marcussims67 Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 (edited) @Terralventhethere's a reason why FNV is not on the list and FO3 is, because FNV did not introduce anything revolutionary or anything unique, FO3 on the other hand had great atmosphere, map design (except for the repetitive and annoying subways), great lighting, immersion, music and decent mix of both RPG and FPS elements. FNV however is merely just a big FO3 expansion with less a immersive atmosphere and map design, horrible interior lighting but FNV's amount of weapons, iron sights, combat oriented gameplay is pretty fun too, eh, but its just my opinion, no one's forcing anyone to like what they likestrangely though, i play FNV more than FO3 nowadays because most new mods are now for FNV Edited March 20, 2011 by marcussims67 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terralventhe Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 @marcussims67 "FO3 on the other hand had great atmosphere, map design (except for the repetitive and annoying subways), great lighting, immersion, music and decent mix of both RPG and FPS elements." Please show me what game you were playing, because the FO3 I played was a miserable excuse for an Oblivion game with guns, riding on the coattails of the success of the previous Fallout series. Fallout: New Vegas wasn't much better in terms of graphics, but at the very least it got the immersion and the story right, unlike Fallout 3 which was the Uwe Boll equivalent of an adaptation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bakafool Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 @marcussims67"FO3 on the other hand had great atmosphere, map design (except for the repetitive and annoying subways), great lighting, immersion, music and decent mix of both RPG and FPS elements."Please show me what game you were playing, because the FO3 I played was a miserable excuse for an Oblivion game with guns, riding on the coattails of the success of the previous Fallout series. Fallout: New Vegas wasn't much better in terms of graphics, but at the very least it got the immersion and the story right, unlike Fallout 3 which was the Uwe Boll equivalent of an adaptation. Terralventhe... you just feel like crap because they didn't consider your beloved fo 1 and 2 for their list... We get that you don't like Fo3 since you're keep repeating it like a broken record. Why keep coming here? If you need direction, NMA is THAT way. There you and 15 others bitter fo1 and 2 fans can can spend all day crying injustice over that Smithsonian list. have fun! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghostrecon123 Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 (edited) @bakafooli like FO1 and FO2 toomy ratings on all fallout games would be1. fallout 32. fallout 1 and 23. fallout New Vegasbut that's just my opinion, although that's one word that "someone here" obviously cannot comprehend and keeps coming back Edited March 20, 2011 by ghostrecon123 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GraDDIman Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 I Voted F03, It was a REALLY hard Choice once i saw Valve had games up there, GO BETHESDA GO! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bakafool Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 (edited) Ghostrecon I didn't mean to imply that ALL fo1 and 2 fans are like that guy.Just the bitter ones like our friend here that keep coming to post stupid things like that on the nexus and Beth forums on the fo 3 section. It's kinda sad though,he is kinda the gamer version of the comic book guy from the Simpson.Though for all his crying and protesting, FO3 STILL gonna be on that Smithsonian list,There are still going to be people who are going to buy the game and actually likes it...and despite his moronic comparison to Uwe Boll, all the awards that FO 3 has received NOT going to suddenly dissapear...and the real kicker, there still gonna be people who preffer FO 3 over NV or the earlier FO games... So i guess right now, it's just sucks to be him. Edited March 20, 2011 by bakafool Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
urbex Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 No Deus Ex?Voted for Fallout 3, would've gone with Morrowind too if it were there. Also, just for the record oblivion sucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marksman_sniper Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 (edited) That's great news :)It's inevitable that gaming will become historical and I'm glad to see that in action and happening right now :) I voted for: Fallout 3, Oblivion, C&C series, Half Life 2, CoD:Black Ops and various other old timers, especially WORMS! Edited March 21, 2011 by marksman_sniper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myrmaad Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 (edited) The best thing about this exhibit, in my view, is that it is being showcased in the Art category of the Smithsonian rather than the History category. The games they chose were meant to be representative of the art form, not a detailed chronicle of all gaming history. Whether gaming is truly an art form has long been the subject of fierce debate, and since I believe it is artistic expression, I'm very happy to see this exhibit hosted at the Smithsonian. Edited March 21, 2011 by myrmaad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nocturnalcowboypsn Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 (edited) Qoat, @Zaldiir Who says I didn't like any of the games on Nexus. I liked New Vegas and I enjoyed Dragon Age: Origins, and the only one I called a train wreck was Fallout 3. That doesn't mean, however, that I think any of those games are good enough to be voted upon as examples of video games as an art-form in an exhibit. Perhaps you should read again before jumping to conclusions that allow you to dismiss other peoples' opinions. i agree with you that fallout 3 is bad, but oblivion was the train wreck, that's why Bethesda has to have modders, modders can do what Bethesda cannot. if i had to play oblivion without any mods, i would kill myself. but i think skyrim may be better, if Bethesda dose not remove vampires and they fix the npc and pc characters faces, and make them look nice instead off ugly. and make the ability of cutting in half and impaling available in the default game. because allot of modders make a mod then plant major bugs and abandon it as a prank. and some cant fix their mistakes because the construction set is so horrid. most mods ive downloaded that is major, Ive had to fix by myself, because 90 percent of all mods are abandon as alphas and betas. but still yet its better than default oblivion. i cried when i bought oblivion because it was so bad. but mods have improved it over the past 5 years its been out. i just don't know why oblivion was abandoned with so many bugs. but at least some mods fixes it. Edited March 21, 2011 by Nocturnalcowboypsn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now