Dec 31 - Dec 31 (The Year Ahead)

The video game industry stirs, a leviathan in disturbed slumber, lurching beneath the waves, incubating in fantasies of untold destruction. And, while the world spins for another week back to that angle of space we deem a new year, unperturbed by what this industry dreams for the coming months, we gamers, we cabal of the digital beast, are content to bide our time and scheme.

Look, it's hard coming up with something interesting to say every week, particularly during weeks when nothing is being released. But, rather than employing the conjuration power of Google Images to nefarious work for me so that I have something to show you, this week as we plunge into 2008 I offer, instead of the traditional Game of the Week, rather my personal Game of the Year. This is the game I can't wait to play in 2008 and for which I will commit felonious assault if it is delayed.

So, my Game of the Coming Year?

IMAGE(http://www.gamerswithjobs.com/files/images/Fallout3.thumbnail.jpg)

Fallout 3.

Comments

Burton wrote:

Personally, I think I would feel better about Fallout 3 if it was in the hands of Bioware instead.

I've never enjoyed the combat in a BioWare game. The games were great, just not the combat. Even the turn based stuff annoyed me. Haven't played Mass Effect though, maybe they finally nailed it. They do so many other things well.

Bethesda makes some weird decisions about melee combat, but Oblivion did a nice job with the sneaky shooty trappy stuff. If they can merge it with Fallout's SPECIAL system, it might be the very first game with equally enjoyable action and RPG elements.

*Legion* wrote:
boogle wrote:

On the bright side, at least we'll get scores on reviews now! :)

And better prizes for the donation drives!

Jesus, integrity just gets in the way of everything fun![/quote]
Especially hookers. Integrity and hookers don't mix.

Personally, my game of the year ahead goes to Far Cry 2. Every time more info on it is released, it sounds even better than I ever imagined, and the fact that the creative director on the project is the same guy behind what I feel are the "better" Splinter Cell games, I have my expectations raised immensely.

Also, I'm looking forward to Fallout 3. I enjoyed Oblivion even though I didn't like the past Elder Scrolls, and because while I loved the post-apocalyptic setting I didn't care for both the writing and the gameplay of the first two (or any of the Troika games for that matter). Thus, my hope is ironically that F3 doesn't borrow from the original series except for the superficial stuff.

Elysium wrote:

I regret to inform you all that, according to several messages I've received, apparently by anticipating Fallout 3, GWJ has completely sold out and is now in the pocket of Bethesda and perhaps any number of other large corporations.

Its about time. So what did my stock options cash in for?

I think people should just stop looking at Fallout 3 as a sequel and judge it in terms of what it is, which is a current take on the setting. If you don't like the game mechanics they've chosen, then stop paying attention to it. It certainly isn't the equivalent to what Interplay themselves did to the franchise with the Fallout console game.

And for god's sake, it's been 10 years. Things change. Deal with it.

boogle wrote:

Didn't mean to be offensive, I'm just saying that judging now or even trying to compare it to previous games is jumping the gun a bit. There's still dev time left, and its a whole new game. They might change somethings that were "key", but it won't be a rehash of the original which makes it feel stale and doesn't do justice to it.

How is comparing a SEQUEL to its PREQUELS jumping a gun in any shape or form ?

Also, the whole "stale" bit is usually based on the false assumption that the Fallout fans just want Bethesda to copy Fallout 1, warts and all. It's a convenient assumption to make, that's for sure. However it is entirely false.

The fans aren't mindlessly resistant to change. They want a new, improved Fallout. Something they almost had with this. That is what Fallout 3 should've been in the 21st century.

What the fans DON'T want is a reinvention of things that worked perfectly. It takes a certain kind of talent and humility to recognize elements that other people put together better than you did, and preserve/improve on them the best you can.

It takes no brain at all to rip everything out and start from scratch with "your own vision" which leaves nothing intact from the Fallout of old. Nothing except superficial visual simularities and what they see as "throwing bones to the fans", like naming a random dog in Fallout3 "Dogmeat" as they proudly announced recently.

