A new-found appreciation for Fallout 3

I was one of the few people on NMA that actually liked Fallout 3. I probably spent two or three hundred hours in that game across two different platforms (I was also drunk almost the entire time). 10 years later the game has aged poorly for me. The quests and dialogue seem empty and so poorly done and most of the exploration and mechanical elements I enjoyed have become chores that are better implemented in the later games. Compared with New Vegas which I didn't love initially but has aged extremely well because good story, dialogue and diverse quest trees never get old.

I'll always love it for the atmosphere it conveyed as it got me into post-apocalyptic genres as well as jazz music (which eventually turned into me learning to play the trumpet along with start a swing dance hobby - I've been dancing Lindy Hop for over 5 years now!). Pretty much I love everything about Fallout 3 now except actually playing it. It exists better in a memory for me.
 
I can't play FO3 anymore. I'm running it in Windows 7. It starts out just fine. After a few days of exploring the wasteland, it starts crashing. The further I progress, the more it crashes. I even tried completely rebuilding my game folder from scratch. It will have to live as just a memory.
 
Korin said:
I was one of the few people on NMA that actually liked Fallout 3. I probably spent two or three hundred hours in that game across two different platforms (I was also drunk almost the entire time). 10 years later the game has aged poorly for me. The quests and dialogue seem empty and so poorly done and most of the exploration and mechanical elements I enjoyed have become chores that are better implemented in the later games. Compared with New Vegas which I didn't love initially but has aged extremely well because good story, dialogue and diverse quest trees never get old.

I'll always love it for the atmosphere it conveyed as it got me into post-apocalyptic genres as well as jazz music (which eventually turned into me learning to play the trumpet along with start a swing dance hobby - I've been dancing Lindy Hop for over 5 years now!). Pretty much I love everything about Fallout 3 now except actually playing it. It exists better in a memory for me.
Click to expand...


This.
I replayed Fallout 3 earlier this year and found it rather tedious. I didn't not enjoy my time, but a lot of it was spent wishing that what I was doing would end.

Fallout 3 hasn't aged well at all. The combat is sub par when compared to other shooters at the time, every other game is open World now and so it all that's left to draw attention to is the story... which is weak as shit.

I loved back in the day, but taking off those nostalgia googles led me to realise that I don't think it's that good at all.
 
The Bethesda game that i actually liked at the first but when i tried to replay it years later and hated it is Oblivion. Going back to it just made me notice how bad and shallow it is. Specially the writing, dungeon design and exploration. I already didn't liked the combat and the level scaling in my first playthrough, these other issues in this playthrough just made things so much worse.


New Vegas was the opposite, to an extent. I didn't care much for it in my first playthrough, but i did enjoy it enough to finish. But the overall impressions were mixed. When i bought the game on Steam two years ago, it was like i was playing a completely different game. Putting the combat aside, which leaves a lot to be desired, i was enjoying the writing, the world building, the characters and even the exploration. I did play a lot of RPGs in between both playthroughs, so stuff like good writing and characters is something i started to appreciate more and more.
 
Richwizard said:
I can't play FO3 anymore. I'm running it in Windows 7. It starts out just fine. After a few days of exploring the wasteland, it starts crashing. The further I progress, the more it crashes. I even tried completely rebuilding my game folder from scratch. It will have to live as just a memory.
Click to expand...
If you really want to play Fallout 3, play TTW.
We spend a ridiculous amount of time optimizing the Fallout New Vegas engine and it's pretty stable even on Windows 10.
TTW is way more stable and has better performance than both Fallout 3 and Fallout New Vegas by themselves.
 
I have a similar feeling with F3. I find the main quest to be really boring and badly written. However the game has anamazing atmosphere and exploration. In fact, I would prefer the game to have no main story overall, just exploring and side quests. That would remove the urge to complete the main quest because the game reminds you every second that "yOUR FATHER IS OUT THERE LOOK FOR HIM".

