Well i think Fallout 3 was a success in terms of sales wasn't it?
So i think they made a good choice when they dumbed it down from the sales department's POV.
I don't think visually they did anything special.
Just nice visuals that were appropriate to the theme of the game..nothing fancy though...
What was so unbelievable in the visuals or the "passive environment" ?
I'm not sure i know what you mean.
I didn't notice any special camera play or new ways of telling a story in a game or anything.
Just played through fallout 3
Moderator: Moderators
Re: Just played through fallout 3
I did not say anything was unbelievable, I merely said it was the most convincing passive setting. The locations, the objects with which you interacted, the world itself - even the lighting and colour palette.
You wandered around a world blighted, dying, and yet still beautiful - the historical and historically fictive elements introduced and retained merely added to that. It didn't do anything new, it merely did it right - nearly all game settings are plastic, almost afterthoughts, while imperfect this was the best attempt I've seen. In fact, I don't think there is a single first-person/third-person game besides this and maybe Bioshock which has used the graphical options available to add to, rather than detract from, the immersion of a setting.
Something does not need to be revolutionary to be superior, particularly if it is superior in only a limited manner.
I might note, however, that this alone cannot redeem the title, particularly because I don't need visuals to construct an atmosphere. I am a writer myself, and personally need very little - my imagination and my experiences are my life and hopefully eventually my livelihood. However, for a supermajority of people in our specialized, mechanistic society, visuals are crucial - we are taught not to dream, in general, but merely to accept.
You wandered around a world blighted, dying, and yet still beautiful - the historical and historically fictive elements introduced and retained merely added to that. It didn't do anything new, it merely did it right - nearly all game settings are plastic, almost afterthoughts, while imperfect this was the best attempt I've seen. In fact, I don't think there is a single first-person/third-person game besides this and maybe Bioshock which has used the graphical options available to add to, rather than detract from, the immersion of a setting.
Something does not need to be revolutionary to be superior, particularly if it is superior in only a limited manner.
I might note, however, that this alone cannot redeem the title, particularly because I don't need visuals to construct an atmosphere. I am a writer myself, and personally need very little - my imagination and my experiences are my life and hopefully eventually my livelihood. However, for a supermajority of people in our specialized, mechanistic society, visuals are crucial - we are taught not to dream, in general, but merely to accept.
-
Spawn_Retard
- Posts: 1248
- Joined: 21 Dec 2006, 14:36
Re: Just played through fallout 3
I totally second thisneddiedrow wrote:
I might note, however, that this alone cannot redeem the title, particularly because I don't need visuals to construct an atmosphere. I am a writer myself, and personally need very little - my imagination and my experiences are my life and hopefully eventually my livelihood. However, for a supermajority of people in our specialized, mechanistic society, visuals are crucial - we are taught not to dream, in general, but merely to accept.
-
[TS]Lollocide
- Posts: 324
- Joined: 30 Nov 2007, 18:24
Re: Just played through fallout 3
Fallout 3 was a bad game, none of the decent gameplay mechanics, nothing interesting in the way of character interaction or even the feeling of post-apocolyptia.
Especially when you can dispatch super mutants like they weren't even there.
Especially when you can dispatch super mutants like they weren't even there.
Re: Just played through fallout 3
IMO Stalker,for example,felt much more atmospheric.
and I'm not talking about interactions with npcs,i mean the way the levels looked and sounded.
and I'm not talking about interactions with npcs,i mean the way the levels looked and sounded.
Re: Just played through fallout 3
Beyond comparisons with the original Fallouts, which harken from a more naive and less commercialised era, Fallout, and to a similar extent Oblivion, represent Bethesda's movement along the same path of genericisation and commercialisation that Neddie outlined, which, in itself, is inherently detrimental to art.
Morrowind was a very rich game, with some truly awesome encounters (festival of sheogorath/the entire of bloodmoon anyone?)
What makes it particularly distasteful, in the case of Fallout 3, is that the first two games are, imo, particularly shining examples of game writing. The brand has been exploited cynically for commercial gain, producing a bland and generic, "decent" game. Bethesda clearly have the skills in house to have produced a genre-defining classic, but methinks the pressure for a fast return on investment scuppered the chances of anywhere near the level of immersion and genuine stimulation that better writing/dialogue/scripted encounters (read: much longer dev cycle) could have produced. :<
Morrowind was a very rich game, with some truly awesome encounters (festival of sheogorath/the entire of bloodmoon anyone?)
What makes it particularly distasteful, in the case of Fallout 3, is that the first two games are, imo, particularly shining examples of game writing. The brand has been exploited cynically for commercial gain, producing a bland and generic, "decent" game. Bethesda clearly have the skills in house to have produced a genre-defining classic, but methinks the pressure for a fast return on investment scuppered the chances of anywhere near the level of immersion and genuine stimulation that better writing/dialogue/scripted encounters (read: much longer dev cycle) could have produced. :<