Dhruin
SasqWatch
NMA takes a look at Broken Steel for Fallout 3, concluding the DLC paves the way for more addons but falls short on its own. On the level cap raise:
More information.
Fallout 3 - Broken Steel Review @ NMA
- Thread starter Dhruin
- Start date
Ergonpandilus
The Preacher
Don't you think that Fallout 3 and it's DLCs totally raped the whole Fallout series?
Brother None
SasqWatch
- Joined
- October 19, 2006
- Messages
- 1,558
Pretty much, yeah, though I wouldn't use that wording. The main game removed most of the core game design of the originals, the DLCs have effectively destroyed the consistency of the setting.
It is what it is.
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2006
- Messages
- 1,558
txa1265
SasqWatch
- Joined
- October 18, 2006
- Messages
- 14,953
I would use terms more like 'urinated on the tradition', because raping means assaulting the actual originals, and last I played, they were still as great.
However, this new work has cheapened the Fallout name by turning it into a shallow action-centric game with paper-thin choice/consequence, middle-school level writing and some core RPG elements remaining.
Of course, none of that would have mattered if the gaming media hadn't instantly enshrined the game as the best thing since their last bestest EVAR ... Oblivion ...
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2006
- Messages
- 14,953
It's not just RPGWatch. It seems to be a popular opinion in certain places that FO 1&2 were the pinnacle of crpgs, while FO3 is utter crap. An opinion that I don't share.
Want to have some fun? Start a thread about FO3 over at RPG Codex, then sit back and grab some popcorn.
txa1265
SasqWatch
- Joined
- October 18, 2006
- Messages
- 14,953
Well, I did extensive reviews of all of the content which prqise nthe game for the strengths it *does* have.
Note that this comment is related to the review of the Broken Steel DLC, which *does* reduce the experience exactly as I said. Have you guys played it? If not then I suggest you read more and play more before casting general aspersions about the entire site.
I have mixed feelings about Fallout 3, but have written tons here for reference. As nfor Fallout 1 and 2, while they were not perfect, they posses a level of writing quality and depth I dontb thinkb Bethesda even aspires to. That doesn't make FO3 bad, but the distinct change makes one wonder why bcall it Fallout at all.
JDR - after the whole BG vs DA thing I figured you would appreciate the expectations set in this way ...
Note that this comment is related to the review of the Broken Steel DLC, which *does* reduce the experience exactly as I said. Have you guys played it? If not then I suggest you read more and play more before casting general aspersions about the entire site.
I have mixed feelings about Fallout 3, but have written tons here for reference. As nfor Fallout 1 and 2, while they were not perfect, they posses a level of writing quality and depth I dontb thinkb Bethesda even aspires to. That doesn't make FO3 bad, but the distinct change makes one wonder why bcall it Fallout at all.
JDR - after the whole BG vs DA thing I figured you would appreciate the expectations set in this way ...
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2006
- Messages
- 14,953
I also don't share that negative opinion re: FO3 despite significant criticisms. Broken Steel merely made certain design and story flaws even more noticeable, and hopefully they will learn from it. However, I am completely bemused by the extent and persistence of vitriol directed at it.
Its also kind of odd that as a community beating up on FO3 (or even DA) seemed allowed, and in some cases even encouraged, but a game like ME2 becomes something of a holy cow in terms of criticism. I guess it has something to do with faithfulness to some perceived original authorial intent of the Fallout or BG Universe, where there is not that precedent with ME. But still confuses me a bit.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2006
- Messages
- 182
JDR - after the whole BG vs DA thing I figured you would appreciate the expectations set in this way …
I have no idea what that's supposed to mean.
Zaleukos
Bum
- Joined
- November 4, 2006
- Messages
- 2,013
While I was quite pleasantly surprised by FO3 I think Mike raises very fair points. The game isnt bad and better than the predecessors in some areas (arguably combat which was very tedious in FO1/2), but it doesnt come close to the predecessors in the areas that were their strength (writing, C&C, diversity in character builds, even quest count) and has some typical Bethesda diseases (jack-of-alltradism, too obvious level scaling, and the consolitis introduced by Oblivion).
