Hating progress (fallout)

Recommended Videos

Fijiman

I am THE PANTS!
Legacy
Dec 1, 2011
16,509
0
1
brainslurper said:
Fijiman said:
MiracleOfSound said:
What I would LOVE to see for Fallout 4 is have Bethesda build the world, make the atmospherics and the visuals and build the physical aspects of the quests, and for Obsidian to do all of the writing (but for the love of God never let Obsidian near a one or zero).
Let's hope they do good on this one. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JGg6m7CEluE
And Obsidion didn't do that bad of a job on New Vegas, but they didn't do that great of a job either.
I thought the core game was better then F3, but the F3 DLC was far better then the FV DLC. SO MANY ACRONYMS!
I've not even finished Dead Money so I can say much for the New Vegas DLC, but Fallout 3's DLC was pretty good. As for the core games, there are things I do and don't like between Fallout 3 and New Vegas, but most of those things are game mechanics related instead of story. Come to think of it, I usually knock the story for exploring every other nook and cranny I can find until I have all the coolest stuff in the game. For example, I have the All American in New Vegas which, in my opinion, is the most kicka$$ rifle ever and I've barely done anything with the story.
 

boag

New member
Sep 13, 2010
1,623
0
0
idontwannabeaschizo said:
OH! and one more thing.

The BoS shouldn't be scoffed for breaking tradition just because they broke with some tenets of their beliefs for the sake of story (even though they did make them a tad too white knight-ish). They have the Outcasts for any BoS fanatics, as well as the actual BoS Chapters on the West Coast and Nevada. The Midwest only being vague Canon? *shrugs* The lack of actual T-51b suits was a piss-off too, did all theirs break or something on the trek over? And you'd think the HQ of the US Armed Forces would have something not state-of-the-Arkas T-45d's. I write that down to game armour/treasure balancing though as well as general writing idiocy, or even a metaphor of the Brotherhood's decline?
I find it plausible that in the 200+ years since the war happened, most of the easier places have already been ransacked.

There is also the possibility that there are factions of US military that just got stuck in the middle of nowhere and got vaporized when the bombs hit. There just isnt enough material in the Fallout games to explain what happened to all the military hardware. Heck i was pleased to see bits of info about some groups that saw the bombs hit, the refugee logs from the Police Station in Fallout 3 and the logs from the teachers in little lamplight shed some minor light into what people might have done immediately after the bombs hit, but really do not have a clear idea of what exactly triggered the mass nuclear attack or what happened to the main forces of both factions during the war.
 

boag

New member
Sep 13, 2010
1,623
0
0
A-D. said:
The big Problem with 3 versus New Vegas and by relation also 1 and 2 is pretty much just the lore. As well as quite a few Gameplay Decisions and Storylines.

The FEV (Forced Evolutionary Virus) was started as the PVP (Pan-Immunity Virion Project) which was initially designed to literally grant immunity against any kind of biological or chemical Weapon. You can already see that this didnt turn out well. Instead of having the desired Effect it instead created literal Super Soldiers, albeit it also made them much more aggressive. The Project was given to West Tek who developed it internally for a few Years, in part because of increased Tension with China, as well as to prevent another Outbreak of the "Plague" which swept the Nation previously, killing Millions. Due to the shift of the Research is was moved to the Mariposa Military Base for further Research and Testing. When the War broke out, West Tek was one of the Targets directly hit by one of the Nuclear Missiles fired by either side, who did it nobody really knows. The FEV got into the Atmosphere and basicly mixed with the radiation, making the Survivors largely immune to direct Contact with it.

Which was the sole Reason the Master later wanted completely clean Humans to turn into his Super Mutants, which he thought were the next logical Step. Remove anything making Humanity different and start from scratch. The Idea was rather noble on Paper, but FEV also made the Super Mutants sterile, meaning that if everyone was turned, we'd eventually die out.

