Poll: Why do you like Fallout? A poll.

[EternalFacepalm]

Because of how, while it does know how to immerse you into the world, it doesn't take itself seriously. At all.

You have so many things happening as well, and every character you can interact with seems, to some degree, to have its own story.

I also like how they add so much to the world without actually drawing any attention to it, like the Dunwich Building, for example. It adds so much to the immersion it's insane.

 

[Jake0fTrades]

The ability to develop your own personalized character in a hostile environment appeals to my imagination. It's like watching a movie in which you control the ending.

 

[Alssadar]

The bloody mess just gives +5% weapon damage to all attacks. I don't see why anybody would have a problem with it, I find it quite useful for a being versatile with any time of weapon. It isn't game breaking, but nonetheless, a good perk to pick for any wastelander trying to survive.

The problem with the Bloody Mess perk has nothing to do with the damage bonus. Besides the 5% bonus, (which is pretty nice) the perk also causes enemies to explode whenever they're killed (well, all their limbs fly off and their head pops like a balloon) no matter how you kill them.

I know that, I was just making a joke about viewing it from a statistical view.
It addition, the bloody explosion of the body parts can allow the player to loot the corpse of a sniper that would normally be unattainable. (But enemies don't always explode, it just happens randomly)

 

[silverbullet1989]

Hated the console version of fo3, then i got the pc version and the vast amounts of mod's that came with it, same with new vegas.. got over 20GB mods on new vegas currently. Thats what i love about it mainly...

 

[Toaster Hunter]

I like open world sandbox games. I like being able to just wander around with no limitations, living by my own wits and weapons. I almost never complete missions because I spend so much time wandering around.

 

[PoweD]

Because i felt Oblivion only needed to have guns.
But mostly because of the setting, same reason i like Mafia 1 and 2

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

Just respond on why you like Fallout, why you play it, whether you agree violence in games affects you and whether you agree with the results.

I will be writing an exam on this so please keep your replies reasonably legible.

I enjoy Fallout because it lets me complete my objective in many different ways.

When I played it, I created a sneaky do-gooder - the kind who would save your life, not ask for a reward, and then pick your pocket.

I avoided the bloody mess feat, and any weapon that was close range. My weapon of choice was Sniper Rifle. For up-close emergencies, Assault Rifle.

I enjoyed setting up ambushes using mines - basically, sneaking in close, placing explosives, then sneaking away to a location that, when the enemies instantly figured out where my sniper perch was as soon as I shot one of them, that they'd immediately run into the mine field I'd set up for them.

Anyway, that's why I liked Fallout 3. The gore was of no interest to me - being a sneaky thief/sniper was.

Hope that helps. ^^

 

[ToxicOranges]

Im gonna be the first negative poster!

Fallout is in no way artistic or representative of any art form in the medium.

This is not a troll post.

Fallout is one bloody miserable event after another, being chased by rotting savages in dark underground tunnels, getting shot at by raiders, and then being nickel-and-dimed by every bloody trader.

Is it just me, or is EVERYONE in Fallout 3 a complete smacktard?

 

[Aiden_the-Joker1]

The setting. I love exploring the large open wastes, the crumbling ruins and the advanced technology in retro 50s Americana.

 

[ghostsprite9]

I freaking love fallout 1,2,3 and New Vegas.
I love it all the style the atmosphere, the game play, everything.
I'm currently half way through Fallout 2. After fallout 3 and New Vegas I bought the two originals, and I loved them even more.

There are definitely problems about it, and the bugs never help (I'm looking at you game-breaking New Vegas). But I can see over that.

OT:
I love the violence, but I'm incredibly anti-violence. I don't believe that games make people more violent, but I believe what was said earlier that violent kids buy violent games.

The violence is sort of the art style of the fallout games, I think it wouldn't feel the same without the violence personally.

 

[OrenjiJusu]

I love fallout for its realism. No not in gameplay. In characterisation and human behaviour. Each little settelment seems right, and people behave in the way you'd expect after the world dies. Some just try to survive, some try to restore the past, some try to brighten the future, others try to dull the realities of whats going on with leftover alchohol and chems. raiders steal resources and lives from people, mutated creatures are hunted for food and experiments from a forgotten past still pose a threat.
The in-game world just feels right. And when a game manages to pull that off its bound to gather some love from me.

 

[SillyBear]

I LOVE Fallout.

The only thing I don't love about it is a few problems in continuity. Like the fact that after 200 years society has barely rebuilt. Fallout 3 was fantastic, but the wasteland was unrealistically chaotic. I guess you can argue that humanity is rotten to the core and "war never changes" but come on - houses are still just lying there in wreck? No one bothered to clean anything up?

I dunno, it just doesn't make much sense to me. But I LOVE it!

