RPGWatch Feature - Fallout 3 Review: txa1265's View

[Brother None]

A good review overall, I'll put it up together with Corwin's on NMA, it'll be interesting to see what kind of feedback it gets

Debating about the score is usually the most useless thing you can do concerning reviews. It's the words that are important, tho' sadly the reality is that many people skip the review for the conclusion + score, so for those short attention span people the score matters. For me, it doesn't, that much.

Anyway, good review, but there are a few things...

When you come to the crest of your first hill and take a moment to look around, you will be struck by one of the most memorable graphical realizations of an environment in gaming history.

I don't like overstatements much, but I guess this is true. Still, I have a decent resolution (1440x900) on a decent monitor (19"), and I was pretty unimpressed by the vista compared to - say - BioShock's opening sequence, the first time you see the city from high up in Mirror's Edge or even seeing Liberty City from a chopper in GTA IV. I don't disagree that it's still one of the best, but comparing it to Oblivion is probably off the mark - Oblivion was a benchmark showing at its time, Fallout 3 is definitely behind the times, especially on PC.

While I have read - and agree with - many assessments of how clunky the game is as a shooter, I pretty much chalk up to the difficulty in translating RPG combat mechanics into FPS gameplay.

I disagree. A large part of the problem with Fallout 3's FPS gameplay lies not in its combination of RPG mechanics and FPS gameplay - remember that Deus Ex approached it much the same way but actually had a bigger skill-to-accuracy impact (the impact of skill on accuracy in Fallout 3 was severely nerfed during development, and skill actually has more impact on damage than accuracy in-game). The problem with Fallout 3 lies more in its odd AI and combat manoeuvring. It feels kind of like an old FPS only enemies circle-strafe you (A LOT). Now combat AI in most modern shooters isn't that good either, but for experienced FPS gamers (and I'm not one) I can imagine how the enemy AI and behaviour feels kind of weird after, say, I dunno, Far Cry 2. And I've even heard complaints about FC2's combat AI and coding, yet it is so much better than Fallout 3's.

I believe that without VATS the game would have been a terrible mess and that it is an ambitious attempt to bridge the real-time and turn-based system

RTwP was ambitious when Baldur's Gate did it. Calling it ambitious now looks a bit farcical.

Unlike Oblivion, where the combat was pretty binary - too easy for most but too hard if you leveled-up too rapidly - Fallout 3 has combat that is challenging but not impossible.

You're not wrong here, but don't underestimate the effects of the localized level scaling system. It's more subtle than Oblivion, which is why most people don't notice it, but I do think it's the explanation for the great variation in impressions people have of combat. I found it ridiculously easy. Vince found it pretty hard. You found it challenging but not impossible. Somehow, I suspect this is because of the different ways the three of us approached exploration and levelling up.

The problems with the main quest being uninteresting and making little sense have been pointed out in even the most frothingly positive '12 out of 10' reviews.

Actually, and I know this in part because of Per's obsessive compulsion to gather all Fallout 3 reviews until he reached round-up #101, that's not true. There were actually, and this still confuses me, reviews that praise the writing or call the Fallout 3 story "great", to the point of comparing it to Tolstoy or James Joyce.

I can only compare this to the self-censorship and compulsive denial that made reviewers ignore that Oblivion had a broken AI system and horrible level scaling in their reviews. I'm considering writing a "You're doing it again, guys" piece on just that.

and the core soundtrack elements by Inon Zur are there and I found them more enjoyable as I roamed the wasteland than I did Jeremy Soule's Oblivion music

Really? I guess we'll have to agree to disagree as it is a matter of taste, but I turned off Zur's soundtrack about 5 hours in because it's so bloody annoying. Especially the combat music is terrible and inappropriate. The radios weren't much better, mostly because the track selection isn't wide enough, and Three Dog is annoying.

OK, maybe that reference doesn't work...but the point is that this is a very good game loaded with excellent features and enough bugs and flaws to completely obliterate most games. Somehow it all works; somehow you can forgive the silliness and lack of depth and closure and lousy writing and combat issues and on and on. Somehow you just keep coming back, trying to avoid hitting the end of the main quest so you can just keep on exploring the Wasteland.