Research of FEV was NEVER passed to a Vault, which while being designed as Scientific and Sociological Studies by the Enclave, the Enclave would never introduce a experimental Virus or mutagenic Substance to any one of them because it would essentially ruin everything, especially because it'd have disastrous Results. The White Noise System tested in another Vault is more likely to happen, as it can be kept local and if failure is apparent, terminated, or at least wont be a viable Threat in the future. Therefore, Super Mutants in the Capital Wasteland are illogical, they COULD have come from the West, in fact, the Storyline would suggest that easily, in that the Super Mutants fled east after the Master died, but they couldnt create more, as by that Point, Mariposa was in ruins and they couldnt simply create more FEV out of thin air.

The Enclave making a return is also another big Problem, especially since they follow the same MO that they did in Fallout 2, which means Idea Rehashing. The original Plan was to mutate the FEV into another, entirely deadly strain and release it, killing every other lifeform except those on the Oilrig or otherwise protected from its Effects, i.e. Vaults. Fallout 3 uses the same Idea but in a less overall Function, with the similar Outcome however.
Equally, the Enclave is powerful, the Brotherhood of Steel, at its prime feared the Enclave for good Reason. They had better training, access to much better Technology and Weaponry, as well as Armor. Yet you can easily go toe to toe with a few Squads of them on your own. New Vegas showed just what a small Squad of 4 People and one Vertibird is capable of by comparison against Enemies which are technological inferior, and the Brotherhood is that as well. They are ahead of mostly everyone else, but the Enclave still has the bigger Toys.

That is essentially the big glaring Lore Problems right there. However the biggest Problem with the Game was essentially the forced Story. You get born, grow up and eventually have to leave the Vault and look for your Dad. That is fine of course, but once you find him, why does everyone react to you as if you will help him, or after he dies, carry on his Plans? Whenever did i make that Decision? Why cant i join the Enclave, or any other Faction but am forced to join the Brotherhood? Why does the Game force you to play a good guy? Especially after giving you the Choice to be evil to begin with, which also boils down to a Black and White Morality. Fallout 2 had Morality as well, but it affected the Game in much different Ways.

For example, in Fallout 2 there is a Settlement named Modoc that you run across fairly early on, in the midst of a famine. Now near that Town is a Farm which has plenty of Food, totally unaffected by the dry Weather and lack of Rain. So you are sent to investigate. You have now several Choices.

1: You can just leave and leave the Town to its fate.
2: Go to the Farm and find out who is there.

Thats two clear-cut choices. Lets assume you picked Option 2, you get more Choices.

1: Leave them to their Fate, which essentially boils down to the Inhabitants of Modoc taking over the Farm forcibly and killing everyone there.
2: Make a Deal with the Farmers and the People of Modoc so both Sides can flourish.
3: Kill everyone at the Farm yourself and tell the People in Modoc about it.
4: Kill everyone in Modoc to save the Farm.
5: Do not tell the People of Modoc about what you found at the Farm, essentially lie. Which means Modoc will become a Ghost Town.

There is one good Choice in there, with all other Options being evil, for one side or another.
But alright, lets get one more Example in here. Broken Hills, which you find relatively in the middle of the Game. The Town's main export is Uranium from its Mine. Once you get there and get involved, you have several Options.

1: Just leave again.
2: Help put the Mutant Haters behind Bars.
3: Help the Mutant Haters kill some big Mutants.

Again the whole Questline isnt solved with that however. Lets assume you help the Mutant Haters. It means the town will die because only Mutants are immune to the Radiation in the Mine. Help the Mutants instead? Well, you better fix the Air Cleaner inside the Mine so the Mutants can go back to work. But again it doesnt end there, because even if you do all the good Choices, the Town will eventually vanish because the Uranium will run out, meaning its sole big Export is gone, and with it the Reason of the Town to be there.