Also, if you ask me, I would make the resources in game way more sparse, and add survival mechanics like the ones from Hardcore Mode/Survival Mode (except the rest to save. Creation Kit games are just way too prone to crashing, even with patch mods). I think that the game is much more fun when played as a survival horror, but in the end game you have so much ammo and stuff that any sense of danger and fear is lost. Yes the old Fallouts also made you into a demi-god but at least some parts of the story would get you to say "Yep, I'm fucked" (Specially the Master and Frank Horrigan).

If the game was a survival horror with RPG mechanics, it would be sooooooooo much better and enjoyable. There are already some mods to do that, so at least we can get that experience.

Also to answer the questions:

-Yep, for the reasons above.

-Welp, at least the game doesn't force you to go there (but the god damn quest marker likes to remind you constantly of Megaton's existence), and if it wasn't because the city doesn't make any sense, I would say it's a neat "tutorial" city. So I have mixed opinions.

-I like fast travel but Bethesda simplified it a lot. I like it way more in games like the old Fallouts or DAO, where you see the path AND random encounters can happen. Their worlds are more interesting to walk and explore but I would like an improved Fast Travel system.
 
Carlitosh636 said:
Also, if you ask me, I would make the resources in game way more sparse, and add survival mechanics like the ones from Hardcore Mode/Survival Mode
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure there was something like Fallout 3 Wanderer's Edition (FWE) for Fallout 3 and that it may have been made/compiled by some of the people who did Project Nevada. I remember using it for a bit and thinking it was interesting but didn't get too far into it. If it's what I remember, it has a lot of adjustable values like Project Nevada does which means you can crank the difficulty of certain things and adjust spawn rates and quantity of loot.

Looking at the list someone made on TTW's forum about incompatible mods says Project Nevada is on that list. Would this ever be a possibility? I would love to see it happen if so.
EDIT: I didn't really fully because dumb. Says that the core module for PNV will work with TTW? I might have to try that out then.
 
I sometimes think about giving it another shot. Then I remember (sometimes before I start replaying) there are only two things of actual value in that game: Growing up in the Vault and the art-direction.

The art-direction is absolutely fantastic and the importance of Adam Adamowicz is exemplified in that he created an actually good translation of Fallout's aesthetic (and I think in several ways improved) to 3D first person and that with his absence the art-direction went to the absolute dogs in Fallout 4. Even stuff like the hazey sky and the distant raised-highway ruins oozes atmosphere (It's a shame that there's no content of worth). The armored vault jumpsuit iteration in NV/3 is also unironically one of my favourite protagonist designs, not sure why.

The Vault childhood sequence I consistently overrate in my own memory because realistically it's actually extremely fast, but at times I felt like I was more of a "Vault Dweller" heading out into the great unknown in Fallout 3 then I did in Fallout 1 where you abruptly start. Call it handholding your personal roleplay (Not arguing for the cinematic narrative style with the dad and the GF and the bully etc but the premise of having that sequence in general) but I liked it.

New Vegas basically outclasses 3 in literally every way after that though. Gameplay wise, character design wise and content/narrative wise. It's not even funny.
 
Liked Fo3 initially, then turned on it in the wake of New Vegas, but I've softened on the game after Fo4. I think that the stuff that people cite about it are true - exploration, atmosphere, art direction, 'imuhrsion'. Of course, these things do not a great game make, and it is objectively worse then FNV in almost every other way. Still, I had a lot of fun playing it as a turn your brain off sort of thing, and I think it's objectively mroe fun than Fo4.
 
Apollyon said:
Mostly avoiding the more populated locations of Fallout 3, scrounging for scrap and generally getting by with the things I scavenged, provided the sort of experience I find most appealing in a post-apocalyptic scenario. It was only after putting restrictions on myself and avoiding the attempts of the developers to make me play the game their way, that I got there. And isn't that weird?


- Have you ever taken a similar approach as I did, traveling directly into the Wasteland or D.C., avoiding the main quest altogether?

- What do you think of the design decision to railroad the player to civilization (Megaton) after leaving Vault 101?

- What is your opinion on fast-travel in the Fallout franchise?
Click to expand...

It's not that weird at all.

