An overview of Fallout: Yesterday, a mod for Fallout 2 that aims to recreate the lost Van Buren Project. Also includes an interview with Hexer/PJ, the lead developer of the mod!
Download Fallout: Yesterday here:
www.nma-fallout.com/threads/f...
(note: you must own a copy of Fallout 2)
Support Fallout: Yesterday here:
/ fallouty
Timestamps:
Intro: 0:00-6:20
Interview with Hexer 6:20-22:38
Sources:
Fallout Van Buren Tech Demo Footage: • Fallout 3 Van Buren Te...
Music from:
Fallout 1
Half Life 1
Coffee Talk
Follow my twitter: twitter.com/ramblelime
Thank you so much for watching! :)
UPDATE: unfortunately the mod is no longer downloadable for the public. You can access the newest build if you're a patreon supporter of the project. Otherwise you'll have to wait for the full release.
Apparently it's because another youtube criticized the project? That's pretty pathetic if so.
@@gargamellenoir8460 modding is a thankless job, pouring hours of sweat and tears for only more criticism or asking for more more more, more fixes more patches more features. it sucks to be a modder. i totally get it.
@@mfgojira I agree. It is unfortunate though. Hopefully it will be a good mod when its done.
Original fallout mod scene is completely insane. So many full products that could easily be released as they own games.
And all of them are much better lore wise than shitty bethesda games.
@@zombie2356not just lore but gameplay wise too. I just can’t get into Bethesda Fallout because of the jank goofy engine it uses. It makes the game not feel that serious when everything is moving goofy like, corpses rag dolling all over the place, the gunplay is just not sastifying at all, and due to the engine, the overall presentation of the wasteland just comes off as silly and weird, not gritty, high stakes, real deal post nuclear apocalypse like the old school isometric Fallouts so thank god for these mods. Even if New Vegas has decent writing, it’s still paired with that janky Bethesda engine gameplay that I just can’t get into at all
Watching the progress of mods like this is always both intriguing and heartwrenching. There have been so many mods with a ton of potential that just never get finished. As someone whos failed at their own modding projects in the past I have a lot of respect for the people who do this kind of industry level work in their own free time purely because they have a passion for it. As enlightening as this video was and has made me keenly interested in the fourth release of Fallout: Yesterday; the content wasn't as entertaining as reading people trying to defend fallout 3 in the comments.
Never heard of this one. Hopefully it'll be good.
It won't. The project lead is unstable, abusive and micromanaging. They're in desparate need of changing their managment style.
@@NikolaAvramov uh, no offense but, you got any proof? Like some sort of post by the creator?
Something about Fluttershy holding the mic with her wing is amazing, just like this entire video
What is it with slavs modding classic fallout? I'm not complaining tho this looks fantastic
post soviet era felt like real apocalypse. 90s were hell. so fallout games are somewhat relatable.
We played Fallout 1 & Fallout 2 under sanctions, while being slandered and treated like sub-human trash in the mainstream global media, waiting to get bombed or just murdered by NATO. We were witnessing a completely different and harsh reality that had nothing to do with the media corporations painting some warmongering rubish. The disenfranchised, harsh atmosphere of Fallout was very relatable. The discrepancy between old communist promises and fairy tales and mandatory optimism was quite relatable to the casual 1950s style consumerism in a wasteland. The game felt very real and relatable to Eastern Europeans of the time.
People from central/eastern Europe don't care about visuals as much, were always mainly PC-based(so for example while Nintendo, Sega etc franchises are very famous in USA, they are much less famous in eastern Europe - nobody here cares about Sonic for example), and like hard games with lot of depth. Also, at least in some countries Fallout 1 and 2 were very cheap games(in Poland it was added to computer magazine year or two after premiere). For exactly those reasons modding community of games like Gothic 1/2, Jagged Alliance 2, and Fallout 1/2 is very strong in eastern Europe.
Just hope this gets a full release someday however long it takes. Good work to everyone involved :)
Wow, a Bioshock 2 appreciation in 2021? Really? And a cold feelings(it's not a bad game, but it's not great and the first two games were better, especially first one, yeah) for a third instalment? You made my day on this one.
bioshock 2 was not even made by the same team as 1 and infinite.
Bioshock 2 was fantastic. The ending sold the game for me.
Minerva's Den solos
the van buren design docs are so cool
Your reviews are awesome man thanks!
Another spectacular video my friend, keep it up
Is ramblelime using music from the game Coffee Talk? You got good taste man. That game is awesome. Excellent video as always. It’s cool that you got to interview the head honcho behind the mod.
I haven't played it yet, but judging by the footage, the project has stylistic issues. Although the new model of the ghoul from Olympus 2207 looks organic with the assets of the original games, but the power armor from Olympus looks too skinny, not suitable for the style of Fallout, robots and brahmins from Tactics looks even worse. It seems to me that it would be better if the author used only assets from the original games, as it was in the Resurrection. Still it's looks very promising.
You should make it!
Hi, PJ here. I don't think your criticism is fair really: only the original Fallout artists can create "perfect Fallout art." However, I showed my art to T-Ray (lead artist of Fallout 2) when I met him in person and he liked it. This is a free game and it's huge - I'm working with what I've got. If something was so out of place I would have never put it into the game. I feel new art fits well enough, including some of the Fallout Tactics enemies. And Olympus 2207 armors aren't even treated as power armors in the game, at best they are combat armors.