...because that's how Bethesda sees their fanbase. As dumb, rabid creatures that will eat up any gimmick that supposedly brings Fallout 3 closer to Fallout 1. That is the ultimately worst mistake any developer can make.

Sarkus wrote:

I think people should just stop looking at Fallout 3 as a sequel

Think about that for a moment.

If this was any other forum, I wouldn't be showing the restraint I have right now. All I can say is, sometimes people need to learn to let go.

/shame boogle, /shame.

boogle wrote:

shihonage, /rant.

boogle, /relent.

kuddles wrote:

If this was any other forum, I wouldn't be showing the restraint I have right now. All I can say is, sometimes people need to learn to let go.

Why ? And now I am curious about your mention of restraint. Why is it that the things you want to say are not suitable for this forum ? Does my pointing out the facts about F3 (on which I haven't really started, really), stir anger inside you ? If so, why ?

Why is it assumed everywhere that Fallout 3 will be a great game ? What gives you that idea, and, most importantly, what automatically gives it more weight than the idea that Fallout 3 will NOT be a great game ?

Why is someone pointing out the shortcomings of Fallout 3 is told to "wait to play the game" before "jumping to conclusions" by the same people who ALREADY jumped to the conclusion that the game is going to be great ?

You can't point out the shortcomings of something that does not exist yet. Maybe I'm just a dirty skimmer, but no one here has assumed this game will be great. They are just looking forward to finding out. All I see is someone assuming the game will be rubbish.

psu_13 wrote:

You can't point out the shortcomings of something that does not exist yet.

You appear to be out of date. It is a project well into its development. It does very well exist. It is even playable. It was demonstrated to the press in action.

Maybe I'm just a dirty skimmer, but no one here has assumed this game will be great. They are just looking forward to finding out. All I see is someone assuming the game will be rubbish.

Assumptions are by definition not supported by fact. There are plenty of known facts about F3 that are not going to change. For example, the fact that the entire game is voice-acted, which automatically reduces the amount of variety in possible dialogue by an incredible amount, no matter how much money they got to throw on voice actors.

I'm looking forward to see what Fallout 3 turns out like. At first I was disappointed that Bethesda was making the game; I don't like the Elder Scrolls series. Now, I'm curious. If it's a FUN game but doesn't have the Fallout feel I'll just pretend it's a generic post-apocalyptic RPG like Shiho suggested. However, I don't see the point in criticizing something that we haven't had a chance to play yet.

boogle wrote:

shihonage, /rant.

Unnecessary. No more of this.

As to F3, the complaints you've offered really only matter if you have a preconceived notion of what F3 _should_ be. I guess I don't as much as I used to, so what I'm seeing leaves me enthusiastic that a developer I've come to respect is working on a new vision for a franchise I'm interested in.

If that leaves me as a less than faithful Fallout fan -- well, from what I've seen lately in other locales, all the better.

Anyway, this is a ridiculous topic to have become so contentious. It ends.

Sometimes I feel that somehow I miss the point of Internet forums entirely.

Er, that was a reply to Vector... posted simultaneously with Elysium.

Never mind.
Boogle, /go sulk in a corner.

shihonage wrote:

Sometimes I feel that somehow I miss the point of Internet forums entirely.

Er, that was a reply to Vector... posted simultaneously with Elysium.

Oddly enough, same here.

I think your complaints are valid (I have the same ones) but you make it seem like you are unwilling to give the game any chance. In my mind it is still possible to capture the spirit of Fallout even though they have changed much of what I found enjoyable.

And guys, Shiho isn't hating on how most are looking forward to Fallout 3. He's saying it shouldn't be called Fallout 3 because so much has been changed.

Vector wrote:
shihonage wrote:

Sometimes I feel that somehow I miss the point of Internet forums entirely.

Er, that was a reply to Vector... posted simultaneously with Elysium.

Oddly enough, same here.

I think your complaints are valid (I have the same ones) but you make it seem like you are unwilling to give the game any chance. In my mind it is still possible to capture the spirit of Fallout even though they have changed much of what I found enjoyable.

And guys, Shiho isn't hating on how most are looking forward to Fallout 3. He's saying it shouldn't be called Fallout 3 because so much has been changed.

