With games like Borderlands rasing the bar for FPS/RPG style games I hope Fallout does not use the same formula as they did on Fallout 3. It would be nice to see some decent multi-player in Fallout more like Borderlands and less like Fable 2.
With games like Borderlands rasing the bar for FPS/RPG style games I hope Fallout does not use the same formula as they did on Fallout 3. It would be nice to see some decent multi-player in Fallout more like Borderlands and less like Fable 2.
I feel like your drawing comparisons between games that were fundamentally different in a number of ways. I think you’re also asking for the Fallout franchise to go against its design philosophy.
Fallout has always been a single player affair. It has that whole “one person against the wasteland” thing going for it, and being single player adds to the sense of isolation and aloneness that would probably happen after a nuclear holocaust. Fallout has also always been more of a traditional RPG where you have lots of individual stats to level up. Just because it has guns and a first person perspective doesn’t mean it was an FPS (or was even trying to be an FPS). As you probably noticed, trying to play it like an FPS was miserable. If you used the VATS targeting it was wonderful (and with the Action Points even more like an RPG).
In my opinion, Borderlands BARELY qualifies as an RPG. It’s basically a shooter with loot and equipment. The quests are all fetch or kill quests, and I feel zero attachment to any character in the world (including my own). I also don’t feel like it “raised the bar” a whole lot. If you want to see some real innovation in the Action RPG department, pick up Mass Effect 2.
Fable kind of splits the two. It kind of feels like 3rd person action, RPG, and the Sims.
That’s not to say I think any of these games are bad. I think they’re all very good. I just think that if you start wanting it all, you’ll end up with a game that’s pretty shitty. Fallout does 1st person RPG really well so let it do that and enjoy the game for what it is. Borderlands does FPS with quests and loot really well so let it do that. If you want another Borderlands, it seems like it woulf be more productive to wait for that studio to make the next one where they improve on the formula. It does appear that they know what their doing.
Raise your hand if you wanted a rant. (Too late.)
You make some valid points. Fallout 3 was the first fallout I played and was not completely filled in on the back story of the title. I think more people and myself included desire better multiplayer games to one get the value from the Xbox Live Gold membership, and two because it is just plain fun to roll through missions and challenges with friends.
I do want to get to Mass Effect 2 but I think it might be smarter for me to finish the first one.
I think most people on LIVE wouldn’t mind better multiplayer games. However, I don’t think that every video game warrants a multiplayer portion. If multiplayer fits with the game and can be done well, go ahead and put it in the game. If my single player experience is going to suffer or it’s a tacked-on, half-assed affair (like Fable 2), please leave the multiplayer out. I don’t want developers making mediocre games so they can get another bullet point on the box.
I think I generally get my $8.33 per month value out of LIVE though. Some months are heavier than others for online play, but I don’t feel cheated.
the only thing that bugs me right now about xbox live is the lag on servers. i’ve experienced lag with most games, and it’s really annoying. my connection is 15 down and 2 up, so i don’t think that’s the problem.
i agree with mandalore about fallout. borderlands and fallout are two very different games, and i think both are great. borderlands 2 is coming, and i think it will give us something to look forward to. in terms of multiplayer — i’m hoping borderlands opens it up and lets more players get together.