Fallout 3 is crap by default?

[Kaucukovnik]

I'm amused by the amount of "logical" reasoning why is Fallout 3 wrong in every possible way.

The game doesn't live up to Fallout 1 & 2, but some people can find anything different from those to be an error. And since anything straight from the originals is considered just cheap copying to sell the game to FO1/2 fans, Bethesda had never a chance to satisfy the Fallout crowd.

(my 2 cents: some weapon and armor designs are better than earlier ones, wasteland exploration and combat has more immersion, but story and dialogue fail miserably quite often, being decent at times)

I'll try to make up some criticism at the first Fallout:

-Why is the land completely flat everywhere?
-What are those square houses with rounded corners made of? Concrete? Mud? I can't imagine a way they would fit there.
-Why are the vaults, supposedly for thousands of people, so small?
-Irradiation kills some people, while some become undead creatures from cheap horrors? And two headed cows? Bullshit!
-Some fights can be done so that the enemy has absolutely no chance to attack you. You call this a hardcore RPG?
-How is Shady Sands supposed to survive the raiders for a single day? Other places being not that much better guarded.
-You can become a good gunslinger just reading magazines about guns without even holding a gun in your hand?
...

I don't really mean anything of the above. But try to prove these arguments wrong!
Fallout setting was never even trying to be realistic. It just managed to bring enough suspension of disbelief which made the environment seem somewhat alive. It's all pulp, based on familiar archetypes and events, sometimes downright copying its predecessors and sources of inspiration.
And I see wannabe serious debates about ecology, geology and sociology.
Be honest at least. Say you don't like 3D or first person perspective and twitch gameplay, maybe you insist on having turn-based combat. Yes, I'm allergic to stupid dialogue/voice acting too. But you guys can find even the smallest rock on the road faulty and not fitting the setting.

In the end, the game made money on the console crowd, and we got a Fallout themed sandbox.
So what are we bitching about? They gave us the toolset. There is a turn based mod. There is a worldmap mod (dying due to lack of interest). People have converted most FO1/2/Tactics equipment into Fallout 3. Tons of concept material for Van Buren is freely available. If you all really loved Fallout so much, we would have a fan-made Fallout 3 done already.

Rather show how smart you are in the toolset, and not on forums, mocking the game you have learned to hate so much.

 

[Lexx]

Cool story, bro.

-Why is the land completely flat everywhere?

Engine limitation.

-What are those square houses with rounded corners made of? Concrete? Mud? I can't imagine a way they would fit there.

Made thanks to the GECK, some chemicals and something else. I don't know the details right now, but it's no magick and reasonable explained.

-Why are the vaults, supposedly for thousands of people, so small?

Engine limitations. Why is the NCR full with thousands of people but has just 3 maps? Also, every "town" in Fallout 3 is super small.

-Irradiation kills some people, while some become undead creatures from cheap horrors? And two headed cows? Bullshit!

This is Science! and therefore arguing about it is nonsense. Also Fallout 3 got that too. Hurr durr.

-Some fights can be done so that the enemy has absolutely no chance to attack you. You call this a hardcore RPG?

Why not? It's either pure luck or your character is just good. Beside this, you can higher the difficult settings in the options, if needed.

-How is Shady Sands supposed to survive the raiders for a single day? Other places being not that much better guarded.

Most of the raiders in Fallout 1 just got spears 'n shit as well. So even with a simple rifle, you would be superior and could defend your town. And: Raiders in Fallout 1 and 2 are not the "Reavers" from Fallout 3.

-You can become a good gunslinger just reading magazines about guns without even holding a gun in your hand?
...

You can't endless read books about guns, as there is a skill cap. After x%, the book will not higher your skill anymore.

 

[Dario ff]

If you all really loved Fallout so much, we would have a fan-made Fallout 3 done already.

I don't really get this statement. Do you mean one of the following?

1) Make a total conversion mod for Beth's Fallout 3 in spirit of a sequel. Which is not likely to happen here, since very very few people are interested in modding F3 already. Also, the game is broken on several aspects which can't really be fixed with several work. (And there's no easy way to do voice-acting, which the game would look even more stupid without it). Also, consider the idea that a LOT of people here don't really like F3's gameplay. Sure, there are turn based mods, world map traveling. I've tried some of them, and they've been really boring to me. Figures.

