Fallout 3 analysis

[Guest]

Fallout was simply the best RPG ever. There was only one problem with fallout 1, it wasnt long enough. After doing all the cool little quests at shady sands, junktown, and the hub; then you get power armor and the game is basicly you kicking the crap out of deathclaws, regulators, and super mutants. It a little too easy if you ask me. (dont get me wrong power armor IS cool.)

Fallout 2 was just more fallout with a cool story line (what more could a guy ask for). The BEST part of fallut 2 was there was so much to do. (i suggest making a character that makes like a raider to merchant parties) There were so many places to go, vault city and modoc, broken hills, NCR, and of course New Reno (The coolest thing that ever hit fallout). The downfall of fallout 2 (according to me) is again when you get Power Armor. I mean, fighting the enclave is really fun but like when your out in the desert, and you get attacked by 20 raiders you can take em out with one arm tied behind your back. (not an exageration, trust me)

Heres my suggestion for fallout 3. Really you guys have come a long way with fallout 2. Fallout 1 was the best game ever and you guys made fallout 2 even better. Fallout 3 needs to have more junktowns and more killing gang leaders like gizmo and decker. also, make more advanced raiders. i think raiders are one of the coolest aspects of the gangs. (if you really want to make it cool let your character join a group of raiders). but thats it, no matter what you guys do im sure it will be hella cool.

thanks to everyone who listens to my ideas.

 

[Guest]

<< Fallout was simply the best RPG ever. >>

I have to agree with you here.

<< There was only one problem with fallout 1, it wasnt long enough. ... It a little too easy if you ask me. >>

I thought the length of the game was just right. It, also, increased the replayability of the game. I had no problem going through it a second, third, forth, or even fifth time. The closeness of towns (in comparison to FO2) was nice as well.

<< The BEST part of fallut 2 was there was so much to do. >>

I think there was too much to do in Fallout 2. It detracted from the main goals of the game.

<< New Reno (The coolest thing that ever hit fallout). >>

This was my biggest complaint about FO2. New Reno felt so out of place, and I never understood why there was organized crime in a city without law enforcement. If there would've been a way to nuke New Reno, I'd have done it. That would've been very satisfying.

<< Heres my suggestion for fallout 3. ... Fallout 3 needs to have more junktowns and more killing gang leaders like gizmo and decker. >>

Well, they need to revert back more to the small time criminals. Really, they need to revert back to that dark & brooding feeling that was in FO1.

<< i suggest making a character that makes like a raider to merchant parties. if you really want to make it cool let your character join a group of raiders. >>

Depending on the main goal, would joining raiders (or creating a merchant party) help you reach it? Is it worth your characters time to join/create a party?

There was a lack of urgency in FO2. I didn't like that at all. It felt so, "I have time to smell the roses, my tribe will be fine." Doesn't joining up with a group of raiders fall under this category? I know alot of people look at it and think, "Cool, I'll get to raid towns and caravans."

I realize it depends on the goal as to whether this matters or not. But, if the game is anything like FO (1&2) in goals; then isn't a character who joins up with raiders saying, "Screw my people, I'm going to forge a new life for myself." You have the right to roleplay your character as you see fit. It is possible to end the game in both FO1 & FO2 without returning the water chip/GECK. Sure your people die, but that's not your concern.

Skie