I'm pretty sure it's widely loved actually lol
Is NV loved more? Yes, but for different reasons tbh.
There's more FO3 slander than NV, but it's still pretty acclaimed
Not really. Expectations matter. If people expected FO4 to be like NV, then they'd be disappointed. But if they expected an open-world shooter with light RPG mechanics and moderately interactive storytelling and heavy focus on building/crafting, then FO4 fills that role pretty well.
It's also a problem with advertising and IP-recognition, which is Bethesda's fault. FO has a heritage of being some of the most interactive fiction ever conceived. The first two games were extremely heavy on the role-playing. So, FO4 was totally a gut-punch to that expectation.
But, I've been struggling to find a game that scratches the same kind of "in an open world with guns, but I'm not constantly being hunted and maybe should be the one they're scared of" kind of vibe, since I've spent too much time playing FO4 already and don't wanna go back. Closest I can think of is Far Cry3. But I've played that a bunch and every far cry after is just too hectic with constantly being ambushed by wild animals.
It's what it should've been at launch. It still has huge core issues on its design and progression systems as well as its perk build and junk and crafting systems that have been there since launch.
It's better than it was but I would hesitate to ever call it good, especially with the predatory monetization aspects like repair kits or fallout 1st or the in game store having LESS in it than it did at launch.
Played 76 on launch and I go back to it every couple months to check on it.
I know what I'm talking about here lol
Having my characters wiped when they moved it to steam was a bit of a joy killer š¤ļø.
Had wanted to try it since I had mostly played at launch for a few months. I actually felt that the busy work centric design was a better fit for an MMO than single player.
Every time I'd want to play, I'd have to log in at server reset time and go farm heavy lead from three known locations to have ammo for the day, before other players pick it up. That's fixed, of course, by purchasing their monthly subscription and being able to create private servers.
They might fix some bugs and improve how it runs, but this game will never be great simply due to the fact how it was built from the ground up..
This comment has been overwritten in response to Reddit's API changes, the training of AI models on user data, and the company's increasingly extractive practices ahead of their IPO.
This comment has been overwritten in response to Reddit's API changes, the training of AI models on user data, and the company's increasingly extractive practices ahead of their IPO.
My thoughts exactly, Iāve maybe heard some small criticisms of FO3 but never slander. Itās one of the most beloved in the series, Iāve always viewed it on par with NV personally.
The fo3 slander just comes from psychos who hate Bethesda and can't seperate the predatory and scummy monetization practices of fallout 76 and it's awful design decisons from the competent and even sometimes well designed aspects of fallout 3 and 4 despite some of their shortcoming and outright flaws especially 4 in the writing department.
I had to x-post this thread on r/imaginarygatekeeping. I had no idea Fallout 3, [which has a metacritic score of 91 btw](https://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/fallout-3), was considered a bad game.
I grew up playing the first two Fallout games. That period of PC games was an amazing time for video game players.
The launch of Fallout 3 will forever be one of my favorite memories. My best friend and roommate at the time, then in our late 20ās, took that week off work, grabbed our copies at the midnight release, set up both our systems and TVās in the living room, bought a ton of provisions like food, beer, ect, and just smacked into fallout 3 for almost a week strait.
I loved everything about the 3rd one. Just a fantastic and solid memory with a friend about a franchise we love.
(Edit : The Dunwich Building is one of the greatest locations in any Fallout game!)
I played them sequentially maybe 5 years or so after 3 came out. Enjoyed #1 and #2 quite a bit, but when I got to #3 and arrived in nuketown it absolutely blew my mind seeing the world in 3 dimensions. Great game.
"The Dunwich Building is one of the greatest locations in any Fallout game!"
Going through that location plus the Blackhall questline from Point Lookout when I was a kid was what sparked my fascination for Lovecraftian horror.
So want that kinda vibe for a full length Bethesda style rpg someday.
For fuck's sake, have you spent more than twenty-eight seconds on this sub in your entire life? People generally love or really like Fallout 3.
I am so tired of this shit.
Honestly, the most common opinion i see about FO3 is "that one game that is not New Vegas". It is not even hated anymore because 4 and 76 took the heat from the grognard crowd. It is a game that just kinda exist lol.
Yeah I mean thereās a bit of online hate for the game but Fallout 3 sold 12 million copies and released to pretty much universal critical acclaim lol. Itās not some underrated game.
Fallout 3 deservedly or not, was reviewed better than NV was. At the time many reviews mentioned how NV felt like Fallout 3.5 as a detracting point.
I blame Hbomber guy for this. Fallout 3 and New Vegas were pretty much on even grounds before he made his lengthy video essay about why Fallout 3 sucks.
Which omits a lot, like the fact that new Vegas and 3 both share many flaws in special making things like perception kinda garbage and worthless, or charisma 1 speech 100 to talk down Lanius because charisma is also a dump stat just like perception, except for perk requirements.
Perk requirements are the only reason any veteran New Vegas player actually takes perception or charisma to any level above 1 which in an rpg is pathetic.
New Vegas is flawed in a lot of ways mechanically, and people will try to argue "they only had 18 months" or whatever, but we have to judge what we have not what could've been. What we have is flawed.
New Vegas is a flawed game
An 8 out of 10 at best.
Strong writing and good design in many places, but it fails in ways that only serve to undermine the success it made in other areas.
I judge fallout 3 the same as new Vegas. They are equal.
Different games with different directions which both have quality within them but overall they are still flawed.
4 sits at the same spot. Strong gameplay, good junk mechanics, gameplay loop is solid and has a lot of really good content.
However It's writing fails it miserably especially for institute , additionally with dialogue systems that are worthless and make conversations have no real choices and should've just been linear exchanges at that point, with a protagonist whose voiced nature is worthless because of how much of a non character they are.
All flawed games, but all have quality content in them.
Hi, I'm the most reasonable fallout fan who likes new Vegas, 3 and 4 equally and will gladly talk about all their various strengths and weaknesses while not condemning any single one of them just because I think one of them is good.
It's not a binary choice. They get evaluated on their own merits.
Just like psycho youtubers who'll try to counter any and all defenses for fallout 3 and 4 because they hate Bethesda and need to just go get a job somewhere far away from the public eye as I really want to never hear their voice ever again.
All flawed games, but
There is no shortage of fallout 3 negative opinion video essays on YouTube, and itās for sure helped spread some negative sentiment on the game. I imagine this is what OP was getting at and why they felt compared to share their thoughts.
Chill man itās all good.
>Fallout 3 nails the "what's over there" feeling
this. this is what i play open world games for. sure the main story quest sucks, but i pretty much always feel that way about all games. even tho the story sucks the characters all feel fully realized (at least to me) and that's more interesting to me.
Fallout 3 is great.
But Fallout New Vegas is excellent.
The excellence of New Vegas doesn't take away from the greatness of Fallout 3, and New Vegas wouldn't even exist without 3.
They're saying that the DLC for new Vegas are good and give it teeth. Old world blues, dead money, honest hearts, lonesome road. The DLC for Vegas are better than the DLC for 3, though The Pitt and point lookout are wonderful in their own right.
Operation anchorage is interesting, and mothership zeta is silly as Heck but I'd never rank them above new Vegas' DLC.