Ok, honestly, having written reviews on games that leave you feeling conflicted myself, I can understand why you wrote this. But - and you may disagree with me on this point - I absolutely hate it when reviewers pull this one, and for that reason try to avoid it myself.

Don't "somehow" your readers. Readers aren't here to read how it all works "somehow". You're supposed to be the "expert", to some extent, this is one of the key difference between reviewing something and just talking about something on a forum.

I just finished playing Mirror's Edge on the PC. First off the way it's ported puts half-assed ports like GTA IV and Fallout 3 to shame. More importantly, it's a game that'll leave almost anyone with mixed impressions, and like Fallout 3 (but to a greater extent) it can't be simply be recommended as there's too much to be conflicted about in the title.

But if I write a review and just say "somehow it works anyway" who exactly am I helping by that? What's the point? Who will take anything extra out of me saying it works, "somehow"? How am I helping anyone understand the game better or make a more educated purchasing decision by noting I like it, but not explaining why?

Now obviously you've covered enough facts and clearly delineated recommendations early on the review, so accusing you of being unhelpful like that would be unfair. Still, I consider it a useless conclusion to say "it works somehow". I know it's difficult, but in the end to say it works "somehow" is just an easy way out, and even after a thoughtful review such statements should be avoided.

But maybe that's just me.

 

[curious]

its just you

 

[JDR13]

Way too many people complaining about the score. Try focusing more on the actual review.

Also, I've seen some people incorrectly refer to it as a "port". It was not a port, it's a multi-platform game.

 

[Brother None]

its just you

Fair enough.

Also, I've seen some people incorrectly refer to it as a "port". It was not a port, it's a multi-platform game.

Sure, officially. But when you say multi-platform game, I think of a game developed simultaneously across multiple platforms. Fallout 3 wasn't, it was developed on the Xbox 360 as the primary development platform and then converted for the PS3 and PC as work went on.

Technically that doesn't make it a port. Yet the end results is that this is more clearly a console port than - say - Mirror's Edge is.

 

[Bedwyr]

A good review overall, I'll put it up together
I disagree. A large part of the problem with Fallout 3's FPS gameplay lies not in its combination of RPG mechanics and FPS gameplay - remember that Deus Ex approached it much the same way but actually had a bigger skill-to-accuracy impact (the impact of skill on accuracy in Fallout 3 was severely nerfed during development, and skill actually has more impact on damage than accuracy in-game). The problem with Fallout 3 lies more in its odd AI and combat manoeuvring. It feels kind of like an old FPS only enemies circle-strafe you (A LOT). Now combat AI in most modern shooters isn't that good either, but for experienced FPS gamers (and I'm not one) I can imagine how the enemy AI and behaviour feels kind of weird after, say, I dunno, Far Cry 2. And I've even heard complaints about FC2's combat AI and coding, yet it is so much better than Fallout 3's.

Yup. They should've emphasized VATS as a legit alternative by alternating enemy initiative. The Bioware KotOR is still the gold standard for qeuing actions in a realtime game.

RTwP was ambitious when Baldur's Gate did it. Calling it ambitious now looks a bit farcical.

And no one learns. It's a solid idea and should be a standard for stuff like this.

You're not wrong here, but don't underestimate the effects of the localized level scaling system. It's more subtle than Oblivion, which is why most people don't notice it, but I do think it's the explanation for the great variation in impressions people have of combat. I found it ridiculously easy. Vince found it pretty hard. You found it challenging but not impossible. Somehow, I suspect this is because of the different ways the three of us approached exploration and levelling up.

With you here.

Actually, and I know this in part because of Per's obsessive compulsion to gather all Fallout 3 reviews until he reached round-up #101, that's not true. There were actually, and this still confuses me, reviews that praise the writing or call the Fallout 3 story "great", to the point of comparing it to Tolstoy or James Joyce.

Yeah. Bad habit of English majors. Criticism as interpretation rather than criticism. It's more about the writer than the subject being written about. You run into those on occasion, especially in Slate or New Yorker style articles.

More often I think people get wowed by experience and transfer the excitement to the writing. It's not awful, but sufficiently bland that you can transfer on it whatever happy memories of the game grace your brain. And there's plenty of beauty to put a little sunshine on your cortex. Bethsoft's real forte is the world and the art. Putting it all together, they're really really good at making a big world look cool and get you excited about wandering around in it. That's the focus of every game they make often to the detriment of other elements and features.

