Fallout 3 Hands-On #14

[Jesuit]

You guys seem to be forgetting that not everything that was in FO2 is considered canon, or even practicle and applicable to the Fallout world.

The wakizashi was yet another in the long line of out of period/atmosphere weapons that they stuffed in to give FO2 more options.

Like the fn fal, and the h&k g11, they were fun to use and powerful compared to soe of the more generic ones but they break the completely different timeline based on the 50s that Fallout had.


Fallout 2 had talking deathclaws, but if they show up in Fallout 3, I'm gonna be pissed.

And yet, I enjoyed Fallout 2. My primary point being that if wakizashi blades didn't ruin fallout 2 for me I doubt katana blades handled in a similar matter will put a dent on my enjoyment of Fallout 3.

Canon is also a slippery topic but I think the baseline for canon is that things that end up in a released sequel and aren't obviously a joke are canon. The wakizashi blades were part of a somewhat common random encounter around New Reno, and I think that makes them canon, though Ausir will know better than me.

Was it a tad absurd anyway? Yep.
Did I want it to happen again? not really.
Is it gonna put a damper on the game world for me? not unless they show up everywhere.

EDIT: Also, I'm fairly certain they've said that talking deathclaws are out.

 

[grapedog]

You guys seem to be forgetting that not everything that was in FO2 is considered canon, or even practicle and applicable to the Fallout world.

The wakizashi was yet another in the long line of out of period/atmosphere weapons that they stuffed in to give FO2 more options.

Like the fn fal, and the h&k g11, they were fun to use and powerful compared to soe of the more generic ones but they break the completely different timeline based on the 50s that Fallout had.


Fallout 2 had talking deathclaws, but if they show up in Fallout 3, I'm gonna be pissed.

Eh...talking Deathclaws bothers me not at all, considering up to two lived through the previous FO's and could possibly breed with other deathclaws.

You're right with everything else though, they did the same thing with Katanas, and weapons and a lot of the little crap that has happened in previous FO's. Developers take liberties from time to time with the game, it's going to happen. Why were people not more ripshit about some of this stuff in FO2?

Rose Colored Glasses....

 

[Ranne]

After teddy bear weaponry, killer bees, nuclear catapults, toilet drinking, radiation spells, bloodbag deathshots, inadequate graphics, laughable AI, dozens of severe inconsistencies and illogicalities, and everything else we know about Fallout 3, do you people really want to nitpick the presence of single-edged swords in the game? I mean, really? Because it looks like another distracting non-issue to me.

 

[rcorporon]

How can stuff in FO2, which was developed by Interplay and is accepted as the only true and real sequel to Fallout, not be cannon?

 

[Per]

How can stuff in FO2, which was developed by Interplay and is accepted as the only true and real sequel to Fallout, not be cannon?

Dis Continuity.

"Ignoring the uber-fanatics who thought that Fallout 2 wasn't really part of the Fallout series, Fallout fans often divide into camps about what is and is not canon. There is some agreement that Fallout Tactics: Brotherhood of Steel, while a decent game, just isn't in the Fallout continuity; some things honestly don't mesh. The console beat'em up Fallout: Brotherhood Of Steel is very often denied existence at all. Diehards have decided that shifting to first-person, Oblivion-style gameplay means the upcoming Fallout 3, no matter how good it may be, won't count as Fallout (the keyword being OWG, or Oblivion With Guns). And so on."

 

[rcorporon]

I still find it hard to swallow that the objects found in FO2 shouldn't be considered cannon, despite being disliked by a few marginalized die-hards.

If it were in Tactics or Brotherhood of Steel, I could see it, but in FO2, which was created by pretty much the same people who did FO1, I'd have to say is as close to cannon as you could hope for.

 

[grapedog]

The devs of the old FO's had certain things set in stone(canon), but they left a lot of it open. Apparently none of the things they left un-touched are open to interpretation though...there is just a void where the rest of the US is...never to be filled.

I don't mind most of FO:T either, as canon goes. They consulted quite often with the original dev's of the FO series. Sure, they took some liberties, but thats always going to happen.

 

[Jesuit]

I still find it hard to swallow that the objects found in FO2 shouldn't be considered cannon, despite being disliked by a few marginalized die-hards.

I don't find it really unusual for people or groups of people to make up their own canon. It only gets stupid if they expect every other iteration of the series to cater to their personal, esoteric version of the world.

That's why if you're trying to make an argument about canon, the definition that the most people will accept is the one you're espousing.

 

[FeelTheRads]

despite being disliked by a few marginalized die-hards.

