11 Ways Fallout 3 Will Beat Oblivion

[GameBanshee News]

Notch another one up for the "Oblivion used to be great, but we can criticize it now to praise Fallout 3"-list. Pretty explicit.

1. More voice actors
Oblivion had 13 credited actors on its voice cast, but you'd never know it from playing the thing. No matter which of the game's hundreds of inhabitants you talked to, they always sounded suspiciously like the same four or five people, with no effort whatsoever made to disguise their voices. That won't be a problem with Fallout 3, however, as the new game will have a much bigger pool of voice talent on which to draw. Bethesda's not saying exactly how much bigger, except that we can expect at least twice as many.

More interestingly, Fallout 3 also features the voice of Malcolm MacDowell, a man who's not only endlessly entertaining to listen to, but was almost talented enough to make Tank Girl watchable. He'll be providing the voice of President John Henry Eden, and unlike, say, Patrick Stewart's here-then-gone turn in Oblivion, you'll hear quite a bit of MacDowell's voice throughout the game. As president of the Enclave, the tattered remnants of America's government, Eden frequently broadcasts fireside chats, which you'll be able to hear by tuning in to Enclave radio, or through the floating mechanical eyes that float aimlessly across the landscape.

Oh, and while we're on the topic of characters and how they're presented, it's worth pointing out that faces in Fallout 3 don't look like they were molded by pounding a lump of soft clay with a hammer. Well, maybe some of them do, but this time it's because they're horrible radioactive mutants.

[kyle]

Originally Posted by GameBanshee News

Notch another one up for the "Oblivion used to be great, but we can criticize it now to praise Fallout 3"-list.

Yeah, and an obvious sarcastic shot from yourself - if you don't like the article, then don't link to it. Seriously, are you just posting news for the sake of it?

[Brother None]

Ah, kyle, my favourite poster.

I wasn't being sarcastic, I was stating my opinion: it's highly suspicious to now criticise parts of Oblivion as "obvious flaws", when reviewers completely failed to mention them when the game came out.

Originally Posted by kyle

if you don't like the article, then don't link to it. Seriously, are you just posting news for the sake of it?

Actually it's because I get paid.

That said - and I've said this quite a few times before, including to you - I don't prohibitively filter news. It's my job to transmit news, not to hand-pick news that I think is good. I leave the picking up to you guys, I just give you everything I get - except for the most extremely irrelevant stuff - sometimes comment on it, and then let you get on with it from there.

I find it an attitude that shows sufficient respect to GameBanshee's readership. Why would you need me to hand-pick articles for you?

[Siberys]

. That won't be a problem with Fallout 3, however, as the new game will have a much bigger pool of voice talent on which to draw. Bethesda's not saying exactly how much bigger, except that we can expect at least twice as many.

Oh wow....Twice as many, that's a big number 26. Dear god, with their budget I'd expect no less than a 200 voice actors, famous or not.

Oh, and while we're on the topic of characters and how they're presented, it's worth pointing out that faces in Fallout 3 don't look like they were molded by pounding a lump of soft clay with a hammer. Well, maybe some of them do, but this time it's because they're horrible radioactive mutants.

They look exactly the same. Shadowing doesn't get rid of the "Lump of clay" look.

Yeah, dialogue trees aren't a revolutionary way to converse with people in games, but they at least beat the hell out of just clicking on a list of conversation topics - or worse, manipulating a big wheel that forces you to joke with, boast to, coerce and flatter someone all in one brief "conversation."

Erm...OBLIVION had this. The dialog wheel only increased a single skill, it had NO merit on actual dialog choices, conversations and quests you can accept or deny.

Fallout 3, meanwhile, will enable you to approach major events in different ways, and the choices you make will determine how they play out. In the early parts of the game

This is the EXACT same thing oblivion promised, why should I believe you or bethesda.

(Child-killing won't be a possibility, however, which probably comes as sad news for any longtime Fallout fans out there.)

Which oblivion didn't have either, what a shocker.

9. Better dogs

The two pictures being used, the shivering isles dog looks WAY more awesome than the fallout hound. The fallout hound was a basic representation of a real dog, but the skeleton blood dog thing just looked...neat.