Actually society has been around for just a century. In 2242 the NCR was a major player, with other societies vying for control. The NCR has replicators, old world clothing extruders, nuclear reactors, newly built buildings with all the stuff old world houses had, etc.

Society did rebuild, but its restricted to California. Why? California (and the west coast) was the center of innovation and had many research stations. Fallout 3 however disregarded all technology and progress that the fallout world had, so you're right on that.

Even in New Vegas it was an issue though. Still scrap lying around everywhere, unused houses, etc, etc. No way would it stay like that for 200 years.

edit: And everything is really dirty and gritty. Don't get me wrong, I love it, but it just doesn't make sense. No one sweeps or cleans in the future?

 

[SillyBear]

I LOVE Fallout.

The only thing I don't love about it is a few problems in continuity. Like the fact that after 200 years society has barely rebuilt. Fallout 3 was fantastic, but the wasteland was unrealistically chaotic. I guess you can argue that humanity is rotten to the core and "war never changes" but come on - houses are still just lying there in wreck? No one bothered to clean anything up?

I dunno, it just doesn't make much sense to me. But I LOVE it!

Actually society has been around for just a century. In 2242 the NCR was a major player, with other societies vying for control. The NCR has replicators, old world clothing extruders, nuclear reactors, newly built buildings with all the stuff old world houses had, etc.

Society did rebuild, but its restricted to California. Why? California (and the west coast) was the center of innovation and had many research stations. Fallout 3 however disregarded all technology and progress that the fallout world had, so you're right on that.

Even in New Vegas it was an issue though. Still scrap lying around everywhere, unused houses, etc, etc. No way would it stay like that for 200 years.

You need to remember that its a war torn area. California doesn't have constant war, and has benefits Nevada does not. It only became a viable locale recently, and even then it would take a level of support the NCR cannot give due to political reasons. Even Mr House said he repaired the strip as best he could on such short notice. It takes time and certain conditions for things to improve.

Nope, it doesn't make sense. London was a war torn city too but that didn't make every one's house look like it has mold growing out of the walls. It didn't make every single piece of clothing dirty. People didn't just leave pieces of rubbish lying around for 200 years after.

It's all down to restrictions with the engine, and stylistic choices. There is no logic there.

 

[PrototypeC]

I figured the OP meant the whole Fallout series, but it doesn't matter. It's the same answer.

Do I want to wander from one end of the wasteland to the other, smashing heads when necessary? Well, maybe. Do I want to complete interesting quests that mix brawn and brains, given to me by shady and interesting people? I suppose it couldn't hurt. Do I want to try to survive in a harsh environment? If I have no other choice... Do I want to build the backstory, appearance, personality and skills of a person and then set them loose in an interesting world? HELL YES WHERE DO I SIGN oh I only need to put in the disc okay

See, the Fallout games provide a wonderful template for me to create in. I don't put myself in my character's shoes (use my own name? How boring!), I decide what kind of person they are and set them loose, making decisions in every interaction as to what I think they would do. Everything from their skills to their choice of clothing helps reinforce who I think they are.

Whether it's a clever, cowardly sniper, a misanthropic "mad bomber", or a sledgehammer scientist-messiah, Fallout has enough weird and extreme situations for me to bounce my characters off of. It has nothing to do with an obsession with violence or bloodshed or anything like that. Even the best FPS's just don't float my boat. It's all about creation and control of the virtual world. I am a red-blooded male and the occasional monster beatdown that has no moral consequences certainly doesn't lessen the game's impact for me... but it's NOT why I play.
I'm not a violent person. Some of my characters are, though.

 

[FernandoV]

Backstory:
This poll is of significance as I'm attempting to show that what can be deemed as an ultra violent game can be appreciated and enjoyed for reasons other than violence.

A lot of study goes into how violent video games make people want to act violent so I'v decided to do my FTV study/poll on...giving gamers a chance to speak up for their game choice. Fallout is the best example for this because:

1: Of the Bloody mess perk especially

2: The First Person Shooter is highly advanced

3: It's got a large and diverse fanbase

4:: It's the most highly developed example of games as a story telling and artform medium.

Just respond on why you like Fallout, why you play it, whether you agree violence in games affects you and whether you agree with the results.

I personally believe that rather than violent video games create violent kids, violent kids like violent video games and the "Studies" have it backwards.

I will be writing an exam on this so please keep your replies reasonably legible.

Well, for #1 the Bloody Mess perk is fallout tradition, it wasn't put there as gore porn, it's there because it's part of Fallout's wacky personality.

As for your essay, that's pretty basic stuff people have been saying for a while. It's not mind blowingly hard to wrap your head around it and it doesn't really need to be opined about further. If you're well adjusted you can play a violent video game and not want to murder someone, if you're not, then you games are probably not what put you over the edge in the first place.

 

[Buttmunch Chicken]

It is fucking awesome.