@@FalloutFansEditor Hi, I did not expect it to be "perfect Fallout art", I'm just saying that some elements don't fit togeher. Again some of it looks good like ghoul model or some enviroment from Olympus, but some like assets from Tactics looks out of place, because of the differences between visuals of those games. I can understand robots, there were only few in originals, but why use brahmin model? But maybe it's just me. Also thanks for clarification about Olympus power armor, my mistake. And thanks for your hard work, I can't wait to see this project finished.
@@pantonearqm2791 Hi, thanks for your suggestions, I appreciate all the feedback. The Tactics brahmin is used for brahmin bulls! See you in the wasteland :D
I agree. The robots being from Fallout Tactics is particularly jarring. But maybe it's a decent way to connect the events of Tactics with the rest of the series (even though both would be non-canon).
Oh god I was hoping something like this was coming
MOTHER 3 definitely bucks the trilogy trend. It's objectively the best game in the trilogy (even though I personally like 2 better).
Deus ex 2 bucks the trilogy trend by being complete dog shit
1:57 ohhhh OHHHHHH that's why you had Half-Life music playing while talking about those other franchises. Very nice 10/10
Legends. That’s dedication.
Never heard of this mod. Great mod coverage.
I want to see this, though I was late to playing the OG fallout, I love them and want to see something of what Van Buren would have been.
Kinda disagree with you take on Mass Effect. The shift between ME 1 and ME2 was more akin to shift between F1-2 and F3. ME1 was a bit clunky (well, a lot clunky) with somewhat buggy combat and repetitive exploration (driving up 90 degree cliffs in that APC of theirs), but it was an RPG. Interesting people to talk, hard choices to make, different places to see and a promise of consequences to face. ME2 ultimately wasn't an RPG - it was a sleek shooter with streamlined exploration (i.e. small railroaded maps), outright removed skill trees (Persuasion attempts based on your reputation? Really? Not to mention some of the checks that failed automatically UNLESS you were playing New Game+ or had an old ME1 save with clear Paragon or Renegade character) and the promised consequences turned out to be a letter or two and a few throwaway speech lines. Hooked up with that wasshername and didn't let her die in the last mission of ME? She believes you to be a traitor anyways. Replaced ambassador with Anderson? Whatever, both are still alive, and the ambassador keeps screwing you over. And the problem with ME writing started in ME2, when they ditched the whole "mass relay's refuse bloats out suns, the reapers where made to deal with it, and decided it'd be easier to kill everything off to let the nature cool off by itself" idea in favour of standard evil invader reapers who thought to kill off all organics because they can't coexist with synthetics, despite the fact you can broker a deal between quarians and geth just fine. ME2 characters were too numerous for their own good as well - is there any hardcore Jacob fans? The guy was just too bland. Miranda and Jack has so much in common, they should have been the same character. Liara? Well, she's got butchered, they even had to make a comic that was sold separately in order to clarify how a reclusive and shy scientist turned into a cynical cutthroat who lightly uses threats to "flay you with my mind" as a simple negotiation tactic. And don't get me started with the DLC-exclusive characters, like that porthean guy. All in all, I'd say ME started crumbling right at the beginning of ME2, and finished its spectacular collapse in ME: Andromeda.
At the end of the day, a lot of people go to games expecting different things- all that you said in terms of criticism of ME2's RPG systems is absolutely true. But I didn't go into ME1 looking for an intense deep RPG experience personally. what hooked me to that game was its characters. Building your crew, getting to know different people with different backgrounds that all felt relatively real and (figuratively) human. ME2, despite its many flaws (specifically with jacob and miranda), reinforced a lot of that with its companion quests, which is why I feel like it's the best in the series. It added a lot *more* to the companion roster, and even if some of it was worse, i think a majority of it was significantly better (legion on his own makes up for jacob and miranda IMO). But as an RPG, you're totally right, ME1 has the most in terms of hard roleplaying options and it only gets worse and more action shooter-y from there.
In a way Mass Effect 2 is to Mass Effect 1 what Fallout 4 is to 3/NV. Lots of stuff is streamlined and simplified, and fans of the original usually don't think that highly of it. I was honestly surprised to hear a positive take on ME2 after exlaining what made ME1 so good.
excited to play it
this was an interesting listen
I think the only recent game that breaks the trilogy curse is witcher 3, which completely destroyed the previous 2 games in terms of the set expectations leading up to its release. But then the devs fucked up right after so maybe the curse was just moved to their next project instead
Almost as if the game set massive expectations for their next game, which they desperately tried to fulfil, despite not having the required equipment.
Looks interesting!
No way, I worked on Fan Made Fallout back in the day, as Stevie D. I wrote a lot of dialogue for a location called Sandover. Doubt it made it into this mod, but it would be amazing if it did
I adore the 3d fallouts but i understand your disapointment. Amazing content
I wonder how the Legion could be implemented
I actually got a chance to talk with Hexer about this specific thing but it didn't make the final cut of the video. I asked him if the legion as seen in Fallout: Yesterday would take any cues from the Legion of New Vegas, and he said that while there are some characters from NV in yesterday (like the van graffs) Yesterday is focused on portraying the Legion as they would've been if New Vegas had never happened and Van Buren was finished in the way it was intended to be (ie. the legion through the vision of the design documents rather than the legion through the vision of obsidian when they made new vegas)
there are some expectations to the " 3rd game being weakest rule." new vegas comes to mind if you see it as the real fallout 3. but i tend to see it more in Japanese games. dragon quest 3 super metroid a link to he past super mario bros 3 etc.