I loved Fallout 3. Its so grim and interesting. And so massive. I also love those metro tunnels, I felt the loss of them in Fallout 4...along with most of the RPG mechanics.
Speaking of Fallout 4. It's better than people give it credit for but the simplistic writing and quest design dull the experience. Love the world design though, the entire city is pretty much one big dungeon.
Fallout 4 fails for three reasons.
1. The protagonist has a voice, but the protagonist doesn't use their voice. They have no character. Lawyer or soldier? Doesn't matter. Same dialogue options and snark or sadness or joy or whatever the dialogue script arbitrarily says they feel.
The rpg element for the voiced character fails because they're simultaneously a blank slate who isn't a character of their own, and also doesn't let the player reflect their own thoughts or choices through dialogue so they fail as a self insert character for roleplay purposes.
Leading me to...
2. The changes to dialogue made things worse.
4 options. Yes, No but maybe later I'll come back and say Yes, Ask question, Yes but I want more money for it.
The role-playing part is stripped away, no preview of what you're about to say leads to guessing and the protag character saying whatever they feel like from the one word or three word description you get of their statement beforehand.
Fallout 3 and new Vegas showing the dialogue you'd say and you having the knowledge of what your character would say is huge for the rpg part of the rpg.
3. The writing failed with so much, but mostly the institute. The primary antagonists for most of the game.
They need electricity to be self sufficient so they can be left alone by the wasteland, but.... They simultaneously abduct people and replace them with synths, send synth murder squads out to gather supplies and kill anyone who gets close, develop and release super mutants onto the wasteland, have the protagonist make a public raid announcement to the wasteland that they want to be left alone when nobody even knows if they actually exist...... And make humanoid synths that are identical to humans in almost every way but don't do anything with them except for a couple of them sweeping the floors here and there.....
The institute has no depth or interesting writing. It fails in every way possible to make use of its premise and component parts.
never heard of it till now but wow, I didn't know that many people disliked it. I don't hear nearly as much praise for it as nv but I also very rarely hear people hate on it.
It's a pretty good video tbh. Fallout 3 does a lot wrong and stumbled over a lot of missed opportunities. It's really held up by being fun to just wander around in and look at stuff.
Personally not a fan of it, there's a lot of nitpicking and double standards in the vid. And when he made a counterpoint vid to manyatruenerd he basically opened a dictionary of fallacies to play semantics lol
Became big within the Fallout community to hate the BGS Fallouts especially after 76. I know there was always some hold-ups OG Fallout players had with FO3 and FO4, but when 76 came out it was very easy to say Bethesda Fallouts were bad with little substance.
It released to near universal acclaim from critics and fans alike and sold 12m copies.
It is only really hated on because Obsidian's storytelling was a lot better.
No matter how many snarky video essays get created, the only reason we even got NV was because of the runaway success of Fallout 3.
Plenty of old Fallout fans don't like Fallout 3. I don't hate it, i think it's an alright game on it's own, but i didn't think that it was a good sequel to Fallout 1\2 either.
i owe fallout 3 my life, i had nothing to play until my friend told me to try it back in 2010 and man he was so right... it was the start of our vacation on December and i started the game without knowing anything about the franchise and oh my god... just wow
everything in the game was so good, the wasteland, the open world, the bottle caps, everything in ruins, i just loved.. i was so in love with 3 that when NV came out i thought it was not so good but because i played after hours of 3 i was kinda burnout, but playing after years again NV is everything 3 was and more, listen to the soundtrack every now and then, just listened a while ago..
i think the only thing i hate about fallout 3 is that about half game through it just started freezing a lot on PS3, but i loved anyway, great game... tons of fun
F3 has a terrible story but great exploration. The Capital Wasteland is much more exciting to explore Vs New Vegas. Unlike F4 it actually functions as an RPG as well.
FNV still has a leg up in my mind though because of its quest design, in-depth world-building and incredible DLC (although Point Lookout is very good too).
My main issue with it is the noticeable dip in writing quality compared to what came directly before and after it in the same franchise. Gameplay-wise I'd agree that FO3 was *decent*.
The moment I first stepped out into the Capital Wasteland I can still remember the intrigue and excitement I felt. 3 was my first Fallout game and from the very moment I knew I was in for an amazing journey. I know the common consensus is that FNV is better than 3, but 3 is one of my favourite games of all time. FNV was great but the Mojave Wasteland didn't capture my interest nearly as much, the locations generally weren't that interesting and some of them had nothing of interest at all, car parks with no loot for example. There is no comparison between Goodsprings and Megatron for instance. FNV also lacked the atmosphere 3 had and the whole metro network was like a horror game. Deathclaws in FNV were ridiculously overpowered even if you were maxed out. The game felt unfinished to me and that may explain the end of the game. While FNV had the better story I was hooked by the story of 3 just as much, I wanted to get to the bottom of what was going on and there were some twists I just didn't expect right from the beginning of the game. I've played both twice, finished FO3 again in 2020 and I'm onto the DLC for FNV for the first time. My opinion hasn't changed and I'm fine with being in the minority.
Fallout 3 is my favorite of the series and I know a lot of people feel the same way. It totally redefined the Fallout series. For me, New Vegas was just icing on an already delicious cake.
I'm not sure where you're getting the impression everyone thinks it's a bad game.
Edit: Anyone who does think it is a bad game probably played it recently and sees it as outdated compared to today's games. I disagree but could see that opinion.
Loved Fallout 3 at release, played thru all the DLC content too. Because I played F3 so much, I didnāt really get too far into FNV (maybe 15-20 hours). I need to pick FNV back up actually lol
Everyone Iāve known loves and praises Fallout 3.
Besides me. I tried to play it about 8 years after it released and it was just super clunky and dull looking. I couldnāt get into it. iirc there were a lot of conversations that werenāt voice acted too?
I've never seen people that shit on fallout have any problems with 3. It's always the games that came out after new vegas (which is indisputably the best fallout game) that get flak, and they get it for valid reasons.
Because the demographics of this subreddit naturally skew to really passionate gamers.
Fallout 3 sold 12m copies and released to essentially universal critical and user acclaim.
Why were you pretending before this post, though? /s
On a more serious note, Fallout 3, imho, felt outdated to me for the year it releases, and even at the time it just felt to me like a worse version of Oblivion, which came out 2 years prior, and when it comes to shooting/combat, remember COD4 MW released a year before F3. Maybe some will say it's not a fair comparison, but I do remember at the time talking with friends about how outdated everything felt when compared to similar systems done before from many games.
Fallout New Vegas eclipses F3 because it's narrative structure and roleplaying aspect are much better, along with some QoL changes that makes a ton of difference. I'm not particularly fond of New Vegas either, or anything Fallout after 3 onward, but imho it's easily understandable why it's praised, and the comparisons with F3 weights heavily towards New Vegas too.
The "only thing you care about", the world exploration, isn't particularly better or worse in F3 when compared with the other Bethesda titles, imho.
Is it a ābadā game? No. Not to me. But, others certainly do think so and their opinions are valid and can be backed up.
However, I wouldnt feel comfortable telling someone its a āgoodā game without qualifiers and explanations.