Shiho's complaints are valid. But to rag on people who are looking forward to Fallout 3 being a different take on the Fallout method because it is called Fallout 3 strikes me as a little petty. Am I allowed to say I am looking forward to [Bethesda Post-Apocalyptic Role Playing Property]. Does that pass inspection? I don't care what Bethesda is calling it. I am looking forward to Fallout 3 because I like the genre, and I am apparently an RPG gaming philistine for enjoying RPG's made by Bethesda. An actual Fallout 3 will never exist. It is impossible.

At least Shiho is making an effort at keeping the dream alive with this "Shelter" thing that I see in his quote area. Thats better than 95% of the fan base these days. Bethesda bought the license. No amount of wailing and gnashing our teeth will make that any different. I understand where Shiho and others are coming from. You don't think I get pissed when I see a movie based off a beloved book that gets pimped out as a stupid summer action movie (I'm looking at you "I Robot")? This is what it is to be a fan. People with money will always get to control big budget entertainment. Don't like it? Make your own damn game. It's either that or pray someone who "understands" the franchise like you do gets put in charge of it.

To me, the debate/blood-feud over another fallout game is similar to the way people felt about the Star Wars prequels. Some people saw Episodes I, II, and III as films made by people who had forgotten what Star Wars was all about and just wanted to cash in. Some people were just happy to go see another film set in the Star Wars universe. I fall somewhere in the middle there. Same for Fallout 3. I hope they can touch that spark of greatness that was in Fallout 1 and 2, but I really just want to play around in that setting again.

I will now hit post comment and probably find someone else has made a much better commentary while I have been typing away :).

Personally, my anticipation of Fallout 3 has almost nothing to do with the name and everything to do with the fact that I enjoyed Morrowind (although Oblivion not so much) and I love the underutilized post apocalyptic setting (I played the heck out of Roadwar 2000, for Pete's sake). If we're going to get all elitist about games, IMO Fallout can't carry Wasteland's jock. I played through the first Fallout and couldn't make myself finish the second. I spent weeks of my life playing and replaying Wasteland.

Gameraotaku wrote:
Vector wrote:
shihonage wrote:

Sometimes I feel that somehow I miss the point of Internet forums entirely.

Er, that was a reply to Vector... posted simultaneously with Elysium.

Oddly enough, same here.

I think your complaints are valid (I have the same ones) but you make it seem like you are unwilling to give the game any chance. In my mind it is still possible to capture the spirit of Fallout even though they have changed much of what I found enjoyable.

And guys, Shiho isn't hating on how most are looking forward to Fallout 3. He's saying it shouldn't be called Fallout 3 because so much has been changed.

Shiho's complaints are valid. But to rag on people who are looking forward to Fallout 3 being a different take on the Fallout method because it is called Fallout 3 strikes me as a little petty. Am I allowed to say I am looking forward to [Bethesda Post-Apocalyptic Role Playing Property]. Does that pass inspection? I don't care what Bethesda is calling it. I am looking forward to Fallout 3 because I like the genre, and I am apparently an RPG gaming philistine for enjoying RPG's made by Bethesda. An actual Fallout 3 will never exist. It is impossible.

I think you're being too hard on him. Other than his first post of this page he wasn't saying anything negative about other people expectations of Fallout 3.

Also, NMA represents a portion of Fallout fans. A portion that I think is stuck in nostalgia and fanboyism. Even when Black Isle was developing Fallout 3 their were some people that were complaining for no discernible reason. It appears to me that Bethesda gets a lot of hate for that game being canceled and their Fallout 3 getting made. There are other Fallout fans (there are many here) and they are not as negative.

Jadawin wrote:

Personally, my anticipation of Fallout 3 has almost nothing to do with the name and everything to do with the fact that I enjoyed Morrowind (although Oblivion not so much) and I love the underutilized post apocalyptic setting (I played the heck out of Roadwar 2000, for Pete's sake). If we're going to get all elitist about games, IMO Fallout can't carry Wasteland's jock. I played through the first Fallout and couldn't make myself finish the second. I spent weeks of my life playing and replaying Wasteland.