So, going over that, Fallout 3 ranks to me like Fallout Tactics does. Its a good Fallout Game, but its not a Sequel to the earlier Installments and as such doesnt really deserve the Number. And yes i got longwinded, anyone being interested in more background Lore, please consult the Fallout Wiki ;P
Why did you compare the sidequests in Fallout 2 to the Main quest in Fallout 3 and blame the latter for lack of choice?

The main quest in Fallout 2 also leaves you little options aside from save your town or dont and the quest isnt completed.

If you wanted to do a fair comparison, you would have compared those quest with helping the kids in little lamplight, or help that abandoned kid in the ant town, or doing harolds quest, or the Big Town quests.
 

brainslurper

New member
Aug 18, 2009
940
0
0
Fijiman said:
brainslurper said:
Fijiman said:
MiracleOfSound said:
What I would LOVE to see for Fallout 4 is have Bethesda build the world, make the atmospherics and the visuals and build the physical aspects of the quests, and for Obsidian to do all of the writing (but for the love of God never let Obsidian near a one or zero).
Let's hope they do good on this one. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JGg6m7CEluE
And Obsidion didn't do that bad of a job on New Vegas, but they didn't do that great of a job either.
I thought the core game was better then F3, but the F3 DLC was far better then the FV DLC. SO MANY ACRONYMS!
I've not even finished Dead Money so I can say much for the New Vegas DLC, but Fallout 3's DLC was pretty good. As for the core games, there are things I do and don't like between Fallout 3 and New Vegas, but most of those things are game mechanics related instead of story. Come to think of it, I usually knock the story for exploring every other nook and cranny I can find until I have all the coolest stuff in the game. For example, I have the All American in New Vegas which, in my opinion, is the most kicka$$ rifle ever and I've barely done anything with the story.
Dead Money is probably the furthest you can get from the aptmosphere of fallout, and it is very bugggy and has difficulty issues. Honest hearts comes in second as a trudge from one side of a canyon to another. The only thing I can say against bethesda's DLC was the MotherShip Zeta had too much content and no relation to the fallout universe.
 

boag

New member
Sep 13, 2010
1,623
0
0
brainslurper said:
Fijiman said:
brainslurper said:
Fijiman said:
MiracleOfSound said:
What I would LOVE to see for Fallout 4 is have Bethesda build the world, make the atmospherics and the visuals and build the physical aspects of the quests, and for Obsidian to do all of the writing (but for the love of God never let Obsidian near a one or zero).
Let's hope they do good on this one. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JGg6m7CEluE
And Obsidion didn't do that bad of a job on New Vegas, but they didn't do that great of a job either.
I thought the core game was better then F3, but the F3 DLC was far better then the FV DLC. SO MANY ACRONYMS!
I've not even finished Dead Money so I can say much for the New Vegas DLC, but Fallout 3's DLC was pretty good. As for the core games, there are things I do and don't like between Fallout 3 and New Vegas, but most of those things are game mechanics related instead of story. Come to think of it, I usually knock the story for exploring every other nook and cranny I can find until I have all the coolest stuff in the game. For example, I have the All American in New Vegas which, in my opinion, is the most kicka$$ rifle ever and I've barely done anything with the story.
Dead Money is probably the furthest you can get from the aptmosphere of fallout, and it is very bugggy and has difficulty issues. Honest hearts comes in second as a trudge from one side of a canyon to another. The only thing I can say against bethesda's DLC was the MotherShip Zeta had too much content and no relation to the fallout universe.
I liked hearing the alien interrogations, and I kinda felt bad for the abducted medic and the cowboy.
 

brainslurper

New member
Aug 18, 2009
940
0
0
Heimir said:
brainslurper said:
Heimir said:
Faithful to the originals? *Vomits allover the screen* Not by a fucking long shot. Good game sure. But hardly faithful.

Fallout 3 was a decent game in its own right. But a shit Fallout game. (I spent 300+ hrs in it :p)

The earlier ones just captured the atmosphere so much better and had alot more variety in terms of characters and things you could do. And they were more RPG's while F3 is a Shooter with some RPG elements.

