Fallout 3 Hands-On #14

[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.

I hate the teddy bear launching but it's easy for me to ignore it because I don't plan to ever build a rock-it launcher let alone shoot fucking teddy bears from it. Same way I ignored that idiotically overpowered Red Ryder gun and alien blaster from the originals. Actually, in the first game I never really used anything better than the Assault rifle because I didn't really like the energy weapons or the B.S. concept of a single person being able to hold and fire a mini-gun.

 

[ookami]

Yes, there are a lot of katanas in America right now.

Fallout isn't based on 'right now'. Even if it was, there aren't a lot of actual katanas in America right now. Certainly not enough for them to just be floating around in any common capacity after the apocalypse. Plenty of replicas that would likely break if you used them for combat, though.

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.

Bethesda seems to be doing more shoehorning than innovating. That's the problem and that's the line. Is it helping the setting or is it just being thrown in because they think it's what the kids think is cool these days and because some other current game had it and it sold pretty well? They also make it too much of a habit so far to express that they "don't care" how this or that got there, it's just there because it's 'fun'. They're just doing it to have that 'cool' iconography shoehorned in there, and perhaps because they aren't creative enough to come up with much of their own. 'Creative Bethesda' seems to be dead, 'Rehash, Immitate And Milk It Bethesda' seems to be what exists now.

It did happen with Fallout 2 and it doesn't ultimately hinder most fans' enjoyment of it, but it does hinder it some. Fallout 2 isn't exactly fully embraced by all and almost everyone who played it seems to have some contention with aspects of it such as that.

Same way I ignored that idiotically overpowered Red Ryder gun and alien blaster from the originals.

Well, when Bethesda categorizes things like the Rock-It Launcher officially as Easter Eggs and treats them accordingly, that will be an accurate comparison.

 

[Per]

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 think anyone's questioning whether katanas even exist in the Fallout universe, but "they were in Fallout 2" is still a bad reason for including them in a new game. They don't fit the setting. Their only link to canon is that vague unexplained yakuza people found only in the wasteland surrounding New Reno used them, so it doesn't take much effort to gloss them over.

 

[Jesuit]

[Fallout isn't based on 'right now'. Even if it was, there aren't a lot of actual katanas in America right now. Certainly not enough for them to just be floating around in any common capacity after the apocalypse. Plenty of replicas that would likely break if you used them for combat, though.

America is a melting pot and always has been, and yes we do have a lot of 'real' katanas here as well as replicas, and we did a long time ago too. For all you know if there were a nuclear holocaust nothing would survive except a bunch of civil war era muskets because some loon built a museum into a mountain. Don't try to decide what item's survival is plausible. In a real nuclear war nothing's survival is plausible. Can we stop it with the Katana crap?

Well, when Bethesda categorizes things like the Rock-It Launcher officially as Easter Eggs and treats them accordingly, that will be an accurate comparison.

Hooray semantics. Look, you have to go through a lot of effort to go on a teddy bear killing rampage and you certainly aren't gonna come across any enemies attacking you with teddy bears. If they don't call it an Easter Egg it certainly acts like one.

 

[ookami]

Can we stop it with the Katana crap?

That would be a good question to ask the folks at Bethesda.

Hooray semantics.

Hooray argument deflection. Semantics isn't really as horrible a thing as people want to make it out to be when it comes to situations like this. Call a spade a flashlight if you like, but don't expect people to behave like you're clearly talking about a shovel.

 

[Jesuit]

Call a spade a flashlight if you like, but don't expect people to behave like you're clearly talking about a shovel.

If you were digging a hole with your shovel and I walked by and called it a stick of dynamite would it blow you up?

I see the semantics gripe if you're extremely worried about the sanctity of fallout canon but as it applies to whether or not an individual player (as per the frame of the argument I made) will enjoy the game there isn't a difference. As far as I'm concerned it doesn't exist and nothing about its current implementation can force me to acknowledge it.

 

[Per]

I see the semantics gripe if you're extremely worried about the sanctity of fallout canon but as it applies to whether or not an individual player (as per the frame of the argument I made) will enjoy the game there isn't a difference. As far as I'm concerned it doesn't exist and nothing about its current implementation can force me to acknowledge it.

Wait... Bethesda throw the teddy bear into plain view, people complain about it, you say they shouldn't because you've decided to ignore the bear, and then everyone who doesn't follow your lead is making a semantic argument? How does that even begin to make sense?