Have you played S.T.A.L.K.E.R. It's what I consider a good transition of Fallout to a first person post-apocalyptic pseudo-RPG.

S.T.A.L.K.E.R. is the one game that gave me hope that the Post-Apocalyptic game experience doesn't have to begin and end with Fallout. Looking forward to their next project and hoping they get enough money/time to finish it :).

Here are some games I'm looking forward to that I have not noticed mentioned yet:

Sadness (Wii)
Star Wars: The Force Unleashed (360)
Okami (Wii)
Civilization Revolution (360)
Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles: Crystal Bearers (Wii)
LEGO Indiana Jones: The Videogame (X360)

I am looking forward to Star Wars: The Force Unleashed as well, but I still can't get over the fact that it is not coming to PC. Has there been any news on this? I have a 360, but I have played all the Dark Forces/Jedi Knight games on PC and I will miss the joy of modding the game. How will I get my "Lightsaber Realism" hack working on the 360?

/pout

Looks like it is The Force Unleashed is coming to the Wii as well. Maybe you can get your "Lightsaber Realism" there.

BTW, PC gaming is dead.

PCs play games too?

Jayhawker wrote:

Looks like it is The Force Unleashed is coming to the Wii as well. Maybe you can get your "Lightsaber Realism" there.

BTW, PC gaming is dead. :-)

Naw, my "Lightsaber Realism" was changing some settings in the game so when you hit someone with a lightsaber it cuts right through them instead of throwing off some sparks and causing health damage. Very hilarious when you hit somebody 8 times in 4 seconds and they fall to pieces. Stuff like that is why I play games on the PC whenever possible. I want to be able to make modifications to my games and i can't get that on the current consoles. I'll suck it up and get it on the 360 I guess.

wanderingtaoist wrote:

As much as I am a fan of Fallout, there is just one game I'm really looking forward to - handheld Civilization.

Yes yes yes. And yes.
Left4Dead and Too Human are up on my list as well, but don't forget about portable Civ.
Okami on the Wii. (Not that I own a Wii, but this went from something I would have rented for the PS2 to a reason to buy a Wii.)
Final Fantasy Tactics A2

Dude, forget Fallout 3. True hardcore gamers know the most anticipated game next year is...

MADDEN NFL 2009.

It's gonna be awesome. I hope they don't mess it up.

shihonage wrote:
Sarkus wrote:

I think people should just stop looking at Fallout 3 as a sequel

Think about that for a moment.

I was unclear about what I meant by that. My point was that Fallout 3 is not related to the earlier RPG's in the way that sequels normally are. It's not a continuation of the story. In fact, I'd argue that the series has never been that way. Fallout 2 was only a continuation of Fallout 1 in terms of using some of the same geography, and Interplay's Fallout 3 appears to have had nothing to do with the earlier games other than taking place in the same area years later. Each game is simply an RPG in a specific setting defined by the first game. A setting, not a gameplay structure.

I find it ironic that there is this much argument here when NMA seems to hardly care and their own front page commentator suggests using the term "game of the year" was premature precisely because we don't yet know what Bethesda will be delivering.

Sarkus wrote:

I was unclear about what I meant by that. My point was that Fallout 3 is not related to the earlier RPG's in the way that sequels normally are. It's not a continuation of the story. In fact, I'd argue that the series has never been that way. Fallout 2 was only a continuation of Fallout 1 in terms of using some of the same geography, and Interplay's Fallout 3 appears to have had nothing to do with the earlier games other than taking place in the same area years later. Each game is simply an RPG in a specific setting defined by the first game. A setting, not a gameplay structure.

Somehow I feel the people who liked the puzzle-based, non-realtime game named Myst would be severely underwhelmed when they discover that a sequel to Myst series they just purchased is a first-person-shooter taking place in fully licensed Myst universe

One plays a game, not a setting. The setting is the meat on the gameplay skeleton.

I find it ironic that there is this much argument here when NMA seems to hardly care and their own front page commentator suggests using the term "game of the year" was premature precisely because we don't yet know what Bethesda will be delivering.

NMA became pretty desensitized toward this sort of announcements, so you need to look a little deeper than just their most recent frontpage posting to find out what they think about Fallout 3.