Inquisition of the Week: Ridiculous Critiques

vats-junk.jpgAs I write this, the results of last week’s poll are still in the air. Calling it now means that most of you said that you will see “more than meets the eye” on opening night, just narrowly edging out those who will wait for the following weekend. I’m very surprised to see so few people aren’t going to see it at all: based on fan outcry at the changes, and some reviewers’ take that it’s going to be Independence Day with an 80’s license, I would have expected more people to be deadset against seeing it.

Fan outcry is the subject of this week’s poll, in a way. The last day and a half for us have been devoted to Fallout 3. We were fortunate enough to be invited to our very first press event as an official news source, both by, let’s say, being in the right place at the wrong time and saying the wrong thing at the wrong time. The coverage has been a huge upsurge in traffic for us, and intrepid reporter Bartoneus has been getting all kinds of positive comments on how he covered it compared to the “big boys.”

What it’s also meant is that I can go back and look at all the places that have been linking to us, and what they’ve been saying (because they sure haven’t been leaving comments here.) Two things that I’ve found: Fallout is HUGE. There is no lack of love for the original game, and slightly less for the sequels, and mixed opinions for other uses of the franchise. Some people are all about the gameplay, some about the atmosphere, some about the options that you could do in the original game. What is disconcerting, however, is that there is a very vocal group that seems to have decided that they know what is and is not Fallout, and anyone who disagrees with them is “falling into the hype machine.”

As I look through page after page, I couldn’t believe how much hate is being brought against this game and against BethSoft. The term “franchise rape” is tossed around pretty freely. There seems to be a lot of people who judged this incarnation way before this recent info came out about the game. And there’s certainly ALL judging before they’ve played the game.

I know what it’s like to feel let down by a franchise and feel rage at its creators (cough Star Wars cough.) And I understand that feeling that a new game is not going to be like the game you loved. Hell, I was a big Fallout fan myself, and not because of the post-apocalyptic setting, but because it was originally based on GURPS. I’ll freely admit there’s aspects of the new game that appeal to me and those that don’t. However, I’m going to reserve judgment until the game is actually out, and either I can play it or have someone I trust review it. In the meantime, seriously, insulting BethSoft employees, or wishing them to die? There’s really no call for that.

On that note, I gathered up some lines (admittedly taken out of context) that I’ve seen on various Fallout boards complaining about the game, and they just made me laugh. So here I ask…


These are all real quotes, though I did blur out the f-bomb. I thought I’d share and let you decide if these are as crazy as I think they are, and which one is the craziest critique of a game that’s still over a year away (and one option if you think I’m out of line). Hey, maybe some of those people will come over here and leave some more gems. Or maybe, just maybe, a realistic, constructive dialogue will start up…

About Dave

Dave "The Game" Chalker is the Editor-in-Chief and Co-Founder of Critical Hits. Since 2005, he has been bringing readers game news and advice, as well as editing nearly everything published here. He is the designer of the Origins Award-winning Get Bit!, a freelance designer and developer, son of a science fiction author, and a Master of Arts. He lives in MD with e, their three dogs, and two cats.


  1. Would I qualify for Crucifiction if I have never played a single fallout game?

  2. holy double post batman, I go to correct a spelling error and it double posts me! sorry

  3. can I get the cross next to him?

  4. Fixed your double post Steve, no worries! It’s okay, you just might be drawing a blank as to why some people are completely irate about the third game. I actually just bought the Fallout Collection off of Amazon so I could give the original, sequel, and tactics a whirl again. I played them all back in the day, but always borrowed copies from friends.

  5. Groin shots are fun, as is killing kiddies (virtual kiddies), and it’s completely reasonable to ask for a nostalgic font, but poor grammar, curse words, and death wishes to Todd are simply unacceptable, turning a potentially intelligent debate into a gorramn flame war…

    Plus, it’s only franchise rape if the majority says no…plus Oblivion was only a single thrust…forgivable, it is, to thrust goodly three times then falter but once…even if the 4th does turn things upside down…assuming there is a 5th thrust at the elder scrolls series, most of us taking it sure numero five-o will return to the original positioning of things…

    In my opinion, double meanings ARE realistic, constructive dialogue…so long as they don’t involve tentacles…

  6. Besides the fact that Bethesda has always done the Elder Scrolls games, so they can’t really rape their own franchise, just make bad games for it. Considering all of Oblivions problems, it was still an amazing game for many other reasons and entertained a lot of people for long amounts of time.

