My personal take on Fallout 3

Discussion in 'Fallout 3 Discussion' started by ScottXeno, Nov 10, 2008.

  1. ScottXeno

    ScottXeno It Wandered In From the Wastes

    172
    Nov 10, 2008
    Hi! I'm new here, not that it's hard to tell. Anyway, I've lurked on these forums for a few years now, reading threads to pass the time when I worked at Intel, working long nightshifts. I've been a huge fan of the original Fallout game since it came out, and I enjoyed the second quite a lot as well. I've played through them more times than I can count, and every computer I've owned has had them installed on it. I never played tactics, because I don't like that sort of game, and I've played BoS once, my brother had a copy, but I shunned it.

    When I heard Van Buren was canned I was heart broken. I didn't know much about it until later, when I got on here, but I knew it was a much anticipated follow up that I would not get to see come to fruition, and that was depressing. And then I heard a whisper that Fallout 3 was indeed going to be made.

    Of course when I found out WHO was making it, my reaction was basically similar to a lot of yours. I was not a fan of Morrowind, and Oblivion was, putting it kindly, lacking.

    Still, as hard as it was, I tried not to prejudge. Not until I finally got a copy in my hands and played it, which happened two days ago.

    I've started two characters already. One, the first one, was blatantly evil, I just went from location to location killing everything that crossed my path. I actually had some regulators show up, but I blew them away as well. The second character I am playing as a goodguy, or at least trying. But that's neither here nor there.

    My general observations... Well, as a game, it's not horrible. I love the way the wasteland looks, it's pretty amazing. The control scheme is pretty neat, VATS is kind of cool, ect. The story isn't even horrible, though at times I am left scratching my head going "really?" All in all, as a stand alone game, it's not bad.

    But put the name Fallout in the title, and things quickly shift. I loved how you could play the orignal Fallout without firing a shot at a single person. I loved that tweaking your stats would not only radically change gameplay, but also change what options you had as far as what you could say go. I loved how even though, yes, Ian you bastard, you shot me in the back, at least he was mildly useful versus the NPC's in this game are. I loved how much personality the first two games had. VATS seems out of place in a Fallout game. In fact, FPS seems horribly out of place, and took some getting used to. I tried it with the third person, but watching my character move around made the gaming experience worse for me, so I toggled back to first person. This game was clearly made with the Xbox in mind, and it shows.

    Storyline issues have been addressed a thousand times over, and I haven't gotten as far as some people yet, so I can't comment on a whole lot, but there were a few things I wanted to point out. And granted, I may be wrong on a lot of my info, as I haven't played the first two Fallout's in about a year or so.

    [spoiler:08aae40f73]The first thing deals with that boy that comes and gets you in front of the Supermarket. He says his little village has been ravaged by the fire ants (who knew they'd actually start fires?). So I agreed to go help him. The issue was the neighbour across the street from Navarro? How the hell did he get from Navarro all the way to DC, and with only a pistol no less? He was talking about needing more firepower and bought himself a shit sawed off shotgun? I have to wonder exactly how he got so far as to have made it to DC, with a wife and little son, when the wastelands are brutal (at least in hard mode).

    Another gripe is the Super Mutants. Are they immortal? I thought they were going to die out and since the vats were destroyed there would be no more, since they are impotent. How are there super mutants in the east? Maybe they are more resilient and able to travel that far, though then again, since that one guy can go from Navarro to there, maybe it's not entirely impossible for them to do it either.

    And then of course there's the Enclave. But that's the same issue as with the Super Mutants, I thought they were defeated in the second Fallout.

    the Brotherhood also poses the same problem.

    So do caps.[/spoiler:08aae40f73]

    I wont keep going on with the things that are so so so wrong with this game, as they've been beaten to death, but those are a few of my thoughts. The game is nothing like the Fallout we all love. Fallout wasn't an FPS, which, while they say you can play in both 3rd and 1st person in this game, it was clearly designed as an FPS, just like Oblivion. It's not exactly Oblivion with guns, but it's pretty close. They wanted name recognition, but did not take the time to consider (or maybe they did) the damage they would do to said name.

    Sorry for the rant that basically says... Well. Anyway. Those are my thoughts.[/spoiler]
     
  2. Barbalute

    Barbalute First time out of the vault

    81
    Nov 6, 2008
    Maybe he was a good talker? After all:
    They didn't travel.

    I much prefer them to gold coins. They're just so distinctly Fallout.
    I don't understand why everyone keeps getting stuck on the perspective. Were Fallout 1 and 2 really all about the perspective to you?
     