Oh, man, so I'm marginalized now. Shucks.

pretty much the same people who did FO1

Not quite, not quite. The Troika (and I don't mean the company) was already gone even before work on Fallout 2 really started.

 

[Ranne]

I don't mind most of FO:T either, as canon goes [...] Sure, they took some liberties, but thats always going to happen.

One of "some liberties" taken by FO:T? World War II era weaponry.
One of "some liberties" taken by F3? Decapitation by a stuffed toy.
Yeah, I can see the parallel.

Also, from a rather dispassionate perspective, Fallout 2 must be considered to be a part of the canon unless it directly contradicts any of the fundamental principles set by Fallout 1. By applying the very same criterion to Fallout 3, it would seem that most of the currently visible design decisions made by BethSoft will render Fallout 3 ineligible forcanon entry.

 

[grapedog]

I don't mind most of FO:T either, as canon goes [...] Sure, they took some liberties, but thats always going to happen.

One of "some liberties" taken by FO:T? World War II era weaponry.
One of "some liberties" taken by F3? Decapitation by a stuffed toy.
Yeah, I can see the parallel.

Also, from a rather dispassionate perspective, Fallout 2 must be considered to be a part of the canon unless it directly contradicts any of the fundamental principles set by Fallout 1. By applying the very same criterion to Fallout 3, it would seem that most of the currently visible design decisions made by BethSoft will render Fallout 3 ineligible forcanon entry.

From what I understood, the stuffed toy taking off someones head was a purposeful overkill, just for showing off the game, a spot of fun. Correct me if I'm wrong...that his character in that video was not uber-buffed.

What fundamental principles do we know for sure, have changed from FO2 to FO3 aside from the camera angle going from 3rd person ISO to First/Third person?

 

[Jesuit]

What fundamental principles do we know for sure, have changed from FO2 to FO3 aside from the camera angle going from 3rd person ISO to First/Third person?

He's talking about gameplay elements that have a bearing on the world such as the inclusion of katana blades and teddy bears... and I guess bees?

 

[grapedog]

What fundamental principles do we know for sure, have changed from FO2 to FO3 aside from the camera angle going from 3rd person ISO to First/Third person?

He's talking about gameplay elements that have a bearing on the world such as the inclusion of katana blades and teddy bears... and I guess bees?

There is a difference between fundamental principles and gameplay elements.

Irradiated Bees suck...but Radscorpions/Mole-rats and the like are ok? I don't really see a difference...and I can't imagine anyone bitching if irradiated insects had made it into FO/FO2. Hell, Scorpions are from the same Family AND Phylum as Bee's in the animal kingdom. You had giant Ants in the Temple of Trials...

 

[Jesuit]

Irradiated Bees suck...but Radscorpions/Mole-rats and the like are ok? I don't really see a difference...and I can't imagine anyone bitching if irradiated insects had made it into FO/FO2. Hell, Scorpions are from the same Family AND Phylum as Bee's in the animal kingdom. You had giant Ants in the Temple of Trials...

It does seem like a completely arbitrary line doesn't it?

Anyhow, just for the sake of interest here's a relevant quote from fallout god, Tim Cain:

Some of them spend more time thinking about the “rules of the Fallout universe” that we do. But sometimes, this can be a bad thing, especially when someone wants to change something and the fans hate it just because it is a change. Not everything in the first Fallout games was intended to be canon. There must be room for some innovation, as long as it is true to the spirit of the original games, if not the letter.

 

[Scare]

I get the feeling that FOoS will look more like cannon than FO3 when it's all said and done. I'm shocked we havent heard that the alligator men made their way up from florida and are running a crime syndicate in DC.

 

[Seymour the spore plant]

Anyhow, just for the sake of interest here's a relevant quote from fallout god, Tim Cain:

You might be surprised at how few people here would dispute his point, but the real problem starts at where to draw this line on what is "true to the spirit of the original games". I don't think mutated bees or their giant cockroaches are major offenders (if offenders at all), but no matter where your priorities lie, it's safe to say Bethesda has crossed this line on more than one issue here.

Giving radioactive superpowers to Ghouls, for an instance, is stupid. It changes them from shambling ruins of men to the wasteland's Ogre-magi, just for the sake of enemy variety. The katana issue is somewhat similar; what would swords be doing in a post-apocalyptic world, if they are an extremely harder to craft and usually less effective weapon than spears, which can be made out of any makeshift pole and scrap of metal? Do we really want to bring the yakuza to the west coast, along with the Enclave, the BoS, the Master's army and basically everyone and their mother just to implement something that doesn't make much sense in the game's setting anyway?