 

[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?

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.

It's not the camera angle in an of itself that I find as a fundamental principle, it's the way you view the world. That third person ISO view was just part of the FO/FO2 experience, and I would definitely consider that to me, fundamental for Fallout. I would have no problem playing FO games today that still had that view...my only request would be the ability to rotate the camera.

That aside, I'm saving my bitching over certain parts of the game until the game is actually out. I'm still of the mind that a number of that stuff is just for show during the previews and to some degree it will be cleaned up a bit before release. I could very well be wrong, but I'll bitch when I know for sure. So far we've gotten a bunch of 30minute to 4hour previews to try and give us a snapshot of the entirety of the game.

Lastly, I've already heard the arguement against it, but as long as I can mod FO, I will have no issues with it as long as it runs smooth. The amount of incredible player generated content was awesome for Oblivion. Maybe they won't release the SDK, and if thats the case I could very well be right here next to you lamenting the death of one of my favorite franchises..but I'm not going to light the torch and grab my pitchfork until it's actually out and I can't make the game I want out of it.

I'm a big fan of the mod community, always have been, my perfect game is never going to be the same as someone elses, and having the ability for me to mod the game is one of the most important things I look at now and days. Because I know I can make my perfect game...maybe thats not the way it should be, but the developers are never going to make a game that is going to please EVERYONE.

 

[UniversalWolf]

I don't think anyone's questioning whether katanas even exist in the Fallout universe, but "they were in Fallout 2" is still a bad reason for including them in a new game. They don't fit the setting. Their only link to canon is that vague unexplained yakuza people found only in the wasteland surrounding New Reno used them, so it doesn't take much effort to gloss them over.

Agreed. Anyone saying it's okay for something to be included in Fallout 3 because it was included in Fallout 2 is using one of Fallout 2's biggest flaws as the basis of his argument.

 

[Jesuit]

Wait... Bethesda throw the teddy bear into plain view, people complain about it, you say they shouldn't because you've decided to ignore the bear, and then everyone who doesn't follow your lead is making a semantic argument? How does that even begin to make sense?

About as much sense as you commenting on shit you haven't bothered to read through. I've never taken a stance on the damn bears and Ranne wanted to know why I wasn't pissed off over them. I told him why. My god.

 

[Per]

About as much sense as you commenting on shit you haven't bothered to read through.

So I didn't see you calling "semantic argument!" when ookami made a perfectly logical point? Because it still seems to be right there. It's a pretty overrated rhetorical manoeuvre and when you're already bending over backwards it doesn't exactly make your point look stronger.

 

[Jesuit]

About as much sense as you commenting on shit you haven't bothered to read through.

So I didn't see you calling "semantic argument!" when ookami made a perfectly logical point? Because it still seems to be right there. It's a pretty overrated rhetorical manoeuvre and when you're already bending over backwards it doesn't exactly make your point look stronger.

Who's bending backwards? Ookamis is the one trying to push the argument that my reason for not giving a shit about teddy bear launching isn't valid unless some jack ass in Bethesda's home office labels it as an Easter Egg. Yes, that is a semantic argument.

 

[Per]

Who's bending backwards?

Sorry, I must have been thinking of some other threads.

Ookamis is the one trying to push the argument that my reason for not giving a shit about teddy bear launching isn't valid unless some jack ass in Bethesda's home office labels it as an Easter Egg. Yes, that is a semantic argument.

Or maybe he just meant it wasn't an accurate comparison, and not specifically challenging your ability to ignore the bears because of that. The cooperative principle.

 

[Brother None]

About as much sense as you commenting on shit you haven't bothered to read through. I've never taken a stance on the damn bears and Ranne wanted to know why I wasn't pissed off over them. I told him why. My god.

Man, you are a belligerent character, aren't you?

No need for the bellicose attitude. Chill. You won't get very far if you start yelling at people every half-step.

 

[Jesuit]

Sorry, I must have been thinking of some other threads.

That would make sense since everything tends to be upside down when you're bent over. I've heard that if you tilt your head you can compensate for this, which might be a good way to avoid any mix ups in the future.

Or maybe he just meant it wasn't an accurate comparison, and not specifically challenging your ability to ignore the bears because of that. The cooperative principle.