2) Make a fan sequel to Fallout(2?), AKA, unofficial Fallout 3. Well, considering the amount of work needed(new engine, content, project direction) which is significantly harder to organize in a content-based game like an RPG. Kind of hard to do something like that over the internet.
That reminds me of the Sonic Retro folks trying to do a HD version of Sonic 2. They spent months(and years!) trying to decide on the engine alone, and we're talking about a 2D platformer! It's been like 4 years, and they're discussing total wars over how a particular sprite's shading must look. I'm not saying that's bad, it's just that making a project of such magnitude on the internet doesn't succeed really often.
If several people contributing haven't been able to do a 2D platformer in 4 years, we should expect to do a complete RPG which MUST stay true to Fallout? And even have some sense, proper direction, explanations, etc?

Fan projects are really easy to propose... the amount of management needed to do it is incredibiy hard unless you make things for people as EASILY as possible. I can't even imagine the amount of debates that would surge here for one particular quest if something like that was ever done.

 

[Kaucukovnik]

Engine limitation.

Hills and valleys can be done in 2D quite well.

Made thanks to the GECK, some chemicals and something else. I don't know the details right now, but it's no magick and reasonable explained.

Shady Sands and other non-Vault originated places have GECK made buildings?

Engine limitations. Why is the NCR full with thousands of people but has just 3 maps? Also, every "town" in Fallout 3 is super small.

That's why I don't mention towns. At least indication of some more space in the vault would make this better.

This is Science! and therefore arguing about it is nonsense. Also Fallout 3 got that too. Hurr durr.

So it makes no sense to bring scientific arguments, because science in this setting works like magic. No problem with that, just use the same measure on FO3.

Why not? It's either pure luck or your character is just good. Beside this, you can higher the difficult settings in the options, if needed.

No luck or character skills. Right amount of AP so that you run to a certain distance each turn and the enemy doesn't even have enough AP to get to you.

Most of the raiders in Fallout 1 just got spears 'n shit as well. So even with a simple rifle, you would be superior and could defend your town. And: Raiders in Fallout 1 and 2 are not the "Reavers" from Fallout 3.

Night attack of superior numbers of raiders and your fancy rifle is useless.

You can't endless read books about guns, as there is a skill cap. After x%, the book will not higher your skill anymore.

That's why I didn't say perfect gunslinger. But you can become able to shoot people in the eyes, from being almost unable to hit at all, just reading books.


But my point wasn't arguing these "flaws". I wasn't trying to find flaws compared to FO3. As i said, it was just example of pointless bitching about things that can be fine in the game.

I'm sure you can find a ton of reasons why is it meaningless/impossible to mod FO3 to match your requirements. But remember it's far easier to point out someone's mistakes than trying to remedy them yourself.
This attitude doesn't help the community to be seen as anything else that the "glittering gems of hatred". But Fallout fanboys found a better solution - just wear that label with a smug smile and continue bitching.

And a little theory of mine. Maybe the story of FO3 would have been better if they didn't try to satisfy original Fallout fans, sticking in both water purification and GECK.

Sure, there are turn based mods, world map traveling. I've tried some of them, and they've been really boring to me. Figures.

Because these mods are nothing on their own. They are waiting to be utilized by a total conversion or something - world travel is useless until someone makes enough places to travel to. Encounters would have to be adjusted to turn based combat. And so on.

Fan projects are really easy to propose... the amount of management needed to do it is incredibiy hard unless you make things for people as EASILY as possible. I can't even imagine the amount of debates that would surge here for one particular quest if something like that was ever done.

http://www.tamriel-rebuilt.org/
And Elder Scrolls community never was so dedicated as the Fallout one. Maybe that's the problem.

 

[Aphyosis]

Engine limitation.

Hills and valleys can be done in 2D quite well.

I don't think that's what Lexx meant.

Engine limitation means the engine literally could not handle hills or valleys. It wasn't a matter of determination as it was literally impossible to implement them.

 

[Crni Vuk]

Shady Sands and other non-Vault originated places have GECK made buildings?

