Fallout 3: Or How I Learned To Stop Worrying & Love RPGs

[Olas]

I never like V.A.T.S. It really felt out of place and ruined the immersion. It's like they didn't know if they wanted the game to be a shooter or an RPG so they crammed both features in together and left it up to the player to figure out.

The openness of the game was a problem too. What might at first seem like exploration soon turns to aimless wandering. The game throws a lot at you without providing much orientation.

 

[Sansha]

I never like V.A.T.S. It really felt out of place and ruined the immersion. It's like they didn't know if they wanted the game to be a shooter or an RPG so they crammed both features in together and left it up to the player to figure out.

The openness of the game was a problem too. What might at first seem like exploration soon turns to aimless wandering. The game throws a lot at you without providing much orientation.

Isn't that the point? Sure they give you a story quest and hints of where to go to follow them, but otherwise you're free to just do what you want. I love the aimless wandering - I play a Hardcore mode mod on Fallout 3, so each day I pack some food and medicine, go out the gates of Megaton, pick a direction and walk in it. I'm usually back 36 hours later with a bag full of loot.

 

[Muspelheim]

I think we can conclude one thing. The biggest obstacle to overcome if someone wish to explore and enjoy RPGs are RPG fans.

But there's the good fans, as well, willing to help by giving you a little push over the wall.

 

[Olas]

I never like V.A.T.S. It really felt out of place and ruined the immersion. It's like they didn't know if they wanted the game to be a shooter or an RPG so they crammed both features in together and left it up to the player to figure out.

The openness of the game was a problem too. What might at first seem like exploration soon turns to aimless wandering. The game throws a lot at you without providing much orientation.

Isn't that the point? Sure they give you a story quest and hints of where to go to follow them, but otherwise you're free to just do what you want. I love the aimless wandering - I play a Hardcore mode mod on Fallout 3, so each day I pack some food and medicine, go out the gates of Megaton, pick a direction and walk in it. I'm usually back 36 hours later with a bag full of loot.

I usually enjoy exploring, I love the feel of discovery. But it's better if you have dense world packed full of interesting areas and things to explore. Not to say Fallout 3 doesn't have plenty of stuff, but everything's sooooo spread out. The map is mostly just a gigantic field sprinkled with monsters here and there. I don't find that particularly interesting. Large open areas can be good for giving a game a sense of scale and general epicness, but they're best when they serve as simply a waypoint between destinations, not the centerpice of the game. Of course everyone has their own preferences.

I also tried the Wanderer's Edition mod (I'm assuming that's what you're talking about), it seemed fun in theory but it usually resulted in me walking a ways out of megaton, getting my arms and legs busted up by a bunch of monsters, and then slowly limping back to get healed. Realism can be a *****.

 

[Sofus]

Planescape: Torment -
Because you know it's the greatest game ever made and everyone who likes a good RPG should eventually play this one.

 

[FoolKiller]

If Obsidian wrote the story and Bethesda did the game world...damn son.

You would think someone would tell the fuckers to collaborate on this already.

 

[PunkRex]

Wow, really? New Vegas was so set on making you follow a set path around the wastes, it got unbelievably dull for me. Not to mention the bugs and i'm not talking about rad scorpions...

...or maybe it's your fault you were so set on the path to begin with. You can completely skip They Went That-a-Way and then hop back on the main story at your leisure. If there's one thing that nobody can argue about in New Vegas, it's the near-absence of linearity.

I admit it improved later but I still think 3 had a much more exploritive nature to it, in New Vegas you were very much the courier with their story fighting against/with the two big factions. 3 was complete blank slate which just appealed to me more.

I still really enjoyed Vegas, completed it twice, I just never felt like the character was me, not that that's a terrible thing I just thought that was what the games were going for.

 

[PunkRex]

Cool, now go play New Vegas. The good one

Wow, really? New Vagas was so set on making you follow a set path around the wastes, it got unbelievably dull for me. Not to mention the bugs and i'm not talking about rad scorpions...

It never really forced you onto the path, though. My first character arrived in New Vegas at level 7, having gone north directly after clearing Primm. It only took a little patience and judicious use of binoculars to sneak past.

As for the bugs, I had (and still have) a worse time of 'em with Fallout 3... but I never played either on a console, so this is very much a "your mileage may vary" observation.

Cool, now go play New Vegas. The good one

Wow, really? New Vagas was so set on making you follow a set path around the wastes, it got unbelievably dull for me. Not to mention the bugs and i'm not talking about rad scorpions...

That pretty much ends once you reach the Strip and even before that there is a ton of optional sidetracking.

My point was that the story never really felt like mine, it was the couriers. In 3, once you leave the vault you're on your own. It's up to you how you act and what you do, even though this is mostly true for NV, alot happened that HAD to happen and it was this that drove alot of the story. 3 had that stuff with your dad but that stuff was so few and far between I actually forgot about it alot.

Either way, I still really liked NV I completed it with both the Rangers and Caesar's Legion.

 

[Kungfu_Teddybear]

The only thing I took away from this is that you killed Three Dog, you monster.

Fallout 3 is indeed a great game, though I did prefer Fallout New Vegas overall.

 

[Erttheking]

You know, how come people can't say that they like a certain game without flame wars breaking out? Someone likes Fallout 3 and you don't? So what? Someone likes Fallout NV and you don't? So what?

Seriously people, it isn't a big deal.

 

[Phrozenflame500]

Consider this incredibly subtle and clever metaphor:

You have two amusement parks in your neighborhood.

One is apocalypse-themed, it's a few years old but it's still as fun as it was the day it first opened. It's big and you can go wherever you want and go on whatever ride you want to go on. Sure the big-ride they always advertise is a bit of a disappointment, and the park employees are a bit dull, but the place is well decorated and just walking around it is a joy.

