Board 8 > FTC just casually leaking out all the details on Xbox Series X mid-gen refresh

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://twitter.com/Wario64/status/1703994120937869528

mainly just a redesign, not like X Pro or an XX as you would

And also a bunch of Bethesdas upcoming games! Though the source is a bit outdated so the years given should be ignored; enough things have been delayed that theres no way those release years are still accurate

https://x.com/wario64/status/1703996755560546707?s=46&t=MY1pO06Q3Sh7Np8E1OEGzA

Aren't Oblivion and Fallout 3 the ones people DON'T want remastered? I know they were big at the time, but I thought history wasn't kind to either of those games.

Lol Ghostwire Tokyo 2 is NOT coming out.

UshiromiyaEva posted...

but I thought history wasn't kind to either of those games.

that's what remasters are for

There are definitely a bunch of people who would adore a Fallout 3 remaster. That's still the most popular game in the series.

I'm the furthest thing from an authority on the subject around, but everytime I've ever seen Fallout 3 brought up over the last half decade it was to talk about how bad it was compared to New Vegas.

Fallout 3 I thought was pretty good

New Vegas is just that damn good

A lot of people like FO3. Theyre wrong to like it, but its just the reality of the situation. Same for Oblivion.

UshiromiyaEva posted...

Aren't Oblivion and Fallout 3 the ones people DON'T want remastered? I know they were big at the time, but I thought history wasn't kind to either of those games.

Lol Ghostwire Tokyo 2 is NOT coming out.

I think theres a decent nostalgia for Oblivion at this point, a remaster would probably go over well.

Generally speaking(if you're applying public opinion):

FO3 going MAXIMUM GREYSCALE AESTETHIC with a story that literally[THIS IS NOT A JOKE] chastises your MC for "not sacrificing themselves like their parents did" just rubbed people the wrong way. Then there's the DLC that had to give a post-story journey to absolve the "YOU WERE SUPPOSED TO SACRIFICE YOURSELF" moment. Additionally, many felt the game was too "shooty" for a FO game.

By comparison, NV brought back the color and zanyness many like. More energetic character personalities and groups to engage with.The story having some small semblance of openness also helped(picking either of House, NCR, Legion, independent or [DLC] Sierra Madre Invasion). NV felt like Fun Fallout again instead of soggy, sloggy greyscale Zzzzzzzzzz.

If you're going by public opinion of course.

UshiromiyaEva posted...

I'm the furthest thing from an authority on the subject around, but everytime I've ever seen Fallout 3 brought up over the last half decade it was to talk about how bad it was compared to New Vegas.

_PandaMaster_ posted...

Generally speaking(if you're applying public opinion):

Yeah the problem is you guys don't hang around 'casuals'. Fallout 3 hit them like a freight train. The hardcore fanbase is not the same - and they're outnumbered. There was a Top 100 list a while back where tons of industry people voted on their favorite games, and even there F3 ranked above NV.

tl;dr version - F3 would smoke NV in a GameFAQs Contest.

I don't disagree about the casual mindset applied to FO3. It's certainly a case of the casual opinion vs the hardcore opinion when it comes to discussions about the games. Expectations from the hardcore fans vs reality compared to casuals being simply blown away just because of the scale of the game.

Still, if one wanted the hardcore perspective(or a shorthand version of it at least) that's more or less it.

I just saw the email about Microsoft wanting to buy Nintendo, and oh my god. Imagine writing "It's just taking a long time for Nintendo to see that their future exists off of their own hardware" in the middle of the Switch's peak year.

KP is absolutely right on Fallout, the general audience outside of vocal online spaces still goes mad for 3. As for Oblivion, thats a fantastic game held back by the constraints of its time and I dont think many say otherwise. A remaster would go down very well.

As somone who had never played a Fallout game before, 3 blew me away. I put a hundred-something hours into it and the DLC, completing every missions and sidequest and fell in love with the world. Then New Vegas came out and it just felt like more of the same in a different location and I dropped off before finishing it. I went back later and finished it and all of the DLC and yeah, it's probably technically the better game, but Fallout 3 at the time was something special.

Then 4 and 76 came out and I kinda don't care about Fallout anymore...

Isn't the simple explanation that FO3 still felt "new" at the time and it'll never lose that advantage over subsequent Bethesda Fallout games?

New Vegas is the hardcore choice but 3 was the overall

mainly because the former took a while for the bugs and DLC to sort itself out and most casuals didnt really get to see it

kinda like how KOTOR 1 and 2 are viewed, and the latter was also done by the New Vegas dev!

I didn't care for either game much but stuck with 3 through to completion and dropped NV quite early on. Both have their fans, generally Fallout 3's good points seem to be its focus on exploration, there's more to explore and its all more accessible than NV. New Vegas is praised for its plot/RPG mechanics (which 3 barely had), but had none of the exploration that a lot of people like 3 for.
The ending for 3 is stupid but i played it with the DLC that makes it considerably less stupid.

Xbox going all digital already kinda sucks.

Doom Year One hype.

false topic title

https://twitter.com/cecianasta/status/1704155135662821763

Oopsies.

Xboner of the Year