That said there is plenty of Luddite reverence towards the "good old days" among RPG fansites, but the watch doesnt doesnt suffer much from that compared to the codex
That said there is plenty of Luddite reverence towards the "good old days" among RPG fansites, but the watch doesnt doesnt suffer much from that compared to the codex
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2006
- Messages
- 2,013
ToddMcF2002
SasqWatch
"Urinating on the tradition" is not exactly an objective opinion. I guess I'm just tired of the constant and frequently too colorful negativity about everything. Damn internet!
txa1265
SasqWatch
- Joined
- October 18, 2006
- Messages
- 14,953
Not trying to be provocative at all if that is your concern!
My point is that I thought we agreed that not only was Dragon Age not as good as BG2, the whole 'spiritual successor' thing actually hurt the game in terms of setting expectations and begging direct compaiprisons feature by feature.
Fallout 3 is worse in that regard as it is called a sequel and there fore it is not out of line to expect it to carry on the traditions in terms of strengths and focus.
As for my urinating quote, Todd, I was moderating the extremes in the prior statement and trying to put some context around Broken Steel compared to the other games.
I also agree that it is unhealthy to assume that all things older are artistically driven and superior.
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2006
- Messages
- 14,953
LuckyCarbon
RollPGs
And this is why I still haven't and am not ever intending on playing Fallout 3.
I remember after Morrowind I was pretty excited to here Bethesda acquired the Fallout license. And then Oblivion happened, then all the quotes from Pete Hines that they only do rpg-lite FPS.
Fallout's a FPS now, ok, I got it, there's a lot more money in it. Bethesda doesn't do story or character development and the graphics were starting to age (poorly). All that's left is a FPS and I've read the FPS controls outside of slow motion automatic head shots is poor. Then they broke all canon to the original series, all they carried over was the Fallout name. That doesn't leave a whole lot of appeal.
Maybe...maybe! Obsidian can revive the franchise with New Vegas but it's going to take an awful lot of convincing to get me to try it. Perhaps if they can get The Codex and NMA both to like it I'll give it a shot.
ToddMcF2002
SasqWatch
This is exactly my problem with all the bashing. I listened to all the hateraide bashing and just got around to trying it now. Low and behold FO3 is a great game and you my friend are missing out. BTW, the VAT system makes the game essentially turn based. Its a very clever implementation and I would not describe this game as a shooter. Try to play it as such is simply a death sentence. Not to mention you will run out of ammo instantly.
D
DArtagnan
Guest
How about blaming yourself instead of other people for your mistakes?
No one is forcing you to listen to and agree with an opinion that's based on something as subjective as personal tastes.
Just a thought.
I played Fallout 3 and I liked it.
The problem with Morrowind, Oblivion and Fallout 3 is:
After playing some time you become the "Überman" and
the games get unbalanced.
For veteran gamers like me, which are used to collect all things
in an rpg, max out the stats, do every quest - the unbalance
horizon comes very fast.
The gaming challenge decreases and then the gaming fun is over, too.
I stopped playing Fallout 3 after the main game after some hours in Broken Steel. No battle was interesting anymore. (And I am playing without VATS)
But I liked the setting and most of the quests and the huge gameworld.
The shooter elements are simplified as hell for me - (I am playing L4D Expert campaigns).
I have to accept that Bethesda is making games for the masses out there and not for gaming veterans with nearly 30 years of computer gaming under their belt.
The problem with Morrowind, Oblivion and Fallout 3 is:
After playing some time you become the "Überman" and
the games get unbalanced.
For veteran gamers like me, which are used to collect all things
in an rpg, max out the stats, do every quest - the unbalance
horizon comes very fast.
The gaming challenge decreases and then the gaming fun is over, too.
I stopped playing Fallout 3 after the main game after some hours in Broken Steel. No battle was interesting anymore. (And I am playing without VATS)
But I liked the setting and most of the quests and the huge gameworld.
The shooter elements are simplified as hell for me - (I am playing L4D Expert campaigns).
I have to accept that Bethesda is making games for the masses out there and not for gaming veterans with nearly 30 years of computer gaming under their belt.
Not really the same situation though. Dragon Age is not constantly bashed the way FO3 is in some circles. I would say that certain aspects of DA are criticized, while FO3 seems to be frowned upon as a whole by many people.