With respect to the first question, I would say that I've always operated with the assumption that this is the way that FO3 is meant to be played. I just re-installed FO3 earlier this year after the game's initial release and it was just as fun as I remembered, except for the main quests and how it sidetracks character development and kind of falsely guides the gameplay leaving more to be desired (not knocking the main quest, it's still fun regardless imho). It was always a question of immersion (i.e. doing what I "want" to do) versus doing the playthrough of quests linearly, that is to say, at the compromise of what could be an isolated storyline for a single character. I mean, that isn't to say that the quests are bad or poorly written (being one of those people who enjoys FO3 and enjoys the quests), because one can make it tie in with a storyline regardless, but ignoring the main questline and just wandering the D.C. Wasteland in favour of a personal story arc is probably the most fun way to play, given all there is to explore, catching quests as you please. There's always options to expand or build characters this way and get a good run of the game without even bothering with the main quest/s, imho.

I'm pretty sure they have mods for roleplay and alternate starting points now which get rid of the tutorial altogether, like they have for New Vegas. It would be really neat if this concept was expanded upon more deeply. This seems like something which could renkindle an appreciation for a game such as FO3's proportions.

Which basically makes the case for one wanting more out of a game in which there is already such a diverse world and storyline for, that it seems redundant to point out the obvious and say that 'such and such design is flawed', I just think it requires a certain level of sophistication to get a good flow of gameplay going, like with writing a story. Like if they hadn't added Megaton as a retreat from Vault 101 it could have expanded the story elements and left it feeling more open-ended, but on the same token could leave you feeling like a helpless person in the wastes or like you're meant to automatically become some super soldier wasteland dude, which it kinda already does. I think besides being a good asset and intro town to a third game, Megaton is conceptually interesting and guides the player into an unknown, with the Springvale School nearby being a good asset for anyone wanting to get their hands dirty.

Fast-travel is useful in my opinion for situations like basic laziness, which I sometimes suffer from. I feel that an over-reliance on fast-travel mechanics does lead to missing a lot of content however, so I try not to overuse it, or only when it seems applicable.

There's still a lot that I have to discover, but these are the musings of a person who is simply interested in exploration while gaming and discovering as you go versus a play to achieve approach. Hell, I didn't even play F:NV for the first time until earlier this year, and so far it's been pretty great. There's new things I find in game all the time. Even though F:NV has probably become my favourite in terms of design/atmosphere and lore, Fo3 is pretty fun to revisit every now and then.
 
Last edited:
Exploration is the primary appeal of Fallout 3 and pretty much what the game really derives its strength from. Its especially good in the low levels when you're genuinely scared of visiting places like the Super Duper Mart, Molerats, and every new location could be terrifying. The tunnels and the addition of feral ghouls to the franchise (which actually were in Necropolis' Lower Levels, just not obviously zombies) were the scariest most interesting part.

It makes the final Power Fantasy part where you're an invincible Badass in Power Armor all the more satisfying.
 
CT Phipps said:
Exploration is the primary appeal of Fallout 3 and pretty much what the game really derives its strength from. Its especially good in the low levels when you're genuinely scared of visiting places like the Super Duper Mart, Molerats, and every new location could be terrifying. The tunnels and the addition of feral ghouls to the franchise (which actually were in Necropolis' Lower Levels, just not obviously zombies) were the scariest most interesting part.

It makes the final Power Fantasy part where you're an invincible Badass in Power Armor all the more satisfying.
Click to expand...

I don’t remember any “feral ghouls” in the Necropolis sewers. All the “ferals” were topside.
 
Fallout 3 is a game I feel many look at with rose tinted glasses. While fun at the time, it however aged like moldy cheese. There are a lot of plot holes, contrivances, frustrations and even out right idiocy in the game and it's DLC. Many a YouTuber have done a better job then I over discussing Fallout 3's problems which I will spare you all from reading an Ann Ryad long chapter of Fallout 3's problems. I also wouldn't know where to begin as there is so much I can talk about what is wrong.
 
Because of the shit level scaling, there is nothing to be "afraid" in Fallout 3 at any level, the game is ridiculously easy. So the power fantasy doesn't work because everything scales to you. Bethesda can't even deliver on that front since you are not one shotting everything like you should be, that's how fucked their games have become since Oblivion.

