|
probably my favorite Action Park thing is the battle karts game with the cannons people outside the karts got where you could just fire the ammo at randos and ignore the actual game, AND where people discovered that if a driver of the karts snatched a round (I wanna say they were straight up just tennis balls?) they could wedge it in the controls somehow to make the speed limiter gently caress up. Like, that level of negligence CAN'T be accidental, that had to be someone making the ride and trying to do a loving cheat code in real life.
|
#
?
May 15, 2018 18:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2024 16:06 |
|
|
MonsieurChoc posted:Dave Anthony voice: Break your loving face at Action Park! Yeah, the Dollop on Action Park is glorious.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2018 18:23
|
|
|
Cheap water parks are freaking terrifying. When I was in summer camp back in the day we stopped at a tubing place during one of our field trips and one of the counselors sliced his hand open on the edge of the slide. Good thing nobody's trying to loosen safety regulations huh? Hahaha...
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2018 20:33
|
|
|
Many a True Nerd (who has some serious great content, I really enjoyed his "Kill Everyone in New Vegas" run videos) made a video that seems to basically be a direct response to Hbomb's Fallout 3 video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5z8XHe2NoAE I'm...skeptical...of the arguments I've heard so far, but it's interesting nonetheless and I just eat up this longform videogame analysis stuff because it's like crack cocaine to my weird brain.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2018 21:33
|
|
|
The real insult would be if he tries to make a video defending Fallout 4. Fallout 3 at least had some decent RPG elements and introduced the series to a lot of people.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2018 21:36
|
|
|
The FO3 world is also a lot of fun to explore. FO4's is just kind of bland in comparison.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2018 22:03
|
|
|
i was pretty salty about fo4 because i'm from the boston area and new vegas is one of the best games ever made and it's so just so loving bad. and for some reason the world wide web went wild for it.WampaLord posted:I'm...skeptical...of the arguments I've heard so far, but it's interesting nonetheless and I just eat up this longform videogame analysis stuff because it's like crack cocaine to my weird brain. fallout 3 wasn't all that bad when it came out but new vegas just made it look like absolute poo poo. hbomb's video couldn't be more right.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2018 22:12
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:fallout 3 wasn't all that bad when it came out but new vegas just made it look like absolute poo poo. hbomb's video couldn't be more right. Yea I'm like halfway though the video now and his arguments are not that convincing. Like he brings up the sweetroll thing in the tutorial as "wow look at all the choices the game gives you" but that's like one of the few times you have a bunch of choices, those moments are very rare throughout the game. Everything else is just subjective preference for different environments/biomes/etc
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2018 22:16
|
|
|
4, as miserable as it was, I'd gladly play over 3 again. 4 at least had a neat map and some good set pieces (That they wasted but oh well) and since Bethesda were never gonna really try with the RPG side anymore, might as well make it a better shooty game so they can hopefully farm out the next installment to someone who can write again.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2018 23:12
|
|
|
Yardbomb posted:4, as miserable as it was, I'd gladly play over 3 again. 4 at least had a neat map and some good set pieces (That they wasted but oh well) and since Bethesda were never gonna really try with the RPG side anymore, might as well make it a better shooty game so they can hopefully farm out the next installment to someone who can write again. I completely agree. I don't like either but if it was a 'gun to your head pick one' thing I'll go 4 every time.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2018 23:58
|
|
|
I doubt we've got any Fallout games coming for a long time. Bethesda just announced Rage 2 so that's going to cover them for post apocalyptic shooters for the next two years at least.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2018 00:16
|
|
|
If you look at the quest page on Fallout 4 you'd think the game has a lot to offer, except besides how 80% of them are just shoot and loot, there's a load of "nothing" quests just to pad out the roster. Press a button, talk to someone, go to location X. Simple one-step affairs that somehow merit a mention. I don't compare new Fallout to old Fallout because they are completely different series with different audiences, I'm not grog enough to fault anyone for skipping those old-arse titles. Fallout 3 was dumb but amusingly dumb and gets by on the sheer novelty of being first. New Vegas was built on familiar ground but soars thanks to its roleplaying complexity and extensive reactivity. Fallout 4 however just aspires to be as boring as humanly possible, without once pushing the envelope and looking embarrassingly out of date given it came out the same year as Wild Hunt. Maybe if the guy who did the USS Constitution quest became a lead-designer then Fallout 5 could stand to be interesting.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2018 00:20
|
|
|
morrowind was the last (maybe only?) good game bethesda even made.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2018 00:20
|
|
|
they're never gonna hire obsidian again so it's not like we'd be getting a good one.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2018 00:20
