I'm a pretty big fallout fan (have been since FO1), but this trailer... I've seen it all before. There's nothing to excite other than some nicer graphics.
I hope future announcements have something a bit more inventive in them.
I'm in the same boat. I'm a huge fan of Fallout but this isn't blowing my skirt up. Looks like more of the same--which isn't bad per se, but it's not exciting.
I hope it's as big as improvement for the franchise as Skyrim was for The Elder Scrolls.
I'm looking forward to this. I'm not crazy excited like I was for the release of Fallout 3, but yeah - this'll be cool.
I hope it's as big as improvement for the franchise as Skyrim was for The Elder Scrolls.
Excited that this a Bethesda release.
Rarely do Shroom and I see eye to eye, but I've gotta agreed with him. If anything The Elder Scrolls have gotten progressively less like rpg sandboxes and into more of a streamlined experience. Sure there have been fewer bugs than in previous TES games but you also lose that sense of freedom within the system. Some of the most fun I've had in the series were things like being able to brew potions that would allow you to jump from one side of the map to the other, or crafting a set of clothing (no durability, no weight) and be completely invulnerable to melee damage.
I miss being able to do those things, but having my game crash less often is quite nice.
Rarely do Shroom and I see eye to eye, but I've gotta agreed with him. If anything The Elder Scrolls have gotten progressively less like rpg sandboxes and into more of a streamlined experience. Sure there have been fewer bugs than in previous TES games but you also lose that sense of freedom within the system. Some of the most fun I've had in the series were things like being able to brew potions that would allow you to jump from one side of the map to the other, or crafting a set of clothing (no durability, no weight) and be completely invulnerable to melee damage.
I miss being able to do those things, but having my game crash less often is quite nice.
If anything, Skyrim and especially Oblivion were a step down from Morrowind.
Funny enough, this is one of my points of hesitation.
I never played Fallout 1 or 2...at least not before I played 3. I played 3...and really enjoyed it for the most part. Then I played New Vegas...then 1 and finally 2.
One it was all said and done, 3 stuck out to me as "incomplete". 3...and Bethesda for that matter...had 2 major issues:
-This is 100s of years after the war...not 10s. 1, 2 and NV had plenty of new civilization to explore. Tons of new development and technology, plenty of human interaction. 3 was simply the wastes...and tons of it. Rubble, abandoned stuff, limited tech. After playing the other titles, 3 really felt flat in comparison...oceans of raiders and ghouls. Far more FPS than RPG...which leads me to my second point:
-FO 1 and 2 were RPGs...and NV successfully added in RPG elements to the game. NV was so much more "full" when compared to 3...which again...seemed much more like a themed FPS than a RPG with a 1st person interface.
The original world of FO wasn't just endless wasteland and rubble...and that's basically what 3 was. I hope that Bethesda will see this and keep many of the elements that I feel made NV better than 3.
I don't see any of the games as complete, but my problem with NV was that it created its own direction for the series to account for, with the NCR and tribals and khans, etc.
I loved 3. I loved the bleakness of Operation Anchorage. It felt like a metal gear solid.
I loved the mothership zeta add on. It was perfect.
NV offered some good additions, like food eating and water. But for me, 3 was top of the top.
Funny enough, this is one of my points of hesitation.
I never played Fallout 1 or 2...at least not before I played 3. I played 3...and really enjoyed it for the most part. Then I played New Vegas...then 1 and finally 2.
One it was all said and done, 3 stuck out to me as "incomplete". 3...and Bethesda for that matter...had 2 major issues:
-This is 100s of years after the war...not 10s. 1, 2 and NV had plenty of new civilization to explore. Tons of new development and technology, plenty of human interaction. 3 was simply the wastes...and tons of it. Rubble, abandoned stuff, limited tech. After playing the other titles, 3 really felt flat in comparison...oceans of raiders and ghouls. Far more FPS than RPG...which leads me to my second point:
-FO 1 and 2 were RPGs...and NV successfully added in RPG elements to the game. NV was so much more "full" when compared to 3...which again...seemed much more like a themed FPS than a RPG with a 1st person interface.
The original world of FO wasn't just endless wasteland and rubble...and that's basically what 3 was. I hope that Bethesda will see this and keep many of the elements that I feel made NV better than 3.
I'm quite glad that this comes across to some people even when FO3 is the first they play - because going FO1->FO2->FO3, FO3 was obviously a revelation in graphics, and clearly had a totally different gameplay style (for better or worse), the story/plot was pretty garbage. NV did feel like a return to form, even if the story did go in quite a different direction - but that's what I hope for in sequels. And of course NV was heavily based on a design for the original sequel to fallout 2, and had more input from people previously in the fallout design teams.
But hey, we need to go back to the 'opening a vault white-blindness fades to a wasteland' scene again, right? That'll be cool again, right?
edit: I only played the original FO3 btw, not the 'altered ending' or any of the DLC. Perhaps they saved it somewhat.
Im taking time off when this comes out. Will have new vid card by then as well. woo woo.