The only fright you can get from Fallout 3 is when you realize that enemies become bullet sponges haflway through the game. Game is still piss easy, but the major difference now is that it's even more boring and even more shit because the enemies take way too long to kill.
 
I feel like Fallout 3 is a well-executed game, with lots of good concepts, made by compotent people, who, despite the constant misunderstanding of the franchise, I think genuinely did respect the property they were working with and wanted to make a good game.

I'm pretty sure if I had played Fallout 3 as my first introduction to the series my response would be "Ok game, not for me though". The world looked ugly, the writing felt bad, and worst of all it wasn't a believable world. It's a compotently done game and has it's charms, but it's not the kind of thing that, IMO, makes you seriously invested and immersed in a franchise.

Having started with Fallout New Vegas, I felt immersed in this entire world, so much so that I wanted as much more of it as possible. The best thing Fallout 3 ever did to me was convince me that in order to get a good Fallout experience, you need to go further back.
 
I think that Fallout 3 vs. Fallout: New Vegas is a battle that people approach one of two ways.

1. The people who think that Fallout 3 is to crap on the original games due to the variety of behind the scenes circumstances that led to its creation. I blame Interplay squarely for that. You hear people who think it ruined any chance of Van Buren and all that.

2. People like me who think New Vegas exists and is awesome because of Fallout 3. It provided the template to build a better game from a very good basis. Basically, Assassins Creed 1 to Assassins Creed 2.
 
As someone who got into Fallout from Fallout 3, I look back at it now with a much more critical eye. 3 at first was fun. Especially to 18 year old me who mostly played CoD with her brothers and cousins. Then I got Fallout New Vegas and I saw what a mass improvement it was.
~For one the settlements felt real and believable. One of the things that grated me about Fallout 3 was how the settlements felt like theme parks. New Vegas presented much more believable settlements.
~The dialogue was better and felt more like how real people would talk instead of parodies or cartoon characters.
~The companions were much better and felt like you had more of a personal relationship with them instead of them just being pack mules.
~The factions were miles better and there felt like there was more conflicts going on with them.
~There was much more in the way of consequences for the player in New Vegas then in 3.
~The world was much more morally gray instead of binary black and white which is a stable of post-apocalyptic fiction.
 
To be fair, I'm actually a bit more cynical on the "everyone is gray" element of storytelling. I know quite a few people who insist the Galactic Empire did nothing wrong and you have to wonder what they're smoking. Still, I've always preferred the Enclave to the Master. Yes, they're genocidal American Nazis but they're a believable outgrowth of the world's ideology. The Master has sympathetic motives but he's never more sympathetic than Ra's Al Ghul.

"I will kill most of humanity and destroy its personality to SAVE IT!"

I think a lot of people missed with the Master that his plan was unnecessary and humanity was already rebuilding.
 
CT Phipps said:
The Master has sympathetic motives but he's never more sympathetic than Ra's Al Ghul.

"I will kill most of humanity and destroy its personality to SAVE IT!"

I think a lot of people missed with the Master that his plan was unnecessary and humanity was already rebuilding.
Click to expand...
The Brotherhood doesn't want humans that aren't them having advanced technology because they fear it will be misused again in conflict. Something that caused the Great War. So The Master believes something similar. That humans are damned to unnecessary violence and that they will never find peace among themselves. With Super Mutants, the dude could just control them and force them into a state of peace. Sure it's fucked up but it's not like he didn't know what he was aiming for. Humanity was rebuilding but conflicts were already arising and you could argue fairly unnecessary ones. It wasn't a matter of eating and living but sometimes a matter of profit or territorial control. These were not conflicts that arise from a need to survive such as killing another animal for food.

I feel like Fallout was trying to argue that even in the event of the world ending by our hands that we'd probably end up doing it all over again seeing as one of the factions is based on this idea and the main antagonist believes it fully enough to transform us into mind slaves to him to put a stop to it.

I'm not saying The Master was right because as a human I'd love to not be forcefully dipped into experimental goo and be mind controlled for my foreseeable sterile life.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top