Also, it allows for exploration that matters. It is fun finding new places and what they have to offer, such as neat small quests that give you more insight into the world at large. Like Vault 4? in Fallout New Vegas that has people who killed themselves. This can be part of a quest or a small great and hysterical experience that you find. It is fun for the exploration, pretty much.

Bob Dylan is the man also, btw.

 

[SillyBear]

I LOVE Fallout.

The only thing I don't love about it is a few problems in continuity. Like the fact that after 200 years society has barely rebuilt. Fallout 3 was fantastic, but the wasteland was unrealistically chaotic. I guess you can argue that humanity is rotten to the core and "war never changes" but come on - houses are still just lying there in wreck? No one bothered to clean anything up?

I dunno, it just doesn't make much sense to me. But I LOVE it!

Actually society has been around for just a century. In 2242 the NCR was a major player, with other societies vying for control. The NCR has replicators, old world clothing extruders, nuclear reactors, newly built buildings with all the stuff old world houses had, etc.

Society did rebuild, but its restricted to California. Why? California (and the west coast) was the center of innovation and had many research stations. Fallout 3 however disregarded all technology and progress that the fallout world had, so you're right on that.

Even in New Vegas it was an issue though. Still scrap lying around everywhere, unused houses, etc, etc. No way would it stay like that for 200 years.

You need to remember that its a war torn area. California doesn't have constant war, and has benefits Nevada does not. It only became a viable locale recently, and even then it would take a level of support the NCR cannot give due to political reasons. Even Mr House said he repaired the strip as best he could on such short notice. It takes time and certain conditions for things to improve.

Nope, it doesn't make sense. London was a war torn city too but that didn't make every one's house look like it has mold growing out of the walls. It didn't make every single piece of clothing dirty. People didn't just leave pieces of rubbish lying around for 200 years after.

It's all down to restrictions with the engine, and stylistic choices. There is no logic there.

Since when was London nuked

Something being nuked 200 years ago has very little relevance. There is no way in hell there would still be mess lying around for that long.

and had a band of highly organized armies regularly attack things on a daily basis?

When was London attacked daily by an organised army? From July to October of 1940. Tokyo is another example, as is Darwin and as is Berlin.

If the war doesn't subside, nothing gets repaired beyond basic needs much like water.

So in 200 years war never subsided anywhere throughout the Mojave? Nonsense. Tokyo of 1946 looked in a better state than DC and New Vegas, and that was only a year after the war. In fallout this is 200 years after the war.

Even if war didn't subside, why is everything filthy and grimy? I'm fairly certain people would still clean their houses and furniture.

Power however is limited to generators due to damage in the electrical grid. You must also realize supplies and knowledge of how to repair things is also limited.

So people lost the ability to clean windows, walls and clothing? Interesting.. that explains why nearly every object of those categories in the game is putrid.

 

[HassEsser]

*sigh* I can't be the only person who sees the title Fallout with no numerals following it, and assume they mean the original.

Anyway, Fallout 3 and New Vegas are... alright. New Vegas is much better than 3, because the writing and story are much better, and the choices more grey. I don't really play it for the violence, I turned off the fancy cinematic slow-mo kill shots because they got annoying.

Same :/ and I agree

Also, the 4 "poll" options don't apply to me as the reasons I play are far from the violence and gore, it's the immersion and RPG-elements that gets me.

 

[TheMetalGuy]

*sigh* I can't be the only person who sees the title Fallout with no numerals following it, and assume they mean the original.

Anyway, Fallout 3 and New Vegas are... alright. New Vegas is much better than 3, because the writing and story are much better, and the choices more grey. I don't really play it for the violence, I turned off the fancy cinematic slow-mo kill shots because they got annoying.

You can switch it on and off in the gameplay options menu.

 

[PrototypeC]

Fallout is one bloody miserable event after another, being chased by rotting savages in dark underground tunnels, getting shot at by raiders, and then being nickel-and-dimed by every bloody trader.

Is it just me, or is EVERYONE in Fallout 3 a complete smacktard?

No, actually, I totally see where you're coming from. Everyone and everything in Fallout 3 is ugly, dirty, mean and unfair. Everyone is an asshole. Everywhere you go is the same kind of run-down, dark craphole with an impossible amount of stacked bricks and cans everywhere.

However, that's also why playing my genuinely good and selfless character was so much more fun than a destructive bastard... what was there left to destroy? Everybody was a huge dick to him when they met him, and I had to remind myself once or twice not to smash them open like so much cockroach. The best part was when he was as nice as could be, every character he met did some sort of double-take, like, "wait... you're not going to rape me, stab me, destroy my home, steal my stuff, blow me up or even stop calling me, 'sir'? What's wrong with you?"

I still did get tired of it after a while because I didn't really feel like I was making enough of an impact, and some unrelated crap regarding my DLC... but even so!