  3. ScottXeno

    ScottXeno It Wandered In From the Wastes

    172
    Nov 10, 2008
    Not specifically the perspective, that's missing the point. It's not about it being a first person GAME, it's about it being a first person SHOOTER. Fallout was not a first person shooter, which this game clearly is. Yes, it being an FPS is an issue with me. No, I don't hate FPS's, I've played a lot of them that I like a lot. Fallout wasn't in that list last time I checked.

    Oh wait, I guess it is now.

    As for the other things, the Super Mutants didn't travel, so was there another Enclave doing the exact same experiments or are they all connected? Like I said before, I'm not that far into it, and I haven't intentionally tried to spoil it for myself.

    I prefer the caps to the gold as well, but my problem isn't necessarily that they use caps, just why they would. The world of Fallout is very isolationist. North America is pretty big, we're talking about people seperated by leagues of wasteland desert, with no readily available means to communicate. Even the radio setup that they use in F3 would be unable to reach the other coast, considering the fact that you lose signal if you go too far away from the source in DC. All I was curious about, and this is also in regards to the rest of it, is why they would use the same currency. You'd think they would have come up with something on their own (though I do accept the nostolgia factor, it is, as you said, distinctly Fallout to use bottlecaps as currency.)

    As far as the man traveling from Navarro to there, remember that we're talking about Fallout 3 here, not 1. In Fallout 1 you could play the game through without killing anyone, but that was not the case in Fallout 2, nor is it the case in F3. In the current game you barely get out of Vault 101 before you are confronted with Raiders (if you went the direction I did).
     
  4. Rev. Layle

    Rev. Layle A Smooth-Skin

    667
    Jul 26, 2005
    Why didn't the super mutant travel? I remember one of the endings in the first two games (F1, IIRC) specifically saying that the remnants of the master's went east after everything pretty much collapsed on the west coast.

    That being said, the reason for the existence of super mutants in F3, i think, are still a different story altogether, anyways.... so it is kinda moot.
     
  5. Gooscar

    Gooscar It Wandered In From the Wastes

    105
    Oct 28, 2008
    I would assume the eastward bound Super Mutants from Fallout 1/2 made their appearance in Fallout: Tactics.
     
  6. Rev. Layle

    Rev. Layle A Smooth-Skin

    667
    Jul 26, 2005
    And fallout tactics is total canon! :-P

    (yes, that is sarcasm)
     
  7. Gooscar

    Gooscar It Wandered In From the Wastes

    105
    Oct 28, 2008
    Aside from Airships, talking Deathclaws, and Vault continuity screw ups, there's not much Fallout: Tactics screws up canon-wise. Not much more than Fallout 2.

    Beyond Tactics not being the Fallout sequel fans wanted, I don't see the irk people have towards it fitting into the Fallout universe.
     
  8. alec

    alec White heterosexual male Orderite

    May 21, 2003
    Hairy Deathclaws. Of which some were capable of talking. Just like in FO2. Which sucked.

    Other things FOT screwed up: weaponry (way too much modern weapons), Brotherhood of Steel, general Fallout lore (storywise). Also: the surroundings felt too modern, they didn't have that 50s feel FO and FO2 had.

    I still enjoyed FOT at the time, but I've never replayed the game. It's not a bad game, but it's a bad FO game.

    The original Fallout is and will always be the best.
     
  9. Gooscar

    Gooscar It Wandered In From the Wastes

    105
    Oct 28, 2008
    I wouldn't say Tactics screwed up weapons, the BOS, and the Fallout setting. Yes it deviated from the frist two, but didn't recklessly abandon or bastardize it to any extent past the Airships, Deathclaws, and Vault screwups. Modern weaponry is there for the same reason the 10mm pistol is there. The Midwestern Botherhood of Steel is the incarnation it is because it shows nothing can be static in a PA wasteland. And beyond questioning just how underpowered the BoS was when they sent the Midwestern expedition, Tactics expands what exsisted in the Fallout universe rather than simply copy/pasting maps from the prior games and just tacking on a "sequel" tag. Don't know about you, but I don't like francises that offer nothing new beyond slight tweaks in gameplay and a different plot. Would explain why I don't like sitcoms in theory.

    At worst Tactics is a decent spinoff, and at best is a nice suppliment/expansion. The same could be applied to Fallout 3.
     