I have very very little experience with japanese games so u could def be right there. Seems mostly evident in 10th gen western games, which is what im most familiar with
Metal gear solid 3
i see new vegas as more of the True Fallout 4, since it acts more as a spiritual successor to van buren, the Original Fallout 3
Interestingly in terms of movies it is sometimes the 2nd one that is the weakest with the 3rd coming somewhat back to form. Think of Temple of Doom right between Raiders of the lost ark and Last Crusade. Still a great movie, but not on the same level as the other two. That also holds in games. The 2nd Castlevania is regarded the worst of the original NES trilogy. The same actually with Zelda. A Link to the Past is still totally playable even today more than 30 years later, but The Adventure of Link is the odd one out, probably because it breaks with a lot of what makes a 2D Zelda.
New Vegas Bounties also follows the trend of disappointing trilogies
So, anyone knows what happened to No Mutants Allowed?
Sad thing is Van Buren was almost ready, around 90% of work was finished. But Interplay wanted to have real-time combat there wich delayd the release of the game. If it wasn't happen we might have one of the best RPG.
@Nagger you can call whatever you want, man.
@@pantonearqm2791 it is bullshit lol I love interplay but there mismanagement of van buren is why they had to sell the fallout ips
@@willbellamy590 It exactly what I'm talking about, we could have VB, but because of Interplay, we don't.
@Nagger I think 90% finished referred to the story and engine, not the actual game itself.
@@pantonearqm2791 I think you're misremembering the stats; the *engine* was 95% done, but only about half the maps were done. There isn't this near-complete beta build of Van Buren zipped up something on a server, it would've leaked by now. If the tech demo leaked, the "near finished" version definitely would've been slipped out on a USB.. especially as Black Isle was shitcanned. Seriously, do you think none of the developers seeing the writing on the wall, who loved Fallout, would've grabbed that? Impossible. I still have assets from the first game I ever worked on.. if I'd worked on something half as cool as Fallout you can bet your ass I'd be preserving it. The tech demo was bare bones, and you have to remember when you're showing stuff off to a board/publisher like that it's very smoke and mirrors. I've worked on a few tech demos, you really are trying to give an impression of a bigger better game that isn't there yet. Very likely, the rest of the game was in a really underbaked state, and a lot of it was probably still theoretical. It's like the mythical "basically done" Duke Nukem Forever build that apparently exists and would be the perfect replacement for the DNF we got.. it's pure wish fulfillment. It's something to project hope on, like a MacGuffin in a film that'll fix all the issues once it's discovered. Van Buren could've been amazing, it could've been total shit. We'll never know for sure. Let it go.
I’d do voice acting for free dawg
unironically valve got it right, if you got it right the second time, theres no need to keep going and risk losing what made the 2nd game so good
To me; Van Buren will forever be defined by Tactics and BOS. Those failed spin offs were the direction that fallout was headed in under interplay, and VB would have been much of the same. If VB happened it would have died then and there, and we would never have gotten the likes of fallout games today, for better or for worse.
What about brotherhood tactics
What vice city mod is this?
How do I install?!
Nice vid but I'm having problems with your discord cant get in.
You didnt even watch the video lmfao
discord.gg/VaA2kbT8Wt You have to agree to the rules on the splash screen before it'll let you in, as well as have an account with a verified email. Hope this helps!
@@ramblelime okay thanks also halo 3 kicks ass and you can not change my mind
its funny; van buren looks pretty much like project zombiod.
cool
Why did hexer go silen tho? It's not Van Buren, but I think it is good enough mod.
He's still active i think?
He didn't go silent. He still updates on discord regularly and released a new version of Fallout yesterday a few days ago.
i love your vids! ;D
Those modded New Vegas faces look horrifying.
New vegas face mods kinda feel the same as oblivion face mods. The originals looks awful, but there's only so much you can do to them to "improve". The mod is FCO. People either hate it or see it as a mild improvement. I am among the latter
@Julia Erstgeist that I use FCO? Lol
@@ramblelime I think they’re thinking of the one face mod that changes a lot of the NPC’s races. A big criticism of that mod is how it replaces seemingly every named African-American npc’s with white versions of the character, which leads to a lot of accusations of racism towards the mod author and the people who use that mod. I’m certain that’s not the mod you’re using since that same mod does try to make Doc Mitchell look younger I think.
@@DalTak i've never even heard of that! If it's FCO that does that i'll uninstall it right away. No idea
@@ramblelime I only remember that mod because people noticed that Oxhorn was using it and used that to call him racist.
the work is huge, but ... for a long time I was hoping to still see something new content, but EVERYTHING is taken from other classic mods. Fallout of nevada, olymp2207, Restjration project, etc... I even saw the title picture somewhere before. Probably this is already arrogance, but now, the total borrowing of all content from other projects makes the feeling of being secondary, unfortunately
I don't know if *everything* is exactly fair, there are a lot of new original assets
You greatly underestimate how much work goes into development, storywriting, and dialogue. More often than not, most people only have bandwidth for one-two skills at most, rarely will a programmer also be an artist.
