No Mutants Allowed

kieranbhoy · Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2012 19:13 Post subject: Is there anyone left?

Is there anyone left in the world that likes Fallout 3 for the way that I do? For the way that brought me into the world of Fallout in October 2008?!

Basically, is there anyone who wants Fallout 4 to be nothing like new Vegas?

No life EVERYWHERE, whether it is plant life, or animals, it's too much!

No citys everywhere!

I liked Fallout 3 because it was a game where I could travel for hours in the wasteland and find a building and go "OMG could this be a building with life?!" then it turns out to be yet another rundown building. A game where you can see people struggling for survival, water, township. basic life!

Is there anyone who wants a game like this? Or do you all want a game called FALLOUT where everything is all fresh and clean?

It may have been 200 years but still, it takes longer than that for the radiation to clear, let alone rebuild.
_________________
Fallout is better than Skyrim.

Brother None · Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2012 19:38 Post subject:

Sure, setting-wise Fallout 3 had a little on New Vegas in emptiness and desolation and ruins, but if you're going to keep doing that you should really explain why there is no recovery and rebuilding. If anything, Fallout 3 struggled being a plausible setting where people's actions made sense, especially compared to New Vegas.

Nothing like New Vegas? I'd like it to learn from its quest/RPG system design and writing. Fallout 3 was rather behind there.

DevilTakeMe · Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2012 21:28 Post subject:

Bethesda fanboys are the ones who want a fresh and clean Fallout game, as evidenced by IGN's editorial. They would rather see the same thing over and over again. (Here's a hint on what they want: They want pretty scenery like in Skyrim, but with guns)

We'd like the world to be in the process of rebuilding, as the drama and story is not in searching for life after the end, but in how the journey of the survivors trying to cope with the end.

"War never changes" - this is the arc words for the series, a look into how the cycle of violence continues, and the perspective of humanity in an unforgiving and mostly lawless wasteland.

New Vegas is the closest of the fallout games to achieve an ideal for civilization, but it also shows just how close it is to slipping off the track and plunging right back into the abyss.

Some people just want a virtual hiking simulator in the post-apocalypse, which is what "roaming around" Fallout 3 was more or less. Many of the people who praise Fallout 3 are not interested in the story anyway.

Here's one opinion of a vocal Fallout 3 supporter on youtube:

Oppen · Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2012 21:55 Post subject:

Yes, I love the free roaming a lot more than I love the uninteresting reasons my character would go through all of the pains to get something I don't care about done.

Nope, just Chuck Testa.

BUT, if we talk about something with a story behind, with a coherent setting, preferable where there are groups trying to arise, AND your beloved destructed world and lotsa exploring, I would be OK with that.

Surf Solar · Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2012 21:57 Post subject:

I kind of agree with the OP on the "desolate" feeling, I would prefer Fallout to come back to its very roots so the world feels much more chaotic and people struggle for survival more etc. But as BN pointed out, it makes no sense if this happens 200 years after the war. And as Bethesda is eager to never jump back in their franchises timelines, I doubt it would make any sense for future games to have such a desolate atmosphere.

To me that was one of the only good points in FO3 - along with the mostly nicely done art, the feeling was really cool. All the rest, Character system, Perks Quest/DIalog design etc. has been done a lot better in New Vegas.
_________________

Ambient. | More Ambient. | Pictures.

Oppen · Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2012 22:12 Post subject:

Sub-Human · Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2012 22:15 Post subject:

kieranbhoy · Posted: Sun Feb 26, 2012 10:03 Post subject:

Guys, I just mean I hope Fallout 4 will be nothing setting wise like NV. I still want the choices and the weapons ect.
_________________
Fallout is better than Skyrim.

WorstUsernameEver · Posted: Sun Feb 26, 2012 11:01 Post subject:

There's space for different things. I wouldn't want every Fallout game to be as civilized as NV, which sometimes stretched it with its glitzy casinos, but I don't want every game to ape the original's atmosphere either. As long as the setting doesn't stretch my suspension of disbelief too much and doesn't stray away from its core elements, I'm okay with whatever comes next.
_________________
Patrolling the Mojave almost makes you wish for a nuclear winter.
Patrolling the Mojave almost makes you wish for a nuclear winter.
PATROLLING THE MOJAVE ALMOST MAKES YOU WISH FOR A NUCLEAR WINTER.

