Exploration Feels Like A Waste Of Time

[TorontoReign]

That is why the mods I add to New Vegas are always new locations. Sad. Ultimately means as good as New Vegas is the game is a bore to explore.

Middle of a desert? That city is either Bakersfield (Necropolis) or Los Angeles (The Boneyard). Get off it and admit you screwed up by using a non canon game as a frame of reference. And have you seen Washington DC? It's one of the oldest cities in the country with many buildings being over a century old. If anywhere in the nation should buildings be like that, it's there.

You said Bethesda's treatment of the setting was "lunacy" and a "defacement of the IP." Both are absurd.

People around here complain that the plot sucks along with the characters, but anything beyond that is debatable. The setting of Fallout is one of the things Bethesda nailed with Fallout 3. I get you wanna jump in the NMA 'let's hate F3 together' bandwagon but you're just being silly and stubborn.

Bzzzzzzzzz! Wrong again Pwener.

Tactics was totally within canon on architecture. If you PLAYED the game you would see that it follows the rest of the series fairly closely in those regards. Actually some of the designs it uses are in Fallout 3. Not all buildings are the same in all regions anyway. Even in the RETRO 50's future...

 

[Pwener]

That is why the mods I add to New Vegas are always new locations. Sad. Ultimately means as good as New Vegas is the game is a bore to explore.


Bzzzzzzzzz! Wrong again Pwener.

Tactics was totally within canon on architecture. If you PLAYED the game you would see that it follows the rest of the series fairly closely in those regards. Actually some of the designs it uses are in Fallout 3. Not all buildings are the same in all regions anyway. Even in the RETRO 50's future...

I never said that Tactics' architecture was non canon. I said Tactics as a game is non canon, and it is. He used Tactics' image of a futuristic-looking Chicago to criticize Fallout 3's architecture because he thought it was wrong. He believed Bethesda came up with that artistic choice, and I corrected him.

I hate that even though I'm in the right, the sole fact that it is Fallout 3 that I'm defending, I'm still wrong because people can't let go of their bias. You hate Fallout 3? That's fine. But hate it for the correct reasons and don't twist the words of the people disagreeing with your opinions just to make them look bad and join the NMA 'let's hate Fallout 3 and all who like it are wrong' bandwagon.

 

[a721402]

One of the elements of Ah-Q mentality is to claim everyone is just a hater to the subject.

 

[Pwener]

One of the elements of Ah-Q mentality is to claim everyone is just a hater to the subject.

For someone that joined in 2016, you don't seem to realize where you are and the views many members here possess regarding Bethesda made entries in the franchise...

Ever heard of the term "glittering gems of hatred?" Seems you haven't. This place has a reputation for a reason. Sure, it's not like it used to be, but that attitude still lingers.

 

[a721402]

For someone that joined in 2016, you don't seem to realize where you are and the views many members here possess regarding Bethesda made entries in the franchise...

Ever heard of the term "glittering gems of hatred?" Seems you haven't. This place has a reputation for a reason. Sure, it's not like it used to be, but that attitude still lingers.

For someone who so far most of the "arguments" often just plainly disagree and often have "Hater" in it, you don't seem to realize if you keep calling people that, no one will take your seriously no matter where you are and you should bring up actual content instead.

 

[TorontoReign]

I never said that Tactics' architecture was non canon. I said Tactics as a game is non canon, and it is. He used Tactics' image of a futuristic-looking Chicago to criticize Fallout 3's architecture because he thought it was wrong. He believed Bethesda came up with that artistic choice, and I corrected him.

I hate that even though I'm in the right, the sole fact that it is Fallout 3 that I'm defending, I'm still wrong because people can't let go of their bias. You hate Fallout 3? That's fine.

I think that Fallout 3 did the architecture right as well, so I am disagreeing with both of you, while also agreeing with both of you. Gizmo was right with the 50's aesthetic being pushed too hard. The old devs agree. Whatever his point was on Chicago, that is not my concern. I won't take non canon being tossed around when it has been stated as SEMI CANON by GOD.

I defended Fallout 3 on the BoS expedition to the East Coast against fellow Glittering Gems, when I dislike Fallout 3 immensely. How do you think that makes me feel?

 

[Risewild]

I never said that Tactics' architecture was non canon. I said Tactics as a game is non canon

Bethesda declared Tactics canon though. Even before Fallout 3 was made.
They only considered a few little things not canon, like the Midwest BoS coming from a vault, ghouls not being immune to radiation, some modern weapons and little more.

 

[Pwener]

For someone who so far most of the "arguments" often just plainly disagree and often have "Hater" in it, you don't seem to realize if you keep calling people that, no one will take your seriously no matter where you are and you should bring up actual content instead.

I have never used the word "Hater" in this website and anywhere else for that matter. The word "hate" is not the same as "hater" precious. Don't put words in my mouth if you don't want me calling you a big fat liar. I also agree with Fallout 3 "haters" (go screw yourself precious) as much as I disagree with them.

You're now on my "people I dislike in NMA" list for putting words in my mouth and presenting me in an incorrect light.

Bethesda declared Tactics canon though. Even before Fallout 3 was made.
They only considered a few little things not canon, like the Midwest BoS coming from a vault, ghouls not being immune to radiation, some modern weapons and little more.

