Fallout 4 Pre-Announcement Bullshit Thread [GO TO NEW THREAD]

[aris]

There was at least another one with a vampire cult leader (or did he think he was a vampire, I don't remember, maybe it was cannibals) on a bridge or close to some bridge.

 

[theHiddenHand]

There was at least another one with a vampire cult leader (or de he thin he was a vampire, I don't remember, maybe itwas cannibals) on a bridge or close to some bridge.

Oh yes I forgot about that one

 

[bminorkey]

Fallout died with 1.

Possibly, but the fact making these two antagonists give up is so easy and instantaneous is awful writing either way. At least in Fallout 1 you had an okay argument, though.

The day will come when a diplomatic solution means more than two minutes of passing speech passes or showing evidence near the end of the game. Or maybe it won't.

 

[Syril]

Fallout died with 1.

oh god, these story/setting fags again.

Game and gameplay = mechanics, you want story or setting? go read a book or watch a movie.
Game is supposed to be played for it's mechanics (forgotten realms, gurps).
Fallout 2 is same as 1 in this aspect, while 3 and NV is not.

Fallout would still be a good game even if it had ponies and south park characters while retaining SPECIAL, turn based combat and isometric setting ( hmmmmm obsidian making SP rpg...)

People who claim that Fallout 2 is a worse game than F1 or a bad game in general are partialy the reason for the decline.

 

[bminorkey]

Fallout died with 1.

oh god, these story/setting fags again.

Game and gameplay = mechanics, you want story or setting? go read a book or watch a movie.
Game is supposed to be played for it's mechanics (forgotten realms, gurps).
Fallout 2 is same as 1 in this aspect, while 3 and NV is not.

Fallout would still be a good game even if it had ponies and south park characters while retaining SPECIAL, turn based combat and isometric setting ( hmmmmm obsidian making SP rpg...)

People who claim that Fallout 2 is a worse game than F1 or a bad game in general are partialy the reason for the decline.

 

[aris]

What is good with fallout 1's turn based combat? You only control one guys, with the only option open to you in combat: click-on-man-to-kill. All the inherent advantages of TBC like strategy and planning, seems completely lost to me in fallout 1, and only serves to slow the game down.

 

[Syril]

^
This is why we can't have nice rpgs anymore like Fallout, gtfo. I hope that Wasteland 2 has exactly this and bores you to death while you take your meds for add.

 

[Bruma Hobo]

What is good with fallout 1's turn based combat? You only control one guys, with the only option open to you in combat: click-on-man-to-kill. All the inherent advantages of TBC like strategy and planning, seems completely lost to me in fallout 1, and only serves to slow the game down.

Character skill over player skill, better control, more combat options... If I want visceral action, I play an action game.

 

[Havoc]

Fallout died with 1.

oh god, these story/setting fags again.

Game and gameplay = mechanics, you want story or setting? go read a book or watch a movie.
Game is supposed to be played for it's mechanics (forgotten realms, gurps).
Fallout 2 is same as 1 in this aspect, while 3 and NV is not.

Fallout would still be a good game even if it had ponies and south park characters while retaining SPECIAL, turn based combat and isometric setting ( hmmmmm obsidian making SP rpg...)

People who claim that Fallout 2 is a worse game than F1 or a bad game in general are partialy the reason for the decline.

What? That's bullshit. Go play a PnP RPG if you want mechanics! Games are for the story! FFS!

 

[aris]

I'm serious, disregarding the non-answer of syril. Better control? Sure, I guess, but better control do to what? Run around, loaded on action points and click to shot-on-man, while the enemy can't follow you? And what exactly are those expanded combat options, that you would not have in RT combat?

And another thing, reading from my post that I want more visceral action game combat in fallout 1, suggests some seriously lacking reading skills, if I'm going to bother with this, you have to do better than this and do some actual arguing.

I believe personally, that fallout 1 would be better off if it had implemented the RT/TB-combat hybrid that arcanum had, where you could, if you wanted to, change between RT and TB combat at will.