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:they're never gonna hire obsidian again so it's not like we'd be getting a good one. i don't think obsidian would even accept an offer anyway after bethesda hosed them out of a bunch of money because !METACRITIC SCORES! (jesus gently caress that was so dumb and infuriating)
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2018 00:22
|
|
|
DEEP STATE PLOT posted:i don't think obsidian would even accept an offer anyway after bethesda hosed them out of a bunch of money because !METACRITIC SCORES! (jesus gently caress that was so dumb and infuriating) Again, people say this constantly but according to Obsidian themselves there is no ill-will towards Bethesda and they'd be absolutely willing to work on another Fallout game. The Metacritic thing, dumb as it sounds, is a normal part of these kinds of agreements in the industry and Obsidian were fully aware of how it worked.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2018 00:46
|
|
|
Plus Obsidian is on record saying they would love the chance to do another Fallout game given the chance. Even so, I'm glad they're doing their own stuff and that Outer Worlds IP they're developing could be really interesting given their track record. The metacritic thing is less to do with Bethesda being vindictive saboteurs and more to do with their quality assurance department being utterly abysmal. So yeah, Bethesda did bugfixing for Obsidian on new Vegas,, and they made some really questionable "fixes" but nothing out of line with their own home built games. There has never been a Bethesda game that wasn't buggy out the rear end. Their fans are a lot more forgiving to Bethesda than they are to Obsidian when it comes to bugs however. So it wasn't sabotage, Bethesda is just incompetent. Arc Hammer fucked around with this message at 01:06 on May 16, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 16, 2018 01:01
|
|
|
Fallout 3 may well have a myriad of faults, and the original may well have an absolutely atrocious ending that they ultimately just had to fix...it still had a lot more moments than FO4 where great things simply occurred naturally. Where exploration did work and you managed to find something special on your travels...sure, NV did a lot more in that regard, but like Oblivion there's still SOMETHING in FO3. Whereas frankly there was nothing in FO4 and it was all just replaced by "OH HEY I GET TO CRAFT ANOTHER TOWN, WHOOPDEDOO I DO NOT GIVE A SOLITARY FLYING gently caress ABOUT THIS"...at least in FO3, when you stumbled upon a side quest it was often worth it, whether it was Oasis, or Agatha's Song, or Those!, or whatever.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2018 01:08
|
|
|
Yeah like, it's pretty obvious that the guys at Obsidian are absolutely jumping on the fact that they finally have their own IPs to work on now and aren't beholden to other company's properties, which in a lot of ways was a source of tremendous amounts of grief in years past. I doubt they'll be involved in Fallout again simply because it's better for them to focus on their own stuff now rather than because they're bitter.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2018 01:15
|
|
|
it's more infuriating that one of the best games ever made has an 84 on metacritic. i'm sure the much worse fallout 4 has a better score but i don't wanna look.khwarezm posted:Yeah like, it's pretty obvious that the guys at Obsidian are absolutely jumping on the fact that they finally have their own IPs to work on now and aren't beholden to other company's properties, which in a lot of ways was a source of tremendous amounts of grief in years past. I doubt they'll be involved in Fallout again simply because it's better for them to focus on their own stuff now rather than because they're bitter. i don't like fantasy apart from dark souls so i wish they'd do a fallout ripoff cuz i didn't care much for wasteland 2.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2018 01:18
|
|
|
Obviously, most people have FO3 and FO4 on the same level more or less. They're seldom regarded as great games. Here's the thing, I think FO4 is the better game because I like to explore and the exploration of FO4 was the best in the franchise, barring random events.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2018 01:29
|
|
|
I'll have to give that Many A True Nerd video a watch later, because I am genuinely interested to see someone defend Fallout 3. I'm also in the camp where I'd rather play Fallout 4 over Fallout 3 (although I did try to do a modded install of F4 recently, and gave up after playing the game for a while). I think the reason is that Fallout 4 improved a lot of the core mechanics. Looting containers is a lot faster with the little quick menu, and the shooting feels a lot better than it did in the previous games. There are a lot other little touches and improvements that I think make it interesting, but it's weighed down by how flat the story and quests are. Granted, I'd pick New Vegas over both of them, but at the moment, I don't even feel like replaying New Vegas. I'd call F:NV one of my favorite games, and there was a point where I wanted nothing more than to start a new playthrough, but maybe I'm just burned out on Fallout for the time being. If anything, I always look to Tim Cain's thoughts when it comes to a defense of Fallout 3.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2018 01:58
|
|
|
Very cool.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2018 03:28