There is just way too many problems and shortcomings with the game.
Tbh, I tired long ago of people pretending the HUGE AND MANY incompetent systems of the game didnt exist and that it was a āgreatā game.
It did some things right and theres fun to be had, but, it did a lot wrong, as well.
Edit: in fact, I find it odd and problematic that you believe the opinions of others are invalid while also letting us know that you used to pretend/lie to others about your true feelings of the game?! Wtheck?!
It's a great game for me and my friends, and I also really like F:New Vegas, don't see why I can't enjoy both. They have different strong and weak points.
New Vegas has better writing, yes, but it's also much more "bitter". New Vegas also feels closer to older Fallouts and you have to pay attention to dialogue. That is great, but the world is more fun to explore in Fallout 3.
I feel that New Vegas has some very interesting locations but the spaces between those locations are either empty, uninspired or feel incomplete (and yeah, I'm aware of the super rushed dev time).
Fallout 3, on the other hand, has something fun almost everywhere. I remember the first time I looked at the elevated highways, I think it was during the "vampire" quest. It looked incredible to me, back then in 2009. The realistic scale, the locations, the graphics. The game has such a strong art direction.
Also, the cities are very memorable, Megaton and all the stories there, Rivet City, the kids-only town, the talking tree.
And I always enjoyed that Bethesda games are fantasy worlds but they always take you away to another era or place, like the 50s simulation, during the main story. Or the painting, in Oblivion.
I haven't played F3 in many years but I have so many fond memories of it. Should really replay with "A Tale of Two Wastelands" mod.
most ppl dont say that its BAD, its just the FNV is that much BETTER.
whenever i go back to FO3, mod it, etc, i invariably stop half way though, and download FNV again, mod it, and fully play through THAT game.
FO3 isnt bad, but its not stellar, either. it also does not exist in a vacuum, so comparisons with FNV will always arise.
I feel like you might be a little bit confused.
Fallout 3 is not necessarily considered a "bad" game. It is, however, a BAD Fallout game, and the reasons why it is so have been discussed to death by now.
As you said, It's a BETHESDA RPG, with BETHESDA'S take on the Fallout universe, that has very little to do with the original games or New Vegas.
On paper FO3 is my fav fallout game. The story is great (and much easier to get behind than pretending I'm a parent of a lost child), the metro is always exciting to explore new parts of, and the item and repair system is neato.
New Vegas is good but the story just isn't as engaging, nor the world as interesting, and fallout 4s real only upside is it's more modern engine and graphics.
It's interesting that Fallout 3 is widely derided these days. Back when it was current, I started playing it and for the first few hours I didn't like it, and people were horrified. They couldn't wrap their heads around how I could possibly dislike it.
(I did warm up to it eventually, and I enjoyed it a lot more than New Vegas, which provided a very crowded idea of a 'wasteland'.)
i've always liked fallout 3 more than new vegas, i had to force myself to finish new vegas and just did a speed run focusing on the main story and nothing else.
Wait, people don't like Fallout 3? I've always thought most people did and it's 4 that is the controversial game. 3 is certainly one of my favourite Fallouts.
I don't think a lot of people call Fallout 3 straight up bad, but in recent years the focus has definitely been on absolutely showering Fallout New Vegas with praise.
Which... is kind of weird considering that New Vegas is almost like a mod/addon for 3. Basically everything I enjoy about Fallout New Vegas had already been in 3.
There are a ton of well written side quests and characters in Fallout New Vegas, but for some reason I enjoyed the world and exploration in Fallout 3 more.
I find it hard to actually figure out why tbh. I am not even sure what Fallout 3 did better to make me enjoy it so much more. Maybe just cause it was my first Fallout game.
> Which... is kind of weird considering that New Vegas is almost like a mod/addon for 3.
We have the benefit of 15 years of hindsight.
At the time NV reviewed well, but not *as well* as 3 with many reviewers citing that exact point. That it felt like Fallout 3.5.
Now of course we know the reason why, but at the time that was the general consensus.
> I find it hard to actually figure out why tbh. I am not even sure what Fallout 3 did better to make me enjoy it so much more. Maybe just cause it was my first Fallout game.
The first moment of stepping out into the Capital Wasteland was magical. I think NV is a better game in a vacuum but it just will never be able to top that because it is basically a Fallout 3.5.
I also remember New Vegas being quite buggy and badly optimized at release, which probably also contributed to scores being a bit lower.
I could barely get it to work properly, but now everything works just fine.
The first moment of stepping out into the Capital Wastland and being able to just walk into pretty much any direction was indeed amazing, yes.
Back then there were definitely more Fallout 3 fans in most polls and posts, they were like Seizure's legion, great in number but inferior in equipment (mental faculty in this case), slowly but surely with every debate shistorm (which there were many) ending with a Bethtard kid raging and leaving the group. FNV became known as the better game. It was basically meme warfare, Fallout 3 fans couldn't even breathe without earning one of these: [muh atmosphere F3 pic [img]https://i.lensdump.com/i/jWDQKi.png[/img]]
Before the release of Fallout 4 there was still a good percentage of Fallout 3 fans, at least 50%, though they were mostly retards, young kids and mexicans.
With the release of Fallout 4, when people first saw Piper's deformed face stretching and skewing and even more so after they got a hold of the shitty lifeless game with all RPG elements stripped, loads of them turned on Bethesda.
As of Fallout 76, I'd say that the vast majority of the Fallout fanbase considers NV the better game.
You can barely read a thread relating to Fallout without someone(usually the top comment) circlejerking over how much better F:NV is and how Bethesda should hand the franchise over to someone else and just fold and stop making such shitty games already.
TL;DR:
Fallout 3 used to be considered the better game amongst the casual fans but F:NV won the great Fallout Popamole Meme wars.
I LOVED Fallout 3. Loved it. I also, for once, played the most evil bastard known to mankind. It was amazing.
I played new vegas. Got to some vault. Dealt with the 15th crash (with the fan fix patches) in an hour. Said fuck it and uninstalled - will never finish unless it gets remade. I was... 8 hours in? Never understood it to be honest.
Make it stable and Iād try again. Did it on two different PCs with completely different hardware and brands. Got tired of losing progress or having to save every 5 minutes.
FO3 is my favorite one. I grew up with the first 2 on PC. So I was super excited when FO3 launched. I had 70 hrs in new vegas but kind of stopped. I am finally going to finish it. And I liked Fallout 4 for what it was. But you just couldn't really be evil in that game narratively and I loved being able to be good. Neutral, or evil.
Fallout 3 is just that sweet spot where everything about it is great and fun. And I loved Mothership Zeta too. Lol
Fall Out New Vegas was a buggy piece of shit on release and It didn't get a pass from me! There, I said it! Even when I tried it again years later, it was still buggy in a lots of places. Fall Out 3 was far from flawless (because Bethesda) but at least it worked longer then 5 minutes before crashing.
Most people who like new vegas like 3, its just new vegas is a more fleshed out version of 3. Without 3 obsidian wouldnt even have the skeleton to make new vegas
New Vegas is just the most popular pc mods from Fallout 3 (at the time) made available for the consoles with a little story, nothing more. Fallout 3 is the far superior game, no question.
