The Courier
Blain is a pain.
With all the talk lately about Fallout 4's (possibly) limited dialogue options and narrow choice I thought I'd mock up a scenario in which Bethesda's obsessive need to tell a specific linear story might actually work. First, we'll begin with what is arguably Fallout 3's biggest problem: Emotion.
Or, rather, the lack thereof. It's not that the game doesn't try to have emotion. It does. But in a hugely half-assed way and with little regard to the player's disposition. There are a lot of issues with 3's plot. It's holier than swiss cheese, for starters. Given Oblivion and Skyrim's narratives, this seems to be genetic thing.
However, as has been demonstrated in film hundreds upon hundreds of times, holes in logic can be easily dealt with. If you cannot engage the mind, engage the heart. Ironically, this seems to be the core of 3's mantra. And the heart is represented, unfortunately, by Dad. Or James, because he's not my dad. James represents the biggest threat to Fallout 3's core storyline and the reason is this: If I gave two shits about James I would have cared about Project Purity. If I cared about Project Purity I wouldn't have played the skeptic. They wanted this: "My Dad died for his dream! I must achieve it for him, as I am his loving son!" Instead, it was more like this: "Boo-hoo, down goes Qui-Gon Jin. What's with this thing, anyway? Who needs water? That one douche outside Megaton?" The game failed to telegraph the need for water, true. But this would not have mattered as much if ol'Daddy-poo had actually engaged me in anyway.
The reasons he did not are manifold, but I will focus on two main reasons. Firstly, there is no time spent with him. You spend a good amount of time with him in the tutorial, which is actually a promising start. The baby stuff was sweet and the G.O.A.T. part had an amusingly familiar "Stop playing sick," routine that most are likely to connect to. However, everything falls apart ironically as the game really begins. Dad leaves. With no build up, no dramatic tension and with little in the way of why. It's just "Hey, your dad's gone and we're all being killed by the weakest enemies in the game! Run! Because it's your fault, apparently." And going forward, none of your moments with him are ever really spent bonding; just dressed up exposition dumps with some kind words thrown in. Yippee.
Secondly, he serves no meaningful gameplay role to the player. Let's take a look at an AI partner done right: Ellie from The Last of Us. She opens pathways for you, helps you fight, keeps your awareness up in battle, aids in the storyline directly and on-screen, etc. "Dad" does none of this. The only time he ever helped me out was on the way back from Tranquility Lane in which he punched a Radscorpion out, saving my ass. That was cool. But a one-time occurrence. Because he serves no concrete role to the player, you place little value on him as a character. There is no positive feedback to him besides to move the paper-thin plot along. Hell, even Ashley in Resident Evil 4 leaves more of an impact.
This is where Fallout 4 could shine. If they use the character's family properly and actually develop a tangible bond, it would be fairly easy to miss the Deathclaw-sized plot holes that will likely pop up. Fallout 1's plot, for instance, was hardly memorable on it's own. Cutting it down to the bare minimum, it was "Go get the Water Chip. Hey, thanks. Oh, there's some big ass green dudes wrecking shit. Do something about that." But the game leveraged it's gameplay and atmosphere perfectly, allowing the player to fill in the blanks with their heart and mind. It was engaging on some level. I accept that bethesda writes dumb games. That's fine, Spielberg directed a lot of dumb movies. But when your big dumb story has a big heart, the flaws fall under far less of a microscope. The move towards a speaking protagonist and the whole baby gimmick has me under the impression that they plan on moving in that direction. Let's hope, at some point between now and when Fallout 3 released, they looked at it's mess of a plot and came to the same conclusion. Or, well, you know, just decided to be smart. But these are the people who managed to stick both superheroes and vampires into a Fallout game, so. Yeah. (Of course, the whale and the flower pot from Hitchiker's were in Fallout 2 and so was King Arthur, so, all things considered, they probably took that insanity as canon. Not the brightest fellas.)
Or, rather, the lack thereof. It's not that the game doesn't try to have emotion. It does. But in a hugely half-assed way and with little regard to the player's disposition. There are a lot of issues with 3's plot. It's holier than swiss cheese, for starters. Given Oblivion and Skyrim's narratives, this seems to be genetic thing.
However, as has been demonstrated in film hundreds upon hundreds of times, holes in logic can be easily dealt with. If you cannot engage the mind, engage the heart. Ironically, this seems to be the core of 3's mantra. And the heart is represented, unfortunately, by Dad. Or James, because he's not my dad. James represents the biggest threat to Fallout 3's core storyline and the reason is this: If I gave two shits about James I would have cared about Project Purity. If I cared about Project Purity I wouldn't have played the skeptic. They wanted this: "My Dad died for his dream! I must achieve it for him, as I am his loving son!" Instead, it was more like this: "Boo-hoo, down goes Qui-Gon Jin. What's with this thing, anyway? Who needs water? That one douche outside Megaton?" The game failed to telegraph the need for water, true. But this would not have mattered as much if ol'Daddy-poo had actually engaged me in anyway.
The reasons he did not are manifold, but I will focus on two main reasons. Firstly, there is no time spent with him. You spend a good amount of time with him in the tutorial, which is actually a promising start. The baby stuff was sweet and the G.O.A.T. part had an amusingly familiar "Stop playing sick," routine that most are likely to connect to. However, everything falls apart ironically as the game really begins. Dad leaves. With no build up, no dramatic tension and with little in the way of why. It's just "Hey, your dad's gone and we're all being killed by the weakest enemies in the game! Run! Because it's your fault, apparently." And going forward, none of your moments with him are ever really spent bonding; just dressed up exposition dumps with some kind words thrown in. Yippee.
Secondly, he serves no meaningful gameplay role to the player. Let's take a look at an AI partner done right: Ellie from The Last of Us. She opens pathways for you, helps you fight, keeps your awareness up in battle, aids in the storyline directly and on-screen, etc. "Dad" does none of this. The only time he ever helped me out was on the way back from Tranquility Lane in which he punched a Radscorpion out, saving my ass. That was cool. But a one-time occurrence. Because he serves no concrete role to the player, you place little value on him as a character. There is no positive feedback to him besides to move the paper-thin plot along. Hell, even Ashley in Resident Evil 4 leaves more of an impact.
This is where Fallout 4 could shine. If they use the character's family properly and actually develop a tangible bond, it would be fairly easy to miss the Deathclaw-sized plot holes that will likely pop up. Fallout 1's plot, for instance, was hardly memorable on it's own. Cutting it down to the bare minimum, it was "Go get the Water Chip. Hey, thanks. Oh, there's some big ass green dudes wrecking shit. Do something about that." But the game leveraged it's gameplay and atmosphere perfectly, allowing the player to fill in the blanks with their heart and mind. It was engaging on some level. I accept that bethesda writes dumb games. That's fine, Spielberg directed a lot of dumb movies. But when your big dumb story has a big heart, the flaws fall under far less of a microscope. The move towards a speaking protagonist and the whole baby gimmick has me under the impression that they plan on moving in that direction. Let's hope, at some point between now and when Fallout 3 released, they looked at it's mess of a plot and came to the same conclusion. Or, well, you know, just decided to be smart. But these are the people who managed to stick both superheroes and vampires into a Fallout game, so. Yeah. (Of course, the whale and the flower pot from Hitchiker's were in Fallout 2 and so was King Arthur, so, all things considered, they probably took that insanity as canon. Not the brightest fellas.)