But, uh- I love Fallout 3 and still play it! It has enough lore and exploration to be literally close to Morrowind, it's just not in plain sight. Fo3 is a transitional rpg, from a time when questless, deliberate worldbuilding and exploration of the world itself was still a thing (and it has A LOT) of it, but interaction was not. FNV went ahead with the times and dropped most exploration for something to do while you're in a location- a quest, a faction, etc. In Fallout 3 you look for stuff and find stuff, in FNV you talk to people instead. I'm an explorer, so I actually prefer Fallout 3 and the lone wanderer shtick, rather than FNV's crowded, busy wasteland. Anyway, looking forward to the game.
I think you're on to something, but I wouldn't say NV dropped it so much as it just opted to follow the templet of its 90s isometric predecessors, but in 3D. Exploration wasn't prioritized the way dialogue, quests and outcomes were. The foundation of the series was built upon reactivity within a deceptively populated world in the vein of a tabletop game. Fallout 3 took less cues from the series roots and moreso from Bethesda's own experience and how they liked to design RPGs. That's not a bad thing. But it was kind of transitional for sure. In reality, both approaches have slowly gone away as game companies seem to be less interested in older RPG formats and have slowly gone in a more Rockstar/Ubisoft direction with open world with the occasional Mass Effect touch thrown in.
@@eddie142 good thoughts, wastelander. You see, the feeling of the old isometric ones I personally think Fo3 captured way better than FNV is that of scarce population and loneliness. Most people forget, that most ingame time in old Fallout was spent on the world map, traveling from one pocket of humanity to another and doing stuff in various locations, but the thing connecting them was this vast, empty world FNV does not have. To me it looks like an amusement park. Fo3 on the other hand is very deliberate in delivering this exact lonely traveler experience- the very intricate system of in and out of DC and use of metros and barriers uses every little bit of space to the maximum, thus creating a huge, but small world. Seriously, space management in Fo3 is a criminally underrated piece of game design. Where else you have both a large city and an open wasteland? I would argue, that FNV got the mechanics right, but Fo3 got the feeling right. It's a matter of taste for everyone, though I'm a bit sad that so many people smear Fo3, even if it was so well designed for what it did.
@@bjorntrollgesicht1144 It's a bit of a thing of the setting. New Vegas is set in a time and place with already established history and factions (from FO1&2) and expands on that. Less about surviving in the post-apocalypse and more about rebuilding in the post-post-apocalypse. But I agree in the space management. In way too many open world games the whole thing has this "amusement part problem", where you barely walk 100 m and run into the next massive thing. I understand that from a game design perspective you don't want to bore the player with running around in the middle of nowhere with nothing happening. But for the setting of Fallout exactly that emptiness is part of it. Just take New Vegas and walk (not run, walk) from north Vegas to Jacobstown. Nothing will happen, just a bunch of ruins and nature. But the tour Goodsprings to Boulder City via Nipton and Searchlight is almost 100 miles. Just to Primm is almost 20 miles. The game doesn't convey just how large and empty the area is.
@@HappyBeezerStudios I get ya. I mean to each their own, I'm far from outright bashing FNV- it's an iconic game. Buuut I'm the boring type- recently I got to play Olympus 2207. Guess what, the main plot is almost untouched and I have all locations discovered. I mean I'm level 50 in CP77 and I didn't get to talk to Takemura yet, so yeah...
01:53 that´s a bit unfair to say many many people would have never known the older fallout if it wasn´t for the 3d revival by bethesda
You can't judge a game by its effect on the outside world. When you judge a game, you judge it as a game in and of itself. It would be dumb to write a review of catcher in the rye and go "0/10, book killed john lennon". Likewise, forgiving all of fallout 3's problems and mistakes just because it popularized the series skirts around the question of whether or not the game itself is good
Fallout is a niche RPG series that disappeared from the public eye with the collapse of Black Isle. Based on design alone, the original games have no hope in the current climate, where many people's ideas of a good RPG is an action game with the barest of RPG mechanics (Skyrim and Fallout 4, for example). Like it or not, Bethesda did bring Fallout back into the public eye with Fallout 3. Not saying that it's better than the originals, just saying that they'd stay niche games if it never existed.
@@mortemtyrannus8813 With how popular titles like Underrail, Pillars of Eternity 1&2, Pathfinder Kingmaker and Wasteland 2&3 were, I think it's safe to say that there's still a market for CRPGs
@@ThePlayer920 The market exists, definitely, but the problem remains that it is a niche market. A CRPG has to cater to that niche in almost all cases, whilst an action RPG like Bethesda's big sandboxes appeals to the more casual masses. Some are lucky to break out of that niche market, especially more modern ones, but the majority remain niche. Doubly so for the older games. As an example, how many people talk about Lionheart: Legacy of the Crusader, the older CRPG set in an alt-history Third Crusade where magic exists? Or Arcanum: Of Steamworks and Magick Obscura, that one CRPG that actually tried to do an industrial revolution in a fantasy world? Can't say I've heard anyone mention Lionheart, save for an old copy of PC Gamer magazine from back in 2003 I had sitting around from when I was a kid, and as for Arcanum, the only person I've heard mention that is Sseth Tzeentach. CRPGs are definitely making a comeback, as are many old-school styles of games, but they are still a niche genre. It sucks, definitely, but it's true.