The writing thing has me perplexed. Emil's a designer and one of the writers. He's getting awards, accolades, and recognition for the game (well he should), but the writing is, well, if not bland I'd call it "perfunctory". It works but it doesn't take me anywhere. For both writing (and NPC animation rigging) they've got the budget to hire really awesome people but consistently come up with mediocre features here. Do they need dedicated Hollywood scriptwriters? Is it that spoken branching dialog is such an immense task that it has to be done without verve or coherency? Is the openness of the world counter-productive to a well made script? What's the dealio?

Really? I guess we'll have to agree to disagree as it is a matter of taste, but I turned off Zur's soundtrack about 5 hours in because it's so bloody annoying. Especially the combat music is terrible and inappropriate. The radios weren't much better, mostly because the track selection isn't wide enough, and Three Dog is annoying.

It's better and getting better for me. Integrating the music into the plot and function of the game was a brilliant touch. The radio songs keep up that irony. It even got me to do a little research into black jump music, trying to figure out what that strange Butcher Pete song was about. eg- How could you get away with something like that in the 50's when series like Dexter cause shock today? Easy. Strong subtext and no white people listening.

Ok, honestly, having written reviews on games that leave you feeling conflicted myself, I can understand why you wrote this. But - and you may disagree with me on this point - I absolutely hate it when reviewers pull this one, and for that reason try to avoid it myself.

Don't "somehow" your readers. Readers aren't here to read how it all works "somehow". You're supposed to be the "expert", to some extent, this is one of the key difference between reviewing something and just talking about something on a forum.

Completely and totally disagree here. That "somehow" captured exactly the feeling I had about the game and connected the review to me in an "I know *exactly* what you're talking about" way.

 

[JDR13]

it was developed on the Xbox 360 as the primary development platform and then converted for the PS3 and PC as work went on..

Links?

Technically that doesn't make it a port. Yet the end results is that this is more clearly a console port than - say - Mirror's Edge is.

FO3 was definitely not "clearly more" of a console port than Mirrors edge. ME wasn't even released for the PC until a full 2 months after the console realeases.

Also, some reviews even specifically mentioned examples of "consolitis" with ME, such as: "You will want to break out an Xbox 360 controller if you want to get the most out of the experience. The keyboard-and-mouse setup is decent but occasionally awkward, and it can't compete with the interesting (but intuitive) gamepad controls."

 

[Brother None]

Links?

Xbox 360 is the lead dev platform. And yes, Hines claims there that Xbox 360 is lead but not first somehow, but I don't even see how that's possible. If it's true, there's no rational explanation for the shoddy interface on the PC or the bad optimization on the PS3.

FO3 was definitely not "clearly more" of a console port than Mirrors edge. ME wasn't even released for the PC until a full 2 months after the console realeases.

I'm talking about how it plays, not when it was released. I've played Mirror's Edge and it is a superior port in every way, after the half-arsed efforts like Fallout 3 and GTA IV. The interface is perfect (to the point where Jim Rossignal commented The movement system is excellent, and must immediately be stolen by other games. Moreover, it’s so much better on mouse and keyboard than on a gamepad.), it runs smoothly and is well-optimized, except for some unnecessary loading screens.

I'll be happy to debate the point if you've played it. If you haven't, I can only assure you there is no way of telling Mirror's Edge was ever a console game from playing it. Exactly what Hines promised above and what F3 failed to deliver.

Completely and totally disagree here. That "somehow" captured exactly the feeling I had about the game and connected the review to me in an "I know *exactly* what you're talking about" way.

That doesn't really negate my point. I mean "I like it" as a statement can also exactly capture the feeling you have, but the job of reviews is not just to agree with feelings, it's to explain to some extent. A good review has a person reading it and not just agreeing, but thinking "oh wow, that explains (...)"

Somehow doesn't explain anything.

 

[JDR13]

Xbox 360 is the lead dev platform. And yes, Hines claims there that Xbox 360 is lead but not first somehow, but I don't even see how that's possible. If it's true, there's no rational explanation for the shoddy interface on the PC or the bad optimization on the PS3..

