Sigh... Fallout 3 don't look so great

[NikolaeVarius]

http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=201105

Visually, Fallout 3 is unremittingly bleak. So it should be, although you have to wonder if there will be enough variation in this vast wasteland to sustain interest. But let's give Bethesda's artists the benefit of the doubt on that count, because unfortunately the game has much more tangible shortcomings to take them to task on: the flat, sterile lighting, the excessive contrast, the feeble effects (excepting the mini-nuke explosions of wrecked cars' power units) and, worst by far, the hilariously, embarrassingly wooden animation.

This was a weakness of Oblivion's, too, but it's even more jarring in Fallout 3. The game presents itself in the first-person perspective, but you can pull the camera out to quite a distant third-person viewpoint and move it in full 3D. This means you can examine your character's Gerry Anderson jerking and flailing from any angle; we'd recommend you don't. Unfortunately, you can't help but observe the erratic path-finding, motionless trances and limp movements of the few enemies you encounter this early in the game. You simply can't invoke the visual style of an action game and get away with this stuff.

It's a clever system with well-implemented controls, even if its adolescent focus on creative brutality doesn't quite sit right with the game's overall tone. The problem with VATS, however, is the fact you will be compelled to use it all the time, because the real-time combat is so terrible. As Kieron noted, what worked okay in Oblivion's melee combat is not necessarily going to wash when you have a gun in your hand, and the lack of precision, sense of connection or tactile feedback is startling. (It's worth noting here that we tested the Xbox 360 version of the game, and some of these criticisms might not apply if you play on PC with a mouse.)

But beyond that, there are simple questions of quality that it's impossible to avoid: characterless art, cold visuals, wonky animation, weak real-time combat, off-kilter writing. As it stands, Fallout 3 just doesn't feel right, and it will leave many players shivering for warmth in its nuclear winter.

 

[Dorkenstein]

We shall see. The videos, albeit short, especially the E3 video looked amazing. I am still looking forward to this.

 

[nycxandy]

Originally posted by: Dorkenstein
We shall see. The videos, albeit short, especially the E3 video looked amazing. I am still looking forward to this.

I've seen the gameplay footage as well and it didn't do anything for me.

 

[Piuc2020]

I'm looking forward to it but I feel it's going to suffer from a big bad severe case of the worst thing that can happen to a game: CONSOLE-ITIS, especially since it's being developed for the Xbox 360, with the 360 in mind, I don't feel much thought is being put into the PS3 and PC versions.

I still think it's going to be a good game, just don't expect a Fallout 3, if you know what I mean.

 

[Thraxen]

Originally posted by: Piuc2020
I'm looking forward to it but I feel it's going to suffer from a big bad severe case of the worst thing that can happen to a game: CONSOLE-ITIS, especially since it's being developed for the Xbox 360, with the 360 in mind, I don't feel much thought is being put into the PS3 and PC versions.

I still think it's going to be a good game, just don't expect a Fallout 3, if you know what I mean.

Not sure that analogy really applies since it was apparently the 360 they tested it on.

 

[CKDragon]

I don't play non-linear RPGs for graphics or perfect controls.

If they tell me the story hinges on you kicking puppies and that there is no freedom of choice, then I'll start to worry.

 

[darkswordsman17]

I wasn't too impressed with the game based on the videos I've seen. I haven't played the first two, but nothing I saw gameplay wise made me really want to play it. To me it looks like they took what makes an FPS game exciting and then slowed it down so it feels like you're playing a game like WoW, which just doesn't sound good to me. The graphics don't bother me, its the gameplay that looks boring.

 

[fatdragondzc]

Fallout 3 trailers didn't do anything for me. It seemed like just another FPS game to me.

 

[Piuc2020]

Originally posted by: Thraxen

Originally posted by: Piuc2020
I'm looking forward to it but I feel it's going to suffer from a big bad severe case of the worst thing that can happen to a game: CONSOLE-ITIS, especially since it's being developed for the Xbox 360, with the 360 in mind, I don't feel much thought is being put into the PS3 and PC versions.

I still think it's going to be a good game, just don't expect a Fallout 3, if you know what I mean.

Not sure that analogy really applies since it was apparently the 360 they tested it on.

What?

 

[erwos]

Originally posted by: Piuc2020
I'm looking forward to it but I feel it's going to suffer from a big bad severe case of the worst thing that can happen to a game: CONSOLE-ITIS, especially since it's being developed for the Xbox 360, with the 360 in mind, I don't feel much thought is being put into the PS3 and PC versions.

Am I the only one who thinks that bitching about "CONSOLE-ITIS" on a _console board_ is somewhat bizarre?

I'm guessing this reviewer hated Oblivion, too. No accounting for taste. 😛

 

[Thraxen]

Originally posted by: Piuc2020

Originally posted by: Thraxen
Not sure that analogy really applies since it was apparently the 360 they tested it on.

What?

If it was designed with the 360 in mind then it should work well on the 360 and the ports would be the ones that were poor. But according to this preview the 360 version has issues. Can't really be the so-called "console-itis" is the console version is poor, right?

 

[BD2003]

I remember hearing the guys from 1up say that the game just doesnt demo well in ten minutes, and I kinda got that feeling myself after watching the e3 demo. Im still looking forward.

OTOH, I would have much preferred another elder scrolls than fallout, the whole post apocalyptic thing is just so boring to me.

 

[BladeVenom]

Originally posted by: erwos
Am I the only one who thinks that bitching about "CONSOLE-ITIS" on a _console board_ is somewhat bizarre?

LOL! Good point.

 

[Eeezee]

People still care about graphics? I thought that argument was over...

Gameplay >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pretty graphics

I like a game to look nice, but gameplay is the most important factor. If Fallout looks and plays exactly like Fallout1, I will be quite pleased. If it looks better and sitll plays great, that'll be nice too.

