PC Action Germany reviews Fallout 3

DJS4000 said:
and i think that 16 hours are quite enough to judge a game. they do this for a living.
Click to expand...

Whoa hey, handbrake. News flash: no it isn't. You can't judge a 100-hour game in 16 hours. You can't even begin to judge a 100-hour game in 16 hours.

Imagine someone reviewing GTA:SA after having played it for 16 hours. You'll have hardly been kicked out of SA and not nearly got to the more interesting missions: verdict: it sucks. Fairness? None.

Conversely, short bursts with stuff like VATS may be fun but perhaps it wears after some time? The reviewers wouldn't know, they haven't played it long enough.

I do this for a living as well, and guess what? It doesn't work that way. Some of the first hands-on previews were based on 5 hours playthrough time, and we're supposed to accept 3 of those chained together make for adequate review time?

No way.

If you don't believe me, go to the Escapist, search for their the Witcher review, based on 10 hours gaming time. Look at the responses. Look how badly he misanalysed the game. It's not about what opinion comes out of it, it's about proper journalistic standards, and you can't review a game that big with such limited time. The Codex' VDweller played Oblivion for a month (no idea how many hours he logged, tho') before reviewing it, and surprise surprise his is nearly the only review (other than GameBanshee's) that covers all the points, good and bad.

Texas Renegade said:
Wow, any of you ever think about getting a job with Oliver Stone? I mean seriously, the conspiracy theories some of you throw around about the links the gaming media will go to to lie about a game just to appease a publisher are kind of...... well just......JFK assassination kind of territory. :)
Click to expand...

Oh yes, when you can't bring up any real arguments just dismiss something as ridiculous.

Now, I work in this industry and I can affirm that yes, gaming media do lie to appease publishers. I have no idea how much that is the case with Fallout 3 (how can I?), but to say that acknowledging this basic truism is falling into a conspiracy theory is just naive.

As I mentioned in another post, some of the guys here are over-stating the case. Section8's point is clear and solid (and from someone who worked in the game industry)
 
Martigens Monster (mod?) adds something insane like 800+ new monsters into Oblivion. It's nuts.

Obscuro's Oblivion Overhaul does just that, overhauls Oblivion. Completely. It's like a new game with the same storyline, and it's 100x better. There's no more world leveling with you, etc.

It makes it what it should have been, IMO.



Back on the topic of FO3, I'm yet to see a game that's been given a 9 or 10 that's been horrible. When big name companies make big name games, they get big scores, because they're usually awesome.

A good indicator is Beth's Star Trek game which completely bombed, and definitely didnt' get good reviews.

I'm a big fan of believing the gaming industry has integrity, and from what I've seen, it does. You know, being in it and all.
 
InZaneFlea said:
Back on the topic of FO3, I'm yet to see a game that's been given a 9 or 10 that's been horrible. When big name companies make big name games, they get big scores, because they're usually awesome.
Click to expand...

Oh yes, bad games never get high scores, it never happens, review pressure never happens either, nor does overrating a mediocre game, or giving a mediocre game a perfect rating.

Look, man, we're not talking about the game industry giving these games perfect ratings. We're talking about them ignoring obvious flaws to pump up heavily flawed game. If you're the kind of games that doesn't notice these flaws anyway then good for you, you don't have a problem, but I prefer my media a bit more critical.
 
Whoa hey, handbrake. News flash: no it isn't. You can't judge a 100-hour game in 16 hours. You can't even begin to judge a 100-hour game in 16 hours.
Click to expand...

Well, according to the Click! review, the main quest takes more or less 10 hours.
 
Section8 said:
But what too many people forget is that the readership has just as much power as the advertiser - because if nobody is viewing the ad space, it's worth nothing and all of a sudden the media needs to start bowing to the will of the reader.
Click to expand...
To a large extent they already do. Hype doesn't just sell games, it also sells magazines. Joe Q. 360 doesn't want to buy a magazine that tells him that there aren't any good games coming out for his console. The Nintendo fans will pitch a fit if any installment of a big-name franchise scores lower than a 9/10.

InZaneFlea said:
A good indicator is Beth's Star Trek game which completely bombed, and definitely didnt' get good reviews.
Click to expand...
I think that's an important point to remember. The reviewers do overhype the good games, but they also aren't afraid to trash a game when it really is crap.
 
Ausir said:
Well, according to the Click! review, the main quest takes more or less 10 hours.
Click to expand...

What does that have to do with anything?

