So, we've seen Fallout 3 presented several times now and even NMA now has a first-hand look. Some love Bethesda's approach, some want a classic approach. What do you think? What do you think of what you've seen so far?

Strident debate is welcome but let's keep any abuse under control, yes?

This sort of thing can be easily manipulated but hopefully specific fan communities (on either side) won't weigh in too heavily so we can get some sort of view of what RPGWatch readers think.

My vote: can't decide.

I've always been in favour of a classic sequel (turn-based, overhead camera) but given the direction I knew Bethsoft would always take, I like the general look and feel from the trailer but don't like magic-hammer-wielding-mutants, handheld nukes, silly humour and have significant doubts about the whole find-Liam-Neeson thing, which just doesn't feel like the sort of story Fallout should have.

There is definitely a 'SB' or Yoda option missing

So as to not add further grey hairs and anxiety issues, I've vowed to stay out of the Fallout debate, but I did vote—not impressed so far.

Originally Posted by Dhruin
This sort of thing can be easily manipulated but hopefully specific fan communities (on either side) won't weigh in too heavily so we can get some sort of view of what RPGWatch readers think.

What, you mean the poll?

NMA has a proven history of sucking badly in amassing people to vote in polls

PS: voted "Not impressed, but time will tell"

I'm with Dhruin on this one; I really want to like it, just like I wanted NWN2 and Oblivion to be good!!

I'm split between hate it and can't decide. My hate it reasons are probably different from many others however. Like those skeletons with picket signs outside the vault the way they read it sounds like Beth is pandering to Beavis and Butthead for customers.

Bro None - I now remember how I found the Dot. It was either NMA or D&C that said that the Dot had a Top 100 of RPG's and linked it so they could flood the site with votes for the Fallouts. That's when the then editors had to fix it to require comments and registration.

I would say either you guys or D&C have a good track record for fixing pills so don't be too hard on yourselves.

Originally Posted by Lucky Day
I would say either you guys or D&C have a good track record for fixing pills so don't be too hard on yourselves.

Really? I don't recall that. I do remember when Gamespy or some site had a "battle of the games" in which 2 games would slug it out and the votes would determine the best in a big, playoff competition for best game of all time, I remember NMA encouraging voting on Fallout a lot there.

I guess all that encouraging of voting started tiring our users after a while.

Level design and combat AI will make or break a game focused on gunplay. I haven't seen even a vague outline of their plans for those areas, so for now, no opinion.

Dhruin, thanks for eliminating the option from the last poll, "RPGWatch should not even cover this", in this poll.
As I just posted in the BioShock poll how disappointed I am that category was included in the final results.

Here we have a group of people (supposedly) whom intend to change the content/context of RPGWatch, from an General RPG site to a "omg, it's not my personal definition of a pure RPG, so RPGWatch shouldn't care", whom didn't even seem to show the least cursory effort of making a case for this position, for the community to react to and debate.

I sincerely hope that you remove those results or at the very least please don't include them in the future if not even a minimalist position is offered.
Apologies for being on such a hard-line on this but it's seems like a subversive attempt to undermine the community by not putting forth a position.

Back on topic, I voted “Not impressed, but time will tell”, though I would like to have seen “Disappointed, but time will tell”, since I can be impressed with and do enjoy nice graphics, though they are not necessary.

The real problem I have with the game is bethseda’s seemingly complete disregard for meaningful dialogue, gameplay and story, or maybe it's their inability to achieve these qualities, while hiding behind the lies of PR.

They constantly mislead the press and fans with out right falsehoods about the game and content, then backtrack when they get caught, as we experienced in their previous title.

As a recent example of Emil Pagliarulo in the 1UP interview http://www.1up.com/do/previewPage?cId=3162284
"We went back and forth with the impact of dialogue on the character, and ultimately decided we didn't want to penalize or reward the player for carrying on a conversation."

Then immediately recanted when he was caught off guard by the game-world’s lack of support of meaningless dialogue, in this thread http://www.bethsoft.com/bgsforums/in…#entry10837831.

edit
If my position is to strong please feel free to delete my post, appoligies I didnt see your post till after I posted this Dhruin.

