5 ms·

Which SNES games have more depth then FO3? I understand a lot of people where disappointed with FO3 but this is a genuine question.

by rrreese 14y ago

ergo14 14y ago
Final fantasy, chrono trigger... any rpg basicly. Fallout 3 was a very bad game and was really dumbed down - New Vegas was way better. Hell... Another World (one of better games of all-time) was on SNES - and it cost the fraction of what Wasteland raised. Fallout 3 is just a shadow of the glory of previous games. One good example of an RPG made with a "modern engine" that would give a lot of freedom to the player would be Vampire:Bloodlines - although it had a fair share of bugs - it's one of best examples on how a great gameplay and story can be.
- danso 14y ago
  Er...not sure if your definition of depth is the same as the commenter's...knows Square games may have been better games...but they were pretty linear with nlittle room for any deviation from the script or any real tactical challenge
  - ergo14 14y ago
    yes but this doesnt mean they were not stellar one of a kind experiences - unlike lots of modern games nowdays :(
- Shorel 14y ago
  I still believe Chrono Trigger is the best RPG of all time.
- criley 14y ago
  This is ridiculous. Final Fantasy 4 did not have "more depth" than Fallout 3. Go play it again. Go roam a town. What's that, an entire kingdom capital has 6 single story buildings and a castle with 10 rooms? Most of the NPC's have 1-2 lines of dialogue with NO interaction with the PC? You are viewing those old RPG's with MASSIVELY ROSE TINTED GLASSES. Seriously, just go play one of the old games. Look at how little character customization you have. How little story option you have. There is no variable dialogue, no choices to make, it's simply a story on rails. What a ridiculous claim to make.
  - shardling 14y ago
    Both of you are being a bit ridiculous here -- the other poster is pretending his opinion on Fallout 3 is objective fact, and you've got a very limited definition of depth. A game doesn't have to offer narrative choice, or customization, to somehow be "deep". A story on rails can be an amazing game if the way you interact with it deepens your engagement with the story. (I'd say that's very much the case with ChronoTrigger.)
    - criley 14y ago
      That's fair. I'd still bet that if you counted up the amount of writing and world building that went into Fallout 3 and compared it to any SNES RPG, you'd find dramatically more "worldbuilding" and "depth" in Fallout 3, but I don't have data to back that idea up, so it is what it is.
  - ergo14 14y ago
    Not sure why bring FF4 here, there were many games in the series ;-). Sorry man, stories in old games were MUCH better, the plots were much longer - i don't even have to go to SNES. Fallout New Vegas is a prime example of how a game can play - on same engine - I believe that last good game from Bethesda was Morrowind. And please, seriously Fallout 3 is supposed to have deep story or dialogue? Compared to fallout 1 or 2 it's a very poor attempt (note. I have finished Fallout 3 and New Vegas). Also character customization has litte to do with game depth - i could still argue that few Final Fantasy games had way more customization. Hell even bethesda's Daggerfall was way more customizable than Fallout 3 - also Fallouts 3 story is a very small main quest on rails as you have put it. It's really weak compared to New Vegas - I bring this reference multiple times to show you how bad fallout 3 is compared to New Vegas on same engine. The attitude you present here is precisely the reason why developers want to use kickstarter to fund their games compared to publishers - they have the same worries about how games are. Also you raised some interesting points: - What's that, an entire kingdom capital has 6 single story buildings and a castle with 10 rooms? - Most of the NPC's have 1-2 lines of dialogue with NO interaction with the PC? Agreed, but i fail to see how abundance of dialogue options are supposed to make up for good gameplay? - it is in reality a lot more complicated. Bethesda style sandbox games got really dumbed down - the plenthora of options is really a meaningless facade. Take mass effect as an example - its a shooter with fairly linear gameplay (although it manages to hide this fact well), but it tells a really really good story - It is not a sandbox game by any means but its really good - because it managed to deliver great experience overall. This is what old games did really well, they delivered massive gameplay - and this has nothing to do with graphics, choice options - its the experience that counts - and for me personally Fallout 3 was a very poor experience - your story might be different obviously.
- PhantomLobe 14y ago
  Final Fantasy, depth? I lost track after the 6, but they are like the most linear RPGs in existence.

