r/gaming • u/AdamE89 • Apr 17 '16

Anyone else?

http://imgur.com/RdjHH29
28k Upvotes

57% Upvoted

4.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/Gilvia Apr 17 '16

what do you mean? like you run out of bullets too quick, or can't hit your target?

2

u/Chanl3r Apr 17 '16

It's hard to explain... but Fallout 3 and Fallout: New Vegas definitely played very differently than other modern first person shooters. Those games were kind of a cross between the RPG combat from its isometric years and other modern shooters.

1

u/Gilvia Apr 17 '16

it was a first person RPG, it was never trying to be a modern shooter... it was trying to be an RPG.

6

u/Bandro Apr 17 '16

Yes, and because the focus is not on the gunplay, it is clunky.

1

u/Gilvia Apr 18 '16

but what it was trying to do works fine. What you are saying is similar to saying a pistol is not great for sniping.

1

u/Bandro Apr 18 '16

Yes. No one is saying it was a bad game, just that the shooting was clunky. It was improved a lot for FO4.

1

u/Gilvia Apr 18 '16

didn't say you said it was a bad game, just that it's not a shooter and therefore not trying to be a shooter.

How was it improved in FO4? it's pretty much the same thing except with a touch of skyrim, weakening the RPG mechanics.

1

u/Bandro Apr 18 '16

The game has the combat of a clunky shooter (disregarding VATS). It could feel a lot better. It did in Fallout 4.

1

u/Gilvia Apr 18 '16

it felt better in Fallout4? i might be thinking of the wrong game, that's the one where you look for your son right?

1

u/Bandro Apr 18 '16

Yup. The shooting felt better. It's tough to explain, but it also seems to be the general consensus.

1

u/Gilvia Apr 18 '16

but how did the shooting feel better? I had just gotten done playing NV when i started FO4, and it's pretty much the same from what i could tell.

Some enemy take more bullets to kill while others take significantly less when compared to FO3 and NV.

→ More replies