“Fallout 3” was not only big and ambitious, but Bethesda Softworks’ first time playing with the coveted “Fallout” license. There’s much to love about the studio’s work in “Fallout 3,” but it wasn’t a perfect game. In fact, several criticisms leveled against “Fallout 3” were pretty universal.
I jotted down three significant criticisms gamers said affected their “Fallout 3” experience and asked executive producer Todd Howard (as part of a larger e-mail interview) to evaluate whether gamers’ and critics’ observations were valid.
Before Howard responded, there was some fear he’d take offense, but he dashed those feelings away. “I tend to think all criticism is fair, as putting a game out and charging money for it should cause such things,” he explained.
With that in mind…
Criticism: #1: “Fallout 3” is just mediocre when judged as a first person shooter
Criticism #2: The ending isn’t very satisfying and much shorter than other “Fallout” endings
Howard: Based on the feedback I’ve seen, most people are pissed off that it ends, not the ‘ending’ itself. Maybe that’s one and the same, I don’t know. That’s another thing we’re changing in DLC3 [downloadable content #3, “Broken Steel”]. We really underestimated how many people would want to keep playing, so that’s probably the last time we’ll do something like that.
Criticism #3: V.A.T.S. is boring once you’re accurate enough to head shot everyone
Howard: Depends on what you find entertaining. I like to blow people’s heads off, so, well, it never got old for me. I agree that the ‘to hit chance’ for head shots is probably too high.
Are you satisfied with Howard’s responses to these “Fallout 3” criticisms?
Got a comment you can’t bring yourself to share below this post? Drop me an e-mail.
Bethesda Won’t Commit To PS3 ‘Fallout 3? Getting Ability To Play Post-Ending
Barack Obama Inauguration Site, Rendered Via ‘Fallout 3?
‘Fallout 3? Update Fixes Bugs Or Reveals Alternate Achievements, Depending On Perspective