Chessboard, fair enough. Lifeless though? I'm sorry Fallout 2 had much more life than Fallout 3.


Also, in my experience, "new school" gamers are just as if not more hate filled than old school. They freely talk trash on the old games incessantly, happily ignoring that the story told in those days was told using the technology available at the time.

Plus half of them have played but not finished the originals. I may bash Fallout 3 at times, but I actually experienced it as a whole, I didn't get to a hard part and put it down.

Even though I prefer old Fallout games, VATS + real time combat fits much better than turnbased in first / third person game. But honestly, I would like to see SW:KotOR type of combat in a Fallout game, it's still the best RPG combat system I've seen.

Next gen Fallout's with Turn-based combat would be terrible.
Plain and simple.

Can't possibly argue with that, you've made your point so well and your references are impeccable.

I never really could get into turn-based games.It just seems illogical to take a swing at someone or a shoot and then let them take a turn.When I play a game I have to rationalize everything.So when I play turn based I have to picture it in my head as a regular fight.

Did you read my post? I gave my opinion on both game modes and expressed my thought process to the best of my abilities. You did not respond to that, or to anyone's post. Instead you chose to complain about how no one is giving to logical replies without quoting anyone or asking them to clarify. What up?

FPS: You play from moment to moment. Reflexes. Sprint over there, roll, duck, headshot, move on.

TBS: You take your time, anolyse the situation, eye out the number of enemies, check armour types, select weapons, queue up attacks and press play. (Metaphorically)

Why, if I may ask? I mean, your opinion of course, but since I happen to have an opposite view on this I'd like to hear you elaborate on your reasons for this issue to be "plain and simple".

I agree with you for the most part.

Vats was made for turnbased fans

but could you imagine everytime you got near an enemmy everything stopped? Feral ghouls wouldnt be scary anymore. You would have unlimited time to react. where as non-turnbased you would piss your pants and shoot a full clip of ammo in terror.

Regualy not "targeted" shooting would piss people off. Being able to shoot two people at once with a wide burst. The rocket launcher pissed me off the most in fallout 1&2. when i shoot a rocket in any game, i always aim for the ground in front of the person. Otherwise you have to be stupid lucky to get a direct hit with a rocket.
dont even get me started about how annoying grenades were in 1&2.

ohh yea.. i have the ability to hit 95% of the time with a pistol, but when i throw a grenade its like.... i dont even know.. i mean... 10 year olds can play skeeball like a pro with no experince.. i should be able to atleast get the grenade away from my body.

Are turned based games half as exciting as real time? IMO, no. I prefer Fallout as real time and VATS to pause time for better aiming, which is actually strategic and a bit like turn based thanks to limited Action Points. Though once you're turn is up, it goes real time.

Okay, I just came off of the Turn-based thread over in the Fallout Series Discussion, so I'm not going to get into that over here. (Though I think I agree with SteveDog, by and large. And yes, Fallout 3 did very well with physics and individual items - but if that makes for a better real-time game, how does it not also apply that it would be cool to have in a turn-based game as well?) Besides, all that talk's probably better kept to one thread; and it doesn't sound so much like that's what the OP wanted to talk about in the first place.

Anyway, there's rather annoying extremists on either side of just about any conflict imaginable. If it's possible to have more than one point of view or opinion about anything, there's going to be lots of people with some pretty extreme feelings one way or the other. Yeah, some people really dislike what direction Bethesda took the Fallout franchise in. But you know what? That's their prerogative. They're not "wrong" for feeling that way - it's just the opinion they have. And taking a step back, they're not any more (or less) annoying to listen to, ad nauseam, than those who approach Fallout 3 (or Bethesda as a whole) with such devotion that they feel the game is beyond reproach, or that their favorite things have an inherent worth beyond that of any other thing.

I feel the most rational response possible to a conflict of opinion would be along the lines of "well, that's how you feel; but I feel differently - and these are the reasons why." What I find just as annoying (personally) as even the worst "oldschool extremist hater" is when people take the approach of "no, you cannot dislike this thing that I like! I like this thing so much that you must be wrong to not feel as I do.!"

For my own two cents: I rather liked Fallout 3, overall. I was initially excited to see what Fallout would look like rendered in this particular view. (I don't call it FPS because I can play it in third-person - and do so almost entirely.) What I feel to be Bethesda's greatest strength as a developer is in creating highly-detailed and vividly "alive" environments. I feel that even if they took some license with the visual style, that the art direction in Fallout 3 was absolutely astounding. (To me) it probably looks even more "Fallout" than the original games did. I'd even go so far as to say that a move to real-time action was the right one. (I prefer turn-based, but if you're only controlling one character, then I think real-time is the more natural choice. More than anything, I believe in adapting the gameplay to the sort of game you want to make - and not trying to shoe-horn bits and pieces into a game just for their own illusory merit.)

That said, I do have some reservations about the specific way they've manifested their vision in Fallout 3. At this point, I don't feel like getting into it all, here. (And after two years, I think I've talked about most of that at length by now...) It's not a perfect game. I don't think a perfect game is possible, however. See my sig - I believe it's possible to be a fan of something while still being able to see it's flaws, as well. Or to overall enjoy something and be happy with the final product and yet still have reservations about it - or to wish that some things had been done a bit differently. (It's not always a question of "horrible," or "awesome," so much as the difference between "good," and "even better.")

So there - I'm about as oldschool as they come, and those are my feelings. We're not all "haters." But coming from "the other side," some of the "lovers" aren't any more fun to listen to, either...

Depends on the game no? I have never seen a true turn based racing game, but I must assume (perhaps wrongly) that the realtime racers are more exciting. However... Having played RPG's where you fight 4 on 30 in one room, I cannot accept FPS's 2 on 5 as anything but just a different kind of excitement. :shrug:
I don't see how one can trump the other [hands down] when they don't compete in the same field (and neither offers a comparable experience).

THIS.

Seriously, I made the mistake to venture into the tanker in San Francisco one time.... and it took forever to kill all those damn floaters. 5 minutes in, and I ended up playing to lose. I just wanted to get out of there.

I love turn-based RPGs, no question, but they're also a pain in the ass.

Completely off-topic, but actually... I've been waiting decades, now, for a PC version of the table-top game http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Car_Wars. (But yeah, real-time racing probably is more exciting, by definition.)

Bogus

It might take little skill to randomly shoot targets, but the idea is to win with no casualties. (though this is not actively encouraged, its assumed unless you are playing a diabolic PC)

A question of design, I'd think. Surely it wouldn't be made "pain in the ass" these days (meaning, without improvements over what they used to be).

Fallout 3's problem was not exactly taking away turnbased, but making it action based instead of stat based. It could have done a better job at translating the SPECIAL system to the first person style. There's not really any excuse for making half of them useless dump stats.

Please don't bring complaints and comments and opinions from other places to wing about here. We've enough of our own and it's very near cross-site trolling.