  7. Come on, Dave’s a moron entry! I wish I had voted for that one now.

  8. If you want to learn more about the issue, segments of the fanbase have produced a number of articles. No Mutants Allowed in particular has a collection of articles that I strongly recommend. Hopefully, it might illuminate our position. I suggest reading them in the order that I list them:

    The first is “The History of Fallout,” the why and how the original Fallout was created to be the game it was.

    The second is the three-part “Glittering Gems of Hatred,” which gives an overview of the community, what our positions are and why we hold them.

    Lastly, there is “Fallout 3, Who is it For?” This article examines the information revealed in the exclusive Game Informer preview, several weeks ago.

  9. Oblivion was an action-rpg, emphasis on the action, and everything we’ve seen so far points towards that’s being the case with Fallout 3. Fans of the original Fallout are loathe to see their beloved franchise turned into an insipid hack and slash (or run and gun) console-RPG with mere Fallout-y window dressing. Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken. The Fatman, the Orc dressed up as a Super Mutant, hell, even the poor community management would be (partially) forgiven if the gameplay was turnbased, but this unholy mongrel of real-time and turnbased really seals the deal for actual RPG fans and not twitch gamers with a penchant for amassing teh ubar l3wtz.

  10. Dave, OK. I agree that Fallout 3, too – as Oblivion -, has emphasis on action.
    Though, I’m not so sure I’m too pissed about VATS. I mean – right now I’m playing through Dungeons and Dragons PC games. They’re basically computerised(??) classical RPGs, no? And there you (for example in Baldurs Gate) can pause during combat, yeah – the hits and misses are rolled, but it’s imitating realtime visually.
    I enjoyed the realtime combat in Tactics, for example. I loathed the lack of dialogue and persuasion and all that what made the first two Fallouts, but the combat was more to my taste – and no I’m not some PS or other console action freak, I’ve played the first two Fallout games since I was seven – I got all my cursing words from Fallout; hell it was fun when I checked the dictionary for the F word.
    What make me nervous are the Fat Man (Todd went woop oop oop when describing how cool it will be to NUKE people, pah!) and the mutants looking like orcs. But hey – if they do the dialogue trees right as they promised (it’s not 100% but hey – the game’s a year away) and my actions will have some effect on the rest of the game world (like in Fallout 2 when I became a porn star there’s a guy in NCR who goes like ‘Hey! I’ve seen you on TV!’ or something by the lines.)

    Anyways, I was with the ‘hardcore fans’ until they started flaming the upcoming game without thought. There’s those who actually discuss the problems, but even on NMA forums there’s a lot of people who just flame like 13-year-olds.

    I’m a fan. I’m hoping for the best – been waiting for teh past 10 years, heh – but hell, life goes on if Fallout doesn’t come out as the (hardcore)fans would like it to. There’s always the Pen and Paper possibility and all the mods, some really good. Hell, if you flame thoughtlessly then rather go to work, raise some serious bucks and make your own game – possibly you won’t get the rights for Fallout(tm), but you might get your turnbased-isometric-view-retro-great-dialogues-post-apoc PC game. (sorry for the flame, but I’m sleepy)


  11. “In the meantime, seriously, insulting BethSoft employees, or wishing them to die?”

    Yes things go to far some times, I got a kid that made threats to Steve Meister to apologize to him, and the most serious stuff is moved from the topics at NMA to the closed forum, and still silliness happens many times.

    Still the reverse happens a lot too, not only insults but wishes that fallout fans should be terminated, annihilated and similar terms. It’s on Gamespy, Quarter to Three, Something Awfull, even a couple of times at Gamespot. Hell I don’t have a serious harsh exchange of words with anyone from Bethesda since 2004 and try not to stir much drama, and I still get hate comments on the blog and Meebo, got my kids dragged into insults against me on the Codex.