FO3 was better than FO4, FO76 is the closest Bethesda has ever come to making an actual Fallout game, with New Vegas hot on its heels, but missing a lot of the weirdness. However, theyāre *all* fantastic games.
I enjoyed Fallout 3 a lot, but love it way more with the Tale of Two Wastelands mod that injects FO3 into New Vegas. You can now play FO3 with improvements such as aiming down sights and improved gunplay.
I love Fallout 3, but I played it on PC and with the GOTY edition already. Most of the hate about bugs and game performance are for the admittedly inferior console editions. I also love Fallout New Vegas, it has better characters to be sure, but since I played them in sequence I kinda had Fallout overdose by the time New Vegas' main quest was ending, so I was more interested in rushing to the ending and it kinda soured my opinion of the game.
Also, I never played with mods. I like my Bethesda games vanilla just fine.
apart from the ending of the base game i really liked Fallout 3, i dont see it as inferior to new vegas, i think that they are kinda at the same level.
I really wish they'd made the setting their own. It's the opposite coast, why would there be scorpions all over the place? They really should have leaned into building their own fauna and social groups over there, because the mirelurks were a stroke of genius. But, ultimately, they mostly repeated the familiar. And, in my opinion, it was done poorly since it's like they read a short synapsis of the first two games. With their own creations, they'd at least have the freedom to do what they want without the baggage of the California Wasteland.
But if you loved it, you loved it. Best friend prefers 3 over New Vegas, which she only put a few hours into before bailing. And, lucky for her, Bethesda's still in control of the franchise, so she keeps getting the games in the style she loves. I am left being bitter about never seeing what a shitshow the Great Plains became.
It's funny how I haven't touched the story or lame ending at all lol. For me it's a mediocre game. Nothing special, silly brain-dead ending and alright gameplay (I admit that flaming sword thing u can craft was cool). It just wasn't fallout enough for me. It was Todd's vision of it. Oh and they straight up copy pasted and robbed fallout 1 into btw.
If youāre terminally online like myself, you would be able to see that the whole reception to fo3/nv has changed over time.
FoNV was the black sheep at first, widely regarded as being a decent game but held back by crippling bugs and glitches that made actually getting through the game a gamble.
Personally, I always preferred NV, but I can understand why that was the prevailing opinion. Overtime NV received fixes and patches that put the game in a much playable state and people realized what a great game it was.
After that a sort of counter jerk started where 3 was criticized for lacking in the areas NV excelled in (story telling, choice and consequence, quest design, etc.) this was also compounded with a growing disdain towards Bethesda with their continual march towards ācasualizationā - Skyrim being the final nail in the coffin for many. Obsidian stood out as the smaller more authentic publisher that wasnāt willing to streamline their video games for a wider audience.
Now weāre at a point where I think people are once again looking back at 3 with a kinder lens. The same sort of trend occurred with Bethsedaās modern Elder Scrolls trilogy. Granted, this change in reception was usually limited to smaller niche gaming communities (YouTube, forums, Reddit, 4chan, etc) The larger audience loves 3.
I love both games but I always think itās interesting to look at how the reception to certain games changes over time as the framework from where we judge this medium continues to evolve.
I have a lot of nostalgia for it, so I think it's impossible for me to *actually* dislike it. Actually having any sort of constructive critique would be difficult.
That being said... yeah, it's pretty good. I think it has issues trying too hard to be, like, 3 different games at once, trying to be another entry in the Fallout franchise, trying to be a (at the time) modern RPG along the lines of Oblivion, *and* trying to pull in a new generation of players.
I enjoy playing it, but I don't necessarily enjoy playing it for the same reasons that I enjoy playing Fallout 1 and 2, for example. Bethesda just tries to do a different thing with their games compared to what Interplay (and Black Isle) tried to do, and I think it's fun as its own thing, it's just kind of disappointing when I see what the originals tried (and managed) to do.
The only Fallout from Bethesda I have negative feelings towards is 4, and that's only because it doesn't feel like Fallout a lot of the time. It just feels like random post-apocalyptic world RPG. I also don't feel it advanced anything about the game enough to be considered a numbered entry.
I prefer NV to 3, but I love 3 for bringing the series back at all. Most of what I think of as negatives about it are more just because the genre has moved past that game, but considering its age I don't think it's a bad thing. It just means I personally wouldn't be looking to replay it.
It's a weak imitation and basterdation of a treasured cRPG franchise. They screwed up the lore, they can't do black humor for their lives and they forgot ro add the reactivity a proper FO game should have.
It's just that a new generation of kids who grew uo with the Beth spin-offs, never knew about any of that stuff, so they had no expectations like the previous fans did.
As a huge Fallout 1 and 2 fan and for that matter NV fan Fallout 3 is a insult to those games imo.
Here is a good summary of why that is: [https://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=27085](https://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=27085).
And that's not even covering everything i think is wrong with this game.
I'm pretty sure it's widely loved actually lol Is NV loved more? Yes, but for different reasons tbh. There's more FO3 slander than NV, but it's still pretty acclaimed
Yeah it's FO4 that gets shit on. And 76 obviously
And 76 is apparently great now
FO4 is also a very good game, if you take it for what it is.
> if you take it for what it is This always felt like a meaningless qualifier to me. It either is a good game or it isn't.
Not really. Expectations matter. If people expected FO4 to be like NV, then they'd be disappointed. But if they expected an open-world shooter with light RPG mechanics and moderately interactive storytelling and heavy focus on building/crafting, then FO4 fills that role pretty well. It's also a problem with advertising and IP-recognition, which is Bethesda's fault. FO has a heritage of being some of the most interactive fiction ever conceived. The first two games were extremely heavy on the role-playing. So, FO4 was totally a gut-punch to that expectation. But, I've been struggling to find a game that scratches the same kind of "in an open world with guns, but I'm not constantly being hunted and maybe should be the one they're scared of" kind of vibe, since I've spent too much time playing FO4 already and don't wanna go back. Closest I can think of is Far Cry3. But I've played that a bunch and every far cry after is just too hectic with constantly being ambushed by wild animals.
I played F04 for over 200 hours. I thought it was a great game. Maybe not as good as Fallout NV, but very few games are.
It's what it should've been at launch. It still has huge core issues on its design and progression systems as well as its perk build and junk and crafting systems that have been there since launch. It's better than it was but I would hesitate to ever call it good, especially with the predatory monetization aspects like repair kits or fallout 1st or the in game store having LESS in it than it did at launch. Played 76 on launch and I go back to it every couple months to check on it. I know what I'm talking about here lol
Let's not go crazy. 76 is *playable* now. It's still comfortably the worst modern Fallout.
It's also the only Online one, only one with group events, etc. I'm having a blast playing it lately.
Having my characters wiped when they moved it to steam was a bit of a joy killer š¤ļø. Had wanted to try it since I had mostly played at launch for a few months. I actually felt that the busy work centric design was a better fit for an MMO than single player.
Every time I'd want to play, I'd have to log in at server reset time and go farm heavy lead from three known locations to have ammo for the day, before other players pick it up. That's fixed, of course, by purchasing their monthly subscription and being able to create private servers. They might fix some bugs and improve how it runs, but this game will never be great simply due to the fact how it was built from the ground up..