Lot of 3d fans never played fallout 1/2 and most of them even hate them. If it wasn't for 3d fallout, we would have had less haters.
NO ONE TELL HIM ABOUT DRAGON AGE 2 SHHHH
Why? Besides several problems it does have a good story and characters.
Good Lord, some of the comments back at it again with their defense of Fallout 3. Look, I'm pretty sure nobody is trying to invalidate the fact that you had *fun* with it. But when they say it's disappointing, it could mean many things, the most likely ones being that they've experienced Fallout 1&2, and that's where they're coming from, so of course they'll be disappointed. The other being that they've experienced much better post-apocalyptic shooters like STALKER etc or that they simply wanted pure shooter in the first place, and there's nothing wrong with that just as much as the fact that you had fun with Fallout 3. But objectively analysing it as a Fallout game and a game in general in many aspects (like what hbomberguy and Creetosis did) you can't deny that it's just not as good as you'd remember. If you haven't played Fallout 1&2 and didn't plan it simply because they're not your cup of tea, then let's stop at that. But if you think they're 'old' and 'irrelevant', or worse that you'd think they were top down isometric (the correct term is cavalier oblique though, but I digress) turn-based cRPG because of "technical/technological limitation", then you're no different than that game journalist who wrote that recent Screenrant article ranking the Fallout games. And if I caught any of you trying to use nostalgia arguments, know that it's not nostalgia when people could simply boot up Fallout 1&2, and compare it where it matters (like RPG mechanics, writings, quest designs, etc etc). In fact, I'd turn it around and say it's you Fallout 3 defenders who are blinded by nostalgia. When does the last time you boot up Fallout 3 and have it run properly without it crashing every 5 minutes and freezing on alt-tabs? Because that's literally my entire experience of the ''''''''GOTY''''''' edition I bought on Steam, in fricking 2015, and it was also my first ''''''''Fallout'''''''' experience no less.
I like 1, 2, and 3, and agree that in terms of the original fallout games, 3 was disappointing and was very flawed. I still believe that 1 and 2's gameplay could've been better, even compared to other CRPGs that released at the time. Combat, in my experience, felt tedious and relied to much on RNG to feel consistent. Walking around a area was a pain since you could only click so far for your character to move there. Still I played the games many times and love them. Whether 3's combat was better or not is up to preference, but I enjoyed it slightly better because I just generally enjoy first person RT combat more. I also experience crashes and freezes with fo2, specifically near the end the most.
@@ranja2486 "relied too much on RNG to be consistent" sounds more like you're not used to turn-based combat in general or that it's not your cup of tea. Simply leveling up your weapon skills is more than enough to tilt the diceroll in your favor, and this is true even for Fallout 1&2's combat which, yes, I agree left a lot to be desired. Yet despite that, compared to other TB RPGs (like UnderRail, which is my pfp btw) Fallout 1&2's combat is actually on the easier side, mainly thanks to (1) the targeting system (branded VATS by Bethesda), which can be spammed and OP even on lower levels, and (2) even if you play avoiding combat, there's an abundance of XP to accumulate from quests alone, more than enough to pump up your weapon skills and tagged ones level up even faster. When you finally get some perks rolling in, it all becomes piece of cakewalk in the park. Navigation is a bit pain in the arse, yes, this is the one area where 'technical limitation' argument holds true. "Whether 3's combat was better or not is up to preference, but I slightly enjoy first person RT combat more." Sure, but combat is but one aspect of a Fallout game. Everything else, like exploration, was rendered completely obsolete mainly due to the level-scaling system. I remembered seeing Fallout 3 memes retelling of their encounter with Deathclaws and how they're scary and terrifying. Turns out this is not entirely true due to the level-scaling, and actually the case with Fallout 1, 2, and NV. Also, people who've played better designed open-world games, like Morrowind and even Gothic, definitely gonna find Fallout 3's design absolutely mediocre in comparison. I know I do, Gothic 1&2 alone simply wipe the floor with everything Bethesda could ever came up with since Fallout 3. And then there's the writing, the quest designs, etc etc. Atmosphere, which people often cites as one of the strongest points of Fallout 3, simply falls apart when you scrutinize it, even on its own level without comparing it to its predecessor or New Vegas. 200 years after the nuke, somehow water is a problem that must be solved? Even if the only ones showing such needs is literally two or three NPCs in the entire game? What about a super market still somehow having canned foods lying around, do people not starve that they somehow resisted opening them within months of the nukes? What about the area where people settled themselves, why is there still garbage lying around? No one's raising proper livestock (no, a single brahmin on the middle of Megaton didn't count), or crops? How come people survived for 200 years seemingly just lollygagging around, sitting with their thumbs up their arse? And all that jazz. Finally, citing Fallout 2 crashing on your computer does not excuse Fallout 3 running like dogshite. Let's make a one-to-one comparison with New Vegas on my laptop; with just the bare minimum essentials like the unofficial patches and the likes of anti-crash mod, Fallout 3 still somehow crash every 5 minutes and freezed on alt-tab, literally ruining my replays of the game, while with New Vegas I couldn't even remember how many times it even crash simply because of how rare it is. Literally the only way for me to replay Fallout 3 without having it crash every 5 minutes, is to play it through the better engine iteration of New Vegas, by installing The Tale of Two Wastelands total conversion mod, which retrofit the entire Fallout 3+DLCs content into New Vegas's system. And yet, I found myself ragequit Fallout 3 upon encountering the absolute horrible mess of encounter designs that was Mothership Zeta. Now, in the same manner, with only Killap's Restoration Project, Fallout 2 on the same laptop managed to run smoother than butter with simple changes to some the .ini files, specifically ddraw and f2_hires. And while at it, since I've talked about the writings, no, the wacky stuff of Fallout 2 does not excuse Fallout 3. In fact, the wacky stuff of Fallout 2 has actually been criticized to death by the community long before Bethesda even acquired the entire IP.
