I *know* WHY Fallout 3 sucks! (descriptions)

Discussion in 'Fallout 3 Discussion' started by Ravager69, Nov 12, 2008.

  1. Ravager69

    Ravager69 Sonny, I Watched the Vault Bein' Built!

    Dec 21, 2007
    There are no descriptions, neither of items in the inventory or the world you play in. I just realised how important these were - witty comments on various stuff were the backbone of the whole Fallout experience - without it, it's just a wannabe action movie.

    Although obvious to some, I think it's worth to mention this in a new topic (that means "please don't ban me").
     
  2. ScottXeno

    ScottXeno It Wandered In From the Wastes

    172
    Nov 10, 2008
    Wow, you know what, I was thinking that just a minute ago as I fired the game up. There've been a few times when I walked up to something, like those somehow pristine motorcycles, and felt and urge to "examine" them to see what I could learn, but alas, Bethsoft must not have considered that very important.
     
  3. Seelix

    Seelix First time out of the vault

    87
    Oct 4, 2008
    Complete lack of descriptions is a big flaw of the game. But one and only icon for every single misc item is even worse. Dropping things just to see how they look or what some of them are is annoying thing.
     
  4. Skynet 2.0

    Skynet 2.0 It Wandered In From the Wastes

    110
    Sep 10, 2008
    Yeah, every time I open my inventory, I feel like I should be reading an item description. Also, why would Bethesda be willing to make the models for each junk item, but not an icon for the inventory?
     
  5. Sir Mildred Pierce

    Sir Mildred Pierce First time out of the vault

    14
    Nov 12, 2008
    Re: I *know* WHY Fallout 3 sucks!

    I never really noticed until you mentioned it that the descriptions aren't there. Yeah, it kinda sucks, but I would hardly call it the "backbone" of the Fallout experience. To me, exploring all the strange nooks and crannies of the Wasteland is the "backbone" of the fallout experience, and in that regard Bethesda has created something very cool, something quite awesome. For what it lacks in descriptions it makes up for in the decrepit beauty of the wasteland.
     
  6. override367

    override367 First time out of the vault

    69
    May 7, 2004
    Re: I *know* WHY Fallout 3 sucks!

    Yea it seems like a pretty drastic oversight, if you're spending the time and money to give everything a 3d model making an icon seems like an obvious amount of effort. I guess it's done to better categorize "junk", but they have an inventory tab for that!
     
  7. rcorporon

    rcorporon So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
    Orderite

    Jan 31, 2008
    Re: I *know* WHY Fallout 3 sucks!

    Exploring FO3 is the same as Oblivion. At first you think, "Wow, this is huge!"

    Then you realize, you are just exploring some copy / paste landscape with no rewards for exploration.
     
  8. UncannyGarlic

    UncannyGarlic Sonny, I Watched the Vault Bein' Built!

    Feb 6, 2008
    Re: I *know* WHY Fallout 3 sucks!

    It wasn't an oversight, they've said in the past that they don't believe in text descriptions and that "with today's technology, you can show the player everything so there's no need for text descriptions" (paraphrasing of course).
     
  9. Leon

    Leon A Smooth-Skin

    681
    Oct 10, 2008
    That's why nobody writes books anymore, UG. They're so out-dated and archaic when you can just show an audience everything on the big screen. Ever watch a movie based on a book? That's some immersion right there, free from all them words.
     
  10. override367

    override367 First time out of the vault

    69
    May 7, 2004
    Re: I *know* WHY Fallout 3 sucks!

    Are we playing the same game? I've found all kinds of unique items exploring the wasteland. Exploring the waste is the best part of the game, the main quest is just so bayud
     
  11. UniversalWolf

    UniversalWolf eaten by a grue.

    Aug 28, 2005
    Re: I *know* WHY Fallout 3 sucks!

    Oh yes, you're undeniably right. Bethesda's whole rotten philosophy is that their games give you an actual virtual reality experience that is totally believable and convincing. By that thinking the objects you encounter need no description, because nothing exists beyond what you see. They don't have to tell you a car is beat-up and will never run again, because that should be obvious from looking at it.

    Another failed attempt at supplanting imagination. Or a successful attempt, for people with no imagination to start with.
     
  12. Ausdoerrt

    Ausdoerrt I should set a custom tit

    Oct 28, 2008
    Re: I *know* WHY Fallout 3 sucks!