    And you probably don’t know, but NMA got obscene pics being posted all over the place and serious DoSS attacks that made the site unavailable, all work of Oblivion fans from Penny Arcade and Something Awfull, so being unreasonable isn’t a monopoly of a few Fallout fans.

    There’s another factor that makes things worse, while, and against the perception of most fans on the Fansites, Bethesda devs do care about the input and worries of Fallout fans, at least many of them do, I know this for a fact, the Bethesda PR machine works with a strategy of disregarding and ignoring the Fansites. While I loved the idea of Critical Hits going to the media gathering (and you coverage was the most revealing and interesting, followed by IGN’s and Gamespy)still it’s strange that you were invited, while having less than a quarter daily unique hits than NMA, and NMA or DAC were barred from going there, when they had people ready to go, that live minutes away from Bethsoft.

    This strategy is only making things worse, if they had showed the dialog to a few community members, for instance, then they wouldn’t have so many PR headaches and so many screams in their backyard door.

    Hope this commentary brings something to the discussion, keep up the good work.

  12. “Besides the fact that Bethesda has always done the Elder Scrolls games, so they can’t really rape their own franchise, just make bad games for it. ”

    Well, it’s not as if you can’t rape your own child…

  13. “Well, it’s not as if you can’t rape your own child…”
    At least not until after it’s been born. Oblivion was the child they created, it was entirely theirs and it couldn’t be raped simply because it is entirely what they wanted it to be and made it to be.
    Fallout 3 is technically still the child of what Interplay created, so the raping makes much more sense. It’s completely inaccurate, but still it’s more plausible then the Oblivion situation.

  14. Well, if you consider the whole franchise as the child, and not individual games, then you *can* rape it, just like Interplay raped Fallout with Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel :).

  15. “Still the reverse happens a lot too, not only insults but wishes that fallout fans should be terminated, annihilated and similar terms. It’s on Gamespy, Quarter to Three, Something Awfull, even a couple of times at Gamespot.”

    ok, but wasn’t that a response to the initial unjustified hatred of fallout fans?
    it all begun in the very first days when the news of bethsoft buying the license spread all around. the very first comment to this event was “omg, oblivion with guns…” without even seeing a damn pic of it. i think this started it all and went then too far.
    at the beginning i too was skeptic.
    now most of fallout fans’ nightmares have been confirmed. bud are those truly bad?
    can’t just ppl take the good out of them?
    my dream was a silent-storm-like fallout 3 (the closest to the originals imho), but some innovation could also be appreciated, such as first-person view and action.
    this can’t all be bad and we should trust a big company such bethsoft.

  16. mactbone says:

    -this can’t all be bad and we should trust a big company such bethsoft.

    First, how does being big imply trustworthy? Second, no, it’s not all bad, but that doesn’t mean everyone should “stfu and wait until you’ve finished the game to critique anything.” Combat has been explained and found lacking for many people – you know the gameplay part of the game. Todd Howard said, “Violence done well is fucking hilarious” which has to concern anyone who loved the humor in Fallout.

    There are definitely areas for concern and to brush it all away with “we don’t really know anything – it’s a year away!” shows an optimism that doesn’t make sense to me. The game will not substantially change in the next year, it will not suddenly change all of the things we’ve heard and to constantly cry, “wait! you never know!” is foolhardy at best.

  17. Well you asked for more comments, so here they are :)something good already came from this discussion

  18. Briosa- Yep, and a lot of it is making a little more sense now. (And believe me, I have no love for SomethingAwful, so we can totally agree on that!)

  19. “Well, if you consider the whole franchise as the child, and not individual games, then you *can* rape it, just like Interplay raped Fallout with Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel :).”
    One of my points is that I don’t believe that the fans are the final arbiters of what is and is not part of the franchise. What’s the essential part of Fallout to you may not be the same to someone else. The games’ creators really have the final say on it, and so even something like BoS cannot be raping the franchise. (It can still be an objectively bad game, however.)
    The FO3 situation is a bit different because the license has changed hands. However, I really don’t think that BethSoft is purposely changing the game to piss off the diehards; they’re changing the game to make the game experience they want to play and as a business what they think will sell.
    I’d love to see the FO fan community design their own new Fallout game, then give it away online. I’d download and play that in a second.