@@nigrum_angelum6655 I liked hearing your thoughts, and agree with most of them. And yes I am very used to the turned based RPG genre. (LISA the Painful, Fear & Hunger, Arcanum series are pretty goods ones, highly suggest you check them out.) Yet despite that, I still it was inconsistent. For example, you said that Aimed Shots was OP, while that can be true, It can also be a BS. I'd miss most shots when aiming at 70% or even higher. This is what I mean when I said that combat relied to much on RNG. This also goes for random encounters, which were tedious, especially at higher levels. Where (and this happened multiple times) I'd encounter packs of dogs or other low level creatures, and have to wait as me and my combat killed them 1 by 1. It wasn't difficult because I had PA, but it was still tedious to deal with because of how slow the combat can be (even at the highest speed with always run on). Other turned based RPGs are faster with this kinda stuff. The game isn't difficult when you know what you're doing though. Of course this is just my, and a friend's, experiences of the game As for fallout 3, yeah the worldbuilding was awful and I hate it when people say it was "the best part of Fo3". Same goes for the main story, which is one of the worst I've seen in any game. It really makes you wonder if the writers were thinking at all. Exploring was fun though, there is a bunch of shit you can find hidden in the wasteland like the Keller family tapes, Gallo, etc.. Fallout 3 may be disappointing and flawed, but it still had it's own minor strengths I could enjoy. Overall, I still like the original games, and they're why I love the fallout franchise. Despite my tedious moments with them, they still were a very enjoyable experience overall. Glad I got to talk about it with you.
@@ranja2486 yeah, thanks for sharing your thoughts too, man. Having to wait for them move one-by-one on screen is the worst part, making the combat speed slider which only goes to 2x faster somewhat obsolete. It's even worst that when a combat is initiated in populated areas, even background NPCs has their turns. In these regards UnderRail, The Age of Decadence, and more modern turn-based RPGs are better thanks to combat speed slider that goes all the way to 5-10x faster. I've played Lisa the Painful + Joyful DLC, while I think it's not something I'll hold as a standard of turn-based games, it's definitely up there among indies like Undertale. Haven't checked Fear and Hunger, only heard about it once, will definitely check it out. Lastly, I've played Arcanum. This is the one game that's in a pretty unique situation where combat can also be played in real-time, which unfortunately hurts the turn-based mode. Enemies that moves slowly but packs quite a punch like golems are piss-easy in real-time because kiting, but trying to fight them in turn-based as a melee is suicide. But if you try to fight a ranged enemy in real-time, it's just as worst (as demonstrated by Sseth in a clip of his review)
fallout 3 is not even a fallout game. it's a bethesda game with a fallout skin. new vegas on the other hand feels like what a 3d fallout should be.
Honestly the footage around 3:16 min has a better art direction than this project. Would've loved to get a name to that one as well.
Fallout 3 was disappointing to you but not to most people who played it
Exactly!
"Most people who played it" being people whose first Fallout was Fallout 3, yeah.
@Nagger Somewhat Same with me, hell I used to love it back when I was a kid, but if you look at F03 *now* (without the ol'nostalgia goggles on) both objectively by itself and comparatively to both of the main games of fallout, itself (discluding BOS, Tactics, and '76) 1, 2 (and a later release, FNV) ((although FNV I must say is a tricky subject to say if its a main game or not, Beth has said that it is not but many consider it as so because it's a spiritual successor and the objectively/comparatively better modern fallout game, so it's really up to the person if it truly is or not but i will here)) it is pretty bad (but not the most terrible here) in the case of the comparison to them and objectively mediocre on the objective scale by itself (If FO3 was the only *main* modern fallout game, I would've say it was the most terrible, but FO4 exists so there's that.)
@Starless That's the thing, heavily flawed but somewhat decent, but again unlike it's predecessor(s) Somewhat bad and worse to it or them, I wont pretend here that Morrowind was "the best thing since sliced bread" or "that it didn't have any problems" (because that'd be a lie) but many fun things were either removed or nerfed, heh *into oblivion* but not as much as they were in Skyrim.
To most people it was probably the first Fallout they played, so there was no preconception of what to expect from a Fallout. Some might've played Oblivion before, but that's it. There is a big nostalgia part about the game. New Vegas added stuff back form the original games while staying mechanically on the foundation FO3 put together. With great storytelling and characters, where basically every major faction has their skeletons in the closet and things are connected. FO4 has pretty much the best shooting mechanics in the series (let's admit FO3 & NV is somewhat clunky) and allows the player to pick up the "rebuilding the wasteland after the apocalypse" role, but greatly reduces player choice and deep roleplaying with consequences. (The only real choice being which factions you want to eliminate at the end of the game) I have picked up New Vegas just this year, after putting more than 2700 hours into Fallout 4, and I love it. There is no nostalgic connection, no thinking back at stuff I used to play. Just a totally cold first experience. And I will go the same way at Fallout 3. Without any nostalgia.