Oppen · Posted: Sun Feb 26, 2012 12:06 Post subject:

Hmmmm, I'd like to know how that side continues some time, but yeeah, it could be a good thing to play somewhere less civilized (there must be some place where fights between factions trying to arise slowed civilization down a lot).
I don't dislike it either. Just two different and interesting settings. But please, not like they did with Fallout 3, something which has explanation would be good.

Tagaziel · Posted: Sun Feb 26, 2012 14:19 Post subject:

KillerBee256 · Posted: Sun Feb 26, 2012 18:47 Post subject:

Even as a post apocalyptic hiking simulator fallout 3 isn't very good. Why? Because Bethesda is very lazy, there are very few building sets to build ruins so every freaking place looks the same in the wasteland "hey didn't I pass that same barn 10 miles back" "wow this office building looks completely the same as the last one." Had Bethesda taken some time to make a more palettes for interiors and exteriors it might not have been so bad, however they didn't. Further more so few building are enterable, there are a few ruined building that look really interesting to explore, the large apartment building that is used on steward square and Tacoma park, but nope no way in. Also they could have added more unique buildings that exist in real life Washington DC, the Supreme Court building, ford’s theater, the Old Executive Office Building, Arlington House and well you get the idea.
_________________
"Chris Avellone loves you" -Marcus

Stanislao Moulinsky · Posted: Sun Feb 26, 2012 20:51 Post subject:

TorontRayne · Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 1:59 Post subject:

New Vegas was desolate enough anyway.
_________________

Banned from the Order Achievement (-20p)

Yamu · Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 3:15 Post subject:

We're quibbling over a technicality, I think. With the limitations of the engine and the way they've chosen to handle overland travel, there's no way that any Fallout can feel (or be) sufficiently desolate in its current form. They've got to cram an entire game's worth of content into an area that could've easily gone hidden in one corner of the map in Fallout 1 or 2. As in the original Fallouts, there's the implicit player/developer agreement that distances, areas and populations in F3 and New Vegas are compressed representations of what they should be. There's no way that the sparse handful of people you meet in New Vegas are the entire population of the city, or that you can run across The Hub in three minutes flat. No player wants to actually check three square miles of ruined buildings or thousands of vault bunkrooms for items and personages of significance, and no designer wants to spend the time mapping and writing it, which is convenient, as no computer could run it.

It's all about suspension of disbelief and establishing a "feel," and honestly, I don't think that any Fallout since the first has nailed that balance (Two might've come close, but New Reno and a few other glaring logical faults sort of screwed it up). New Vegas certainly didn't, but if you think Three did, with all due respect, you're either kidding yourself or you're not working from the dictionary definition of "desolate."
_________________
Founding Father (50p)

Consultant for the Committee Achievement (15p)

Achievement of Charismatic Excellence(25p)

Resigning Chairman's Token: Luke's Golden Duck Achievement(25p)

KillerBee256 · Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 3:54 Post subject:

Four Suited Jack · Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 15:16 Post subject:

Fallout 03 was my introduction to the series and I adored the wasteland/ruins feel.

I generally preferred that atmosphere over the one in New Vegas although I do think New Vegas was the overall better game.

donperkan · Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 23:59 Post subject:

DevilTakeMe · Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 0:54 Post subject:

If you mean by spreading the map out even more, yes, it's most certainly possible.

Certain mods disable the invisible walls at the ends of the map, and it's been shown that there's many many miles of terrain beyond what we've seen in game.

The problem is trying to populate larger areas. Large expanses of empty ground would have helped, but casual players would have complained.

Ben · Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 1:32 Post subject:

I liked Fallout 3 until Butch took my sweet roll
_________________
We soon got into battle: we made a charge of bay'nets:
The Rebel blackguards soon gave way: they fell as thick as paynuts.
Och hone! the slaughter that we made, by-god, it was delighting!
For, the Irish lads in action are the divil's boys for fighting.