now i can see something to get a little mad a gamedaily about. i don't think the guy that reviewed this game actually played it for any real amount of time. there is a jump button, there are zoom modes. there's a lot of variety to the world and characters. there's also some very non-standard weapons found in the game too, you just have to look for them, which i know he didn't. because the reviewer makes no mention of the fat man at the GNR building, WHICH IS IN PLAIN SIGHT BTW. it also sounds like the people that agree with the review whole-hearted didn't play it either. the game is a blast to play, offers more choice than any game i've ever played, and is a hell of a lot more interesting to play through than oblivion. i'm not saying one opinion is right, but a biased opinion is always wrong, especially when you half-ass it and quit playing the game within the first few hours.

To anyone reading this review and comments, I feel I need to correct & clarify some things. 1. There IS a jump button, but this isn't a spastic, jump around, fps shooter. Jump and spin all you want, you will still get shot in the face by a shotgun, or deservedly jump yourself onto a land mine. 2. There IS a zoom. It is only slight, but it helps. There are also weapons with SCOPES, that have a good zoom range to pick people off. 3. VATS is a good addition. It isn't perfect or useful in all situations, so you end up using a mix of VATS and running around trying to aim and hide behind things at the same time. 4. Weapon condition, skills, perks, etc make the game fun, not add complication. It adds diversity to the game. You can choose how you want to play and try to make it work. Good luck trying to take out a sniper by charging at him with a sledge hammer though. 5. Level scaling.... I am only level seven, but so far, it is 1000x better than oblivion. Enemies don't get much harder as you level, so much as you get better by killing better equipped people. You have a pistol, they have a shotgun, not an easy fight. Throw a grenade under his feet, watch him fly, and YOU now have a shotgun. Early in the game you start out having to shoot raiders over and over to kill them. Later, you can often take their head off with a single shot. NOT like Oblivon. 6. Diversity. There might not be a huge number of creatures, but one of them is humans. That adds tons of diversity. Raider with a pistol, bang bang, he is dead. Another raider, ooooh scary, gonna drop him too. Oh, crap, what the hell? Flame thrower! Run away!!!! It burns, it burns!!! ....Reload save. Add in grenades, sniper rifles, shotguns, mines, traps, etc... 7. Weapons. They are varied and all have their uses. You need to choose the right weapon for the task. Yes, machine guns are great, but they spray bullets like a water hose. This is a game of salvage and survival. Weapons use different ammo, and you must conserve. Keep wasting shotgun shells shooting roaches and you might end up with nothing but a 10mm pistol trying to stop that 500lb super mutant charging at you. Kinda like throwing tennis balls at an angry bull. 8. Final thought.... This game is actually quite fun. So far, it doesn't have quite the same caliber of writing and story as the first 2 Fallouts, but still more than the typical game. Quests are actually fun to do. The nature of the world helps make the game fun. Most of your gear is not bought, it is salvaged, scavenged and stolen. Some quests and locations can lead you to get certain unique equipment and abilities. You explore so you don't miss out, but you still will, because you still have to make choices. Do you befriend a group or kill them and take all their stuff? You might miss out on a few quests if you kill them, but that is a really juicy looking armory.... 9. It is not Oblivion with guns. It has ok NPC interactions, but not quite a true sequel to Fallout 1 & 2. It is a bit more combat based, but the combat is fun. 10. Biggest complaint, is the damn Metro tunnels, caves, etc. They seem too much like every other game out there. Run around aimlessly in a dark, nondescript tunnel and kill the things that attack you. Find a door/fence that takes you to a different area. They are basically mini-dungeons that don't have the same feel as the rest of the game and get kinda tedious. Bottom line, it is a good game and worth trying out. Bethesta didn't completely **** up the Fallout franchise nearly as bad as BOS. They did remove some things they shouldn't, but they did add a couple things that are good. Tag skills change screwed the pooch. Item condition and repair is a great addition. -Taziar

I appreciate the fact that the reviewer posted among other people, that is really cool. I also appreciated the fact that you said, had it been a point grade, it would have a recieved an 8.9 -- much better than an 8. I wasn't saying the game deserves a 10; I would hover around the 9 range. Your post made my mind change a bit, just try to add in the stuff you mentioned in your post in the actual article. Thanks for responding.

Micheal, um, this is the PC Game review, correct? What do you mean by no jump button? The space-bar jumps. On a different note, like in most RPGs, accuracy is not determined by how high the dpi of your mouse is, but by "rolls of dice" behind the scenes. So you should not rely on your "FPS skills." That is why when you are shooting there is always a percent chance of missing, just like if you were to shoot a gun in real life (thus mimicking RL better than FPSs do). Some weapons have better accuracy than others, and with increased stats comes increased accuracy.