  20. “One of my points is that I don’t believe that the fans are the final arbiters of what is and is not part of the franchise. What’s the essential part of Fallout to you may not be the same to someone else. The games’ creators really have the final say on it, and so even something like BoS cannot be raping the franchise. (It can still be an objectively bad game, however.)”

    Maybe not if you consider the company the maker of the game. I consider the people who made the game the makers and they had nothing to do with BOS.

  21. “What’s the essential part of Fallout to you may not be the same to someone else. The games’ creators really have the final say on it, and so even something like BoS cannot be raping the franchise. (It can still be an objectively bad game, however.)”

    May I ask, did you read “The History of Fallout” I linked to earlier? All the facts there are backed up by referenced quotations from the original developers. It outlines the ‘essential parts’ of Fallout by the very people who created the game, top to bottom. While Interplay owns the franchise, Cain, Boyarsky, and Co. are the artists who created it all.

    The fans largely use that original vision to measure Fallout games against. Take turn-based combat for example, this is what Tim Cain has to say;

    “I think the strength of Fallout’s combat system is that it was easy to understand and use, but still complex enough to give you many options on how to fight. Turn-based combat gives you more time to think of battle tactics, so combat feels richer – and a lot of people responded to that.”

    Additionally, Tim explained “It also showed how popular and fun turn-based combat could be, when everyone else was going with real-time or pause-based combat.”

    Considering that this time everyone else is going with real-time or pause-based combat, and instead of being different (and dare I say truly “innovative” rather than an empty buzzword), Fallout 3 is following the crowd. It is things like that, ignorance or ignoring of the original core design decisions of Fallout, which leave Fallout fans unhappy with the direction of Fallout 3.

  22. Yessir, I did read the articles, and they do very eloquently put out your position. However, I still contend that the factors listed- with the exception of being turn-based- are not necessarily absent in FO3… it’s too early to judge one way or the other. If, however, that’s a deal-breaker for you… why nitpick things like bobbleheads and groin-shots? Isn’t the game already ruined for you? What’s the point now in keeping up the harassment? And is that really worth threatening people’s lives?

  23. Also, and this is just my personal opinion as a game designer, I take exception to the following statement: “Ah, they’re making it for themselves. Good market there, I hear”
    It’s always my goal to make a game that I and my friends want to play. I wish more companies would do that. In Bethesda’s case, they are able to do that, AND have a built-in Oblivion market, and even if they alienate a lot of Fallout’s base, there’s plenty who will buy it on the Fallout name alone. So it does make market sense and game design sense. It just may not, as you contend, make sense if the goal is to make a game with Fallout 1’s design goals.

  24. mactbone says:

    Which brings us around to why exactly buy the Fallout franchise? I really can’t believe that it sold well enough and has enough cache to warrant 5 million dollars. If that’s the case, then why not create their own IP? As you said, they’ve got the Oblivion market – what does Fallout bring to the table (and maybe more importanly, what does it take away)?

    There are only two reason I can think of –
    either they’re really big fans who don’t quite understand why a lot of other people like the games or the Fallout name brings a gravitas and nostalgia that resonates with critics and old-school gamers (although why that would be a consideration, I don’t know).

  25. You seem to feel that the Fallout fanbase more cohesive than it really is. No one I have relations with or respect has threatened the staff of Bethesda. NMA in particular has rules against threats on our forums. We don’t have, or pretend to, control over the entirety of the fanbase, elements of which can behavior in a decidedly stupid manner.

  26. Good question. The two reasons you list seem pretty reasonable. As I said, the non-alienated portion of the fanbase is likely to buy it for the name (and there’s a portion of that who will buy it SOLELY for the name no matter what.)

  27. If it sounds like I’m singling out NMA, I’m not trying to, and I apologize. The samples in the poll were taken from several sources. Good on you for banning threats. However, it does look like there’s a very vocal faction that is certainly off-putting to me. What percentage of the fanbase this actually is I have no idea.

