I Think It's Time We All Decide... Bethesda Better Be Listening

[C0rrup73d]

>People saying it should have been developed by Bethesda

What? Are they joking?

Tbh I liked Fallout 3 more than New Vegas.

[Kendo 2]

I suffered through being a Steam victim for FOW just like I suffered through it with GFWL and FO3. I don't like third party apps or covert info mining, Steaming being very bad about that.

 

And I haven't purchased the game yet. I had it on pre-order and cancelled it after I heard about the Steam factor. If I'm going to have Steam forced on me to play the game, I'm going to break even on the money and buy it off of Ebay. Bethesda won't get my money this time.

[Madae]

As much as I enjoyed Fallout 3, despite the many problems I had with it, they practically butchered it. I'm glad Obsidian took over and brought it back to the right path. New Vegas is an excellent addition.

[reclaimerxxx]

People really want Bethesda ruining the franchise more?

 

I think only people who played Fallout 1 and 2 really appreciate New Vegas. Why? Obsidian is composed of many former Black Isle/Interplay employees, all who worked on Fallout 1 and 2. Fallout 3 was an atrocious butchering of Fallout lore, New Vegas saves it by going back to it's roots.

 

Also Kendo, what are you going on about? Data mining? At the most Steam takes hardware surveys, and it asks you specifically if you want to participate. If you dislike a service, that's fine, but creating a false image of the service is wrong. Steam was chosen over GFWL do to it's flexibility and easy access for all users. I'm sorry that you find having to keep around a login and password a bad factor.

 

tl;dr Bethesda sucks and Steam is fine, deal with it.

[Madae]

I agree. There are two types of people in the world; those that played Fallout 1 and 2 and were sad to see Fallout 3 change as much as it did (despite being fun in its own way), and those that haven't played Fallout 1 and 2 and consider New Vegas a step in the wrong direction, as in Fallout 3 is all they know. If you've played Fallout 1 and 2, you should appreciate what New Vegas did to the franchise - it's more in line with the Fallout universe than Fallout 3 ever was.

 

Not to mention the dialogue, story, and writing, arguably the most important part(s) of an RPG, were terrible in Fallout 3. Obsidian houses the people that made the originals, and also Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale, and Planescape Torment - literally some of the best RPG's to ever be created for the PC. These guys know how to do it, and while Bethesda has the open world exploration and general gameplay down pat - some of the best in the industry, they are seriously lacking in the department that defines what an RPG actually is or is supposed to be.

[Kendo 2]

People really want Bethesda ruining the franchise more?

 

I think only people who played Fallout 1 and 2 really appreciate New Vegas. Why? Obsidian is composed of many former Black Isle/Interplay employees, all who worked on Fallout 1 and 2. Fallout 3 was an atrocious butchering of Fallout lore, New Vegas saves it by going back to it's roots.

 

Also Kendo, what are you going on about? Data mining? At the most Steam takes hardware surveys, and it asks you specifically if you want to participate. If you dislike a service, that's fine, but creating a false image of the service is wrong. Steam was chosen over GFWL do to it's flexibility and easy access for all users. I'm sorry that you find having to keep around a login and password a bad factor.

 

tl;dr Bethesda sucks and Steam is fine, deal with it.

 

:blink:

Thanks for the troll baiting. I was responding to the OP's poll and giving my OPINION of what I know to be true about Steam. I'm sorry you find it necessary to bait someone WITH YOUR FIRST POST ON THE FORUM. And I'm not about to turn the OP's Poll thread into a debate topic or waste my time arguing with ANYONE.

[JimboUK]

I agree. There are two types of people in the world; those that played Fallout 1 and 2 and were sad to see Fallout 3 change as much as it did (despite being fun in its own way), and those that haven't played Fallout 1 and 2 and consider New Vegas a step in the wrong direction, as in Fallout 3 is all they know. If you've played Fallout 1 and 2, you should appreciate what New Vegas did to the franchise - it's more in line with the Fallout universe than Fallout 3 ever was.

 

Not to mention the dialogue, story, and writing, arguably the most important part(s) of an RPG, were terrible in Fallout 3. Obsidian houses the people that made the originals, and also Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale, and Planescape Torment - literally some of the best RPG's to ever be created for the PC. These guys know how to do it, and while Bethesda has the open world exploration and general gameplay down pat - some of the best in the industry, they are seriously lacking in the department that defines what an RPG actually is or is supposed to be.

 

^^^ This. Fallout3 was fun but it wasn't a good RPG, better than Oblivion but still well short of what Obsidian have produced with New Vegas. I'd like to see Obsidian given the next game, the thought of going back to Bethesdas over simplified design and their laughable writing is not a pleasant one.

[Mogadin]

Well considering there's no free roam when the story is done, to me it wasn't worth the price.

All in all the game is good, even with it's quirks. My biggest complaint would have to be, having to start all over once you finish the story.

But I guess this is the actual END of the Fallout series.

I find steam to be an annoyance at times but if that's what it takes to keep the morons from completely ripping off the games then so be it.

It actually seems more like a HUD for advertising then anything else.

But then that's just my opinion.

[NmESeth]

The only time steam pisses me off is in when I decide I want to refund a game, then realize I can't because I bought it from steam instead of gamestop.

 

Oh, and I guess when I can't play games offline, even though they have 0% to deal with the internet.

 

other than that I like steam.

 

Def. worth the money, I will be buying the DLC as long as it adds enough content, and Obsidian did a fine job, I'd like to see an explanation as to why the game has so many bugs, but the actual game itself is way better than F03, Just needs more time to polish.

 

Maybe listen to the beta testers this time.

[cerebus23]

Well considering there's no free roam when the story is done, to me it wasn't worth the price.

All in all the game is good, even with it's quirks. My biggest complaint would have to be, having to start all over once you finish the story.

But I guess this is the actual END of the Fallout series.

I find steam to be an annoyance at times but if that's what it takes to keep the morons from completely ripping off the games then so be it.

It actually seems more like a HUD for advertising then anything else.

But then that's just my opinion.

 

and there was free roam in fallout 3? seems to me we had to wait for the dlc to raise the cap and you had to pay 10 dollars for that cap to be lifted. granted broken steel dlc was better than the actual game imo.

 

steam is fine, way some people act you would think steam is stealing all your porn and bank info off your harddrive while you are playing games. steam does collect system specs and etc but asks you to submit them, steam does do a good bit of data mining of game info, things like play time, what your favorite weapons are number of deaths distance traveled, etc etc but many games do things like that not to spy on your lack of having a life when you clock 30 hours of play time in a 3 day period, but to drawn some patterns of players habits and see if they can use that to make the next game better.

 

rockstar does it, i am sure gfwl does it, bioware does it, more and more games are dating mining your game habits and developers collect them to try and spot trends and figure out things like way does 80% of people play soldier class or use guns and how can we try and convince them to try something else.

 

but some people act like steam is the sole company out there to do it, which is near laughable. but even the whole well i dont want to have to be offline to play games and that can be an issue but standard steam can run in offline mode as long as the client has made an initial handshake you can offline game all you want. cloud based steam tho could be trouble, no worse then ubisofts efforts with online saves, but the issues with steam cloud and nv seem to indicate that these save system are no ideal at all even with steams relatively good networks. we know ubisoft abandoned it after two games because the vast majority of people hated it especially when their servers crashed incessantly when the games launched.