 

[EvilComputer92]

Originally posted by: Eeezee
People still care about graphics? I thought that argument was over...

Gameplay >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pretty graphics

I like a game to look nice, but gameplay is the most important factor. If Fallout looks and plays exactly like Fallout1, I will be quite pleased. If it looks better and sitll plays great, that'll be nice too.

It's not going to be anything like Fallout 1 and 2 if you've gathered from the previews.
Bethesda is essentially turning Fallout into post apocalyptic Oblivion with guns. Not that there is anything wrong with that as I liked Oblivion a lot.

 

[imported_Imp]

I have my concerns, but the dude played an incomplete version, probably for a restricted amount of time. If I started "reviewing" things for the first 3 or so hours of play, I'd never finish another game.

 

[Yreka]

Loved 1&2 as well as Oblivion.. F3 is going to get at least a rental here regardless of what the reviewers say.

 

[purbeast0]

wow your bolding and underlining skills (or lack there of) made that very hard to read.

 

[Schadenfroh]

The only people who could make a worthy Fallout 3 would be Interplay / Black Isle Studios (defunct), Troika (Activision killed them), or possibly Obsidian Entertainment if they hired key exTroika staff.

/flame on

 

[VashHT]

Originally posted by: Eeezee
People still care about graphics? I thought that argument was over...

Gameplay >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pretty graphics

I like a game to look nice, but gameplay is the most important factor. If Fallout looks and plays exactly like Fallout1, I will be quite pleased. If it looks better and sitll plays great, that'll be nice too.

They did comment on the game-play, they said the real time combat was terrible.

 

[AstroManLuca]

Originally posted by: VashHT

Originally posted by: Eeezee
People still care about graphics? I thought that argument was over...

Gameplay >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pretty graphics

I like a game to look nice, but gameplay is the most important factor. If Fallout looks and plays exactly like Fallout1, I will be quite pleased. If it looks better and sitll plays great, that'll be nice too.

They did comment on the game-play, they said the real time combat was terrible.

That's kinda too bad, but I was planning on playing it turn-based anyway. There are plenty of FPSes out there, but not many turn-based shooters. And it makes the game more like Fallout 1/2.

 

[Piuc2020]

Originally posted by: Thraxen

Originally posted by: Piuc2020

Originally posted by: Thraxen
Not sure that analogy really applies since it was apparently the 360 they tested it on.

What?

If it was designed with the 360 in mind then it should work well on the 360 and the ports would be the ones that were poor. But according to this preview the 360 version has issues. Can't really be the so-called "console-itis" is the console version is poor, right?

Console-itis doesn't only apply to botched up controls and mechanics due to ports from consoles to PCs, it also applies to the general reworking of the game to fit audiences that are broader on consoles, this usually means a lot of streamlining, more focus towards intuitive and non-stop combat and usually shorter, easier to play games with less focus on game-changing decisions and less "boring" sections such as dialogs and story sequences.

Just to clarify, I do not think console games are like this, but in order to cater to the majority of the console userbase some developers choose to do this, especially when dealing with franchises that were born on the PC or genres that have usually been prime on the PC.

Fallout is a series that was born on the PC, I'd expect Fallout 3 to feel like a Fallout game, EVEN if it's on a console (it's on PC anyways too), so if Bethesda is going to mess up the game to cater to the majority of console players, then yes, the game suffers from console-itis.

The game looks good enough but it doesn't feel fallout-y enough, if Bethesda wants to make a post nuclear apocaliptic action game then I'm all for it, just don't call it Fallout 3 if it's not going to be a worthy sequel to Fallout 2.

Now this is just speculating, the game might turn out to be rather awesome but after what happened to Bioshock and RPGs in general, I'm a little skeptic.

I just have to say, I don't dislike console games, some of my favorite games ever are on consoles, what I hate and mean by console-itis is developers ruining PC games and PC franchises by making games much more accessible and hence, much more limited and different from their predecessors. I just think consoles should focus on what it does best and PCs likewise.

For that reason, I think it's fair to bitch about Fallout 3's console-itis even if we are on a console forum.

 

[purbeast0]

wow I hadn't seen a PC elitist post on these forums in quite some time, but you take the cake Piuc2020

 

[RaiderJ]

I can't imagine real-time combat could be that good. You can't have targeted shots w/ percentages AND do aiming with a controller/mouse. You kinda have to pick one. And why does EVERYTHING have to be real-time? They should have just left combat as turn-based.

 

[Piuc2020]

Originally posted by: purbeast0
wow I hadn't seen a PC elitist post on these forums in quite some time, but you take the cake Piuc2020

LOL I'm not an elitist, far from it, despite the disappointment Bioshock was in comparison to System Shock 2 I still enjoyed that game a LOT for example. I don't dislike console games at all (heck last gen I played a LOT more games on my PS2 than my PC), like I said, I just feel a new entry in a franchise should be kept to the same spirit and feel as the last entry, Fallout 3 looks good (I'll probably buy it), it just doesn't look like a Fallout game, in fact, it seems a lot like an action game with some RPG elements than anything else, it's not a bad thing, but it shouldn't be called Fallout 3.

It'd be like Bungie releasing Halo 4 and making it an incredibly complex and dialogue-filled RPG with strategic turn-based combat and stats, 1 hour cut scenes or whatever. It might end up being a good game but it wouldn't be Halo 4 and every Halo fan on the planet would likely be disappointed.

My thoughts are, just don't milk a franchise if you are not going to do justice to it, just create a new IP and everyone will be happier.

That being said, Fallout 3 might end up being a worthy Fallout 2 succesor, so I'm not going to jump to conclusions, I'm just saying what the videos and previews have conveyed to me.