Fallout 3 - PAX '08 Video Demonstration

24 Comments

View All Comments

• Hxx - Monday, September 1, 2008 - link

  Bioshock was a great game, almost just as good as Crysis. But anyway, this game looks sweet - especially the slow motion combat, im gonna be gettin this game as soon as it comes out.

• andrew007 - Tuesday, September 2, 2008 - link

  Almost as good as Crysis??? Good God, the Crysis was the most dissapointing game of the year by far - average graphics that only looked good in high resolution and high settings - which were of course unplayable even on heavily overclocked systems. And the gameplay was an ultrafrustrating mess of save-load-save-load because of insanely powerful enemies (and large numbers of such). Never mind the choppers! Only the alien levels were any good as far as enjoyment is concerned (you know, aliens actually COULD be killed unlike supposedly inferiorly armed North Korean soldiers). Bioshock was miles better but still considerably behind System Shock or Deus Ex (story in Bioshock? WHAT story? The one told by unintelligible tapes (that is IF you manage to listen to more than a few sentences during firefight which usually happens as soon as you pick one up))? If Crysis is the best PC can offer then PC gaming is indeed dead (which it in many ways IS, despite desperate articles on Anandtech to the contrary). Except for RTS, massive online games and P&C adventures, just about everything else is better on consoles (including single player FPS).

• Symelian - Friday, September 5, 2008 - link

  i just had to comment on this line --- "average graphics that only looked good in high resolution and high settings" - every game has average or subpar graphics when they are dumbed down to work on obsolete machines - the game is made to be played at it's highest settings - go to a museum and water down half of the colors and u'll get crap - nonsense ... i heard so much crap about crysis - that it needed a 5000$ PC and whatnot and it came from legitimate reviewers and it just got me thinking that i shouldn't trust a single review more than anything else
  
  System Shock and Deus Ex were great games - but they were different from Fallout - is that bad? - should all games look and play the same? - Crysis had great graphics and a lousy story (really lousy) - it's so bad that i can't even justify the sequel....
  
  so basically ur saying that u want a "System Shock" or "Deus Ex" in a Fallout setting - well i want a Fallout in a Fallout setting ....

• Maiyr - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link

  It is amazing how games can be interpreted differently across the spectrum of people. I loved Crysis all the way up to the alien part. I've been playing PC games for the past 24 years and it ranks up in the top of my list of favorites (again, up to the alien parts which I could have done without). A lot of the arguments I see here seem to infer that most would like for FO3 to remain closer to its original in terms of gameplay. Whether good or bad will constantly be up for debate, but there is one thing that is definite. Games will continue to evolve both in play and story. If anyone doesn't realize that then they just aren't paying attention. Heck, if they didn't we'd all still be playing pong on a Coleco Telstar system. Or am I dating myself... :)

• HOOfan 1 - Tuesday, September 2, 2008 - link

  To me Fallout 3 looks like what Deus Ex 2 should have been. Then again we are also getting a Deus Ex 3 in the near future...lets hope that looks as good as Fallout 3 looks.

• Amart - Monday, September 1, 2008 - link

  I was about to mention that game - System Shock was revolutionary and far ahead of it's time. Now that concept is finally possible to execute with realistic immersive graphics. I definitely it as the primary insparation (STALKER was supposed to be a derivative, but only in promised features, so it's a bad comparison). System Shock had incredible depth compared to modern FPS shooters, and was a completely different genre, even if it used the First Person perspective. It wasn't a mindless shooter.
  
  Fallout 3 is expanding on the different possible interactions even more - besides the different combat tactics you can employ there is evidence of weapon/trap assembly and use, and a veriety of interactions with the environment and the plot lines.
  
  I disagree that Diablo III can serve as a model on how to make isometric view successful - Diablo was always a mindless dungeon crawler, a glorified NetHack clone. Diablo III will be successful not due to the veriety of interactions - those will be limited to your class and actually not that many in number. You'll have fun out of combining the different moves together, against dynamic enemies - but at it's core its action - and more fitting to the fantasy setting then any futuristic Sci-Fi.
  
  I mean, as soon as you add aiming to an Isometric game it starts to suffer - you either do auto aim like Starcraft, but then you don't have the RTS elements to keep it interesting.
  
  Fallout Tactics showed how limited the combat system is - I never finished the game because of how bored I got, and in later levels being forced to do a veriety of AI hacks to survive, not actual tactics - the game didn't support any "tactics" really - was frustrating. The box trick was the mildest of all.
  
  I am getting tired of people being excessively negative after watching such an excellent preview - just because the game takes a different approach to some aspect from the original "holy grail".
  
  If Fallout 3 actually delivers sufficient depth and story / side quest content, and non-repetitive exploration - the game can become the best in the series. Perhaps that is something you fear?

• Symelian - Friday, September 5, 2008 - link

  takes a different approach to SOME aspect - its a very different approach - for instance - its an RPG and the aiming is done by rolls - so - will u, at the early stages of the game and with very low stats and poor weapons miss a lot of shots even if u are dead on with the crosshair? - cause if u hit every shot than its not an RPG in view of the stats. What's the point off perception then? - and so on --- i don't mind the FPS aspect as much as that.
  
  --- "I am getting tired of people being excessively negative after watching such an excellent preview - just because the game takes a different approach to some aspect from the original "holy grail". "
  ----- the point is to bring the game up to par with the times not to redo the whole thing so it has little to do with the original...
  
  and btw u expect "non-repetitive exploration" from Bethesda when they are so obviously building this on Oblivion in any way possible - the game could have been called Elder Scrolls: Repetitive exploration.... :)
  
  If i feared smth about games in any way - i'd be the first to commit myself for observation :)
  
  

• JarredWalton - Monday, September 1, 2008 - link

  Look, I'm a HUGE fan of the Fallout games, but the combat is only a small part of it. In fact, there's plenty that I don't like about the combat - like the fact that it can take a long time for some battles, and it's quite easy to cheat the system with "strategy" that would never work in the real world. (Hide behind barrier, pop out and shoot target, walk behind barrier.) Fallout Tactics addressed some of the issues with the original, outdated combat, and people like you probably hated it for not being exactly like the original two games, only with a different story.
  
  After over ten years, you can't go back to the same old way of doing things. Fallout was always about the story and the game world - affecting the locations with your decisions to act or not act. The combat was just a means to an end. Call me a fanboy or whatever, but I am looking forward to this game more than anything released in... about a decade.
  
  BTW, your comparisons to STALKER and Oblivion also don't do your argument any favors in my book, seeing that both of those were excellent games. I'd say they've done far more than just porting FO3 into the Oblivion engine, but you know what? They could have done exactly that and I'd *still* be happy!

• Frallan - Monday, September 1, 2008 - link

  Well Ill pick it up in the $10 box after the failure and keep on playing the old fallout i think.
  
  Not a good thing to do to transform it to a FPS.
  
  /F
  
  

• Justin Case - Monday, September 1, 2008 - link

  Looks like they did to Fallout what they did to Elder Scrolls: took one of the few RPG series still in existence and turned it into yet another console-oriented shooter. I think I'll pass.