Games for Windows reaction to FO3 trailer

[meeneque]

Yeah, right, two minutes of bus. I wanna explore this shit...

It's not even retarded. It's pathetic.

 

[roshan]

Pip (the original Fallout boy!)

What a bunch of fucking idiots.

 

[Araanor]

Oh, wonderful. This is the kind of journalism we have to look forward to for at least two years from now on. Gradual build-up, previews, grafix, drooling. Bam, release. Reviews, omg, grafix, drooling. Game of the year, decade, century, eternity, true to Fallout's spirit, reinventing, nex-gen, bloom, look at the trees--er, ruins! Ad nauseum.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Remember all those retarded arguments that Bethesda will have no choice BUT to make a true Fallout game because otherwise the media backlash would be horrible and like totally devastating?

 

[Krafter]

The realization is starting to occur to me that the situation is worse than I thought. If Vault Dweller would have said "Ha, that was another joke interview!" or something, I would have thought he made it too obvious. Ugh.

What's with all the turn-based hate with the mainstream idiots? For what is supposed to be a creative field, they sure want a lot of paint by numbers clones.

It is very obvious that the whole games journalism thing is on the level of Entertainment Tonight or something similar. Not even a 'point vs point' debate with a few 'old style vs new style' people, just non-stop sucking up to it. I doubt these jokers could quell their ADD long enough to get past Shady Sands.

 

[Bradylama]

I'm getting Games for Windows for free and I'm reconsidering. At this point any issue I get of PC Gamer goes straight in the trash while I give GfW the once-over.

 

[Surgey]

Shawn Elliott: Good God, this looks good.

Jeez, he was just saying that it LOOKED good. Do you not agree?

 

[Vault Dweller]

Shawn Elliott: Good God, this looks good.

Jeez, he was just saying that it LOOKED good. Do you not agree?

The masturbation-over-shiny-stuff forum is over here:
http://www.bethsoft.com/bgsforums

To answer your question though, it was an insignificant and meaningless intro, showing nothing but pretty colors. The "Good God..." reaction was way, way over the top. The idea of several senior editors praising the intro as the first coming of Jesus and trying to convince the audience that turn-based gameplay is obsolete and crappy and really shouldn't be in FO3 smells too much like a paid commercial.

 

[Section8]

What's with all the turn-based hate with the mainstream idiots?

The reasoning is thus - "Chess is for fags. Chess is turn based. Turn Based is for fags."

Basically what these dipshits want is a movie that takes it to the EXTREME, with the barest minimum of interactivity to stroke their egos because they're the hero or villain, instead of Paul Walker.

 

[JarlFrank]

Remember all those retarded arguments that Bethesda will have no choice BUT to make a true Fallout game because otherwise the media backlash would be horrible and like totally devastating?

Those who give a totally devastating backlash [Codex, NMA etc] will just be blacklisted, and the problem is solved!
The mainstream media will love it, and if they don't they get bribed. Problem solved!

Bethesda is a few millions richer, and we are for one beloved franchise poorer, until they get the next license to rape.

 

[Excrément]

Shawn Elliott: Good God, this looks good.

Jeez, he was just saying that it LOOKED good. Do you not agree?

The masturbation-over-shiny-stuff forum is over here:
http://www.bethsoft.com/bgsforums

so if we disagree with you, we have to be a ESF kiddo?
Your way of thinking reminds me the ego-Rex Exitium fuckthreads.

 

[Micmu]

It's funny how they all openly bash POS, even bethesda, which is kind of unusual for a company to directly bash other company's product (Hines called it horrible and a waste of time).
BAD DEMON WE HATE YOU TOO

Available for XBOX360/PS3/PC

 

[Vault Dweller]

Shawn Elliott: Good God, this looks good.

Jeez, he was just saying that it LOOKED good. Do you not agree?

The masturbation-over-shiny-stuff forum is over here:
http://www.bethsoft.com/bgsforums

so if we disagree with you, we have to be a ESF kiddo?

There is a difference between disagreeing and typing "but teh graphics look good!!!"

 

[Excrément]

There is a difference between disagreeing and typing "but teh graphics look good!!!"

Jeez, he was just saying that it LOOKED good. Do you not agree

where is "teh graphix look good!!!"?
stop using goebbels propaganda methods.
It's beginning boring this method people have here to use kiddo-style of writing in order to distort people arguments.
You are not the only one in that case, it was fun, ironic at the beginning, it's now repetitive.
Find another style.