Certainly nothing there that would dispute it being a multi-platform developed game. In fact, it pretty much confirms what I said. Having a "lead" has nothing to do with it being a port vs multi-platform.

“The 360 is our lead development platform, so we got it working on that one first,” he said. I mean, we develop them all simultaneously, but one of them’s got to be the lead, so it was 360.”

The choice was made more by the timing of the console’s release than anything else, Hines added.

“We had a year’s head start on the 360 because it came out a year earlier, so we had final dev hardware to work with earlier on than we did with PS3,” he said. “But as this point all three of them are pretty much on par. The goal is that, if I get three versions in here and hide the console or PC and just had them running on the screen, that you wouldn’t be able to tell the difference.”

I'm talking about how it plays, not when it was released. I've played Mirror's Edge and it is a superior port in every way, after the half-arsed efforts like Fallout 3 and GTA IV. The interface is perfect (to the point where Jim Rossignal commented The movement system is excellent, and must immediately be stolen by other games. Moreover, it’s so much better on mouse and keyboard than on a gamepad.), it runs smoothly and is well-optimized, except for some unnecessary loading screens.

I don't see that quote anywhere in the link you provided. Even so, it's no shock to hear something like that come from the mouth of one of the devs right before the PC version is about to be released. Unfortunately, many people seem to disagree with him.

Exactly what Hines promised above and what F3 failed to deliver.

Really? And what did he promise and fail to deliver exactly?

 

[Brother None]

Certainly nothing there that would dispute it being a multi-platform developed game. In fact, it pretty much confirms what I said. Having a "lead" has nothing to do with it being a port vs multi-platform.

I agreed that it's technically multi-platform and not a port. That doesn't mean you can't obviously tell by playing it that this is a game made for consoles and only half-heartedly put on PC. "Lazy port" is an easy way of saying just that, even if it's not technically true

I don't see that quote anywhere in the link you provided.

It's in the comments.

Even so, it's no shock to hear something like that come from the mouth of one of the devs right before the PC version is about to be released. Unfortunately, many people seem to disagree with him.

It's not a dev, it's a journalist.

Also, I don't know about agreeing or disagreeing since I haven't played Mirror's Edge on console, all I know is that it plays perfectly on PC, and there's no way of telling by playing it that it was released on console - as in, there are no tells like the bad interface of Fallout 3. If I didn't know better, I'd assume it was a PC game. Maybe it plays better on console, I don't know, all I know is it plays great on PC.

Really? And what did he promise and fail to deliver exactly?

The goal is that, if I get three versions in here and hide the console or PC and just had them running on the screen, that you wouldn’t be able to tell the difference.” That is not true (and yes, he doesn't promise it, only states it as a goal, but let's not go on the apologist path here). Also, as txa points out in his review, Bethesda ensured us all they'd do a better job porting the game to PC this time around, yet they did not.

 

[Arhu]

I can only assure you there is no way of telling Mirror's Edge was ever a console game from playing it.

I so hope that others can learn from this instead of repeating the same mistakes over and over again. I mean, surely word must have gotten out by now, after decades of gaming, that people don't like bad ports. Or do they?

Somehow doesn't explain anything.

I took it as "I liked it despite its flaws", which doesn't explain anything either, but it's something I can relate too.


Oh, and hi Bedwyr! Long time no see. Don't be a stranger!

 

[JDR13]

I agreed that it's technically multi-platform and not a port. That doesn't mean you can't obviously tell by playing it that this is a game made for consoles and only half-heartedly put on PC. "Lazy port" is an easy way of saying just that, even if it's not technically true..

Well I guess opinions will vary, there are many people who would disagree with the "half-hearted" part.

The goal is that, if I get three versions in here and hide the console or PC and just had them running on the screen, that you wouldn’t be able to tell the difference.” That is not true (and yes, he doesn't promise it, only states it as a goal, but let's not go on the apologist path here). Also, as txa points out in his review, Bethesda ensured us all they'd do a better job porting the game to PC this time around, yet they did not.

You're right, the PC version looks better by most accounts. And as far as doing a better porting job, are you trying to claim it wasn't better than Oblivion? Because in that case- most people would definitely disagree.

 

[Brother None]

You're right, the PC version looks better by most accounts. And as far as doing a better porting job, are you trying to claim it wasn't better than Oblivion? Because in that case- most people would definitely disagree.