There is no such thing as "semi-canon" in my mind. Either a work is fully canon or it isn't. I'm very black and white on the issue.

 

[TorontoReign]

I have never used the word "Hater" in this website and anywhere else for that matter. The word "hate" is not the same as "hater" precious. Don't put words in my mouth if you don't want me calling you a big fat liar. I also agree with Fallout 3 "haters" (go screw yourself precious) as much as I disagree with them.

You're now on my "people I dislike in NMA" list for putting words in my mouth and presenting me in an incorrect light.



There is no such thing as "semi-canon" in my mind. Either a work is fully canon or it isn't. I'm very black and white on the issue.

That explains it.

 

[Pwener]

That explains it.

You have to admit, the idea is a bit silly. Especially in Tactics' case. We were not given a list of what is canon in the game and the developers just take things from it and implement them in their games without any perceived limitations or narrative rules.

So either the entire game is canon or it's simply a well from which writers can draw upon.

This is what the wiki says; "Because of some minor inconsistencies with previous Fallout games, Fallout Tactics has been declared as non-canon by Bethesda Softworks except for its pivotal events. Some nonpivotal elements do not contradict canon, though, and as such, the game's content can be used as "flavor" material."

Basically a more elaborate echo of what I said. It's a well to draw upon.

 

[TorontoReign]

You have to admit, the idea is a bit silly. Especially in Tactics' case. We were not given a list of what is canon in the game and the developers just take things from it and implement them in their games without any perceived limitations or narrative rules.

So either the entire game is canon or it's simply a well from which writers can draw upon.

This is what the wiki says; "Because of some minor inconsistencies with previous Fallout games, Fallout Tactics has been declared as non-canon by Bethesda Softworks except for its pivotal events. Some nonpivotal elements do not contradict canon, though, and as such, the game's content can be used as "flavor" material."

Basically a more elaborate echo of what I said. It's a well to draw upon.

Sure, which makes it semi canon like I said. I am not sure why people can't understand the difference. Star Wars used semi canon lore multiple times over the years.

 

[Pwener]

Sure, which makes it semi canon like I said. I am not sure why people can't understand the difference. Star Wars used semi canon lore multiple times over the years.

Well, if that's what you call a game being "semi-canon," then that's fine. I just avoid using the word 'canon' altogether because it carries with it certain connotations that I just don't agree Tactics possesses.

I consider Tactics as a 'writer's resource.' That's how I think Bethesda and Obsidian approached the installment and out of convenience just said the game was mildly canon. Just my opinion though.

But like I said, I don't consider it canon in any way beyond the possibility of there being a Midwestern BoS.

 

[Big No]

Also it looks wrong to begin with. FO3's towns and cities actually look like run down 50's architecture—which is absurd for 2077, let alone 2277.

The setting calls for a futuristic "World of Tomorrow" cityscape—blown all to hell; it's what they imagined would exist in the far future—not parody relics from their own past.

Look at Fallout:Tactics' depiction of 2077 era Chicago:

Does this look like Mayberry, or Petticoat Junction? Bethesda's concept of the setting is lunacy; practically criminal defacement of the IP—which they own, and can deface to their fart's content.

The thing is though that Washington D.C. wouldn't be able to have buildings like that, at least not as tall. In real life, there's a height limit for buildings in the D.C. area so nothing can dwarf the Washington Monument and I assume the same would hold true for Fallout's D.C. So while Chicago could have towering buildings made of steel like that, D.C.'s buildings would pretty much need to be the same size they're depicted as in F3.

 

[Gizmojunk]

Intelligence and ignorance can be mutually exclusive. I've seen and known otherwise "smart" people who would make the same mistakes BGS has with FO3, it really has to do with drive, direction, and how serious they take their work. I cannot prove my conjecture, but the theories I've read about BGS being calculatingly apathetic and precisely so, is not believable.

The reason I think it is pragmatic apathy is because they know that if they did a proper Fallout title... that it would have zero chance of making the sales numbers of a proper TES title. Plain and simple; they cater to the market, and the market (majority) buys FPP empowerment fantasy; and this is more important to them than a good RPG... for many of them that non-RPG aspect is actually the hallmark of what they think makes a good RPG; and that actual RPG mechanics (and the reasons for them) are deleterious to their fun.

Alas... I think this has happened with Bard's Tale 4 as well.

 

[Orius]

I agree about not caring for exploration. Personally - and I've said this before on this forum - I think that roleplaying games have been watered down by exploration ever since around the time FO3 was released, and it's only gotten worse after 2010. I think the major difference between the appeal to roleplaying and this so-called "open world" gameplay is that roleplaying deals more with how the world responds to your actions as a character, whereas in "open world" games, it's quite the opposite, where it focuses more on how you interact with this huge world. There's a subtle difference to this beyond the opposite sides, but it is an important difference that defines whether if the game actively interacts with you as a real sentient being would, or if it's just a dead, static world that you poke with a stick. It's a huge open world, but it's still stationary, and you're the only one doing the interacting in the game as opposed to it being a two-way interaction.

And that's well and fine as FO3 did demonstrate (at times) how an open-world system can pave way to some pretty interesting side stories in each individual vault you find, among other locations. But it does greatly affect the fundamentals of roleplaying, where you interact with the world, and the world actually reacts back organically and realistically.