Which SNES games have more depth then FO3? I understand a lot of people where disappointed with FO3 but this is a genuine question.

by rrreese 14y ago

Which SNES games have more depth then FO3? I understand a lot of people where disappointed with FO3 but this is a genuine question.

ergo14 14y ago

Final fantasy, chrono trigger... any rpg basicly. Fallout 3 was a very bad game and was really dumbed down - New Vegas was way better. Hell... Another World (one of better games of all-time) was on SNES - and it cost the fraction of what Wasteland raised. Fallout 3 is just a shadow of the glory of previous games. One good example of an RPG made with a "modern engine" that would give a lot of freedom to the player would be Vampire:Bloodlines - although it had a fair share of bugs - it's one of best examples on how a great gameplay and story can be.

danso 14y ago
Er...not sure if your definition of depth is the same as the commenter's...knows Square games may have been better games...but they were pretty linear with nlittle room for any deviation from the script or any real tactical challenge
- ergo14 14y ago
  yes but this doesnt mean they were not stellar one of a kind experiences - unlike lots of modern games nowdays :(
Shorel 14y ago
I still believe Chrono Trigger is the best RPG of all time.
criley 14y ago
This is ridiculous. Final Fantasy 4 did not have "more depth" than Fallout 3. Go play it again. Go roam a town. What's that, an entire kingdom capital has 6 single story buildings and a castle with 10 rooms? Most of the NPC's have 1-2 lines of dialogue with NO interaction with the PC? You are viewing those old RPG's with MASSIVELY ROSE TINTED GLASSES. Seriously, just go play one of the old games. Look at how little character customization you have. How little story option you have. There is no variable dialogue, no choices to make, it's simply a story on rails. What a ridiculous claim to make.
- shardling 14y ago
  Both of you are being a bit ridiculous here -- the other poster is pretending his opinion on Fallout 3 is objective fact, and you've got a very limited definition of depth. A game doesn't have to offer narrative choice, or customization, to somehow be "deep". A story on rails can be an amazing game if the way you interact with it deepens your engagement with the story. (I'd say that's very much the case with ChronoTrigger.)
  - criley 14y ago
    That's fair. I'd still bet that if you counted up the amount of writing and world building that went into Fallout 3 and compared it to any SNES RPG, you'd find dramatically more "worldbuilding" and "depth" in Fallout 3, but I don't have data to back that idea up, so it is what it is.
- ergo14 14y ago
  Not sure why bring FF4 here, there were many games in the series ;-). Sorry man, stories in old games were MUCH better, the plots were much longer - i don't even have to go to SNES. Fallout New Vegas is a prime example of how a game can play - on same engine - I believe that last good game from Bethesda was Morrowind. And please, seriously Fallout 3 is supposed to have deep story or dialogue? Compared to fallout 1 or 2 it's a very poor attempt (note. I have finished Fallout 3 and New Vegas). Also character customization has litte to do with game depth - i could still argue that few Final Fantasy games had way more customization. Hell even bethesda's Daggerfall was way more customizable than Fallout 3 - also Fallouts 3 story is a very small main quest on rails as you have put it. It's really weak compared to New Vegas - I bring this reference multiple times to show you how bad fallout 3 is compared to New Vegas on same engine. The attitude you present here is precisely the reason why developers want to use kickstarter to fund their games compared to publishers - they have the same worries about how games are. Also you raised some interesting points: - What's that, an entire kingdom capital has 6 single story buildings and a castle with 10 rooms? - Most of the NPC's have 1-2 lines of dialogue with NO interaction with the PC? Agreed, but i fail to see how abundance of dialogue options are supposed to make up for good gameplay? - it is in reality a lot more complicated. Bethesda style sandbox games got really dumbed down - the plenthora of options is really a meaningless facade. Take mass effect as an example - its a shooter with fairly linear gameplay (although it manages to hide this fact well), but it tells a really really good story - It is not a sandbox game by any means but its really good - because it managed to deliver great experience overall. This is what old games did really well, they delivered massive gameplay - and this has nothing to do with graphics, choice options - its the experience that counts - and for me personally Fallout 3 was a very poor experience - your story might be different obviously.
PhantomLobe 14y ago
Final Fantasy, depth? I lost track after the 6, but they are like the most linear RPGs in existence.