 

[Syril]

oh jesus.... are you a 10 yr old? or are you just a natural dumbfuck ?

1s) Nice to see that you neglected Unorus character skill over player skill.

2) It's about stats, watching numbers, having a dice roll that ends up with various effects - that is the combat of a real rpg, THIS is the fun of the combat (of any rpg). You click once and watch the game mechanics in action.

INSTEDD OF MASHEEUN BUTTANS IN TWITCHA WITH DUK AND MATURR STORY THET LEAVES YOU LKILLKIN MOOUSSA BUTTAN LIEEEK A KINEKTT TARD.

But that's too boring for you so go and play twitcher with Havoc.

 

[Havoc]

Yeah. Come and play a game with mechanics with me!

 

[thesoup]

I honestly don't believe Obisidian is going to make another Fallout spinoff seeing as how the vast majority of gamers nowadays preferred FO3 to FO: NV.

 

[aris]

oh jesus.... are you a 10 yr old? or are you just a natural dumbfuck ?

1s) Nice to see that you neglected Unorus character skill over player skill.

2) It's about stats, watching numbers, having a dice roll that ends up with various effects - that is the combat of a real rpg, THIS is the fun of the combat (of any rpg). You click once and watch the game mechanics in action.

INSTEDD OF MASHEEUN BUTTANS IN TWITCHA WITH DUK AND MATURR STORY THET LEAVES YOU LKILLKIN MOOUSSA BUTTAN LIEEEK A KINEKTT TARD.

But that's too boring for you so go and play twitcher with Havoc.

I like how the best arguments a lot of codexers can present, starts with suggestions of inferior age, intellect or naivety either due to nothing, or due to my join date on this forum. This is then followed by a non-sequitor or red herring which has nothing to do with the point I raised, and then finally, it is toppled of with a good ol' strawman, which god knows where it's coming from.

This is the last time I'm going to bother with answering on this, if I can't get a better answers, which adresses specifically the questions I raised.

 

[Syril]

Good, now that everything is cleared up you can go and fuck yourself.

 

[General Maxson]

Good, now that everything is cleared up you can go and fuck yourself.

And he can also GTFO with his decline ideas. Fallout with real time combat? Travesty!

 

[Turisas]

I honestly don't believe Obisidian is going to make another Fallout spinoff seeing as how the vast majority of gamers nowadays preferred FO3 to FO: NV.

Who gives a shit, the market isn't exactly saturated with the types of games Bethesda is known for - if it's deemed profitable for both parties, of course they'll do more.

 

[praetor]

i thought it was generally accepted (particularly here on the dex) that FO1 and FO2 had pretty fucking terrible and boring combat, partly because it's single-character+TB and severely lacking in tactical and strategic options. i don't know if it would've been better in RT, but at least it would've been faster

 

[Roguey]

I honestly don't believe Obisidian is going to make another Fallout spinoff seeing as how the vast majority of gamers nowadays preferred FO3 to FO: NV.

Did they? Posts on the internet don't tell an entire picture. Just look at the Steam stats and you'll see that thousands of people still play New Vegas at once every day and Fallout 3 doesn't even rank.

 

[Syril]

updating my decliners_list.txt

 

[aris]

i thought it was generally accepted (particularly here on the dex) that FO1 and FO2 had pretty fucking terrible and boring combat, partly because it's single-character+TB and severely lacking in tactical and strategic options. i don't know if it would've been better in RT, but at least it would've been faster

My point exactly. There is nothing particularly good to be said about the combat in fallout 1, if you ask me. That is not what fallout 1 does well. As I said, I think it would have been improved somewhat, if the same combat system was implemented as in arcanum, where you could either have pure turn-based combat, for TBC-junkies, or a hybrid, where you could change between the other at will.

 

[thesoup]

I honestly don't believe Obisidian is going to make another Fallout spinoff seeing as how the vast majority of gamers nowadays preferred FO3 to FO: NV.