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Many a True Nerd (who has some serious great content, I really enjoyed his "Kill Everyone in New Vegas" run videos) made a video that seems to basically be a direct response to Hbomb's Fallout 3 video: I wasn't 100% sold on all of his arguments either, but his initial point is right on the mark: People really can't seem to praise New Vegas without also making GBS threads all over Fallout 3 in the same breath. Like, I'm not gonna be contrarian and claim Bethesda's games are objectively superior or not buggy or whatever, but people seem to uniquely have it out for them in a way that borders on obsessive. Or just insecure, since it always seems to carry a twinge of "stupid normies and their F3, everyone knows New Vegas is better  " plus all of the hilarious times people are ready to wage war on Obsidian's behalf based on hearsay. You can set your watch to some of those posts for inevitably they appear.I did appreciate the way he compared the map flow of the two games, and I think he at least made a fair case that F3 has some competence on display. Unsurprisingly, his conclusions aren't a huge surprise if you're at all familiar with ye olde F3 vs. NV debate: Fallout 3 is good for aimless wandering ala Elder Scrolls, has some kind of knack for environmental storytelling (even Hbomb noted the dropped forks sight gag), and there's a fair bit more detail to some of the quests than it first appears. F3 is more scattershot, so each individual idea may or may not work but that's okay because they're just one random side story out of dozens.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2018 04:14
|
|
|
John Murdoch posted:I wasn't 100% sold on all of his arguments either, but his initial point is right on the mark: People really can't seem to praise New Vegas without also making GBS threads all over Fallout 3 in the same breath. Like, I'm not gonna be contrarian and claim Bethesda's games are objectively superior or not buggy or whatever, but people seem to uniquely have it out for them in a way that borders on obsessive. Or just insecure, since it always seems to carry a twinge of "stupid normies and their F3, everyone knows New Vegas is better
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2018 04:22
|
|
|
John Murdoch posted:Like, I'm not gonna be contrarian and claim Bethesda's games are objectively superior or not buggy or whatever, but people seem to uniquely have it out for them in a way that borders on obsessive. Or just insecure, since it always seems to carry a twinge of "stupid normies and their F3, everyone knows New Vegas is better who are you even talking about
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2018 04:29
|
|
|
Fallout 3 suffers from Oblivion syndrome where your character does not matter in the grand scheme of things. It also suffers from something that all fantasy games suffer from where WE NEED A RACE THAT IS ALWAYS EVIL EXCEPT ONE DUDE with the Super Mutants who are post-apocalyptic Orcs. New Vegas had the Nightkin yes but they were being driven insane and you could still talk down Tabitha & Davison while Jacobstown was a friendly community that you could save. Fallout 3 had Fawkes but the Super Mutants were otherwise just sadistic monsters
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2018 04:42
|
|
|
It also doesn't help that the Super Mutants in Fallout 3 are a massive step backwards in characterization compared to them in previous fallout games.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2018 04:45
|
|
|
Augus posted:who are you even talking about Goons. Also literally anywhere else on the internet any time Fallout 3/Bethesda comes up. John Murdoch fucked around with this message at 04:53 on May 16, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 16, 2018 04:49
|
|
|
Terrible Opinions posted:It also doesn't help that the Super Mutants in Fallout 3 are a massive step backwards in characterization compared to them in previous fallout games. Yeah, the whole Super mutant thing in the Bethesda games feels super sketchy, while they were established as bad guys in Fallout 1 they at least had actual aims and motivations and interesting characters like Lieutenant and the Master. Later in 2 and New Vegas you see mutants like Marcus or Lily who have real personalities and humanity (ironically) and in Marcus's case still has a lot of loyalty to the Master's aims despite being an overall good person which provides some nuance. In the Fallout 3 they're basically just a mindless force of pure destruction with only Fawkes (who's clearly an aberration) as an exception. It's so counter and plain bad compared to what they were doing with them in games past, and then NV, it's stuff like that which causes the comparisons since it gives the impression that Bethesda was mostly interested in the surface trappings of the franchise, New Vegas as a huge scale spin-off in the same engine with the same mechanics but with a lot of the people that worked on the old games and the design principles from those titles showed the massive differences in priorities within the series in a way that's almost unique in any video-game franchise, hence the comparing and contrasting.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2018 05:06
|
|
|
I tried to play the original Fallout games and that poo poo is utterly unplayable unless you played it as a youth.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2018 05:21
|
|
|
It's perfectly playable without nostalgia. You just need to be the sort of graph lover who plays dwarf fort, paradox games, etc unironically.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2018 05:29
|
|
|
It's just an isometric RPG, it's not all that complex.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2018 06:38
|
|
|
sponges posted:I tried to play the original Fallout games and that poo poo is utterly unplayable unless you played it as a youth. The gameplay systems are unforgivable garbage sadly (this applies for basically every isometric game of that era, they're all un-intuitive and in general a chore to play). The Fallout 3 video has some spectacular cherry-picking in its run-through of the opening and for some reason he's quoting Hbombs arguments almost verbatim while carefully dodging around actually adressing them. I just don't know what the point of this video is. 