 

[Vault Dweller]

There is a difference between disagreeing and typing "but teh graphics look good!!!"

Jeez, he was just saying that it LOOKED good. Do you not agree

where is "teh graphix look good!!!"?

*sigh* Ok. I posted this article filled with too dumb to believe errors and overall stupidity. Surgey decided to overlook all that and focus instead on one comment about the ghraphics. The point of his post is "the graphics look good". He did use different words to express this point, but that doesn't change the meaning.

It's beginning boring this method people have here to use kiddo-style of writing in order to distort people arguments.

Distort?

 

[Ander Vinz]

Bethesda is a few millions richer, and we are for one beloved franchise poorer, until they get the next license to rape.

I can even imagine the picture of Bethesda "reinventing" one franchise after another:
Fallout 3
Arcanum 2
Gothic 4
Wizardry 9
Ultima 10
...

 

[Excrément]

There is a difference between disagreeing and typing "but teh graphics look good!!!"

Jeez, he was just saying that it LOOKED good. Do you not agree

where is "teh graphix look good!!!"?

*sigh* Ok. I posted this article filled with too dumb to believe errors and overall stupidity. Surgey decided to overlook all that and focus instead on one comment about the ghraphics. The point of his post is "the graphics look good". He did use different words to express this point, but that doesn't change the meaning.

It's beginning boring this method people have here to use kiddo-style of writing in order to distort people arguments.

Distort?

Sorry for the English, I don't know how to translate maybe by "to take away the credibility of someone "or if you want an image I would say "hey guys, he is a noob, he speaks like a retard"

 

[Vault Dweller]

I don't think it works that way. The only one who can take away the credibility of a poster is the poster himself.

 

[mister lamat]

omfg! people are happy!! rape their faces!!! this is unjust and cannot be allowed to continue!

there shall be no merriment in my autocracy.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Let's overlook the overwhelming stupidity and plain wrongness of the article and pretend that it's all about the Codex being unhappy about someone else's happiness.

 

[mister lamat]

they speak not of thine views! to offer up their opinion on the web was heresy, they must be crushed!

 

[Vault Dweller]

Come on. We both know that it's not about different opinions but about really stupid opinions:

So yup, this is Fallout. I'm also now completely convinced it's gonna be some first-person Oblivion-style thing. ...

In fact, if Bethesda decides to take a radically different direction with Fallout 3, I'd rather that than a dull remake.

I loved the first two Fallouts to death, but now is not the time for another isometric turn-based RPG.

Not with the amazing possibilities that Bethesda could bring to this series after knocking it out of the park with Oblivion.

And so on.

 

[Slaine]

I don't think it works that way. The only one who can take away the credibility of a poster is the poster himself.

Fallacy Of Extension

 

[Excrément]

Come on. We both know that it's not about different opinions but about really stupid opinions:


So yup, this is Fallout. I'm also now completely convinced it's gonna be some first-person Oblivion-style thing. ...

that's not that stupid, if it's in-engine, it's hard to imagine they will do an isometric game with such detailed graphics (even if it's possible)

In fact, if Bethesda decides to take a radically different direction with Fallout 3, I'd rather that than a dull remake.

a lot of people agree with that, even core fallout fans.

I loved the first two Fallouts to death, but now is not the time for another isometric turn-based RPG.

this one I agree with you is a stupid assertion.

Not with the amazing possibilities that Bethesda could bring to this series after knocking it out of the park with Oblivion.

did you know you can enjoy oblivion without being retarded?
You arrive to enjoy Age of Decaadence without being retarded.

EDIT : What is important is not the fact one journalmist has this opinion you find stupid, but that's all the gaming journalists have the same opinion nowadays; that's the unique problem and the unique interest of your news post.

 

[mister lamat]

there was a serious grognard that used to write for cgw about fifteen years ago... i think his name was trotter. wrote the rpg and war sim columns i believe. rpgs could have been scorpia's domain though, but that really doesn't matter now does it? none of those opinions and ideas you noted would have passed through either author's work. that being said, i'd have to dig out a fifteen year-old magazine to find a time when such opinions were shared with the periodical itself.

if you wanna pick a fight there are ways to go about it being an adult. get a big enough group and people will talk about the ideas and mechanics that you want to see.