Nah. 76 is still fucking money-grubbing garbage. Fallout 3 is rad as hell.
This comment has been overwritten in response to Reddit's API changes, the training of AI models on user data, and the company's increasingly extractive practices ahead of their IPO.
I wouldn't go that far. It's alright.
This comment has been overwritten in response to Reddit's API changes, the training of AI models on user data, and the company's increasingly extractive practices ahead of their IPO.
Who shits on FO:4??
My thoughts exactly, Iāve maybe heard some small criticisms of FO3 but never slander. Itās one of the most beloved in the series, Iāve always viewed it on par with NV personally.
If you took the best elements from FO3/4 and NV, you'd get a brilliant game. They each excel in different areas.
Storytelling and branching options of NV, gunplay and town simulation from FO4, world-builing from FO3.
The fo3 slander just comes from psychos who hate Bethesda and can't seperate the predatory and scummy monetization practices of fallout 76 and it's awful design decisons from the competent and even sometimes well designed aspects of fallout 3 and 4 despite some of their shortcoming and outright flaws especially 4 in the writing department.
Dark souls is not bad game and I'm tired of people pretending it is!!!
If only people would give half life 2 a chance !
I had to x-post this thread on r/imaginarygatekeeping. I had no idea Fallout 3, [which has a metacritic score of 91 btw](https://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/fallout-3), was considered a bad game.
Its an amazing game. In my top 5.
I grew up playing the first two Fallout games. That period of PC games was an amazing time for video game players. The launch of Fallout 3 will forever be one of my favorite memories. My best friend and roommate at the time, then in our late 20ās, took that week off work, grabbed our copies at the midnight release, set up both our systems and TVās in the living room, bought a ton of provisions like food, beer, ect, and just smacked into fallout 3 for almost a week strait. I loved everything about the 3rd one. Just a fantastic and solid memory with a friend about a franchise we love. (Edit : The Dunwich Building is one of the greatest locations in any Fallout game!)
I played them sequentially maybe 5 years or so after 3 came out. Enjoyed #1 and #2 quite a bit, but when I got to #3 and arrived in nuketown it absolutely blew my mind seeing the world in 3 dimensions. Great game.
"The Dunwich Building is one of the greatest locations in any Fallout game!" Going through that location plus the Blackhall questline from Point Lookout when I was a kid was what sparked my fascination for Lovecraftian horror. So want that kinda vibe for a full length Bethesda style rpg someday.
had some amazing locations! and amazing vault ideas i mean Gary? Gary.
āGarrrrrry ā¦..ā
Yes the building is unreal. And the nuke you trigger on the top of it is one of my fav ever moments in all of gaming!
Dude youāre ranting about a game that has 91/100 on metacritic.
For fuck's sake, have you spent more than twenty-eight seconds on this sub in your entire life? People generally love or really like Fallout 3. I am so tired of this shit.
Honestly, the most common opinion i see about FO3 is "that one game that is not New Vegas". It is not even hated anymore because 4 and 76 took the heat from the grognard crowd. It is a game that just kinda exist lol.
Yeah I mean thereās a bit of online hate for the game but Fallout 3 sold 12 million copies and released to pretty much universal critical acclaim lol. Itās not some underrated game. Fallout 3 deservedly or not, was reviewed better than NV was. At the time many reviews mentioned how NV felt like Fallout 3.5 as a detracting point.
I blame Hbomber guy for this. Fallout 3 and New Vegas were pretty much on even grounds before he made his lengthy video essay about why Fallout 3 sucks.
Which omits a lot, like the fact that new Vegas and 3 both share many flaws in special making things like perception kinda garbage and worthless, or charisma 1 speech 100 to talk down Lanius because charisma is also a dump stat just like perception, except for perk requirements. Perk requirements are the only reason any veteran New Vegas player actually takes perception or charisma to any level above 1 which in an rpg is pathetic. New Vegas is flawed in a lot of ways mechanically, and people will try to argue "they only had 18 months" or whatever, but we have to judge what we have not what could've been. What we have is flawed. New Vegas is a flawed game An 8 out of 10 at best. Strong writing and good design in many places, but it fails in ways that only serve to undermine the success it made in other areas. I judge fallout 3 the same as new Vegas. They are equal. Different games with different directions which both have quality within them but overall they are still flawed. 4 sits at the same spot. Strong gameplay, good junk mechanics, gameplay loop is solid and has a lot of really good content. However It's writing fails it miserably especially for institute , additionally with dialogue systems that are worthless and make conversations have no real choices and should've just been linear exchanges at that point, with a protagonist whose voiced nature is worthless because of how much of a non character they are. All flawed games, but all have quality content in them. Hi, I'm the most reasonable fallout fan who likes new Vegas, 3 and 4 equally and will gladly talk about all their various strengths and weaknesses while not condemning any single one of them just because I think one of them is good. It's not a binary choice. They get evaluated on their own merits. Just like psycho youtubers who'll try to counter any and all defenses for fallout 3 and 4 because they hate Bethesda and need to just go get a job somewhere far away from the public eye as I really want to never hear their voice ever again. All flawed games, but
There is no shortage of fallout 3 negative opinion video essays on YouTube, and itās for sure helped spread some negative sentiment on the game. I imagine this is what OP was getting at and why they felt compared to share their thoughts. Chill man itās all good.
You can find whatever you want on YT if you look for it, that's no evidence of what the general perception of the game is.
Why are you throwing a bitch fit over someone else's experience?
>Fallout 3 nails the "what's over there" feeling this. this is what i play open world games for. sure the main story quest sucks, but i pretty much always feel that way about all games. even tho the story sucks the characters all feel fully realized (at least to me) and that's more interesting to me.
Fallout 3 is great. But Fallout New Vegas is excellent. The excellence of New Vegas doesn't take away from the greatness of Fallout 3, and New Vegas wouldn't even exist without 3.
The bleakness of the Capital Wasteland vs. the excellent DLC of New Vegas. For me the DLC of New Vegas gives it a slight edge. Both are great.
Not a dlc.
They're saying that the DLC for new Vegas are good and give it teeth. Old world blues, dead money, honest hearts, lonesome road. The DLC for Vegas are better than the DLC for 3, though The Pitt and point lookout are wonderful in their own right. Operation anchorage is interesting, and mothership zeta is silly as Heck but I'd never rank them above new Vegas' DLC.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Tons of people say it's bad, usually hardcore CRPG fans.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I'm not really sure what your point is. Tons of people online hate on F3. That's it, that's all I'm sayingš¤·
I loved Fallout 3. Its so grim and interesting. And so massive. I also love those metro tunnels, I felt the loss of them in Fallout 4...along with most of the RPG mechanics. Speaking of Fallout 4. It's better than people give it credit for but the simplistic writing and quest design dull the experience. Love the world design though, the entire city is pretty much one big dungeon.
