RPGWatch Feature - Fallout 3 Review: Corwin's View

Nothing wrong with sites that express their opinions freely and allow their community members to do so, within reason of course.

But look at Bethesda which has been known to delete many posts on their game forums, some that just questioned some of their design decisions. Not like the posts were profanity & hostility-filled either.

You should be allowed to take criticism and not take things personally.

Corwin said:

BN, I'm confused as to why you don't 'get' my argument. To me, the differences between U5 and U8 are far greater than those between F2 and F3. If U8 is considered a sequel, then so should F3; both fall under the heading of rpg's, but both are VERY different in substance and style.

Click to expand...

That's not a valid argument. The circumstances surrounding Ultima were different, whether it be through the game series running longer or because the original designer was with the series the whole time. You have to consider a general status for something to be a sequel in general and then judge it against individual cases like, like Metroid, GTA or Fallout.

rune_74 said:

Do you honestly believe any company would support a site like NMA?

Click to expand...

Interplay did. Heck, Interplay still does. We've had courteous relations with every developer we've ever tracked games from, whether it was SSE with the Fall or Microforte with Tactics. The only real exceptions, so far, have been Interplay while working on F:BoS/cancelling Van Buren and Bethesda while working on Fallout 3.

But I wasn't talking about NMA. Like I said, and Ausir said, they are unsupportive of fansites in general, except Planet sites. I didn't attach any judgement to that and I know why they do it (mostly because of their near-paranoid need to be in full control of all info regarding their games), but it is what it is, and NMA being mean is not at fault.

Let’s consider my favourite series - Ultima.

Click to expand...

Yeah, let's.

Ultima 5 had TB combat, while U7 was Real Time.

Click to expand...

... and virtually everyone will add the caveat that the combat sucks when praising U7. You can't tell anyone a good thing about U7 without warning them of the combat lest everything you say will be discredited once they experience the combat.
I believe it's actually a major reason why U7 isn't the undisputed champion of the series.

Who would have expected jumping puzzles for example, after playing U4-7?

Click to expand...

Noone. I don't know anyone who liked them either, so they actually patched in a "jump to" feature because the jumping puzzles pissed off players so badly.

In fact, every accusation levelled at FO3 for being too different from the earlier game could be used against the Ultima series, but no-one has done so.

Click to expand...

That is simply a lie. You're a liar. You treat truth like toilet paper and claim your shit doesn't stink.


So yeah, many changes to Ultima were big, big fail. Realtime combat, jumping puzzles, removal of party gameplay, new setting disaccociated from the older games. That's why the Guardian trilogy is considered a slope downwards.

Wow superguest, that was a bit harsh, thank god for the internet and no consecences.

I think people are forgetting just how much criticism Origin got for Ultima 8, even back in the day.

I very clearly remember heated usenet discussions about how big a step down U8 was from U7, and how it was an example of selling out. Since I never played Ultima pre-U8, I was actually a fan of it and I also liked Ultima 9. But having later played around with U7 - I can definitely see certain changes for the worse.

I'm not sure I see how it's really any different from what's happening with FO3. You can argue about whether it's a good game or not, but to ignore the changes made to appeal to the mass market would take an impressive level of blindness.

Superguest, you're welcome to disagree to your hearts content but quit the personal attacks.

My sole point with the Ultima analogy, was that these games are still considered Ultimas, so despite the changes with FO3 I think it still deserves to be called a Fallout game. I was not discussing the merits of U8; I disliked it intensely, but I think I'd lose the argument if I tried to claim it's not really an 'Ultima'.

Corwin said:

My sole point with the Ultima analogy, was that these games are still considered Ultimas, so despite the changes with FO3 I think it still deserves to be called a Fallout game.

Click to expand...

It is too bad that the point was lost - it is a discussion worth having. I did a lousy job of making it in my own, because me saying 'it doesn't matter' about Fallout 3 compared to the older games had as much to do with my not really thinking there is relevance in comparing FO3 to the others as anything else. In other words, I think that in the context of 'being a Fallout game' FO3 is pretty crappy ... but that isn't what FO3 is all about.

Corwin said:

My sole point with the Ultima analogy, was that these games are still considered Ultimas, so despite the changes with FO3 I think it still deserves to be called a Fallout game. I was not discussing the merits of U8; I disliked it intensely, but I think I'd lose the argument if I tried to claim it's not really an 'Ultima'.

Click to expand...

And my sole point is that "Ultima 8 is considered an Ultima, so Fallout 3 should be considered a Fallout" is dubious logic at best, completely ignoring the individual circumstances considering the different titles and attempting to kill the debate by making some kind of "eh, let's just call them all sequels" argument. I'm sorry, but it's just not a useful point to make, not remotely.

i
have to agree

And I have to disagree, especially since it addresses the core beefs people have with it being called a Fallout; too many changes from the first two. However, as these are only our personal opinions, we will only argue round in circles and get nowhere, so let's simply agree to disagree.

i prefer disagreeing to agree--its more honest!

Wow! This is starting to get RIDICULOUS.

Fallout 3 is indeed Fallout 3, whether some people like it or not.

Some people just need to accept that fact, instead of going on about the differences ad nauseum.

I think I said that in the review!!

Corwin said:

My sole point with the Ultima analogy, was that these games are still considered Ultimas, so despite the changes with FO3 I think it still deserves to be called a Fallout game. I was not discussing the merits of U8; I disliked it intensely, but I think I'd lose the argument if I tried to claim it's not really an 'Ultima'.

Click to expand...

Ok, got it

Sorry I missed that, as I haven't read the thread thoroughly.

Personally, I don't think the analogy really applies because Garriot and Co. (Origin) were developers on ALL Ultimas, and Ultima 8 and Ultima 9 weren't based on a purchased license. Even as Garriot succumbed to the pressures of EA and the mass market as time went on, he isn't quite as worthy of the critique I think is suitably placed on Bethesda.

Bethesda changed significantly when the original lead guy left - sometime before Morrowind - and Howard took over. Since then, it's been all about making a profound first impression on gamers, rather than construct a solid gameplay structure to act as underpinning for high quality gameplay throughout. That's partially why most reviewers salivate over it, because it DOES make a great first impression (like Morrowind and Oblivion did as well) - but it's unfortunate that most reviewers are too inexperienced to balance their opinion by giving the game a thorough analysis.

Howard is much more a "people" person and like Levine of former Irrational, he's much more about making games "cool" and accessible to the masses. I suspect it has to do with their history of being secluded nerds, who now have the opportunity to show the world just how cool games really are. Unfortunately, games were never "cool" - there was just some brilliant gameplay in some of them. Cool isn't what we need games to be - that's for the suits.

But anyway, Fallout 3 is unlike Ultima 8, because it's done by an entirely different group than the prequels with - in my opinion - entirely different motives.

But the pedantics about it being a Fallout by title are worthless and not useful for this discussion, in my opinion.

Nice review Corwin. I thought I'd pitch in with my own take on Fallout 3 and where it sits in regard to the first two.