  28. I won’t say there isn’t some ridiculous criticism on the NMA forums, because there is some, but largely it is from individuals without much community influence. There is a complex dynamic, especially because of Oblivion-related discontent with Bethesda. Also pay attention to our news coverage and articles in contrast to the forums, because we keep them separate, different in atmosphere.

    There is also order of importance, while I’m not satisfied with V.A.T.S. I also think the novelty weapons that Bethesda has introduced run against the Fallout setting. That latter concern is trivial relative to the combat system, but there may be a time and place to voice my unease with both elements. Or the matter of relative importance, displeasure with the features of super mutants may not mean much to you and may seem silly; but Bethesda’s needless and bland reinvention of an iconic Fallout creature may represent quite a bit more to me.

    Anyway, it seems obvious that Bethesda isn’t making a game for the community (nor wants anything to do with us), which largely wants the core design of Fallout to be respected. While there is plenty of room for improvement on Fallout, Bethesda seems intent on reinventing everything to fit a completely different gaming model. NMA’s goal at this point is to present an alternative to the hype, an honest alternative to a disingenious gaming media.

  29. mactbone: “why exactly buy the Fallout franchise?”

    I think that Fallout is a big name with older crowds that loved it, many (or most) of which have never read a Fallout forum in their life (as I had not until today). Secondly, who’s to say that a big company like Bethsoft isn’t going to go sell movie rights and make ANOTHER quick turn around on the license? I mean, maybe, we could get a big deal director like…. UWE BOLL!

  30. I missed a lot today…a year’s worth of votes and about 25 comments or so…after this small addition on the subject of franchise rape, I’m done…

    As I see it, it is us, the consumers, who take it from the franchise…makes sense if you consider why gang rape is called such…franchise rape is just more metaphorical, involving sticking something we think will be okay to the consumers, at which point we will either scream for more or say “NO!” (thus making it rape)…

    However, it is only the bad thrust after “no” that the producer has begun to rape us with the franchise…if looked at on a franchise’s long term supply and demand chart, franchise rape really can resemble something horrible…

    Macroeconomics did me well…

  31. jfreund says:

    What it boils down to is that Bethesda is not making a Fallout game. Fallout is a faithful representation of the Pen and Paper RPG experience using a computer to enable a single player to enjoy it. Bethesda is making a console FPS action “RPG” and for some ungodly reason they spent $5+ million to put the Fallout name on it. They did not need the Fallout IP to make this game. If they’d release it as their own IP, then fine, they can do whatever they want with their new game. It’s as if they spent millions of dollars specifically to piss off Fallout fans.

    It’s like the crappy 70s and 80s bands that tried to sound like Led Zeppelin. They attempted to imitate the sound Zeppelin had, but they had no understanding of the music that influenced the members of Zeppelin. Todd and co. think that violence itself is “fucking hilarious” and that a HANDHELD nuclear device is teh kewl and oh so Fallouty. Bethesda does not understand the PnP foundation that made Fallout what it is.

  32. jfreund: the end-all be-all difference with your analogy is this – those other bands were not Led Zeppelin. This game IS Fallout 3. The Fallout franchise may change and you may not like that, but whatever you say or do it will not change the fact that this game is a Fallout game. Whether you see that as a good thing or not, it’s the truth.

  33. jfreund says:

    Bethesda has spent more than 5 million dollars to call this game Fallout 3. That does not automatically mean that the game they are making is truly a Fallout game.

    If somebody bought the Led Zeppelin name from Jimmy Page or Atlantic Records or whoever owns the rights to it, then released an album with the Led Zeppelin name on it, would it really be a Zeppelin record?

    Fallout fans don’t give two shits how much money changed hands between Bethsoft and Herve Caen. We want another game that carries the distinguishing characteristics of Fallout. The post-apocalyptic setting is only part of it. The top-down viewpoint, turn-based combat, character development that affects gameplay, gameworld consequences to player actions, and dialog otions that affect character relationships and gameplay outcomes are all essential. The original Fallout ran against the trends in computer gaming at the time by having those features. Bethsoft had the chance to follow the Fallout legacy by again bucking industry trends and making a game that featured those characteristics. Instead, they are ignoring what makes Fallout unique and slapping the name on a generic FPS with roleplaying elements.

