole game was written for 4 year olds, while great they have an opinion its just plain wrong. I like to read, alot actually. This game is no worse then any other recent releases when it comes to writing. I think as another poster stated there were otherworldly expectations for this game. As well, there were minds made up before even the first screenshot was shown.

Oh well, I guess everyone will have to learn to agree to disagree.

 

[n1]

Can we have it so people have to register before making posts? Alot of people hide behind the fact they cannot be held accountable for what they write by using a guest account.

I've got an account here, the name: n1. I'll log in eventually. Now you can hold me accountable for what I write.

Anyways...to say all the writing in the game was horrible is not telling the truth...the truth is its inconsistant, I think maybe because of the style change of the game ie open world vs strict defined boundries. Some would have you believe the whole game was written for 4 year olds, while great they have an opinion its just plain wrong. I like to read, alot actually. This game is no worse then any other recent releases when it comes to writing. I think as another poster stated there were otherworldly expectations for this game. As well, there were minds made up before even the first screenshot was shown.

Section8 stated his expectations quite openly. Not only does he criticize what he disliked, he also points out what he'd prefer and why - and, how most of what he prefers was realized in Fallout (e. g. consistent setting, better writing, more balanced character system ...).

If everybody here could accomplish that we'd actually have something to argue about. Now all we've got is "it's opinion" and "we've to agree to disagree". Don't get me wrong, I'm all for criticizing. But I'm sick of the "let's all howl what a POS review that is"-stance when most critics generalize and fail to back their arguments by quotes from the review.

 

[Prime Junta]

Am I the only one who found this combination of sentiments mildly ironic?

Can we have it so people have to register before making posts? Alot of people hide behind the fact they cannot be held accountable for what they write by using a guest account.

Oh well, I guess everyone will have to learn to agree to disagree.