F:NV was a step in the right direction.

The fact that the first two had more segments of black humour made the seriousness of the various of topics and things you ran into so much more grim at times even though you were having a chuckle.

Fallout 3 is just.... Grey and bland mush. And the story sucked a hairy asshole and was a huge let down. F:NV's story was alot better by F3's standard.
A better story only counts for so much when the game won't let you see the effects of your actions.
Translated into; Fallout 3 is absolute shit, your words. Because it doesn't do that.
Yes, yes it does. I wonder if you people had ever played fallout 3. Bethesda didn't develop so many outcomes that it would be impossible to represent them in the game world, so with DLC you could play after the end of the game. Also, Fallout 3 actually had a reason to stop you at the end of the story. In new vegas, you had just spent hours shaping new vegas how you wanted, and they don't even let you see it.
 

A-D.

New member
Jan 23, 2008
637
0
0
boag said:
Why did you compare the sidequests in Fallout 2 to the Main quest in Fallout 3 and blame the latter for lack of choice?

The main quest in Fallout 2 also leaves you little options aside from save your town or dont and the quest isnt completed.

If you wanted to do a fair comparison, you would have compared those quest with helping the kids in little lamplight, or help that abandoned kid in the ant town, or doing harolds quest, or the Big Town quests.
Actually i compared the Morality of all Quests. Fallout 3's Quests all essentially boil down to 3 Choices. Be Good, be Evil or avoid them. The Outcome is very clear cut in each of them, especially so in the Mainquest, which ties into alot of secondary Quests.

But yes i could have compared the Mainquests, but if i had done so, i would also have to compare Fallout 2 to its Predecessor, which would make for a very very long Post. Because even the Mainquest in Fallout 2 pales in comparison to the one in the very first Fallout, especially so when we consider the Choice of "Big Bad". The Master was and will always be the best Villian in the Series, the Enclave, for as much as a Boogeyman as they were, are not really up to par with the Master. Which may i point out is one of the Reasons as to why i hate Fallout 3 for that, they reused the Enclave, especially so they reused the whole Goal the Enclave had. If Bethesda had removed Eden, and simply used Augustus Autumn as the "big bad" it would have been a much better Game, because while Autumn was part of the Enclave, all he wanted to do was remake the United States, he had no desire to taint the Water or anything, so Bethesda dropped the ball there.

But even so, when we then look at New Vegas, we see the same trend, the Legion can not compare to what we fought before. Most of the "evil" of them even seems shoehorned in. I mean lets remove the Fact that they see Women as Slaves, as inferior, what else is there really left to call them evil? In fact, if you remove their Slavery altogether, they are miles ahead of the NCR, the designated "Good Guys".

Point being, Fallout 3 was morally too clear-cut. The Reason i consider The Pitt to be utterly superior to the Maingame is because of that. The Pitt gave me morally Grey Choices. There was no good or evil besides whatever the Designers designated as such. Think about it, you can either support the Guy who knows what he is doing is wrong but considers it a necessary Evil to further Progress, or the Guy who you know nothing about, you dont know his ultimate Goal or anything, he simply wishes to take over with no real longterm Plan or Solution. He just wants to rule, not be ruled. So what is the real evil choice? What is the good one even? Fallout 3, in most all Areas except The Pitt, Tenpenny Tower and Harold's Quest utterly lacked that grey area that Fallout always had, there was no real good or evil to follow, at least not in the sense that the Good Choice from a Moral Perspective also meant that its the good thing in the game. You can be a saint, but that doesnt mean the World will become a better Place for it. Equally being evil shouldnt mean the World goes down the drain.

Its just my Take on it, Fallout 3 isnt a bad Game, its actually really good, but to me, its just not really part of the Series, its more of a Spin-Off, a good Spin-Off but still just that.