Fallout 3: Game of the Year Edition

The Capital Wasteland'i bitirseniz bile oyunu bug'a sokmayı başarabilirsiniz. Bu ana hikayeyi bitirseniz de geçerli.

взорвал мегатонну, чтобы не платить за аренду матраса , нашел с кайфом диско пижаму , упоролся психо, потом прошел игру, шедевр на века, только столбняк подхватил через экран

Fallout 3 is genuinely one of my favourite games of all time. All these years later I still come back at least once a year to do another playthrough. I can admit that some of the gameplay mechanics are dated and not so great, but this game oozes atmosphere and charm. The world pulls you in and holds you captive from beginning to end. I’ve also never had any issues with getting this game to run on modern hardware. Install, press play.

This plays SO rough in comparison to Fallout 2 or Fallout New Vegas. Flat characters, uninspired environments. Rivet City, Brotherhood HQ, every single one of those never ending Metro tunnels, the entire scrapheap that is DC - everything looks the same, feels the same. With this being the last one I have now played all Fallouts and this is easily the worst one.

I'll keep this review somewhat brief because almost everything I mentioned in my Fallout: New Vegas review applies directly to Fallout 3 as well. Therefore, I will only talk about the differences between the two games here. Feel free to read my [url=https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561199010844173/recommended/22380/] New Vegas review [/url] if you'd like more context. The reason I kept referring to New Vegas as a "Bethesda game" in that review was that it was built directly on top of Fallout 3. Obsidian made New Vegas a year and a half using the exact same assets, so naturally, these two games are almost identical. So, why isn't Fallout 3 loved as much as New Vegas? Honestly, even though I know the reasons people give, I don't fully understand them. First off, in terms of Role Playing mechanics, New Vegas is certainly the superior game. Skills and Perks feel pretty pointless in Fallout 3. I made this criticism for New Vegas too but the situation wasn't quite as dire there. That said, I had zero expectations regarding this matter (or anything else in Fallout 3 really), so it didn't bother me much. One of the most heavily criticized aspects of Fallout 3 is its main story. Well, I have a funny confession to make: I vastly prefer this main story, which is pure absurdity and nonsensical from start to finish, over New Vegas's story. Honestly, I found the plot of New Vegas to be completely unengaging. For me, the main questline was just doing boring work for a few factions I couldn't care less about. Even though Fallout 3's story is a total mess, I have to admit I enjoyed the events that unfolded much more. The same goes for the DLCs. While the DLCs in New Vegas felt like utter torture to me, I liked Fallout 3's DLCs up to a certain point. Of course, they aren't amazingly good either but since they didn't feel like a chore, I'm not complaining. I also found the side quests in Fallout 3 to be much more memorable. Right at the start of the game, one of the very first side quests you encounter gives you the choice of whether or not to nuke a town. Sure, the number of side quests is much lower compared to New Vegas and the fact that they feel disconnected from both the main plot and other side quests is a bit of an issue, but still i enjoyed them more. Lastly, Fallout 3's world feels unexpectedly alive. I really enjoyed random encounters like stumbling upon an Enclave Vertibird out of nowhere or seeing NPCs engage in dialogue with each other. If New Vegas had things like that, I honestly don't remember. Tbh, I can't say I liked either Fallout 3 or New Vegas that much. In my opinion, Fallout 1 and 2 are by far the best games in the franchise and they will most likely stay that way. Only mainline game I have not played is Fallout 4. I hope it is better than 3/NV

Fallout 3 has what the Pokémon franchise has where the newest game in the series is so bad it makes the old one look good by comparison. People hated this game on release. Old fans didn't think it had enough RPG elements while new comers wanted it to play like Call of Duty. Bethesda has taken the wrong lessons from the critiscm of both this one and 2 so it's long overdue for a change in management.

I was told that Fallout 3 was really bad and I was proven wrong the first day of playing. Despite the game being over 10+ years at this point, it remains one of the best open world RPG games I've played, and I've played a lot of AAA games like Red Dead Redemption 2, Cyberpunk, etc. too. Fallout 3 offers so much value in terms of the open world exploration. There's a lot of side missions and unmarked quests that you just get from a random note on some random corpse you find which you could easily miss had you not explore all the locations and talk to a bunch of NPCs. The main storyline is pretty good, I would say it's better than Fallout 4's main story and a little worse than Fallout: New Vegas, but it's still pretty interesting if you add in the fact that this was the first first person RPG-like game from the Fallout series and already over a decade old. There's a bunch of selection when it comes to weapons, from the DLCs and the Vanilla version, and collecting the unique guns are fun to do because it doesn't feel like a chore to do so. You sometimes just stumble across it after exploring a location or from the workbench crafting. Overall, solid 8/10 game. It goes below Fallout New Vegas but it's so much better than Fallout 4 base building slop & Online slop of Fallout 76.