That might even make a little bit of sense if I had been arguing that the Teddy Bear gun is like the two easter egg guns. In fact, if you read closely you'll see that I was saying I could ignore the teddy bear gun the same way I ignored the two easter egg guns. Actually, looking closer I see that I even mentioned the mini-gun as something else I ignored... and that wasn't even Easter Egg at all? Assuming ookami wasn't being a non-sequitor according the cooperative principle you so cleverly linked to.. It would seem to be required of me to respond to him as if he was responding within the framework that I had previously set up.

Thanks for getting involved for no good reason though.

 

[terebikun]

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?

@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.

Nitpicking the katana is a non-issue for you, but you're in a huff about things that were simply for demo purposes and/or are completely unknown? They've said time and time again that Fatboy ammo is very rare. Maybe they're lying or exaggerating, but you can't say it's "overabundant" at this stage because a hacked character shot off a bunch in the demo to show them off. They've also said that the physics for the teddy bears and cigarettes were upped for crowd-pleasing purposes, and again maybe they were lying, but you can't use it as an example yet of how the game doesn't fit to canon, as I'm pretty sure demos don't usually count for canon anyways. I also fail to see how the use of factions is uncanonical, as points for all their inclusion have been made on this forum. Supermutants were heading East after the end of Fallout 1, we've been given a pretty plausible story for the BoS in the dev diary, and there's no reason the Enclave can't have a surviving cell. I'd hardly call the mechanic of killing children an issue of canon, but at least there is a dynamic response when you try to kill them. As for infantile/dumbed-down humor and writing, I would say it's too early to say that given that we've seen so little examples of the writing, but I won't argue the subjectivity if you're one of those people who sees something called "Super Duper Mart" as the ultimate form of blasphemy. Speaking of said Mart, how is a run-down supermarket unfitting and inconsistent? Finally, headshot dismemberments=bloody mess. I have no idea how this is not conforming to the Fallout formula, other than it happens to be in 3D.

I would like to see these dozens of other inconsistencies that directly contradict the wordrules of Fallout, as the only real inconsistency you've pointed out so far is that cars in Fallout 3 were powered by nuclear engines, and I'm pretty sure they were fusion engines in the previous game. Maybe they were nuclear fusion? I dunno. You could poooooossibly say that Fallout 3's view of radiation has changed from the previous games, but I think it's a bit of a stretch. Radiation turns you into zombie, now even more radiation turns you into a radiation-emitting zombie. Whatever.

 

[entropyjesus]

As far as I'm concerned it doesn't exist and nothing about its current implementation can force me to acknowledge it.

That's a great philosophy. Next time I play Oblivion I'm just going to repeat to myself "This is a fun and memorable experience and all that stupid AI, clunky interfacing, generic architecture, and poor implementation of RPG elements does not exist."

Denial is the new immersion.

Thanks for getting involved for no good reason though.

This is called an "open forum" for a good reason.

 

[Jesuit]

That's a great philosophy. Next time I play Oblivion I'm just going to repeat to myself "This is a fun and memorable experience and all that stupid AI, clunky interfacing, generic architecture, and poor implementation of RPG elements does not exist."

Speaking of inaccurate comparisons... that would be one.

 

[Ranne]

Nitpicking the katana is a non-issue for you...
[...]
Whatever.

Whoa. Whatever indeed.

It would take me an hour to make a consistent and all-including reply to this overly forgiving and certainly forgetful line of reasoning. However, when I have to begin my response by pointing out that the existence of nuclear catapults, the Megaton bomb, hundreds, if not thousands, of highly explosive nuclear cars lying around is not accordant with the standards set or implied by the previous games in the series, and that such a high number of we-already-know-about in-game objects capable of producing nuclear explosions do, in fact, validate my use of the word "overabundant"... When I have to start with all this only to counter your rather unsubstantiated and superficial "maybe they're lying or exaggerating, but you can't say it's "overabundant"", I can't help but wonder if this is the type of discussion I really wish to continue. Excuse me, but for every single point you questioned there is at least a dozen of already existing NMA posts that can answer and/or explain it much better than I am willing to do. Give me a break. Just use the the search button.

 

[entropyjesus]

That's a great philosophy. Next time I play Oblivion I'm just going to repeat to myself "This is a fun and memorable experience and all that stupid AI, clunky interfacing, generic architecture, and poor implementation of RPG elements does not exist."

Speaking of inaccurate comparisons... that would be one.

Umm...nope

You said you'll just overlook the inconsistencies in Fallout 3 and basically deny their existence to further your enjoyment of the game, or did I miss some kind of brilliant point?