Indeed, the PC version looks better, while the PS3 version looks worse (slightly). Regardless, they do not look or run the same.

Better than Oblivion...I guess so, though Oblivion had gone through a few patches when I first played it, while Fallout 3 hadn't, so I'm not the best person to judge.
Good enough? Definitely not, for either Oblivion or Fallout 3.

I mean, surely word must have gotten out by now, after decades of gaming, that people don't like bad ports. Or do they?

They seem to sell well enough, so perhaps publishers have no reason to care.

 

[Thaurin]

Indeed, the PC version looks better, while the PS3 version looks worse (slightly). Regardless, they do not look or run the same.

I would certainly expect the PC version to look better. They didn't even really stress the high-end of the PC market with Fallout 3, but I'd be very disappointed if the PC version looked exactly like the Xbox 360 version. PC hardware has progressed beyond the consoles by now.

The PS3 version shouldn't look any worse, though.

 

[Brother None]

PC hardware has progressed beyond the consoles by now.

Obviously. That's why the PC version looking better is hardly an accomplishment. I'm more concerned about how little interest the PC version shows in using mouse + keyboard.

The PS3 version shouldn't look any worse, though.

It does, but only slightly.

 

[Alrik Fassbauer]

Way too many people complaining about the score. Try focusing more on the actual review.

I think that's a lesson to learnm on what people focus most when reading.

We are in the age of icons - of the wish to gain the maximum of information as fast as possible. "Icons" like stars are the fastest medium.

 

[Relayer]

0/5? Eliminated as soon as I stepped into the wasteland.
5/5? Killed before I left the Vault.

I'm curious, how did you die IN the Vault? I set the game on HARD from the beginning and had no trouble in the Vault - thanks to poor AI and Vats, the game isn't too difficult unless you manage to get a lot (3+?) of enemies on you.

As far as outside, in the wasteland - same thing applies. Use Vats to get a few shots in, then run away. Most enemies don't chase too far and forget about you. I did get to a point early on where it got too hard - of course it was on the hardest setting and I was still very low level - still most of it had to do with me deciding to stand my ground instead of using the run & gun/vats tactic above.

I'm sure you stand by your score, and I understand the whole thing about no 1/2 points. But I still think it's bad for the industry overall when perfect & near perfect scores are given to games far from it. And the games that do deserve those scores don't get them because they're often not wrapped up in a shiny or new enough package, even though the foundations, the things that matter are more than rock solid.

 

[Relayer]

By the way, I don't mean to be too negative, I enjoyed reading the review and you hit on most of the important points - I just think your final score doesn't reflect that.

 

[Relayer]

Way too many people complaining about the score. Try focusing more on the actual review.

Call me crazy but I always thought the final score reflected the contents in the review. It's something used to represent the bottom line of the review, the overall worth of the game being reviewed. Otherwise, what's the point of tacking it on at the end?

Play magazine did away with their scoring, it was a great idea.

Also, I've seen some people incorrectly refer to it as a "port". It was not a port, it's a multi-platform game.

A multi-platform game built with consoles in mind.

For how long has the "I" key been used to pull up your inventory window in a PC game? Not to mention the flexibility to reassign keys to functions? Not so in Fallout 3 or Oblivion. What normally would take 1 key press takes several.

Morrowind's interface had it's issues too but it was better suited to a PC. The fact that you could resize the seperate windows for map, inventory, stats was awesome. You could also choose to keep the map open while you played. There is no flexibility in Fallout 3's interface because it was designed for a console limited by a half dozen buttons.

 

[Brother None]

I'm curious, how did you die IN the Vault? I set the game on HARD from the beginning and had no trouble in the Vault - thanks to poor AI and Vats, the game isn't too difficult unless you manage to get a lot (3+?) of enemies on you.

You misunderstood him. He meant "the idea of giving it a 5/5 was abandoned even before I left the Vault". Which is fair enough, you can tell this is no 5/5 game that early, pretty much.

 

[Ausir]

I'm baffled at everyone who thinks that clicking and scrolling through several different screens to see all of your character sheet is more convenient than simply having it all displayed on one screen. Hell, in FO3 you even have to scroll to see all your *skills*.