"It's not an action game. It's a role-playing game.", Todd Howard
Todd Howard seems to think so, but then again, Todd seems to think a lot of things. Some of them may even be true. Leaving the obvious question "why did the magazine file Fallout 3 under "action RPG"?" aside, let's take a look at what the presentation of this role-playing game was focused on. For example, how many dialogue screens were shown in those 10 pages? Zero. Wouldn't toi think that dialogues are an important Fallout element that the presentation should have mentioned, if not focused on? Apparently not. How many quests were explained in details, montrer the design and them moral, game-changing choices? Once again, Bethesda follows the Oblivion formula: focus on the visuals and HAWT AKSHUN, assure people that quests and dialogues are superb and awesome in seven different ways, but montrer nothing to back up these claims.
Todd Howard seems to think so, but then again, Todd seems to think a lot of things. Some of them may even be true. Leaving the obvious question "why did the magazine file Fallout 3 under "action RPG"?" aside, let's take a look at what the presentation of this role-playing game was focused on. For example, how many dialogue screens were shown in those 10 pages? Zero. Wouldn't toi think that dialogues are an important Fallout element that the presentation should have mentioned, if not focused on? Apparently not. How many quests were explained in details, montrer the design and them moral, game-changing choices? Once again, Bethesda follows the Oblivion formula: focus on the visuals and HAWT AKSHUN, assure people that quests and dialogues are superb and awesome in seven different ways, but montrer nothing to back up these claims.