In Oblivion, your projectile weapons were limited to simple bows and arrows of varying destructive capabilities.

Wow...that's amazing that people used bows and arrows in a society that didn't have firearms technology yet.

Oh, and magic spells, if you chose to become some kind of fruity wizard or whatever.

That alone gives us the prime reason why he hates oblivion.

HOLY CRAP YOU CAN WEAR HATS INSTEAD OF JUST HELMETS NOW.

Just...wow, this is one of the top 11 reasons this game will be better than oblivion? Damn dude, this is pathetic.

[kyle]

Originally Posted by Brother None

Ah, kyle, my favourite poster.

I wasn't being sarcastic, I was stating my opinion: it's highly suspicious to now criticise parts of Oblivion as "obvious flaws", when reviewers completely failed to mention them when the game came out.

Two things - number one, sarcasm and stating opinions aren't mutually exclusive, you can use/state both at the same time.

And secondly, I'm going to... I don't know, 'man up' as they say, and issue you an apology if you can 1) point me in the direction of when the writer you quoted said Oblivion lacked any obvious flaws, and/or 2) point to when you have said to me that you don't prohibitively filter news, or words to that effect. As far as the second one goes, I may have made a post, you responded, and I never checked back, in which case, I apologize. As far as the first one goes - did that writer say Oblivion was without flaws? (let's leave out the subjectivity of the word 'obvious') Or are you attributing to the previewer things other gaming journalists have said? A little unfair if you are.

Originally Posted by Brother None

Why would you need me to hand-pick articles for you?

And that, people, is called a straw man fallacy.

[dragon wench]

Kyle,
if you have an issue with Brother None, please take it to PMs, these forums are not the appropriate venue for personal bickering.

[DesR85]

I'm amazed how many reviewers praised Oblivion to high heavens and then criticise it within a span of what? A few months later? Now they're going about praising Fallout 3 to high heavens and say that Oblivion is rubbish.

Anybody bet that history will repeat itself?

[kyle]

Originally Posted by dragon wench

Kyle,
if you have an issue with Brother None, please take it to PMs, these forums are not the appropriate venue for personal bickering.

He starts his quote off with 'Ah, kyle, my favourite poster' and I'm the one accused of personal bickering? I don't know how the the tone of my second post was interpreted, but I made an honest gesture here - an offer to apologize on something easily checkable, if I'm factually wrong I want to know and I'm fine with admitting it - and am looking for an honest debate, on top of which I didn't check who it was exactly who posted the original piece anyways, which is what I had an issue with. Again, I'm the one getting personal?

[BuckGB]

DW is right. Regardless of what was said above, I'd appreciate it if the two of you could bring the debate to PMs.

And to change the subject...

Originally Posted by GameBanshee News

Oblivion had 13 credited actors on its voice cast, but you'd never know it from playing the thing. No matter which of the game's hundreds of inhabitants you talked to, they always sounded suspiciously like the same four or five people, with no effort whatsoever made to disguise their voices. That won't be a problem with Fallout 3, however, as the new game will have a much bigger pool of voice talent on which to draw. Bethesda's not saying exactly how much bigger, except that we can expect at least twice as many.

If those original 13 voice actors were brought back in for characters in F3, it's not going to matter that there's a second team doing voiceovers. After spending hundreds of hours in Oblivion, I don't want to hear those actors in any other game ever again.

[SupaCat]

Originally Posted by BuckGB

I don't want to hear those actors in any other game ever again.

You got that right .
And about the article, Siberys is right. This article is written badly without the proper observation of possibly both games. Especially the "In Oblivion, your projectile weapons were limited to simple bows and arrows of varying destructive capabilities" made me so angry. That's such a redicilous statement, although, when I think of it, Oblivion would be improved if you could just blast Mehrunes Dagon to pieces with your minigun .

It's true that Bethesda has made many false statements about their games ( the one that still makes me angry is the one where they said that you could play Oblivion without fighting), but lets just hope they make it right this time.

Where did Bethesda go wrong

[Ronan]

This article is so bad, god damn. They just criticize Oblivion and praise Fallout just like said above. They say nothing about NPCs and they represent the game as an FPS for dummies. Not that I wouldn't like that kind of games occationally, but I never want to see Fallout as one of those. Overall the RPG things are all just those that were in the previous Fallouts and they even left some out. Fallouts were great because they showed us sommething new, but this is has nothing new except "hats". Now if that isn't pathetic I don't know what is.