I too have an issue with your review of the combat/VATS system. You say that VATS was implemented as a "balanced way to solve the game's lack of shooting accuracy." Um, no. VATS is in place to mimic the way in the old fallout games you could target specific body parts and how combat in the original game was turn based and used action points. However, I do have to agree with the criticism that the VATS will show a 95% chance of hitting the target, then you pop up and hit a rock instead, even though it looks like you are shooting over it. Other than that, thanks for not being like many other reviewers and showering the game with praise just because it is Fallout 3. While I believe the game deserves a 9 or better out of 10, I understand why you gave it an 8 and I support most of your review.

(yes, as you might guess, I'm the evil dude who reviewed the game) As always, we appreciate comments about any reviews that we write. In this case, I will admit that if we had a point grading system, Fallout 3 would be an 8.9. So why is it an 8 and not a 9? Hype should never score a game, a critical reviewe should... right? But I digress. It's an amazing game, that's not up for debate. It integrates several items, storylines and lore from the Fallout series to make fans happy and a post-nuke world has never looked so good. With the review, I'd been hyped up for the past two years and was tripping over myself to play. But as I started playing, I decided to leave the hype behind and play the game as others might. Little things bothered me at the beginning and grew as I played. There are roughly 10 creature types to battle (although with variations) in a game that's probably close to Oblivion's 100+ hour range. VATS helps sometimes but I stopped using it due to it being far less accurate than my FPS skills (skills, perks and condition of weapon seem to add needless complexity to the VATS system for the average user). Also, why no jump button to avoid getting shot at? While Bethesda has clarified that it chose the red bar to represent an enemy's HP (they felt that there were too many numbers already displayed and didn't want to add to the confusion). They also clarified that the blinking HP bars represented potential HP damage, although you'd have to go to the manual (or buy the strategy guide) in order to discover that. You read the manual... right? This is where a tutorial or help function in Pip-Boy 3000 would have helped average players, or players who didn't already play Oblivion. Fallout 3's truly brilliant story and mature gory details keep me coming back to play it again. But as you'll see, the variations are slight and the innovations are less than most of the hyped expectations. If you can find no flaws with the game (or think you have a better way to verse it), please feel free to write a critical review here without cuss words that trumps mine. I'd love to read your challenge.

Calm down. It's an 8/10 not a 3/10...

To Pahla I never mentioned a specific media outlet, so I don't know what you mean when you say you dislike the ones "I mentioned." Is this left for me to assume that you dislike every media outlet but this one, which means you challenge yourself far less than I do? Yes, an opinion is an opinion and that is fine; if you dislike a game, no one can blame you for that. Sadly, what people seem to forget in this business is that you shouldn't review a game based on how much you "like" it but how well it executed its intentions. For example, I absolutely hate GTAIV but the game is an incredible accomplishment and deserves the praise it receives. This review doesn't represent the game well, it focuses on minor gripes rather than the overall amount of content that it offers. This is my problem -- if you dislike the game fine, but I can't imagine many people who would merit anything lower than a 90% for this title. It offers hundreds of hours of solid gameplay, an almost endless amount of weapons, plenty of varying enemies, unique character creation that promotes multiple playthroughs due to karma decisions and various approaches to the different areas and buildings. Bugs are there sure, which is why it isn't a "perfect" title, but that doesn't de-merit this title's deserved praise. While I don't just jump on the bandwagon for reviews and hype, it does say something when over 90% of the outlets out there gave this game more than a 90% overall. It has become one of the highest rated games on Metacritic, OXM and others. While that is an arbitrary set of statistics, it shouldn't be ignored -- especially when the game deserves it. This review simply missed the point of what reviewing a game should be, and didn't represent it well at all. Opinions can be opinions, but in this business there are times when yours can be wrong when you don't review the content, focusing on your "fun-level" instead. I wouldn't review a basketball game because it would suck ass to me, and I think this person shouldn't have reviewed Fallout 3.

I'll have to agree with Helix2345 here. This article barely even mentions the fact the game is an RPG or touches any of the RPG elements of the game. The reason your shots don't always hit is because it is an RPG based on stats, not a first person shooter. I think the reviewer clearly wanted it to be a first person shooter and I think that skews this whole review. I think contrary to what another poster said, the reviewer in fact doesn't bring up any real gripes with the game save some minor combat and minor graphical issues that will not affect someone's decision to buy or not buy this game whatsoever. I think this website would have been better served by having someone review this game who likes and understands RPG games, and spent some more time with it than this reviewer clearly did to give a more complete, in-depth review.

All I have to say is if you liked Oblivion get this game.