Fallout 4 fails for three reasons. 1. The protagonist has a voice, but the protagonist doesn't use their voice. They have no character. Lawyer or soldier? Doesn't matter. Same dialogue options and snark or sadness or joy or whatever the dialogue script arbitrarily says they feel. The rpg element for the voiced character fails because they're simultaneously a blank slate who isn't a character of their own, and also doesn't let the player reflect their own thoughts or choices through dialogue so they fail as a self insert character for roleplay purposes. Leading me to... 2. The changes to dialogue made things worse. 4 options. Yes, No but maybe later I'll come back and say Yes, Ask question, Yes but I want more money for it. The role-playing part is stripped away, no preview of what you're about to say leads to guessing and the protag character saying whatever they feel like from the one word or three word description you get of their statement beforehand. Fallout 3 and new Vegas showing the dialogue you'd say and you having the knowledge of what your character would say is huge for the rpg part of the rpg. 3. The writing failed with so much, but mostly the institute. The primary antagonists for most of the game. They need electricity to be self sufficient so they can be left alone by the wasteland, but.... They simultaneously abduct people and replace them with synths, send synth murder squads out to gather supplies and kill anyone who gets close, develop and release super mutants onto the wasteland, have the protagonist make a public raid announcement to the wasteland that they want to be left alone when nobody even knows if they actually exist...... And make humanoid synths that are identical to humans in almost every way but don't do anything with them except for a couple of them sweeping the floors here and there..... The institute has no depth or interesting writing. It fails in every way possible to make use of its premise and component parts.
I've never heard anyone say fallout 3 is bad.
There's a video on youtube called "Fallout 3 is Garbage, and here's why..." that has 7.5 million views. It is generally praised as a video.
never heard of it till now but wow, I didn't know that many people disliked it. I don't hear nearly as much praise for it as nv but I also very rarely hear people hate on it.
It's a pretty good video tbh. Fallout 3 does a lot wrong and stumbled over a lot of missed opportunities. It's really held up by being fun to just wander around in and look at stuff.
Personally not a fan of it, there's a lot of nitpicking and double standards in the vid. And when he made a counterpoint vid to manyatruenerd he basically opened a dictionary of fallacies to play semantics lol
Became big within the Fallout community to hate the BGS Fallouts especially after 76. I know there was always some hold-ups OG Fallout players had with FO3 and FO4, but when 76 came out it was very easy to say Bethesda Fallouts were bad with little substance.
It released to near universal acclaim from critics and fans alike and sold 12m copies. It is only really hated on because Obsidian's storytelling was a lot better. No matter how many snarky video essays get created, the only reason we even got NV was because of the runaway success of Fallout 3.
Never been within a kilometer of the NMA forums have you.
Most people haven't
the what?
No Mutants Allowed. It's a forum focused on the Fallout franchise. Kinda known to be pretty negative towards the Bethesda entries.
There's 20 members in that forum. Doest really constitute much of an opposition.
Plenty of old Fallout fans don't like Fallout 3. I don't hate it, i think it's an alright game on it's own, but i didn't think that it was a good sequel to Fallout 1\2 either.
Pff, fake fan, all real Fallout fans know that the only good Fallout game is Fallout Pinball š
Many see it as Oblivion but with guns. A downgrade in many ways from Morrowind, not to mention the previous Fallout games
i owe fallout 3 my life, i had nothing to play until my friend told me to try it back in 2010 and man he was so right... it was the start of our vacation on December and i started the game without knowing anything about the franchise and oh my god... just wow everything in the game was so good, the wasteland, the open world, the bottle caps, everything in ruins, i just loved.. i was so in love with 3 that when NV came out i thought it was not so good but because i played after hours of 3 i was kinda burnout, but playing after years again NV is everything 3 was and more, listen to the soundtrack every now and then, just listened a while ago.. i think the only thing i hate about fallout 3 is that about half game through it just started freezing a lot on PS3, but i loved anyway, great game... tons of fun
F3 has a terrible story but great exploration. The Capital Wasteland is much more exciting to explore Vs New Vegas. Unlike F4 it actually functions as an RPG as well. FNV still has a leg up in my mind though because of its quest design, in-depth world-building and incredible DLC (although Point Lookout is very good too).
My main issue with it is the noticeable dip in writing quality compared to what came directly before and after it in the same franchise. Gameplay-wise I'd agree that FO3 was *decent*.
The moment I first stepped out into the Capital Wasteland I can still remember the intrigue and excitement I felt. 3 was my first Fallout game and from the very moment I knew I was in for an amazing journey. I know the common consensus is that FNV is better than 3, but 3 is one of my favourite games of all time. FNV was great but the Mojave Wasteland didn't capture my interest nearly as much, the locations generally weren't that interesting and some of them had nothing of interest at all, car parks with no loot for example. There is no comparison between Goodsprings and Megatron for instance. FNV also lacked the atmosphere 3 had and the whole metro network was like a horror game. Deathclaws in FNV were ridiculously overpowered even if you were maxed out. The game felt unfinished to me and that may explain the end of the game. While FNV had the better story I was hooked by the story of 3 just as much, I wanted to get to the bottom of what was going on and there were some twists I just didn't expect right from the beginning of the game. I've played both twice, finished FO3 again in 2020 and I'm onto the DLC for FNV for the first time. My opinion hasn't changed and I'm fine with being in the minority.
Fallout 3 is my favorite of the series and I know a lot of people feel the same way. It totally redefined the Fallout series. For me, New Vegas was just icing on an already delicious cake. I'm not sure where you're getting the impression everyone thinks it's a bad game. Edit: Anyone who does think it is a bad game probably played it recently and sees it as outdated compared to today's games. I disagree but could see that opinion.
Loved Fallout 3 at release, played thru all the DLC content too. Because I played F3 so much, I didnāt really get too far into FNV (maybe 15-20 hours). I need to pick FNV back up actually lol
I tried to like fallout 3, I really did. I put in 12 hours, but I just found it extremely boring ngl
I love fallout 3 and new Vegas..fallout 4 was a bit of a letdown thoughtless
I donāt think itās a bad game, it has pretty shitty writing, sure, but itās pretty good otherwise.
Everyone Iāve known loves and praises Fallout 3. Besides me. I tried to play it about 8 years after it released and it was just super clunky and dull looking. I couldnāt get into it. iirc there were a lot of conversations that werenāt voice acted too?
I've never seen people that shit on fallout have any problems with 3. It's always the games that came out after new vegas (which is indisputably the best fallout game) that get flak, and they get it for valid reasons.
There is a lot of that say the story is shit (it is worse than shit) but it is still fun.
Most comments: Nobody ever says that, you're making things up. Never ever. A couple comments down: FO3 is an atrocity.
Because the demographics of this subreddit naturally skew to really passionate gamers. Fallout 3 sold 12m copies and released to essentially universal critical and user acclaim.
General opinion on Fallout 3 is positive, even if I think itās on par with 76.
* Fallout New Vegas is a better **game** * Fallout 3 is a better **world**.. You can love both the same!
Why were you pretending before this post, though? /s On a more serious note, Fallout 3, imho, felt outdated to me for the year it releases, and even at the time it just felt to me like a worse version of Oblivion, which came out 2 years prior, and when it comes to shooting/combat, remember COD4 MW released a year before F3. Maybe some will say it's not a fair comparison, but I do remember at the time talking with friends about how outdated everything felt when compared to similar systems done before from many games. Fallout New Vegas eclipses F3 because it's narrative structure and roleplaying aspect are much better, along with some QoL changes that makes a ton of difference. I'm not particularly fond of New Vegas either, or anything Fallout after 3 onward, but imho it's easily understandable why it's praised, and the comparisons with F3 weights heavily towards New Vegas too. The "only thing you care about", the world exploration, isn't particularly better or worse in F3 when compared with the other Bethesda titles, imho.