Did they? Posts on the internet don't tell an entire picture. Just look at the Steam stats and you'll see that thousands of people still play New Vegas at once every day and Fallout 3 doesn't even rank.

Yeah, but FO3 is a game from '08., NV Ultimate Edition came out just recently.
Of course NV is better by every possible metric, but I'll be damned if I don't see a lot more people preferring FO3. I've read comments saying how NV felt empty (yes, a desert should have had lots of enemies behind every corner), how FO3 had a better story, a better, more apocalyptic setting, better atmosphere, etc. Lots of people will claim that Obsidian just copied F3 and badly at that, adding more bugs and missing the point of the setting. It's depressing, really, and it's why we can't have nice things.
Just type "Fallout 3 vs Fallout New Vegas" in the youtube search bar if you want to commit suicide.

Also, while I'm at it, everyone who hates F:NV solely for being first person is a dumbfuck. FO1 and 2 didn't have exactly stellar uber balanced mechanics and NV isn't much worse in that regard, only different. Deus Ex and VTM: Bloodlines are also first person, but that didn't stop them from becoming one of the hivemind's favorite games.

 

[General Maxson]

i thought it was generally accepted (particularly here on the dex) that FO1 and FO2 had pretty fucking terrible and boring combat, partly because it's single-character+TB and severely lacking in tactical and strategic options. i don't know if it would've been better in RT, but at least it would've been faster

My point exactly. There is nothing particularly good to be said about the combat in fallout 1, if you ask me. As I said, I think it would have been improved somewhat, if the same combat system was implemented as in arcanum, where you could either have pure turn-based combat, for TBC-junkies, or a hybrid, where you could change between the other at will.

Arcanum had shit combat. I didn't know which was worse, RT or TB. And yes, Fallout 1 combat wasn't as deep as for example JA2 combat, but it was surely fuckton better than what you suggest. Everything should be real time, so that "tedious" combat is at least faster?

 

[Infinitron]

I honestly don't believe Obisidian is going to make another Fallout spinoff seeing as how the vast majority of gamers nowadays preferred FO3 to FO: NV.

Did they? Posts on the internet don't tell an entire picture. Just look at the Steam stats and you'll see that thousands of people still play New Vegas at once every day and Fallout 3 doesn't even rank.

Yeah, but FO3 is a game from '08., NV Ultimate Edition came out just recently.
Of course NV is better by every possible metric, but I'll be damned if I don't see a lot more people preferring FO3. I've read comments saying how NV felt empty (yes, a desert should have had lots of enemies behind every corner), how FO3 had a better story, a better, more apocalyptic setting, better atmosphere, etc. Lots of people will claim that Obsidian just copied F3 and badly at that, adding more bugs and missing the point of the setting. It's depressing, really, and it's why we can't have nice things.
Just type "Fallout 3 vs Fallout New Vegas" in the youtube search bar if you want to commit suicide.

Also, while I'm at it, everyone who hates F:NV solely for being first person is a dumbfuck. FO1 and 2 didn't have exactly stellar uber balanced mechanics and NV isn't much worse in that regard, only different. Deus Ex and VTM: Bloodlines are also first person, but that didn't stop them from becoming one of the hivemind's favorite games.

Well, FO:NV also sold more than FO3. What that means, I'm not sure.

Also, ban gaudaost

 

[FeelTheRads]

Also, while I'm at it, everyone who hates F:NV solely for being first person is a dumbfuck.

NO U.

FO1 and 2 didn't have exactly stellar uber balanced mechanics and NV isn't much worse in that regard, only different.

What does perspective have to do with balanced mechanics?

First-person in Fallout 3 and its expansion (NV) sucks first of all because it's poorly implemented (absolutely retarded combat, but then you'll have shitheads who think it's somehow better than Arcanum's combat) and second of all because IT'S NOT FALLOUT. First-person =/= Fallout. Motherfucking PERIOD.