Dont be silly. Obvoiusly the GECK is not that kind of technology. What some speculate here is that it contains viable data and probably seeds for certain crops which would be suited for such a wasteland which would prove to be very handy for a community which knows how to use it. The GECK device has been by both games F1 and F2 stylised and it fits the 50s idea of "science can fix everything" even when it might not be completely true ~ and thus a man made illusion. Just like the idea to survive a nuclear engagement during the cold war cause you have been hidding under a table or in the courner of your room. And many believed that really.

No luck or character skills. Right amount of AP so that you run to a certain distance each turn and the enemy doesn't even have enough AP to get to you.

Its called "strategy" duh. Also works not with every enemy.

Did you even played the game ? Try doing that with supermutants and enclave patrols all the time. IT works when you want to get away from the area. But you have no chance to beat them without the right equipment and skills.

~ also we all know that Fallout 1 and 2 have not been the top of tourn based combat. But it was sufficient .

So it makes no sense to bring scientific arguments, because science in this setting works like magic. No problem with that, just use the same measure on FO3.

You should take your time to make youre self known with the setting before talking further about that topic.

The world of Fallout is based on a 50s idea about the future ~ so for example Plasma and Lazer have been the norm, nuclear age never stoped, powerarmor have become a reality etc.

Obviously not everything can and should be explained by that. For example nuclear powered cars exploding with a single bullet when they should have been either A ) constructed in a way that this does NOT happen (by the way the Cars in Fallout used fusion cells) and B ) should have been already looted a long time ago.
Or computers sitting outside in the wasteland without cover for centuries just waiting for mikey blue eyes to pass by and crack the password so he can read the a-mail inside. Clothes or Bobleheads which "magicaly" increase your stats. etc.

The point you might mean is verismilitude. And that part is quite good in F1 and F2. Its not perfect. But which game is it. Though complaining about the SCIENCE! in F1/F2 (you know what that means?) when its part of the settting is like complaining about Metroid Prime that youre playing some chick in space armor fighting of some empire ruled by parasites. Here its SCIENCE Fiction. Which is somewhat from its direction similar to Fallouts SCIENCE!. Hope you understand what I mean.

That's why I didn't say perfect gunslinger. But you can become able to shoot people in the eyes, from being almost unable to hit at all, just reading books.

It still doesnt replace the need to spend skill points in that part. You can somewhat raise with books your skills. But you will not become a professional that way. And it makes more sense to learn something from reading a book then simply using a lab coat to increase your science skill for 5%.

http://www.tamriel-rebuilt.org/
And Elder Scrolls community never was so dedicated as the Fallout one. Maybe that's the problem.

Fallout 1 and 2 contain just as many conversions and well done mods.

I dont see what that should mean though. The argument "if you dont like it make your own game" is a moot argument in my eyes anyway.

Thing is if you are looking over to the nexus for example you will not find many story changing mods for either Oblivion and less for Fallout 3 with QUALITY. 90 % if not more of the mods for Oblivion and Fallout 3 are "hello kitty/super armor/super weapon" modifications. The people which played Oblivion like the Sandbox experience. And thust mos of the mods there are made to give that. Eventualy quests which could be comparable with some RPGs are rare (they exit but not all of them have the same quality).

We have to wait and see if someone will come up with a total conversion for Fallout 3. Yet I have to find a good one for Oblivion though.

 

[Kaucukovnik]

Don't see things so black and white. Fallout 1 = perfection. Fallout 3 = utter shit by every inch. I'm sure I saw people criticizing aspects of FO3 that were taken straight from FO1. First Fallout had many quirks and errors, we just like to forgive because the game managed to drag us in, which is, after all, the most important aspect of any game.

The science in Fallout is as much of science as in Star Trek. Just technobabble that explains interesting environment and plot devices.

You are angry about exploding nuclear cars, yet animals that grow another head or even fire-breathing ability due to radiation are fine.
And you can see that my false rantings about things wrong in FO1 are not easily dismissed either. Should we continue discussing them?

And I'd say I am quite familiar with the series and setting. Played Fallout 1 three times (I think), and Fallout 2 at least 10 times. Never finished Tactics, though (robots became boring opponents, I hoped for more missions with reavers*, for example).