More gore: Ok, fun but just not the most important thing.

More voise actors: Just not many enough with a game of this scale.

Realistic lockpicking: Just blaah. Really! Are you ****ing kidding me? This is what makes Fallout great. It wasn't even bad in Oblivion.

Actual dialogue replaces conversation wheels: I'd be disapointed if this wasn't implemented, so this is a good feature, but still not that great.

Moral decisions actually carry weight and relevance: Previous Fallouts had this, why wouldn't this? I'd be shocked if this wasn't implemented. Anyways a great feature. Doesn't tell us enything though as if there aren't enough ways to do the quests then it will suck.

Better drugs: Using drugs doesnät make any game great. I never tought that drugs made Fallouts great.

Better dogs: Couldn't care less, so minor.

Nuclear catapults: WHAT THE HELL?!?!

Hats: I'll say nothing, this is just so ridiculous.

[Kipi]

Originally Posted by Ronan

More gore: Ok, fun but just not the most important thing.

Yeah, that was one thing that got boring in Fallout 1 & 2. At first it was fun, but after you saw them thousands of times, it was just plain boring. Oh, and it can't be good if they got things mixed up so badly that the cinema shows legs ripped of when you aimed to head

More voise actors: Just not many enough with a game of this scale.

But in this case, every extra is good. God I still hate when in Duhblivion you talked to someone with personal voice, then suddenly one generic reply from that person was voiced by the same voice hundreds of other NPCs used as well. Just plain stupid in my opinion.

Actual dialogue replaces conversation wheels: I'd be disapointed if this wasn't implemented, so this is a good feature, but still not that great.

Moral decisions actually carry weight and relevance: Previous Fallouts had this, why wouldn't this? I'd be shocked if this wasn't implemented. Anyways a great feature. Doesn't tell us enything though as if there aren't enough ways to do the quests then it will suck.

But as the article was about the ways how Fallout beats Oblivion, I say these fact actually belongs here.

Nuclear catapults: WHAT THE HELL?!?!

Yeah that made me laugh a lot
How can one even compare these things, as the settings were totally different. Also, I've at the very beginning been against the nuclear catapult, as there is no way of such thing being not unhealthy to player as well (radiation, blast radius, heat wave etc.)

[CFM]

I want to see an article titled "11 Ways Fallout 3 Will Beat Fallout 2. As An RPG."

With their new Fallout, it sounds like coming up with 11 of these ways would be quite a feat.

(Did they really mention hats? *sigh*)

"Fallout 3" continues to burn me up. It wouldn't be a big deal, if they just removed either the word "Fallout" or the number "3" from the title. Fallout Tactics was great, but it sure was not Fallout 3.

[Ronan]

Originally Posted by Kipi

Yeah, that was one thing that got boring in Fallout 1 & 2
But in this case, every extra is good. God I still hate when in Duhblivion you talked to someone with personal voice, then suddenly one generic reply from that person was voiced by the same voice hundreds of other NPCs used as well. Just plain stupid in my opinion.

It'll help for a while, but with a game this big you're still bound to get bored with the voices eventually so I would like a lot more voices. Still it's good to have even some more.

Originally Posted by Kipi

But as the article was about the ways how Fallout beats Oblivion, I say these fact actually belongs here.

Ok, I admit I got a bit carried away from the subject.

Originally Posted by Kipi

Yeah that made me laugh a lot
How can one even compare these things, as the settings were totally different. Also, I've at the very beginning been against the nuclear catapult, as there is no way of such thing being not unhealthy to player as well (radiation, blast radius, heat wave etc.)

And they even said that a single gun is worth mentioning in the 11 better things. Makes me start to think what kind of a game we'll get.

[Kipi]

Originally Posted by Ronan

And they even said that a single gun is worth mentioning in the 11 better things. Makes me start to think what kind of a game we'll get.

Either that, or what it tells about the author. Seriously, if the author thinks the big guns are always positive things and beat the other ways of killing enemies, then he should stay away from medieval RPGs and stay instead in FPS games...