 

[Jesuit]

Giving radioactive superpowers to Ghouls, for an instance, is stupid.

I'm not doubting you but I hadn't heard this yet. Do you have a link?

The katana issue is somewhat similar; what would swords be doing in a post-apocalyptic world, if they are an extremely harder to craft and usually less effective weapon than spears, which can be made out of any makeshift pole and scrap of metal? Do we really want to bring the yakuza to the west coast...

They're there for the same reason guns are, they're leftovers. Yes, there are a lot of katanas in America right now. Spears are nice too if you have to make something up but they break a lot easier and aren't as effective weapons when you're talking about single combat. No one said anything about yakuza, and on the other hand this is all questionable in terms of violating the spirit of the first games since the first games had katana swords.

The spirit of the first games is always going to be at issue, and in my understanding of the game world so far, any violations are highly auxiliary in terms of how I have understood that spirit. I'd prefer it if they weren't there as well but they aren't going to hinder my enjoyment of what I consider to be the core spirit of the first game (if that proves to be there), the same as they didn't in Fallout 2.

I personally think Tim Cain was arguing for a more generalized understanding of that spirit and focusing less on the little minute details of the world... like katana swords and faction migrations. But your mileage may vary.

 

[Seymour the spore plant]

Do you have a link?

Yep. This old preview here, from Gamestar.de, and even older info from Gamespot.

No one said anything about yakuza, and on the other hand this is all questionable in terms of violating the spirit of the first games since the first games had katana swords.

Only Fallout 2 had actual swords, though the Wakizashi behaved much like a knife in-game (maybe they mistook it for a tantō, or maybe just for the sake of reusing frames). I believe someone mentioned the yakuza as reason for swords still being around earlier on this thread, and to me, that would be the only good reason for katanas to make a significant appearence in the US, since the surge of interest in japanese culture is quite recent and most likely never happened in the world of Fallout.

 

[Jesuit]

Only Fallout 2 had actual swords, though the Wakizashi behaved much like a knife in-game (maybe they mistook it for a tantō, or maybe just for the sake of reusing frames). I believe someone mentioned the yakuza as reason for swords still being around earlier on this thread, and to me, that would be the only good reason for katanas to make a significant appearence in the US, since the surge of interest in japanese culture is quite recent and most likely never happened in the world of Fallout.

Thanks for digging up that link for me. I actually found it sort of weird that the Yakuza had Wakizashi. Just because they happened to be japanese they knew where to go to find Wakizashi? There were a lot of Japanese in America before this whole Japanophelia thing broke out so it's not like there wouldn't be any Katanas. Like I said, I think they're explainable, but I think they're a bit absurd too and I hope they're rare.

 

[Ranne]

What fundamental principles do we know for sure, have changed from FO2 to FO3 aside from the camera angle going from 3rd person ISO to First/Third person?

As I said before, I'm not that big of a Fallout I/II expert to construe or cite the canon. But even I can come up with dozens of examples that can illustrate the point I was trying to make. The overabundant and entirely inappropriate use of nuclear weapons, particularly in close range encounters where it borders on insanity. Completely uncanonical use of the preexistent factions. Unkillable children. Dumbed down, almost infantile humor and writing. Unfitting and inconsistent "à la SuperDuperMart" environments. And yes, teddy bears.

Those teddy bears that ignore the laws of physics and lie around in packs of ten or more, ripe and ready for your Rock-It Launcher marksmanship practicing convenience. Or the hunting rifles and shotguns sticking out of rusty mailboxes. Should I really mention the half-naked Chinese commandos, character safety booths, radiation auras, headshot dismemberments, easily explodable nuclear-powered cars, and dozens of other inconsistencies that defy reason and directly contradict the spirit and worldrules of the previous games? Then how about the ridiculously perverted, even inverted view of radiation, which, once again, goes against the infinitely more realistic and substantiated setting of the previous games?

Right now it seems that Fallout 3 took took out all the realism from Fallout 2 and moved whatever silliest moments there were left into the realm of absurdity and bad taste. Is there anything about Bethesda's handiwork that is appropriately realistic or intelligent or extraordinary and not trite? You tell me.

Oh, by the way, seeing camera positioning as a fundamental principle worthy of canonization? Ouch.

@Jesuit: I largely agree with your post on katanas but I wish you were similarly rational when it comes to mutilations being caused by catapultable teddy bears and cigarette packs. I mean, if that's something even remotely normal, does it really matter how many katanas are out there and where they came from? That's why I called it nitpicking a non-issue.