I agree that Fallout 3 is by far the weakest part of the series. I personally don't consider it canon. But I don't blame things that are not the reason.
If the writing was better, I'm sure most of the remaining issues wouldn't be such a problem. And writing is maybe the easiest part to correct, if you can do without voice acting. And since when does a hardcore RPG community find voicing crucial? Much of FO3's voicing is atrocious anyways.
You can make a whole new plot taking place in Bethesda's environment - it's pretty good for the most part.

I also agree that most FO3 mods are not even worth the bandwidth, but this is the situation in every modding community, and the easier modding is, the more stupid mods you will find.

----
* I'll never forget the line "if you wanna make a reaver cry, kick a toaster"

 

[aenemic]

if there's anyone who sees things in black and white here, it's you. you're putting words into peoples' mouths here. yes, a lot of people are dissatisfied with FO3, but for a number of different reasons that are not restricted to the ones you mention. and I'm pretty sure I speak for everyone here, or at least a great amount of people, when I say that we're all pretty critical of the previous games as well. neither FO1 nor FO2 are entirely perfect. but they had several basic things that made us love them, which FO3 didn't have or were just badly implemented.

anyways, as for the size of vaults, I simply imagine there being more levels of the vaults that are inaccesible to the player because there's simply no reason to go there.

 

[Crni Vuk]

You are angry about exploding nuclear cars, yet animals that grow another head or even fire-breathing ability due to radiation are fine.
And you can see that my false rantings about things wrong in FO1 are not easily dismissed either. Should we continue discussing them?

Sorry we can only point you in the direction of what the difference between exploding cars and cows with 2 heads is. But we can not understand it for you.

Don't see things so black and white. Fallout 1 = perfection. Fallout 3 = utter shit by every inch. I'm sure I saw people criticizing ...

May I ask you where you have been when people around here mentioned critical points about both Fallout 1 and 2 ?

Since this topic/part of the forum is about Fallout 3 we mention somewhat Fallout 3 flaws.

What you do here though is selective reading. You search for issues in F1 to explain the flaws in F3 as like that would make it suddenly "alright". Even if there are issues in past games it doesnt excuse any flaws in future games ~ Fallout 3 has bugs! But Fallout 1 has them too! So its ok for Fallout 3 to be buged - thats moot.

But that is beside the point anyway. Some issues you mention are part of the settting ~ see the intention behind SCIENCE!

Here again do you know what is behind Fallouts science?

I will point you to the Wiki :

Fallout World - The Vault Fallout Wiki
The Fallout world exists in an alternate timeline that split away from the history of the real world following World War II. Up until the Great War in 2077, the Fallout world was dominated by the distinctively American culture of the 1950s, though with a far more advanced technological progression. The Fallout world's setting is heavily influenced by the science fiction anthology Worlds of Tomorrow, which was released during the Golden Age of Science Fiction in the 1950s.

Searching here for realistic science is again a moot point. One should more try to use the 50s view on science fiction. If anything.

To give another better example. When Fallout 2 was still quite new people would mention New Reno and San Francisco as the places which contradict the setting most. New Reno mainly cause of its exagerated 30s setting with Mafia families and the mobster-gangster style. That is more only regarding the design though. Not so much the way you play the quests.

But issues with verisimilitude are NOT part of the science or setting and thus should be avoided. Example. The Karma o Meter in F3 which is ridiculous. You do bad things and get bad karma. But you get your home and a free water source and suddenly you get a way to incrase your karma. Kill a whole village. It doesnt matter just give the bum next to you 10 bottles of clean water. And you are the saint of the wasteland again. This is not part of the Fallout setting in any way. Its just bad designed gameplay. Same for towns that consist of 5 people and 3 shacks ... so much to that part. Or a child town right next to a Super mutant hidout ? Not to mention the ridiculous dialogues you have in F3. THIS are flaws in my eyes. And at least such things have been quite rare with Fallout 1.

 

[Dario ff]

Don't you think it'd be a much better idea picking a free or open-source engine and develop the game themselves? The amount of work required to fix, and deal with Fallout 3's glitchy and slow engine are not really worth it IMO.

Ever heard of Postworld? Looks like a promising project, but what I'm trying to show there is that people would prefer working on a new engine themselves instead of dealing with F3's engine.

