Which is better: unrealized potential or overabundant resources?

Nothing, but when Americans idolize it in film, they either do Slice of Life or Historical Drama.

I don't want the daily life of a frontier family, or to watch General Lee sipping lemonade, or hear a little boy screeching SHAAAAANE! as some dandy who never did anything interesting rides away, I want to see the adventure and intrigue.

Here, take a gander at the difference:

American Western:
youtu.be/kf-HWHofL6c

Spaghetti Western:
youtu.be/LjFVOuYShp0

3 and 4 have shit worlds, NV is made by the original devs and those games had post-apocalyptic communities and the politics between them, Fallout was never about surviving the apocalypse it was living in a post-apocalyptic world, why the fuck do people in 3 and 4 still live like savages 200 years after the bombs fell.

Americans were fucking sick of cowboy movies by the 50s and seeing the success of the spaghetti western there was some revival to it and make it more gritty and realistic, stop being a fucking pleb who's dislike of a real-world topic comes from the shit media he's seen or consumed. Middle-eastern history for example is probably shittily told and boring but I bet the actual events of Persian Cossacks against the Russian Cossacks or an Armenian defending his village from the roaches in actuality through the lens of a refined piece of media that caters to the contents of their subjects be a lot better.

...

I just don't like how Americans portrayed it is all, the actual history is really cool. Hell, one of my favorite games as a kid was Civil War: Great Battles impossible to find without buying, like most of the games I grew up with, oddly enough, which was a turn based tactical strategy game that was both battle based and grand strategy.

This you?

Nope.

I dunno if anyone still circulates that pic of 3 vs NV with the NV art having a cowboy hat on it, it caught on for a little while a couple years back. That was me.

I'm gonna take that as a yes.

That's date rape, user.

Check out the events leading up to the trail of tears, the whole Cherokee Nation fiasco as well as what happened to the the families that spearheaded it are very interesting.

I will agree that the American Revolution is kind of boring but that's only because we used to cover it all the time from elementary to high school, same goes for the Civil War.

Fuk U the Civil War was interesting as fuck, watered down school lessons that cant say nigger are just the shittiest fucking medium possible

I have no idea what "overabundant resources" is supposed to mean. Please elaborate, you didnt give enough information. And that phrase makes no sense in that context.

It's not they were overabundant it's that they had all these resources and made a shit product.

If you say so mang, but hearing about it all the way up until the end of my high school days made it an extremely boring topic. I took AP courses that required "parental consent" signatures too because of the content, didn't make it any more interesting.

You know what makes FO1 shit? it's the writing. It's really boring. Who cares about politics in video games, you're praising this crappy pretentious writing like if it was written by Tolstoy. FO2 was much better for the simple fact that the dialogue was a lot more idiotic and less serious. It's less boring, at least until the president's speech part.

Fallout's strength was never at the combat either, and at least FO4's combat is a shitload less bland. NV too was crap due to the overabundance of bullet sponge, that is somehow even worse than FO3 and 4.

That's where you're objectively wrong. 4 has the worst bullet sponge enemies out of all of them. Especially if you encounter any of the "elite" enemies. Bullet sponge in FO4 is so disgustingly bad that I don't even understand how you can begin to spew that bullshit about NV being worse

He specifically said "overabundant resources", which is why I questioned that, also "overabundant resources" is not the opposite of unrealized potential.
Not to mention he decided to be a (1) and done op.
But what you described that is pretty common in the game industry.

Only when the legendary enemies appear, which is easily fixed with mods. Also, the bullet impact is a lot better that I don't need to use VATS in the whole game. It makes bullet sponge a less pain in the ass. I don't know, gunplay in NV feels like shit no matter how many mods you invested in, even worse than FO3.

You're full of shit, I honestly don't understand how your perception of reality works because what you said makes no sense at all

When did I say 1 was a good game, 1 and 2 are debateably good games but the lore was top-notch, NV came in and took the good gameplay of 3 and the lore from the 1 & 2 written by the original creators, NV is the best Fallout game. Good lore and mediocre gameplay is the defining feature of Bethesda.

or deflection from criticism of poor game design
Holy shit its real. Its actually real. I though it was a myth.

