Amata

Personally, I could always relate to Burke, seeing as he seems to utterly despise the people of Capital Wasteland. Honestly, if you think about it, better view from your balcony is more valuable than 10 Megatons.

Besides, flooding the TT with ghouls was out of the question for me due to manners. See, when encountered with a ghoul, my usual reaction is to politely point out that ghouls do not run. This is, of course, best achieved by crippling their legs. And are those bastards grateful? No, they attack you, forcing you to defend youself. How rude. Well, at least they cannot run when they're dead.

Maybe Philips used some special ghoul smell on his mask. By rubbing it somewhere on his body. Let's not think about this particular idea.
 
It's not like feral ghouls are smart enough to notice a mask, but still, it DOES sound pretty dumb a mask would fool a group.

Maybe it's like a zombie thing, pretend to be one and none of them notice you.
 
Yeah but you figure that they've got to have some way of identifying ghouls from humans.

Most animals don't base everything off their sight, they are using sense of smell, or even hearing. And since ghouls are indeed feral, they are more "animal" than "human".
 
Well, that's it then. Reward for helping the ghouls is a badly stiched mask, that spent an unhealthy amount of time being rubbed against ol' Roy's rotting ballsack. I shudder to think where he got the materials. That just made the only sorta gray moral choice (not so much thanks to the omniscient karma message) a lot easier.
 
I was going to respond with how the "won't attack sentient ghouls because they can sense their own" thing was one of the dumber things Fallout 3 had done with ferals, but that got me going about how it really, really wasn't, which got me off on a tear about how ferals shouldn't exist in the first place, and since more off-topic F3 bashing is the last thing this forum needs I believe I'm going to go make a nice soothing cup of Earl Grey.

To bring things back, I'll say that Fallout 3 could have been a much better game if they'd kept a tighter focus on Amata and on the Vault in general. Here's this vault, thrown into turmoil, everything the overseer has ever told them proved false, damaged by the recent civil strife and possibly limping along. Now they're thrown open to the wasteland, and your childhood friend and possible love interest is suddenly thrust into the Overseer's chair at the nexus of all the most significant crises and changes the Vault has ever seen. She's hardly seen anything life has to offer and she's not sure she's up to the challenge of healing the schism in the population, let alone dealing with an entire wasteland. You're the only person with any real contact with the outside world. How does this play out?

What if you had to kill her dad? How does she reconcile the fact that you're crucial to the vault with her inability to deal with you? What if you let her keep her gun and she ended up killing the guard that had her captive? Does that change how the vault sees her? Does it plant the seeds for a dissident faction in her already shaky new order? Does she have to turn to you to deal with them? We could do this all day. With a little more consideration given to her arc, Amata could have been a central and compelling character and developing your relationships within vault 101 and managing the vault dwellers' collective fate could have been one of the better parts of the game, if not the central plotline. Que sera sera, I suppose.
 
It would be awesome if V101 was a sort of counterweight to Project Purity. What I mean is we could have James (now less of a Saint McGoodguy and more of an optimistic idealist) and Amata (who would be more pragmatic and slightly cynical having to deal with both dissidents inside and dangers outside of her Vault). You'd help both sides and in the end make a choice who to help - James or Amata - as a sort of idealism versus pragmatism story.

In that story James would be his usual saintly self, but you'd be pointed out that his efforts are somewhat misguided (as in he means well, but the wastland is not ready for 'well') and like in FO3 ask you for GECK for PP. That's pretty much how I always saw James anyway. How this operation ends depends on how you do (from taken over by raiders to abandoned and fell apart, James becomes a drunk to how it worked out in Broken Steel as the best ending).

Amata on the other hand would have grown somewhat bitter by her encounters with the wastelanders, but instead of following her father, she'd want to set up a Vault City-esque settlement, which would be a place of order and civilisation being reborn and spread around the wastes - either by diplomacy or by force. How that works out depends on the choices you make during the course of the game (from becomes a raider town to destroyed by raiders to becomes a militaristic dictatorship to becomes like NCR as the best ending).

The ending (or better yet somewhere in the middle - like the point of no return for faction choice in FNV, thus determining the form of MQ later on) sequence would give you a choice - give the GECK to Amata or James, with both sides having their pros and cons. A golden 'everyone is happy' ending would be impossible, as you'd have to disappoint someone.

You know, just an example. There are already dozens of 'better story for FO3' ideas. My favourite was this one guy, who said that FO3 would be awesome if the conflict for PP included 3 factions (or 4, I don't remember exactly) and you choose one faction and help them. Before you ask, this was after the release of FNV.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top