    I still can’t figure out why Bethsoft needs the Fallout IP to make this game. They don’t. They could remove any references to Fallout canon and mechanics and their game could still be released pretty much as-is.

  34. “The top-down viewpoint, turn-based combat, character development that affects gameplay, gameworld consequences to player actions, and dialog otions that affect character relationships and gameplay outcomes are all essential.”
    All of those are in Fallout 3 except for PURE turn-based combat. Does that one omission make it not a Fallout game?

  35. First of, sorry about my poor english.

    Im one of the fallout hardcore fans, but hey, we (the fans) dont have the same opnions. So dont judge a reaction of some, that appear more because of flaming, as the voice of all of us. But this had already been said.

    So heres my point. If they bought the rights to follow the franchise, why to go so far of it? I mean, if they intended to follow up the name Fallout, why not to study the franchise and tries to get the same felling, even if changing things. Its not the lack of the turn based system the problem. Only such a change isnt all the problem. The problem is within the felling. You could say that even changing the combat system is everything there, but it isint. You cant take the details of the franchise so crude. The look, the feel and such isnt there. If i prefer isometric turn based system? Oh hell yeah, but im a old hardcore nostalgic gamer anyway. But if, even without these elements, the fallout setting where there, it would be fantastic, i would praise Bethesda and the world would be wonderfull.

    Ive never did any criticism since the very begining, this is the first time. I dont want to blame Bethesda, nor the Obilivion franchise, nor they Fallout 3 first person action based Fallout game. But besides some elements poorly developed, there isnt a thing from the real Fallout series there. Mutants now look like a band of monster to fight off (at least is what looks like by the preview, but we cant take this as a ultimate truth until the game is finished), without the real gray areas, and looks too much like orcs or Doom 3 monsters. The world, fantasticaly detailed, is like the world have just blowed up, like no one in 200 year have moeved one single brick out of the way. Almost all scenes are too bluish (am i writing it right?) and the place all full of trash, without that desert “you’re alone” feeling.

    So, it looks like they’ve saw “nukes”, “pipboy (vault boy)”, “mutants”, “50’s music” and “vaults”, only for a few moments, and throwed any kind of what they suposed it must have been in the game. Even the 50’s look, except by the music on the radios, isnt there. Its a modern alternative way of looking into the future, only within more nukes and old music then normaly would be.
    If the game will be good? Of course? Im almost dying to see all that features at once. The graphics, the hard to survive feeling, the choices and all. Its wounderfull and theres nothing like that actually. But, even if its a fantastic game, we must look at the facts. It isnt a Fallou game.

    So, stop the debate. The game is great, but according to the fallout franchise its out of place. I will buy and play it, but not because of the fallout title, but for what the game is. Its just sad that the so expect Fallout 3 will only exist in my dreams…

  36. jfreund says:

    Top-Down view:

    The camera CAN be pulled back enough to get a similar view. Is there any indication that it is a viable way to play the game? Everything released so far concerning the combat system indicates that it would be impossible to carry out combat from the isometric-like view. What about dialog? Can you initiate conversation with an NPC from the top-down perspective? Can you pick up objects? Or is it just a camera view you can momentarily use to look at the environment before you go back to FPS mode?

    Turn-based combat:

    Information about VATS is still muddled, but there does not appear to be anything turn-based about it. Real-time with pause seems to be the best we can hope for with the current info. It really seems to be another version of bullet time a la Max Payne. The Max Payne games were fun, but this is supposed to be an RPG. BTW, VATS is a terrible acronym. What exacly is “Vault Tec Assisted” about it? Did Vault Tec make a magic widget that allows the bearer to pause time to line up shots? It’s an example of Bethsoft trying to refer to the original games and missing the soul of Fallout’s PnP origins.