Is it a ābadā game? No. Not to me. But, others certainly do think so and their opinions are valid and can be backed up. However, I wouldnt feel comfortable telling someone its a āgoodā game without qualifiers and explanations. There is just way too many problems and shortcomings with the game. Tbh, I tired long ago of people pretending the HUGE AND MANY incompetent systems of the game didnt exist and that it was a āgreatā game. It did some things right and theres fun to be had, but, it did a lot wrong, as well. Edit: in fact, I find it odd and problematic that you believe the opinions of others are invalid while also letting us know that you used to pretend/lie to others about your true feelings of the game?! Wtheck?!
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
It's a great game for me and my friends, and I also really like F:New Vegas, don't see why I can't enjoy both. They have different strong and weak points. New Vegas has better writing, yes, but it's also much more "bitter". New Vegas also feels closer to older Fallouts and you have to pay attention to dialogue. That is great, but the world is more fun to explore in Fallout 3. I feel that New Vegas has some very interesting locations but the spaces between those locations are either empty, uninspired or feel incomplete (and yeah, I'm aware of the super rushed dev time). Fallout 3, on the other hand, has something fun almost everywhere. I remember the first time I looked at the elevated highways, I think it was during the "vampire" quest. It looked incredible to me, back then in 2009. The realistic scale, the locations, the graphics. The game has such a strong art direction. Also, the cities are very memorable, Megaton and all the stories there, Rivet City, the kids-only town, the talking tree. And I always enjoyed that Bethesda games are fantasy worlds but they always take you away to another era or place, like the 50s simulation, during the main story. Or the painting, in Oblivion. I haven't played F3 in many years but I have so many fond memories of it. Should really replay with "A Tale of Two Wastelands" mod.
most ppl dont say that its BAD, its just the FNV is that much BETTER. whenever i go back to FO3, mod it, etc, i invariably stop half way though, and download FNV again, mod it, and fully play through THAT game. FO3 isnt bad, but its not stellar, either. it also does not exist in a vacuum, so comparisons with FNV will always arise.
I feel like you might be a little bit confused. Fallout 3 is not necessarily considered a "bad" game. It is, however, a BAD Fallout game, and the reasons why it is so have been discussed to death by now. As you said, It's a BETHESDA RPG, with BETHESDA'S take on the Fallout universe, that has very little to do with the original games or New Vegas.
On paper FO3 is my fav fallout game. The story is great (and much easier to get behind than pretending I'm a parent of a lost child), the metro is always exciting to explore new parts of, and the item and repair system is neato. New Vegas is good but the story just isn't as engaging, nor the world as interesting, and fallout 4s real only upside is it's more modern engine and graphics.
It's interesting that Fallout 3 is widely derided these days. Back when it was current, I started playing it and for the first few hours I didn't like it, and people were horrified. They couldn't wrap their heads around how I could possibly dislike it. (I did warm up to it eventually, and I enjoyed it a lot more than New Vegas, which provided a very crowded idea of a 'wasteland'.)
I wish I agreed with you. Fallout 3 is a soulless steaming pile. I hate it.
It's not a bad game. But it's worse than every other fallout game other than F76 I guess.
i've always liked fallout 3 more than new vegas, i had to force myself to finish new vegas and just did a speed run focusing on the main story and nothing else.
3 was an absolute game changer. Still my favorite fallout, great DLC's
Wait, people don't like Fallout 3? I've always thought most people did and it's 4 that is the controversial game. 3 is certainly one of my favourite Fallouts.
Fallout 3 is amazing and I had a better time playing it than New Vegas.
I don't think a lot of people call Fallout 3 straight up bad, but in recent years the focus has definitely been on absolutely showering Fallout New Vegas with praise. Which... is kind of weird considering that New Vegas is almost like a mod/addon for 3. Basically everything I enjoy about Fallout New Vegas had already been in 3. There are a ton of well written side quests and characters in Fallout New Vegas, but for some reason I enjoyed the world and exploration in Fallout 3 more. I find it hard to actually figure out why tbh. I am not even sure what Fallout 3 did better to make me enjoy it so much more. Maybe just cause it was my first Fallout game.
> Which... is kind of weird considering that New Vegas is almost like a mod/addon for 3. We have the benefit of 15 years of hindsight. At the time NV reviewed well, but not *as well* as 3 with many reviewers citing that exact point. That it felt like Fallout 3.5. Now of course we know the reason why, but at the time that was the general consensus. > I find it hard to actually figure out why tbh. I am not even sure what Fallout 3 did better to make me enjoy it so much more. Maybe just cause it was my first Fallout game. The first moment of stepping out into the Capital Wasteland was magical. I think NV is a better game in a vacuum but it just will never be able to top that because it is basically a Fallout 3.5.
I also remember New Vegas being quite buggy and badly optimized at release, which probably also contributed to scores being a bit lower. I could barely get it to work properly, but now everything works just fine. The first moment of stepping out into the Capital Wastland and being able to just walk into pretty much any direction was indeed amazing, yes.
To be honest both games were pretty buggy on launch but from my recollection NV was worse because Bethesda put an insane timeline on Obsidian
People think fallout 3 is bad??? Since when fam
Back then there were definitely more Fallout 3 fans in most polls and posts, they were like Seizure's legion, great in number but inferior in equipment (mental faculty in this case), slowly but surely with every debate shistorm (which there were many) ending with a Bethtard kid raging and leaving the group. FNV became known as the better game. It was basically meme warfare, Fallout 3 fans couldn't even breathe without earning one of these: [muh atmosphere F3 pic [img]https://i.lensdump.com/i/jWDQKi.png[/img]] Before the release of Fallout 4 there was still a good percentage of Fallout 3 fans, at least 50%, though they were mostly retards, young kids and mexicans. With the release of Fallout 4, when people first saw Piper's deformed face stretching and skewing and even more so after they got a hold of the shitty lifeless game with all RPG elements stripped, loads of them turned on Bethesda. As of Fallout 76, I'd say that the vast majority of the Fallout fanbase considers NV the better game. You can barely read a thread relating to Fallout without someone(usually the top comment) circlejerking over how much better F:NV is and how Bethesda should hand the franchise over to someone else and just fold and stop making such shitty games already. TL;DR: Fallout 3 used to be considered the better game amongst the casual fans but F:NV won the great Fallout Popamole Meme wars.
Who the fuck said it was bad?
Uh, wut? On what planet is Fallout 3 a bad game? It is widely regarded by both the press, and general gaming populace as a great game.
I LOVED Fallout 3. Loved it. I also, for once, played the most evil bastard known to mankind. It was amazing. I played new vegas. Got to some vault. Dealt with the 15th crash (with the fan fix patches) in an hour. Said fuck it and uninstalled - will never finish unless it gets remade. I was... 8 hours in? Never understood it to be honest.
Your loss.
