Yes. FO3 was pretty fucking shitty. I wan't a game that make me feel like I am atleast in the Fallout setting. Not generic grey apocalypse number 131245133213967
Yes. FO3 was pretty fucking shitty. I wan't a game that make me feel like I am atleast in the Fallout setting. Not generic grey apocalypse number 131245133213967
made by the ever charming and talented Lillian Thorne.
Obsidian are fantastic plot writers. New Vegas was very well made in that respect, especially with Lonesome Road, I thought. Bethesda are very good at making little mini stories. Loot is carefully and logically placed so you may infer about the types of things that happened there as well as the people are there. What they can't do is write plots. It's not an original analogy, but Bethesda games are wide, beautiful, knee deep oceans.
i never mentioned New Vegas becosue "LOL GAME KEPT CRASHING"
I complain about FO3 becouse the gradient, the lazy texturing the terrible placement of obstacles and the generally shitty outline of things. Variety was small, everytime you came to new place, it was mainly the same thing with just a some other props added. What lazy fucked descided to reuse textrues evereywhere, reuse the same set of lighting and have every house feel like cardboard? ugh.
made by the ever charming and talented Lillian Thorne.
Defiantly but I still cared about the main plot. The characters I met along the way were a lot more memorable for me. Elder Lyons, Three Dog, Dad, Fawkes, etc. The events were all memorable, too. So call me a little crazy but I still thought FO3 was better but both Fallout 3 and New Vegas were amazing. I easily spent about 50+ hours on both games over the time I played them.