 

[Kaucukovnik]

I wasn't pointing out flaws in FO1 to make flaws in 3rd installment allright. I tried to show you how easy it is to criticize anything. In this manner you could present any game as incredibly stupid, and your points would be very hard to sweep away - there is always a way to support an idea if there is the will to do so.

About the 50's - not even 50% of Fallout was inspired by 50s, there are many more influences. Leather jackets and metal spiked armors? That's Mad Max! New Reno is based on earlier organized crime as you said. There are many pretty modern weapons, straight from our universe and time. I see no reason why more influences and ideas shouldn't be added.
Fallout: Tactics has pretty much no retro feel at all, and it's still quite respected among the community.
I'm sure the original devs didn't do that much research, they just put in various cool stylish post-apocalyptic and retro-futuristic stuff and it worked. Look at the Cat's Paw "magazine".

I clearly said I'm against any "serious" scientific discussion, because it is meaningless in a pulp setting. You don't have to explain it to me in different words.

I agree about that karma thing, but again, it's not fixed there - no reason you shouldn't get rid of it, get a mod, or simply ignore that stupid option. And pretty much all the issues about the game mechanics can be helped that easily.


The thing is that this community can sometimes nitpick incredible details and find arguments pretty much against anything in the game they hated since the moment it was announced.

Bethesda is considered to be the destroyer of Fallout franchise, but can you imagine any other major developer who would provide us with complete toolset for the game they release? From this point of view FO3 ended up the best way it could. Yet, it comes from the evil, bloomy Bethesduh and therefore isn't worthy of our time. And whoever admits he plays it, quickly adds how much he suffers, so that he remains cool within the community and isn't considered a silly consoletard.

I'm probably generalizing too much, sorry about that.
I don't mean anything of this as offense, I'd just like to see a proper Fallout 3 built on that half-assed, but modifiable game we have now. And who is more competent than these ancient Fallout fans?
Please, throw away that hatred and accept FO3 at least as a modding platform. Of course, people who insist on isometric view cannot be satisfied, and i understand that. But I guess most of us don't love Fallout because of isometric graphics above all - there are far better games at that.

I'm amazed there is no sticky thread dedicated to mods bringing FO3 closer to our vision of Fallout. It's the least I'd expect from a dedicated community like this one.

 

[Dario ff]

I'm amazed there is no sticky thread dedicated to mods bringing FO3 closer to our vision of Fallout.

Uh?

Please, throw away that hatred and accept FO3 at least as a modding platform.

It's not really hatred, it's stupid when you think about it. As I said before, I'd enjoy much more working with an engine to allow a proper isometric camera(Just a 3D perspective with rotation and zoom capabilities) and work with it as I please. There are game engine limitations regarding dialogue(maximum amount of lines), and talking to those faces without voice-acting seems pretty dull.

And not everything can be modded. Maybe some severe reverse engineering could be needed to hack the executable and add some tweaks, but REing a modern game is not pretty at all.

 

[Kaucukovnik]

Shame on me, didn't look for it in modding section - expected only topics for modders there...


And the isometric view never seemed that important to me, but ok, won't argue - I like 2D graphics, don't get me wrong.

I would see the beauty of existing moddable engine in the possibility for everyone to contribute, because the toolset is still quite easy to use, despite being so much more confusing than Morrowind's. In a few years there could be really huge game world...

 

[Dario ff]

And the isometric view never seemed that important to me, but ok, won't argue - I like 2D graphics, don't get me wrong.

It is when you consider that it radically changes the type of gameplay AND the crowd it appeals. A FPS must have good visuals, decent textures, etc. Most probably, when you think of an open-world game, you don't expect to have really detailed maps.

And Isometric view alone doesn't mean it can't be succesful for visuals on these days. Using a lot of Pixel shaders and plenty of other stuff, you can achieve amazing stuff like this.
[youtube]http://youtube.com/watch?v=-Q6ISVaM5Ww[/youtube]
[youtube]http://youtube.com/watch?v=vtYvNEmmHXE[/youtube]

That doesn't mean I can't enjoy a FPS Fallout game. It's just that these transitions must be done well. Here I go with another sonic example during the 3D craze on the 90s.