Okay, what ever you say Holla Forums.

Never played it, did you?

...

This is a shitty thread by the way and only cancer bumps it, starting now.
(^:

3 is fucking garbage and the gameplay is only hard to sponge brains but it was alright, streamlined/accessibility is better.

...

*better term

It does make sense. Fallout 3 has shit animations. FNV has both shit animations and worse bullet sponge.

But mods DID fix it though.

A bunch of guys talk about deathclaws, then there are talks about the mutants, the master, I look for the water chip, maybe not politics but boring talks regardless.

...

The only thing Fallout 4 did better was power armor gameplay. And Bethesda managed to make a mess of it by making power cores deplete instead of being capable of energize power armor for centuries as stated in lore.

The fuck does overabundant resources mean?

So it is you.

So you never played it. Good job Todd.

Well, I couldn't even fucking run the game the first time I played it. It fucking crashes to desktop after the birth scene unless you fuck with the .ini files, install some sort of memory usage extender, and sacrifice a chicken on Todd's Altar before booting up.
Why? I found them to be about the same, honestly. NV is a bit more interesting because there's actually some build variety, it has a much better story, the shooting mechanics seem to be generally better, and your choices generally matter more.

to think what this game could've been if they had the finances

Todd, come on man, try harder next time

And the time, as well, since Streum On always releases their games choc-full-o-bugs. Hopefully EYE 2 is actually happening in the future, I'm not too sure how successful Deathwing has been

...

It's almost as if you never read Steel Ball Run

FO2>FO1>NV>FO3>FO4

How about you stop using a smaller caliber weapon and move on to something with more punch? NV's huge arsenal and weapon diversity wasn't an accident. If you expect to take on Death claws, mutants, and cazador's like you do humans, you are the idiot. You can't have a single one weapon that does it all in new Vegas like you can in 3 and 4.

The problem is you played NV like 3.

...

wrong.jpg

so you got to the hub, gave up because information wasnt being forcefed to you by a marker, and read the wiki? GG.

FO2 > NV > FO1 > FO3 = FO4

...

Fallout 1 is a slow moving game with complete shit for combat, but has cool things in it. It feels completely horrendous to play and intentionally wastes your time. Back then I didn't really have anything better to do, all I had was a pc written off my dad's work and a fuckton of time. I probably wouldn't like it so much if it wasn't for that.
Fallout 2 is more of the same, with emphasis on MORE. Want to fuck the wife and the daughter of a mob boss and then kill the mob boss? Here you go! Want to be a pornstar? Go on! The lorefags will complain, but nobody cares.
Fallout 3 is essentially a different franchise. The combat is generic and kinda feels like oblivion, but at least it isn't fucking VATS. If you use VATS you are a huge faggot. The story is shit, the green filter is revolting and the whole thing is pretty mediocre. As in any game made by bethesda, you will encouter bugs that will break your game sooner or later.
Fallout NV has an alright story, same dull gameplay and even more fucking bugs. If you are a storyfag will go right up your alley.
Fallout 4 is the game when beth finally decided that the combat should feel satisfying to some degree. As the result the game plays as a mediocre shooter, which is still better than every previous installment. The story is better than in FO3, but worse than all the other games. Not an rpg anymore, mostly about shooting shit and exploring shit for perk magazines. VATS is still in the game for some reason, which is a big negative.

Fallout seems like a series that tries to excuse its absolutely horrendous gameplay with an interesting setting and writing, and unless you enjoy slogging through hours of repetitive bullshit and boring combat sections which are barely reliant on your input and more on stats you won't like that series.

TL;DR
Story
FNV>F2>F1>F4>F3
Gameplay
F4>FNV>F3>F2=F1

Unrealized potential doesn't exist in the games industry unless the game development process explicitly has good developers being set back by shit. Overabundant resources is way more common.