  10. Frisca

    Frisca First time out of the vault

    22
    Nov 1, 2008
    Great post OP.
    And I agree on tactics and that is exactly what is wrong with FO3. It should be a spin-off and damn, I would have no problem with it, as I am sure that 95% of the Fallout fans would not.
     
  11. quasimodo

    quasimodo First time out of the vault

    32
    Jul 29, 2006


    I've been having some fun with this game as a generic PA shooter, but the only time it has ever felt the slightest bit "Fallouty" to me was when I was exploring a particularly isolated area with the camera zoomed all the way out in a "pseudo isometric" view and I could see my character trudging along in his blue vault suit listening to the pipboy radio playing some golden oldies.
     
  12. Barbalute

    Barbalute First time out of the vault

    81
    Nov 6, 2008
    So it's not just the perspective, but it also needs to be turned based to be Fallout? That seems like a pretty shallow view of the Fallout setting. It's a big departure from the first two games, but I think it captures the setting of Fallout very well.
    Same goes for the above poster.
    It's different, but 1950's 'future-tech' permeates the environment.

    In spoiler tags, just in case you don't want it spoiled. I'm not entirely sure from your wording:
    [spoiler:42896931ec]I'm not sure of the specifics, but they're apparently another strain of the mutation. It's mentioned fairly often on these boards and is mentioned in some computer logs in the game.[/spoiler:42896931ec]

    I don't know why. I guess they could use anything as money, really, but Bethesda probably chose caps because it has strong connotations to Fallout 1. Lore-wise, I don't think there's any reason given.

    We're talking about the Fallout universe as a whole. Maybe he's good at hiding and staying off the road, or bartering for his life with the raiders. Just because certain options aren't opened to you doesn't necessarily mean they aren't open to other NPCs. Also, he did eventually die anyways, so...
     
  13. ScottXeno

    ScottXeno It Wandered In From the Wastes

    172
    Nov 10, 2008
    That's still missing the point, it isn't just about perspective, no, and it's not a shallow view of the Fallout setting at all. The Fallout setting is, of course, everything, the retro-futuristic tech, the wastelands, the raiders, the small fringe towns, cobbled together from the refuse of an age long lost. It's all of those things, but the gameplay also had a huge part in that as well.

    I know things change. Fallout three was not marketed to a specific crowd - us - it was marketed to be popular with more than just the hardcore Fallout one fans. Isometric gameplay, and this is just an opinion, probably wouldn't do as well. But the game was a CRPG, and that's what I like to play. Granted, I've played a lot of FPS games and liked them quite a bit, as well as third person shooter games like Resident Evil four. I love all sorts of games, and like I said, I am not totally and entirely shunning this particular game either. It does capture certain things very well, and I don't think the wasteland has ever looked so amazing (though last night I found quite a few glitches in the game, does anyone else get weird ray-like black beams shooting through the sky? Also sometimes, specifically in Arefu, when I walk around the entire screen will get blotted out, and the graphics will get all chopped and messed. And another thing I noticed is this weird robot getting stuck in the ground in Bigtown, wtf?) but yes, a large part of Fallout for me was the way the game played. There have been times in this game when I am wandering around, and I run into yet another group of raiders who do basically the exact same the last dozen and a half group of raiders did, and it becomes mindnumbing. The one thing that did break it up is, with my evil character I ran into Regulators a few times. They at least took a bit more to take down, but it's still all the same thing.

    Speaking of which, that's another thing I noticed. In the original Fallout I could actually play the game as a goodguy and feel attached to things sometimes, even a crappy NPC like Ian, who I always worked hard to keep alive. In F3 my first character that I made was evil, not exactly intentionally, I just couldn't get as attached. It felt... Easy, to be evil. So I started a second character as a goodguy, and am kind of playing them together. The perspective change is pretty interesting, I'm finding that my evil character levels way way faster, as well as gets all the best equipment, but that my goodguy character gets, while less, his equipment for free a lot. Also people's reactions, I am kind of sad about that. With my evil character some people immediately distrust me, as you'd expect, but more often than not they treat me like they do with my good character, that is, until I shoot at them. And my good character, when he saved Megaton from the leaking pipes of doom and the bomb, at first they give me things, and then when I talk to them, they still act like they hate or do not trust me. Also, has anyone else noticed that the Ladykiller perk is pretty much useless?


    Thanks for the info on the game, as well, that cleared a bit up for me, much appreciated.