I don't see anything that's too strong. And I understand your point about putting a case for not covering Bioshock but I'm still interested in that sort of feedback, even if proponents don't make a case.

I voted with Brother None on this one. I would have been hovering between that and "some concerns," but his piece on the demo tipped me to "time will tell."

I can't decide. I admit I haven't read all the articles in full but more with a quick eye.
Maybe if there are some demos and real screenshot that I will know more.
Never played F1 or F2 only a short demo So I don't know that much of the games really, but I have to admit I am interested in Fallout 3 but not so Interested like I will be in the Witcher and the new Jowood and Pb games

I think they are doing great. I'm a big fan of the originals, too. Fallout 2 being my favourite PC game ever. Only thing I'm a bit worried about is the lack of prostitutes They were somehow so.. hmm.. important .. in fallout 2

I also think that the combat system is a very nice idea. Could work very well.

Oh.. and I'm not a bethesda fanboy. I did love Daggerfall and Morrowind (morrowind in my top5 list of CRPGS) but was a bit dissapointed with oblivion.

I'm at 'good but some concerns'.

My thought is that it 'looks' good, but while I had fun in Oblivion it was not tense and a post-Apoc *shooter* needs tension. So it depends on the emphasis on the 'Action' game side in my mind. (not I'm not defining RPG's or FO3's place in it, just recognizing that there are both RPG and action elements here and they will play out differently than in Oblivion). I am also generally concern that RPG elements will turn out largely vacuous and vanilla like in Oblivion.

I voted "looks good, but with some concerns".

I am trying to keep my expectations down after some disapointments with Oblivion and other recent games.

But, seeing the info we have gotten so far about Fallout 3, it does to me seems like it will be a good game. But its also impossible to know how the important things in the game will feel like at this point.
Yes we know that it will be 1st and 3rd person view instead of isometric, but that doesn't really matter to me. Its the story, the setting and the dialog and choices that are important.
And though they say they are using alot of time on those things to make it good, its still impossible to know how those things will turn out before you play it.
And seeing how Oblivion turned out compared to Morrowind, I am concerned that they might go the same way and downgrade the RPG elements even though they try to indicate otherwise.

Welcome to the forums; nice to see someone from the beautiful city you live in!!

I voted 'good, but I have some concerns.'

I'm not that concerned about the actual gameplay's choice & consequences. However, I'm concerned that what brother none called 'verisimilitude' wouldn't be up to par.

It seems, to me, that what brother none wrote in the NMA preview, probably is true.
Especially about the setting: it seems like a generic post apoc setting added with a sprinkle of Fallout. I'm also concerned about the BoS being knights of the wasteland and that supermutants are only seen as bad -aehm- people?

On the positive ist that you will need science skills to unlock & hack things, tnat you will need skills in small arms and big guns to actually hit somone or something, that you apparently can

From the info on VATS, I sort of figured that it was some sort of realtime w/ pause like Bioware did in the 1990's with the infinity engine. Also, from the info that they've three options, one for neutral, one for good and one for a bad option.
Does this means that Bethsoft are making some sort Bioware game?? Not that this necessarily are bad. It just seems to be sort of non creative and non innovative solutions to me Just like the game's supermutants do. The look like a cross between the Uruk Hai's from LOTR and the orcs from either Oblivion, Baldur's Gate or Oblivion.

I'm also a bit concerned about the silly humour, and Todd's vision that violence somehow is funny. Yes, violence in the tom & jerry show is funny, because violence in this series is used to portray a conflict between the two, not just used for it's own sake, like I get the feeling it is in Fallout 3 ?

As for the 1up interview, Emil mentioned that game dialogue did not affect the ending. And that was he said more precizely on the Bethesda Forums. Karma, e.g. the actions made throughout the game influences the ending of the game. Whch, sort of makes sense…

There should be one more category:

The game is 4 years away. It is hard to vote based on concept art and interviews.

Originally Posted by Reyla
There should be one more category:

The game is 4 years away. It is hard to vote based on concept art and interviews.

As far as I know the announced release date is fall 2008, which in my screwed up mind makes it now approximately one 1 year away from release.