I like bioshock infinite
Fallout fans stop pretending BoS never happened and Van Buren was going to be good challenge
Never 4get
bos is why van buren even got cancelled.
BoS was made by a different developer, but Van Buren was being developed by the same creators of Fallout 2. They only share a publisher.
Hey! Bioshock Infinite , Fallout 3 , Mass Effect 3 and Borderlands 3 were all good games!
Sure, just not as good as their predecessors
Am I crazy? I absolutely love Fallout 3. Yeah, I probably am.
Side content and atmosphere was amaizing tho
I like the game too but main quest and writing were a step down from the two og games ( especially the main quest ) , its strength is more in the world , side quests and exploration
They nailed feeling like you were in a wasteland even better then new Vegas, even though I like new Vegas way better
@@willbellamy590 I out NV above 3 on everything except for sheer atmosphere. F3 did fantastic in that.
Nah dude. I completely agree. It's definitely my favorite "modern" Fallout game. Fallout 3 was amazing. It had MUCH better atmosphere, environmental storytelling, and worldbuilding than New Vegas. Plus, there's actual incentive to complete the main story because your character has a personal investment in it, compared to New Vegas where the main story is basically just a flimsy excuse to get you to pick a political faction. There's basically no reason for your character to care about the plot after you find/kill Benny. The biggest problem with Fallout 3 is the complete lack of player choice and linearity of the main story.
Its a shame these developers, who are passionate about Fallout and trying to show people what is so good about the first 2 Fallout games, will never be recognized officially by Bethesda who can’t even be fucked to release remasters of the originals and treat them like an embarrassing member of the family they try not to talk about.
They'll fu## it up anyway.
Fallout 3 was supposed to be better than Fallout 2 in every way, given that Black Isle had the opportunity to finish the game and not sell the franchise do Bethe$da.
Solid video, but I’ve got to disagree with several of your bad third game examples. Bioshock Infinite IMO was way better than 2 at the very least for how it recontextualized the Bioshock lore. And Fallout 3 is a solid game, certainly not as good as FNV but if you look at its reception at the time I hardly think people would’ve referred to it as a disappointment
My dislike of infinite comes from how it handles player choice and how limited the immersive sim aspects of gameplay are when compared to the originals (only being able to hold 2 guns is a good example). The lore is cool but it doesn't say nearly as much as its fans think it does. If you think people wouldn't have seen fallout 3 as a disappointment when it was released, you clearly weren't around the classic fallout community when it came out lol. People got mega disappointed
@@ramblelime Okay, but lack of consequences is something the entire industry went through. No matter if it's Bioshock, Mass Effect, and even Deus Ex, they all lost that freedom to make a more streamlined and approachable game. One could say they all went mainstream and lost what made them special in the first place. And even Bethesda's own Elder Scrolls games went through that. If we compare Morrowind, Oblivion and Skyrim, with each installment the player has less freedom, less ways to do things and more "follow the map marker" gameplay in linear dungeons with choices that don't matter. So by consequence we have to assume that Skyrim is a bad game in the same way Bioshock Infinite is a bad game.
Fallout 3 is an exception, great game
Great sandbox, meh game.
Absolutely disagree on Fallout 3 and Bioshock 3
3de vid I watched.....
I personally love 3 even though it’s objectively worse than 1 and 2.
This philosophy can not only be applied to games & movies, it is also true for sexual encounters. Having sex with yourself - Great Having sex with someone else - Omg Awesome Having sex with 2 people - "Um, why do I have another pair of balls dangling in my face?" LOL
Unless those 2 other people are of your chosen gender. Then it basically is part 2, but more.
Bioshock Infinite isn't in the same boat as the others, people just hate it because it's different than the others and they like to hop on the hatred band wagon like they do with everything. Bioshock infinite but you take away the Bioshock in front of it and all of a sudden it's a wonderful game. that being said Fable 3, Saints Row 3 (Great on it's own, Bad if compared to Saints Row 2, God tier if compared to the new Taints Row), Oh and Assassin's Creed 3 although not technically the third edition so it may not count.
I Remembered the Ending... Never mind its Bad, It's in the same Boat.
I still enjoy replaying Saints Row 3 more than 4, despite 4 mechanically offering more. But progression is just made too easy. Still a fun game tho. And it took until 2019 for someone to find and pick up the code of SR2 and make a proper PC port, so a lot of people have missed out on it.
@@HappyBeezerStudios Same here, when I play Saints Row 4 it makes me want to play Saints Row 3 instead. I agree on progression as well, I think they did it to maintain momentum as well as thinking people will most likely blast through it like a Dream through Minecraft rather than exploring and taking the Time to enjoy it and have fun just playing. That in turn made the progression seem way too fast and unfulfilling, I am currently playing a new campaign on Hardcore where I use CQB and any Advantageous positions I can get to stay alive it's a lot more fun when it feels as though you can actually take damage. Saints Row 2 is tied with Saints Row 3 for me, they both have a different atmosphere that requires a different mood to play. I'd akin 2 to New Vegas, and 3 to 4 in terms of writing and gameplay.