MiddleOne fucked around with this message at 06:52 on May 16, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 16, 2018 06:40
|
|
|
I feel like Fallout 4 is better at "being Fallout" than Fallout 3. It's a worse role-playing game in almost every single way, but the universe that it creates is closer in tone to the good Fallout games. It's not on the level, but, it shows a better understanding of the series and its central ethos. Also I really liked that one quest where the super mutant is seeking to drink the milk of human kindness to get the powers of Macbeth.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2018 07:11
|
|
|
Terrible Opinions posted:It's perfectly playable without nostalgia. You just need to be the sort of graph lover who plays dwarf fort, paradox games, etc unironically. MiddleOne posted:The gameplay systems are unforgivable garbage sadly (this applies for basically every isometric game of that era, they're all un-intuitive and in general a chore to play). I don't know if I'd say that it's complicated or unintuitive. You don't need graph paper (when I think graph paper games, I think more stuff like the tile based Might and Magic or Wizardry games).You might want to take a couple of notes here and there, but it's nothing too major. Games like Dwarf Fortress or Europa Unversalis throw so much at you that I get overwhelmed and give up before I even get started. Fallout 1& 2 are daunting if you've never played a classic CRPG before, but I think it's relatively easy to pick up. The problem I think is that Fallout 1 and Fallout 2 are very slow games, and they're pretty unforgiving early on. Combat can go south easily if you rolled a character that doesn't really excel at it, and it can be a little frustrating for a combat turn to just consist of you shooting an enemy once and then just ending the turn because you don't have enough Action Points for another attack. It's not really hard to grasp, though, and I think it's easier to approach than Baldur's Gate (though with BG, I think the problem with it is just that it expects you to know some of the intricacies of 2E D&D rules or spells in order to excel). I beat Fallout 1 a couple of years ago. Prior to that, I had tried starting a game multiple times, but never got very far before getting burned out on it. I didn't really take to it after I finished it, but that being said, I don't think it's a bad game. I started Fallout 2 late last year, but I haven't gotten very far in it. Best thing I can recommend is to seek out a guide to help with building the kind of character you want or will help you get through the game (I'd recommend The Nearly Ultimate Fallout Guide). There's a Fallout thread in Games, so you could probably ask there to get some more assistance if you needed it. Max Wilco fucked around with this message at 08:14 on May 16, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 16, 2018 08:09
|
|
|
Max Wilco posted:I don't know if I'd say that it's complicated or unintuitive. You don't need graph paper (when I think graph paper games, I think more stuff like the tile based Might and Magic or Wizardry games).You might want to take a couple of notes here and there, but it's nothing too major. Games like Dwarf Fortress or Europa Unversalis throw so much at you that I get overwhelmed and give up before I even get started. Fallout 1& 2 are daunting if you've never played a classic CRPG before, but I think it's relatively easy to pick up. Yeah, the actual systems behind Fallout 1/2 aren't that hard to fail your way forwards through, and you can get *really* far if literally all you know is "max out rifles and aim for the eyes." The big cognitive load is in actually solving the story. It's not that hard to get really far and really lost before you even realize that you maybe might have wanted to take a few notes about what people said 10 or so hours ago.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2018 08:42
|
|
|
Terrible Opinions posted:It's perfectly playable without nostalgia. You just need to be the sort of graph lover who plays dwarf fort, paradox games, etc unironically. Yep, i played Fallout 2 after 3 and New Vegas and i found it perfectly playable. I don't think the first one should be terribly different in that regards, but since i don't like time limits for main quests, i haven't played it. Max Wilco posted:Might and Magic For an old RPG-series that one is surprisingly playable at least from part 3 on, mainly because you have an Automap (Yeah, you need a character with the right skill, but still) and a quest journal. Of course, OTOH you don't see stats for items in your inventory, so you have to memorize the stats of the character you want to equip, go to items, equip what you want to equip, then go back to the stats of your character to see what changed. englerp fucked around with this message at 10:52 on May 16, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 16, 2018 10:33
|
|
|
I don't think you read my post with the intended tone. There is just a certain level of love of being rewarded for attention to detail needed. It's something I have but acknowledge is not necessarily as widely appealing as New Vegas which has a much more modern design with regards to accessibility. edit:Really Foldable summarized it better than me.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2018 10:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2024 16:06 |
|
|
Terrible Opinions posted:I don't think you read my post with the intended tone. There is just a certain level of love of being rewarded for attention to detail needed. It's something I have but acknowledge is not necessarily as widely appealing as New Vegas which has a much more modern design with regards to accessibility. As is said, i didn't find it that inaccessible (Especially compared to other older PC-RPGs), and while i liked the 3D-Fallouts, i liked Fallout 2 a bit more. englerp fucked around with this message at 10:59 on May 16, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 16, 2018 10:56
|
|