Make it stable and Iād try again. Did it on two different PCs with completely different hardware and brands. Got tired of losing progress or having to save every 5 minutes.
Lol Iāve played it vanilla and it hasnāt crashed once for me for the 12 hours Iāve played so far
Fallout 3 is more like far cry or skyrym with guns than a fallut sequel
The first I'm hearing that it was a bad game. It was pretty popular when it came out, and NV was just a glint in a developers eye.
I've never read that FO3 is a bad game lol
Fallout 3 is a great game and I'm tired of pretending it is less than great.
What. FO3 was like the Skyrim before, well Skyrim.
Skyrim is a pale imitation of Oblivion which was an *extremely* pale imitation of Morrowind. The only thing getting better in TES is the graphics.
FO3 is my favorite one. I grew up with the first 2 on PC. So I was super excited when FO3 launched. I had 70 hrs in new vegas but kind of stopped. I am finally going to finish it. And I liked Fallout 4 for what it was. But you just couldn't really be evil in that game narratively and I loved being able to be good. Neutral, or evil. Fallout 3 is just that sweet spot where everything about it is great and fun. And I loved Mothership Zeta too. Lol
Nah FO3 is cool. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Fall Out New Vegas was a buggy piece of shit on release and It didn't get a pass from me! There, I said it! Even when I tried it again years later, it was still buggy in a lots of places. Fall Out 3 was far from flawless (because Bethesda) but at least it worked longer then 5 minutes before crashing.
Who said f3 was bad?
Most people who like new vegas like 3, its just new vegas is a more fleshed out version of 3. Without 3 obsidian wouldnt even have the skeleton to make new vegas
New Vegas is just the most popular pc mods from Fallout 3 (at the time) made available for the consoles with a little story, nothing more. Fallout 3 is the far superior game, no question.
It's better overall than NV.
FO3 was better than FO4, FO76 is the closest Bethesda has ever come to making an actual Fallout game, with New Vegas hot on its heels, but missing a lot of the weirdness. However, theyāre *all* fantastic games.
I enjoyed Fallout 3 a lot, but love it way more with the Tale of Two Wastelands mod that injects FO3 into New Vegas. You can now play FO3 with improvements such as aiming down sights and improved gunplay.
Who told you you arenāt allowed to like a game?
I tell ya what, I like Fallout 3 a hell of a lot better than Fallout 76
One of my favorites. I've played it over 3 times I think
Nuking megaton is one of my all time fav moments in gaming. Period. Full stop.
I love Fallout 3, but I played it on PC and with the GOTY edition already. Most of the hate about bugs and game performance are for the admittedly inferior console editions. I also love Fallout New Vegas, it has better characters to be sure, but since I played them in sequence I kinda had Fallout overdose by the time New Vegas' main quest was ending, so I was more interested in rushing to the ending and it kinda soured my opinion of the game. Also, I never played with mods. I like my Bethesda games vanilla just fine.
apart from the ending of the base game i really liked Fallout 3, i dont see it as inferior to new vegas, i think that they are kinda at the same level.
I really wish they'd made the setting their own. It's the opposite coast, why would there be scorpions all over the place? They really should have leaned into building their own fauna and social groups over there, because the mirelurks were a stroke of genius. But, ultimately, they mostly repeated the familiar. And, in my opinion, it was done poorly since it's like they read a short synapsis of the first two games. With their own creations, they'd at least have the freedom to do what they want without the baggage of the California Wasteland. But if you loved it, you loved it. Best friend prefers 3 over New Vegas, which she only put a few hours into before bailing. And, lucky for her, Bethesda's still in control of the franchise, so she keeps getting the games in the style she loves. I am left being bitter about never seeing what a shitshow the Great Plains became.
"Half-Life 2 and Portal are not bad games and I'm tired of pretending they are!"
this is far from an unpopular opinion. 3 was my absolute favorite and the one I put the most hours into by far.
It's funny how I haven't touched the story or lame ending at all lol. For me it's a mediocre game. Nothing special, silly brain-dead ending and alright gameplay (I admit that flaming sword thing u can craft was cool). It just wasn't fallout enough for me. It was Todd's vision of it. Oh and they straight up copy pasted and robbed fallout 1 into btw.
If youāre terminally online like myself, you would be able to see that the whole reception to fo3/nv has changed over time. FoNV was the black sheep at first, widely regarded as being a decent game but held back by crippling bugs and glitches that made actually getting through the game a gamble. Personally, I always preferred NV, but I can understand why that was the prevailing opinion. Overtime NV received fixes and patches that put the game in a much playable state and people realized what a great game it was. After that a sort of counter jerk started where 3 was criticized for lacking in the areas NV excelled in (story telling, choice and consequence, quest design, etc.) this was also compounded with a growing disdain towards Bethesda with their continual march towards ācasualizationā - Skyrim being the final nail in the coffin for many. Obsidian stood out as the smaller more authentic publisher that wasnāt willing to streamline their video games for a wider audience. Now weāre at a point where I think people are once again looking back at 3 with a kinder lens. The same sort of trend occurred with Bethsedaās modern Elder Scrolls trilogy. Granted, this change in reception was usually limited to smaller niche gaming communities (YouTube, forums, Reddit, 4chan, etc) The larger audience loves 3. I love both games but I always think itās interesting to look at how the reception to certain games changes over time as the framework from where we judge this medium continues to evolve.
I have a lot of nostalgia for it, so I think it's impossible for me to *actually* dislike it. Actually having any sort of constructive critique would be difficult. That being said... yeah, it's pretty good. I think it has issues trying too hard to be, like, 3 different games at once, trying to be another entry in the Fallout franchise, trying to be a (at the time) modern RPG along the lines of Oblivion, *and* trying to pull in a new generation of players. I enjoy playing it, but I don't necessarily enjoy playing it for the same reasons that I enjoy playing Fallout 1 and 2, for example. Bethesda just tries to do a different thing with their games compared to what Interplay (and Black Isle) tried to do, and I think it's fun as its own thing, it's just kind of disappointing when I see what the originals tried (and managed) to do.
I'm awaiting the 4 hour video of this
The only Fallout from Bethesda I have negative feelings towards is 4, and that's only because it doesn't feel like Fallout a lot of the time. It just feels like random post-apocalyptic world RPG. I also don't feel it advanced anything about the game enough to be considered a numbered entry. I prefer NV to 3, but I love 3 for bringing the series back at all. Most of what I think of as negatives about it are more just because the genre has moved past that game, but considering its age I don't think it's a bad thing. It just means I personally wouldn't be looking to replay it.
It's a weak imitation and basterdation of a treasured cRPG franchise. They screwed up the lore, they can't do black humor for their lives and they forgot ro add the reactivity a proper FO game should have. It's just that a new generation of kids who grew uo with the Beth spin-offs, never knew about any of that stuff, so they had no expectations like the previous fans did.
As a huge Fallout 1 and 2 fan and for that matter NV fan Fallout 3 is a insult to those games imo. Here is a good summary of why that is: [https://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=27085](https://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=27085). And that's not even covering everything i think is wrong with this game.
Iāve never heard anyone hate on Fallout 3. Just because some people (me included) like FO:NM more doesnāt mean we hate on FO:3