Search results

apologies, the quote was from the link provided in the "Fallout 3: Tools of Survival" newspost

not to interject but wasn't it pretty much confirmed elsewhere that ammo was at least sold? i.e. "Within the first 6 hours of playing, I managed to amass an arsenal that included a missile launcher, a personal nuke launcher, and a chaingun. I could only afford one nuke to put in my launcher...

hmmm... yeah i really should do something about my grammar, if for nothing else than to be understood :oops:

on the topic of this i was wondering if i was the only one to feel actively insulted by beth's treatment of those that like FO1/2. while less so about the "viable consumerbase" (from my viewpoint of a mere lowly potential player i must admit that i have neither the stats nor research to side...

now this is somewhat off-topic but i was wondering if throwing about your "credentials" when you are a recent member actually makes a difference how serious you are taken the reason i'm curious is that as a recent member myself i don't believe i've felt it necessary to do the whole "longtime...

personally i see per's statement in these terms (although i could always be wrong iand wouldn't want to be accused of putting words in his mouth) beth's rationale for fp seems to be the that it adds "immersion" which is lacking in iso. now as F1 and F2 were iso it's not a great leap to assume...

seems a bit of a stretch to refer to that 4hrs as a few short minutes

now i haven't been keeping close tabs on beth's little project but i'd be rather surprised if all the previewers only had "a few short minutes of carefully arranged gameplay and features" to base their opinion as it seems a bit excessive to pay for all the weekend trips for the press that they...

to be honest i feel that a point to be taken into consideration is the sheer amount of times regulars here are confronted with the same old tired arguments (often from those with an incomplete, or at times apparently any, knowledge of Fallout's history) to which they have replied/rebutted many...

which, to me, is what concernedcitizen is after when he talks of a "Fallout game" to be honest i probably wouldn't be pissed at them if they had made it a spin-off as while i would rather have a proper sequel i must admit to never having much faith in them having the ability/inclination of...

@sander:sorry to bring this up again (you might have missed it since it was originally in an edit): in regard to the core design argument could i ask you to confirm or deny that you would be less pissed if the current project was "Fallout:FPS" rather than "Fallout 3" (note less pissed as...

with all due respect i wasn't even sure as your position regarding "Fallout 3" and a "Fallout game" until relatively recently and as such felt compelled to ask directly edit: @sander: in regard to the core design argument could i ask you to confirm or deny that you would be less pissed if the...

the way it seems to me is sander does not necessary find your opinion "insulting" and "ridiculous" in terms of the end product being merely a "Fallout game" but that they become so when applied to "Fallout 3" (a stance i would add seems to be fairly commonly repeated here ie the same sense of...

to be honest i'm surprised that the whole sander vs concernedcitizen thing is still going on considering that, to me at least, the whole thing seems to be fairly simple by now and it can be reduced to: sander wants/demands Fallout 3 concernedcitizen wants/demands an entertaining Fallout...

while it of course correlates to beth's broken promises (lies?) and such i was more wondering about how it described gameplay and such (more as a guide to how seriously to take the Fallout 3 article to be honest)

sorry to go back to a previous point when the discussion has moved on completely but was the GI article on Oblivion written any better than the Fallout 3 one? also i was wondering how it compared to the final product

aha now i get you. you're using the tired old argument that beth has the legal right to make the game in whatever form they will (something that i don't believe people ever said they didn't) as for your second point it appears you're arguing against your own stance as it was you that seemed...

sorry if i'm a bit confused here but it seems to me that you're saying that it's not beth's own people doing Fallout 3 but rather that it's the original team who have suddenly changed their mind as to what Fallout is. in which case err... what?!? are you perhaps suggesting that every post in...

err... i think you just said it edit: just realised that my main point was badly phrased as i was referring to the bit i bolded about the concern that Fallout 3 was looking more akin to a "fps" ie what sander was talking about

i'm not sure if you're saying what i think you're saying but i don't believe that tb/iso was scraped from van buren (unless i'm mistaken it's just that it wasn't yet implemented in the tech demo) err i'm not too sure how to reply to this in a serious tone considering what interplay is/has...