Now there is this other, high-tech amusement park around the block. It's western-themed and just opened up and is getting praised by all your friends. Not only is it bigger and there are more rides, but each one adjusts depending on your personal taste; if you want it to go faster it goes faster, if you want there to be more loops there are more loops. The place is not as well decorated and the park employees are a bit monotone but you can tell they're interesting people and are trying their hardest.

The catch is there is a field of landmines between the entrance and the best rides. Also every once and a while the rides stop, the lights go off and you're yelling at the employees to let you out as their head gets stuck mid-way into a steel girder.

If you missed my incredibly subtle and clever metaphor, what I'm saying is that while Fallout New Vegas is better written and has more and better quests then Fallout 3, Fallout 3 has a better environment and embraces the exploration aspect of a sandbox game. They're are plenty of good reasons to prefer one game over another, and it really comes down to personal preference and what you prefer to do in an RPG: carve your own role or take an already existing role and make your choices from there. Most people tend to prefer New Vegas just because they're more things to do, is better written and acknowledges your choices a lot better then Fallout 3, but there is no shame in enjoying Fallout 3 either.

 

[BehattedWanderer]

Guys, chill! This was his introduction to RPGs, coming from tiny, linear shooters where everything is decided for you. If he liked Fallout 3, that's great! Compared to an FPS, Fallout 3 is a shiny golden buffet of story, character, and choice. Yeah, its story falls a bit flat when compared to other RPGs, but you have to do these things gradually. You can't just go from mindlessly shooting dudes in first person straight to the tippy top of the best RPG (isometric or otherwise) list in one move.

Schuyler--Fallout 3 is a great game. The amount you can explore and do and decide over in the game is all wonderful. Why not try New Vegas, experience a new story where you can make even more choices with a similar armament? Was it just VATS you liked, or did you find yourself into the lore? Was it the change to open world that you didn't know you could have, or was it the myriad and varied characters? Everyone here is dumping the RPG list on you without thought to whether it was any one aspect that made you like it so much, and not all RPGs play or feel equally, regardless of how great of a game they are. There's a harsh change in gameplay between Fallout 1 or 2 and Fallout 3 or New Vegas, and that distinction doesn't work for everyone. But hey, glad you liked Fallout 3, at least. You could do a lot worse as an introduction to the genre.

 

[Imbechile]

This was his introduction to RPGs

And then he immediately goes to state that Fallout 3 "is a gateway to further RPGs", the template that future RPGs should be built upon.
This would be like if someone who's never played a FPS before, play the newest COD and then declare it a landmark title in the FPS genre.
Someone who is new to a particular genre should not do stuff like that.

 

[Wesley Brannock]

This is the type of article I like to read. That too which gaming has opened the mind of someone else. Yes I realize insecure gamers will nit-pic over their choice favorite installment into the fallout series. However this is just immaturity and will be seen as such.

 

[putowtin]

Cool, now go play New Vegas. The good one

hahahahahahahahahahahaha

It's true, but also funny!

OT, I get that this was a turning point in your gaming life, but was an editorial really needed? That's like making a new forum post everytime you hit a new level in Mario!

 

[Blackpapa]

Conclusion: Fallout 3 was intended to reach a very broad audience, the COD and NLF people. The audience Fallout 3 targetted was deliberately very different than the F1/F2/Black Isle audience.

Mission accomplished. Marketing and business department wins. This is why we can't have nice things.

 

[Banzaiman]

Glad Fallout introduced you to the much more environmental aspects of a videogame. You should try out some other touted RPGs like Skyrim, though that particular one isn't with guns. In fact, I can't think of any other games that mix the RPG and FPS genres like Fallout. Well, here's hoping the next generation will bring some more!

 

[zinho73]

I realized with Fallout 3 that an RPG didn't have to be full of impractically sized weapons or crazy hair but can depict a "real" world that didn't rely on fantasy or outlandish plot twists.

Are you serious? Sit down and think for a minute here about what nonsense you've just written. Fallout is a parody of the unrealistic notions people had about the future in the past while remaining steeped in purposefully overdone americana.

It's got mutants. And laser guns. And a giant mechanized statue of liberty.

As for the plot, it's pretty much nothing BUT a long series of outlandish plot twists. None of the characters have a coherent motivation and the whole thing is closer to the peyote-fuelled night terror of a madman than anything reasonable.

Fallout 3 isn't a bad game, but your expressed reasons here don't make a lick of sense.

You are obviously right, but the thing is that, in comparison to some J-RPGS Fallout might as well been a documentary as far as realism is concerned. I guess that's what he meant: a post-apocaliptic scenario is a little bit more grounded than talking dragons and somersaulting teens full of angst and giant swords.

 

[Nigh Invulnerable]

The amount of people complaining about the OP's choice of Fallout game, and deriding his limited experience with RPGs need to just grow up. "You think FO3 is an RPG? I started back with [insert older CRPG]! That's a 'real' RPG, man." Please, people. This just reeks of a "Stop Having Fun!" guy mentality. Heaven forbid someone enjoy something you don't.

Besides, all of you claiming "real" RPGs are things like the first Fallout games, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, etc. are failing to give respect to the source of said games: Dungeons and Dragons and other tabletop games. This particularly bugs me when commenters are saying that "Game X really gives you freedom" and I just want to suggest they try a tabletop game with some good friends instead if they really want freedom.

My main point is simply this: Let people enjoy the things they like and stop telling them they're 'wrong' for liking it. Whenever someone discovers a new genre, it's our job to help them explore it further and not try to tear their choices apart.