    I think we have a different connotation of "reward" in this game. Loot is really not all there is to it, and besides the loot is often not that great and there isn't that much unique loot either. I remember how pissed I was exploring a dungeon for some 3 hours just to hit a wall and find two broken rifles. Awsome.
     
  13. Sorrow

    Sorrow So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs

    Feb 9, 2006
    Re: I *know* WHY Fallout 3 sucks!

    I agree. Those comments made it a bit like there was a competent GM around ready to describe most of elements of the world.
    It was one of the thing that made Fallout stand out in the crowd of other cRPGs. It has nice graphics, but unlike in a lot of other cRPGs with nice graphics, someone made effort to write all these descriptions.
     
  14. Tycn

    Tycn Still Mildly Glowing

    203
    Sep 27, 2008
  15. sentorio

    sentorio First time out of the vault

    37
    Oct 16, 2008
    Re: I *know* WHY Fallout 3 sucks!

    This is totally funny, If you are planning to give some realistic experience at least you should have some decent graphics, I don't why everyone loves fallout graphics but just check out any other AAAA title in the market during the 2008, all of them are just better than it.

    When it comes to graphics F3 is no Heavy Rain or MGS 4 after all.
     
  16. Ravager69

    Ravager69 Sonny, I Watched the Vault Bein' Built!

    Dec 21, 2007
    Universal Wolf, I prefer a mix of visualization with writing - i.e. Fallout. IMO RPGs should be like interactive books - lot to read about stuff you see, but you may actually DO something with the text and don't fall asleep after 15 minutes (rarely books keep me interested to read them longer than an hour or so, but when one grabs my attention, I read 'till it's over).

    You see, because F3 has every goddamn junk in-game (papers, cans and such), the game looses it's focus. After a while, when you checked 50 cans to see if THIS ONE has anything interesting about it, you begin to ingore the details and thus, often miss out stuff that was meant for aware players (man, I already checked so much stuff, this is probably nothing as well).

    Games should have *areas of interest* with uninteractive(is that a word?) areas between them (a world map like Fallout's), so you won't bore to death trying to find anything (which is the main problem of Fallout 3 \ Oblivion \ Stalker - you have to walk through all these empty, dull spaces before you can do anything interesting). Exploration is nice, but damnit, give me some reward for exploring, least it will only be an eye candy show.

    Besides, it's totally diffrent to see a broken car and to read something about it, since you can't have a peek inside, get in and check it out. In Fallout 3 it's like "Oh, another broken down car...hell, at least I can blow it up! [unloades the fury of Fatman, goes further and blows more cars\super orcs]". In Fallout 1\2 it's like "A broken down car! [clicks it to examine it] "Even if the Mechanic of the Year suddenly appeared next to you, both of you wouldn't be able to repair this junk" [chuckles]". This makes even the most uninteresting junk be worth of notice, not just a part of background you can blow up.
     
  17. Yem

    Yem First time out of the vault

    23
    May 7, 2008
    I totally agree with Ravager...and telling crap like "look we got 3d graphic, we dont need descriptions! we can see everything!" is just meh ;/ another "console" type of argument...
    U guys can imagine games like planescape torment, baldurs gate series (or fallout) without those descriptions giving fuel to our imagination ?
     
  18. Public

    Public Sonny, I Watched the Vault Bein' Built!

    May 18, 2006
    IMO Fallout (and some other great games) was made of many little things. Not just the name of the game, or a post-apo feeling inspired by 50's imagination are important (these are major things), but those little things like: item descriptions, dialogues, even floating text from your enemies during the combat, etc. Fallout had lots of little things, but FO3 doesn't have that, only some small major things (graphics and design).
     
  19. Sorrow

    Sorrow So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs

    Feb 9, 2006
    Baldur's Gate series didn't have these descriptions (only descriptions of items) and in PsT there was a very limited amount of descriptions outside of dialogues and items.
     
  20. Ravager69

    Ravager69 Sonny, I Watched the Vault Bein' Built!

    Dec 21, 2007
    1) Baldur's Gate sucked, Baldur's Gate 2 was better but still worse than Fallout

    2) Planescape Torment described very much of the environment through dialogue, so I don't think they should do lot of descriptions out of them.

    That said, descriptions are a vital part of a good RPG - you don't feel like you're just watching at slideshows of pretty grafix, you can immerse yourself into the world (a good lector also helps things)

    Another thing why Fallout 3 sucks big time is that you can't play mouse-only. I don't intend to name all faults of Lolout, but these two things are a nails to the coffin.