ME1 absolutely has better gameplay than 2, if you're playing as a class with powers and not just shooting things. I guess 2 is better than your average cover-based shooter, but it's a rubbish genre. This might not apply to console.
This project will fail 'cause Vexer/PJ is an extremely bad manager. Mark my words. The man's unstable and that's the death of creative projects.
Unstable in what way? Is the mod running into problems? If so it wouldn’t be the first time something like this has happened for projects like these.
@@oneinathousand2156 I would ignore that cynicism. You can follow the development of this mod on its Patreon. Updates have been consistent every week since its first release. PJ is also active on the Yesterday discord server.
I'd disagree about fallout 3 being disappointing. I loved it and the world just feels so much more alive and twisted. than the first ones. I'd love to see the first 2 remade in 3d.
Bioshock infinite is better then two
Fallout 3 wasn't a disappointment, it just wasn't a classic Fallout game.
Which is why it was a disappointment
@@ramblelime While I understand and respect your opinion, in my opinion, you can't expect a series that's been to hell and back to stay the same, especially after a buyout.
@@franciscospaghetti7969 yeah, but New Vegas did just that and so did Wasteland 2.
@@pantonearqm2791 New Vegas was made by the same people as the originals, it's no wonder that it's similar.
@Nagger Like I said, Bethesda did a bad job making it like the originals (i.e. a true RPG). However, Fallout 3 wasn't a bad game, nor was it a disappointment.
I know youre just writing a hook but really? BioShock infinite is debatable but halo 3...halo 3 is nearly perfect
He said Halo 3 is one of the exceptions... Pay attention.
I was really enjoying your videos and opinions but what you said about bioshock infinite is worthy of a unsub
Dark souls 2 was ass
Gotta say cold take on bioshock infinite. It was irrational games second one, bioshock 2 was worse than the first. Infinite was greater than both. Same with fallout 3. Just cuz new Vegas was better doesn’t mean fallout 3 was bad. Agree van buren would have been better tho.
Maybe you just wanted different things in the bioshock games than I did. Infinite generally made the immersive sim elements of the first game worse (only being able to hold 2 guns is a good example) and went too far in trying to make it the marketable bro shooter that the industry kept demanding at the time. It had a unique setting but its story was just ok. Felt too much like it was trying to do a christopher nolan mindfuck thing and ended up feeling (to me) like it was smelling its own farts. Especially in burial at sea. 2 generally improved on everything that made 1 good gameplay wise, and it has easily the best pacing of the three games but its story was a little less interesting. If you wanted a big ol' elaborate mindfuck dudebro action game i can def see why infinite is more appealing. Not necessarily what i went into it wanting but that's ok
i understand the trilogy talk, but maybe i'm just a Borderlands 3 apologist or something. However, I think Borderlands 3 is unfairly judged as being bad when really the moment to moment gameplay of it is fantastic, I recently replayed a lot of the game and the DLC and found it gave me a Destiny 2 kind of feeling without all the grinding or forced mulitplayer of Destiny. Overall very underrated gameplay, god the writing sucks so bad though.
I dont think so. For me the first of a trilogy is good, the second is bad cuz they try to innovate and the third is the best cuz they pick the good innovations from the second and mantain the ones from the first, and for me mass effect 3 is a great example of this. fallout 4 (the third 3d fallout), skyrim (the third 3d TES) , transformers 3, pirates of the caribbean 3 are just some examples of awesome titles with good ones but bad twos
new vegas being worse than 3 or 4 is... an interesting take indeed
@@ramblelime I like fo3, i hate fonv (not the mechanics, the plot and map and everything else) and I love fo4
@@mysteriumxarxes3990 The Indiana Jones movies also follow that pattern. The first movie is great and can totally stand on it's own. The second is a sequel that changes some things up, tells a new story, but is generally not as highly regarded. The third comes back to the idea of the original, but adds the good stuff form the second. The fourth is an unnecessary sequel that nobody wanted and is generally seen as the worst of the series, but a few people really enjoy it. An important thing there is the 4th in a series that suddenly makes the 2nd look not so bad. For 3D Bethesda Fallout that would be 76, which is absolutely seen in that way. Although for Elder Scrolls I would say that they become more streamlined, approachable and mainstream with each installment. Don't get me wrong, Skyrim is a good game and i have hundreds of hours in it, but looking at the freedom, choice and roleplaying potential in Oblivion or even more so Morrowind, it is basically the prime example of "as wide as an ocean, as deep as a puddle" And coming back to movies, I wouldn't say that Alien 3 is the best. We have a horror story set in space in the first movie. Added some action in the 2nd, the 3rd focuses basically completely on the action, but is still not back, then comes the 4th that nobody wanted and nobody prefers over the others. For games that would be Dead Space. The first is a great horror game that can genuinely spook you without completely relying on cheap jumpscares. The 2nd adds more action and expands the lore. The 3rd focuses entirely on action, on multiplayer (or rather coop), on microtransactions. Those are examples where it gets worse with each installment.
@@HappyBeezerStudios ah yes. the fourth and fifths of a trilogy are always really bad, take transformers for example, or pirates of the caribbean
F3 was good. Greatest game of the World? No. Never liked isometric games.
bl3 still has best combat and the most skill trees