    Character development that affects gameplay:

    This remains to be seen. If it is possible to play through the entire game in FPS mode then character stats will not determine the outcome of combat. Definitely not RPG mechanics. Will character stats determine dialog options? Will the outcome of actions (lockpick, repair, first aid, etc) be determined by character stats? Or will they have Oblivion-esque minigames? I actually found it easier to pick locks in Oblivion with a low to middle lockpick skill than I did with lockpick at 100%.

    Gameworld consequences to player actions, dialog options that affect character relationships and gameplay outcomes:

    Megaton appears to be going along these lines. If what they want us to believe about Megaton is accurate and is indicative of the quest design throughout the whole game, then there is a good chance that this will be a decent game. The problem with that is the same problem with Fallout 3 as a whole. It is being developed by the same team that made Oblivion. It is being managed by the same team that managed Oblivion. It is being marketed by the same team that marketed Oblivion. Bethesda has NO cred as a developer of PnP based RPGs. Their pre-release hype for Oblivion was wildly innacurate. What reason do we have to take what they say about Fallout 3 at face value? We have no hard evidence to suggest Bethesda is actually capable of making a true Fallout game. What they have shown us so far is definitely not a sequel in gameplay to Fallout and Fallout 2. The more they protest that “this is Fallout”, the less credible they become. Bethesda makes console FPS action RPGs. Fallout is a computer RPG with pen and paper mechanics. It doesn’t matter if they call this crap sandwich filet mignon, it’s still a crap sandwich. The fact that they expect Fallout fans to eat it with a smile is insulting.

  37. Late to the party I see… Happy 4th all, I’m just waking up from mine, 4 days later.

    First off, great site, I don’t browse game sites unless a fave of mine is being released (Fallout), but yours is definitely getting a bookmark, just for remembering GURPS.

    About fallout and your increduousness regarding its fan base: Really? Are you really surprised to find game fans rabid about a 20+ year-old franchise (If you count Wasteland) that produced 3 solid, intelligent and darkly humorous games? That’s like, I dunno, questioning your entire audience as to why they even exist in the first place. Might as well ask a sports fan why they just knocked out some opposing team’s fan with a piece of BBQ grillware; That’s just how we roll, son.

    I was especially perplexed as to why a site called “Critical Hits” would be mystified when fans were annoyed by groin-shots being removed from the game. I mean, come on, short of the venerated Vorpal Sword, nothing and I mean NOTHING says “Critical Hit!” like a shot to the twigs&berries. Maybe a vibro-blade to the ovaries, to keep it real for the ladies? Works for me.

    Finally, as to the whole “Killing kids, omg!” thing:

    Yeah, it’s fallout, you gotta have it. That game was dark, and the people who inhabited it, including some of the kids, were some of the worst humanity had left to offer, and if you chose to, you were the worst of them all, a pure psychopath. A point in the other direction, is that without the freedom to act atrociously, you not only devalue atrocity, but you devalue its’ opposite as well… altruism.

    Not much value in life if life itself is not constantly at risk, and let’s be honest, this is a game, a complete fiction, those are pixels and there are simply no legal issues to it, that’s a bunch of baloney. I mean, they have cannibalism, sex, random murder and drugs, might as well stay true to the original and keep the kids at risk, it makes it all the better when you get through a game (As I always do, I choose “good” paths, sue me), without harming a single innocent hair on the sneak-thiefiest urchin’s head.

    That’s it, and yeah I plan on waiting to see a playable version before I criticize this game deeply, but that’s just me, 36 years on and still an optimist, despite the many, many franchise disappointments in every media.


    Jay Pappas.


  1. […] week, we tried to find out if any of you were as amused by some of the critiques of what we know of Fallout 3. The majority of people did not call me a moron, but only by a slim […]

  2. […] “This is not Fallout.” “This is not D&D.” “This is not Dune.” […]

  3. […] Inq. of the Week: Ridiculous Critiques (hundreds of people calling me a moron, also, most voted on poll) […]

  4. […] could come close to overshadowing the announcement of Dungeons & Dragons Fourth Edition. Like certain other sequels, it has been met with a mix of excitement and snark, with some fans proclaiming doom and others […]