First of all, I absolutely hated Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion. I played its predecessor, Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind, to death. Morrowind was a wonderful open-world, fantasy RPG from Bethesda Softworks. The story was engaging and epic, and the world was brilliantly crafted with unique regions that had distinctive plant, animal and humanoid life (along with different styles of architecture). I will admit that the visuals have not aged well (plus the game was poorly optimized at launch) and the combat system was a bit wonky.
In the lead-up to Oblivion, I was really excited. I even pre-ordered the collector’s edition for PC and bought a DVD drive for my computer (undoubtedly the best thing to come out of that debacle). Then, I played it. It was terrible. Everything that I loved in Morrowind was not present in Oblivion; furthermore, Bethesda managed to carpet bomb this game so bad that collateral damage was inflicted across the game. The world was expansive, but bland. Every area was essentially the same view with the same creatures. Even though the world was big, Morrowind felt bigger (the benefits of reduced render distance, no mounts and no fast travel). The graphics were pretty (save character models, especially the faces), but it was a system hog. The combat and magic system was improved, but the scope was reduced. The most damning indictment of Oblivion was a gross “dumbing down” of the RPG elements. NPCs were lifeless, dialogue trees were sparse, and every enemy in the game leveled with you. This produced the ridiculous phenomenon of bandits and highwaymen clad in ebony armor and brandishing glass weaponry. I’m sorry, but why do they need to prey on travelers when they can afford to acquire and maintain some of the most expensive equipment in the world?
Guess which map comes with the quality game...
In defense of Oblivion, the complaints raised against it are similar to the ones raised against Morrowind by devotees of its predecessor, Daggerfall. I never played Daggerfall, so I clearly lack some perspective. However, if Daggerfall fans disliked Morrowind, then they probably felt the same about Oblivion.
So now Bethesda has got its greedy little fingers on the Fallout franchise. Needless to say, I have been a bit worried. Fallout 1 & 2 were deep, post-apocalyptic, isometric-view, turn-based RPGs. Fallout 3 is a first/third-person shooter with RPG elements (“Oblivion with guns” is the flame-bait). This worry was exacerbated by the last two years when I lived with a roommate who vehemently criticized Fallout 3 (if you are reading this, Hi Jackson). I sympathized with his views entirely, and, after the Oblivion disaster, my reservations were inflamed into true concerns. Yeah, it looked damned cool, but it clearly isn’t even close to the Fallout RPG standard.
A few weeks ago, I decided to take matters into my own hands. I bought a copy of Fallout 2 so I could decide for myself if Fallout 3 was truly an Oblivion treatment for the Fallout franchise. Unfortunately, Fallout 2 came up short of my high expectations. Fallout 2 did have some impressive open-world RPG elements and the dated graphics weren’t terrible. However, Fallout 2’s game design has aged terribly and I do not doubt that if Fallout 2 were released today, ignoring the visuals, it would probably not be reviewed very well. This game is hard as hell. I frequently died in the early areas and the combat system seemed cumbersome and unreasonable. The game manual suggests to save often (after and before battles) and in as many save slots as possible. Not only is this immensely frustrating, but it is bad game design. In an RPG, I want to focus on managing my character and immersing myself in the game world. Having to save every few minutes prohibits the suspension of disbelief and indicates that the combat system has not been properly balanced. Fighting a level 1 ant should not be a battle of attrition that, 50% of the time, leaves me unable to kill a second one without using a very finite supply of healing abilities. Adding auto-save functionality would not fix this game, but it would solve some of the tedium of saving.
Ok, so I didn’t enjoy the five hours I spent in Fallout 2. This assuaged many of my doubts about Fallout 3. The arguments of the Fallout purists began to convince me less. I think that Bethesda’s re-imagining of the Fallout world is a welcome one, but they should strike the “3” from the title because I don’t think that it is a true sequel. I would suggest: Fallout: Road to the White House, Fallout: Washington, etc.
Sweet, sweet irradiated brains.
Delay induced update: Fallout 3 is great. I'm only a few hours in since I have to split time with Fable 2 and taking care of dogs (*sigh*). So far, I am impressed. Running and gunning, like in a shooter, is a surefire way to get killed. Using the RPG-esque V.A.T.S. system is the way to go and the slo-mo kills are cool. The most impressive feature so far: beard selection for male character. The number of facial hair styles available is mind-boggling and truly unprecedented (no "five-o'clock shadow" option, but the "Honest Abe" makes up for it). Unfortunately, you can definitely tell that Fallout 3 runs on a modified Oblivion engine. The animations are, at times, very poor, especially if you play from the third-person perspective.
In other news…
Fable 2 is also awesome. I have been slashing, sniping, blasting, price controlling and farting my way into the hearts and minds of the people of Albion. I am on an open-world game overload with GTA IV and Fable 2. Fallout 3 is really piling on the gaming hours (plus Gears of War 2 coming next week). Once again, this is the most wonderful time of the year for lovers of the video game.
Bioware and Lucasarts made the rumors official and announced the continuation of the Knights of the Old Republic series with Star Wars: The Old Republic. They are hoping to craft a truly story-driven MMORPG. The interviews that have been given so far have gotten me excited, but I still have reservations. First and foremost, I really wanted KotOR III and not an MMO sell-out game. It’s no use getting all worked up now though. “SWTOR” is 2-4 years from release and probably closer to 4.
3 comments:
I asked on a forum whether Fallout would be fun for the demographic of people who didn't like Oblivion that much, but everyone just called me a PC snob :(
Let me know if Fallout 3 is still cool in two weeks - it should be in the bargain bin about time I get back.
p.s. didn't know you had a blog. I'm starting one (other than china) on my general interests so let's be sure to cross-link. not ready for viewage at all but it will be: jwcons.blogspot.com
Oh, I just skimmed your post and didn't see my sweet cameo. Yeah, Fallout 1 was hard as hell too. Stupid rats. I will be more than willing to eat my words, but after Oblivion got 9's everywhere I'm waiting on trusted sources (you). Nice map comparison btw.
I will say that I am still uneasy about Fallout 3, but the world just has this permeating atmosphere that sucks me in whenever I play. It definitely improves on Oblivion from that aspect. When you stand on a mountain and look into the distance, the feeling of scale is much improved and the ground textures don't look like total crap.
However, they did manage to keep two of the more annoying things from Oblivion. First, the resolution scaling of the interface is, once again, very poor. Having to scroll down through vendor lists that only display 7 items at a time or dialogue menus that only display 3 medium length responses at a time is really annoying. Fortunately, there are already a few fan mods that do UI fixes. Which brings me to the second point, Bethesda, in its infinite wisdom, has decided to not release any developer tools. So the trickle of mods that are coming out now are fairly small in scope.
I really do feel like it's a logic modern addition to the Fallout series, but a lot of folks from "No mutants allowed" would probably disagree.
Post a Comment