D said:
I think that's an important point to remember. The reviewers do overhype the good games, but they also aren't afraid to trash a game when it really is crap.
Click to expand...

When it really is crap. Dungeon Siege I and II sucked but they still got high marks. It took the total stinkbomb of Space Siege for the reviewers to wise up.
 
Ausir said:
Whoa hey, handbrake. News flash: no it isn't. You can't judge a 100-hour game in 16 hours. You can't even begin to judge a 100-hour game in 16 hours.
Click to expand...

Well, according to the Click! review, the main quest takes more or less 10 hours.
Click to expand...

10 hours? You've got to be kidding me.

10 hours of game, 90 hours of fluff?
 
Texas Renegade said:
rcorporon said:
If we're comparing based on graphics then, why not compare FO3 to MGS4? MGS4 has better graphics than Oblivion did, and thus should be a better yardstick than Oblivion.

Your logic eludes me sir.

In terms of reality however, being Falloue "3" means it should be directly compared to Fallout "1" and "2." When Gears of War 2 ships, guess which game it'll be comapred to. (If you said anything other than Gears of War "1" you're incorrect.)

FO3 isn't Oblivion 2, it isn't an Elde Scrolls game, and should be judged based on how well it is as a sequel to Fallout 2.
Click to expand...


Well lets see: A) Bethesda developed both Oblivion and FO3 and they both run on the same engine. A natural comparison is thereby inherent. MGS4 is a completely different engine for a completely different game that has no connection at all to Beth.

B) Your using Gears of War 2 is completely dodging my point. GoW1 is a new game that is familiar to readers and has probably been played by the person previewing it. My entire point was that this probably does not apply to these previewers in regards to FO1 and 2.

It is the logic of, you can't compare it to something you have never played and am totally unfamiliar with.

It would be like asking me to compare Hurricane Ike to Hurricane Carla. Well Ike I was here for, Carla I wasn't even born. So I really have no personal knowledge of Carla and therefore would be unable to make a comparison.
Click to expand...

yeah, the problem here is not that they compare it to Oblivion, its that they don't compare it to FO1 and FO2. Hell, Pete and Todd have been all like "oh yeah we totally wanted this to live up to/be like FO1" so at least compare and contrast it to FO1...

While I still have faith in FO3 I sure wish they realease a modding toolkit as soon as possible...
 
The game world is absolutely stuffed. I'm guessing, for someone like me, it will take over 200 hours to soak in all it has to offer. The main quest is 20-30 hours, with 100+hours of sidequests, and many more of just fooling around and exploring.
 
Well, I'll be able to finish it in a weekend if it's just 10 hours. Sounds like all the attention I'd be willing to give it anyways.
 
I dont recall well what numbers were used to describe the playtime of Oblivions main and side quests but I think it was even bigger than if F3, too bad 90% of it was boring as Hell.
 
Well i guess im stating the obvious with this post but theres been from time to time someone mocking beth for reviews when thats clearly reviewers / magazines responsability.

Gaming companies are quite often after profit and thats to be expected, there might be few exceptions and are in business JUST for the art and fun. Good for them, but reviews and reviewists exists because companies ARE biased and there should be someone unbiased and professional to guide consumers. They should stand for their status and salary unmoved, even in such conditions as nice hotel and trips around europe.

Though, maybe the situation is worse than i thought and one can really be fired or hated because of simply bad review of big name product, and thus cant be blamed as single cases but as whole rotten system... or maybe my expectations of reviews are bit too high :?
 
kikomiko said:
The game world is absolutely stuffed. I'm guessing, for someone like me, it will take over 200 hours to soak in all it has to offer. The main quest is 20-30 hours, with 100+hours of sidequests, and many more of just fooling around and exploring.
Click to expand...

Todd has said it can take between 1.5-20 hours just to play the main quest, depending on who asked... Different mags have called it more like 10 hours.

Hines mentioned some 100 hours of total gameplay.


all told, you're still short 100 hours of stuff to do.

I don't even want to know how much playing dressup, having your robo-barber cut the PC's hair, and how much pretending to be a vampire is going to make up that time.
 
Damn i hate when people defend corporations and companies like it is okay to manipulate and bribe, must be the fluorite water in action.

This is not new anyway, FOX news fired reporters because of Monsanto, so it happens in the more important part of news as well as the gaming area.

And please stop with the conspiracy theory defense, it just shows how sheep you are and easy to manipulate when you don't even try to see that the mainstream news are not god, made by humans and as fallible as all of us.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top