Mario had Super Mario 64. Total 3D gameplay. It was done very well, and a lot of people took the change in a positive way. There's also the hardcore 2D fans of course.
But what about Sonic's case? Was the jump to 3D succesful? Looking at the reviews of Sonic Adventure years after it, the awful scores truly demonstrate something true... Sonic 3D games sucked because of its poor execution.

Same thing goes for Fallout 3 to me. What if the FPS gameplay was actually nifty, maybe even affecting some part of the accuracy by the stats? It could've been nice to have some proper iron sights(F:NV). And then we get the Win Button V.A.T.S. Practically ignoring most aspects about original aiming in the older fallouts, and just doing some kind of stupid cinematic. The poor balancing of having little skills in small guns and being able to do a headshot didn't help as well.

While some of this can be tweaked with mods, the problem is that the combat, the general feeling, everything was done to go along with this shoddy FPS. It's no surprise people want to go to Isometric view with turn-based combat after such a horrible experience.

Now, if you still think Fallout 3 has a good chance of being modded, then I don't think there's really much reason to do it NOW rather than everyone should wait for Fallout: New Vegas. If it all goes well, maybe it will motivate the community to improve the game. Fan-made patches, tweaks to improve everything. We shouldn't be dealing with the limitations of the actual engine when New Vegas' one has been freed from them.

 

[lucas.]

In my opinion both sides are filled with retards.


Fallout 3 fanboys are just stupid kids who are too close-minded to enjoy something in a game that doesn't explode or is extremely realistic.

While F1 and 2 fans who hate Fallout 3 are just too arrogant and elitist to understand that Fallout 3 isn't aimed to please old gamers.


Fallout 3 is a very good game who gave me hundreds of hours of fun, sure the story is a bit more childish than older fallouts and everything is so freaking easy after the first playthrough but it's still a good game.


If you hate something, even if it's in the internet just stay away from it, why would you waste precious minutes of your life (and health) doing rage posts about how Fallout 3 destroyed the Fallout series or how Fallout 2 sucks ass becuz of teh grapheckz


I was expecting users in an old Fallout fansite like this one to at least tolerate each other...

 

[Aphyosis]

While F1 and 2 fans who hate Fallout 3 are just too arrogant and elitist to understand that Fallout 3 isn't aimed to please old gamers.

Oh we know that, but just because it's not aimed at the previous demographic doesn't mean we get to give it a free run. We'll be critical of its flaws just as we are of the originals.

 

[.Pixote.]

yes, a lot of people are dissatisfied with FO3, but for a number of different reasons that are not restricted to the ones you mention...

I’m not dissatisfied with “Fallout 3”… because I don’t consider it a true Fallout game…it’s just a FPS with the Fallout tag slapped on to boast sales. Now as a FPS is “Fallout 3” of any merit…maybe a little (I’ve never played it, but have watched others)…though I do admit it seemed to suck as a FPS, and as RPG it certainly sucked shit…but so do most of the recent Bethesda releases. So people should stop imagining that this game is Fallout, because obviously it isn’t (regardless of how much Fallout iconography is tacked on). Clearly the developers hadn’t really played the first two games, but they made their money and have “Fallout 3” to keep the console masses satisfied.

 

[x'il]

Kaucukovnik, let's see, you wrote:

(...) The game doesn't live up to Fallout 1 & 2 (...)

Yes, I'm allergic to stupid dialogue/voice acting too.

Maybe the story of FO3 would have been better if they didn't try to satisfy original Fallout fans, sticking in both water purification and GECK

(Which means zero creativity/originality, fail. Also, were do you get this notion that they recicled those plot devices for the sake of 'satisfying the original fans'? )

I agree that Fallout 3 is by far the weakest part of the series.

I personally don't consider it canon

Much of FO3's voicing is atrocious

I agree about that karma thing, but again, it's not fixed there - no reason you shouldn't get rid of it, get a mod, or simply ignore that stupid option.

(I see... let's play 'pretend that very intended and glaring game mechanics does not exist'... that one always solves everything. Also modders. They always fix it.)

And pretty much all the issues about the game mechanics can be helped that easily.

(Yes, very easily, by means of 'pretend' or modders. Imagination and denial can do and fix anything! So cool. )

I'd just like to see a proper Fallout 3 built on that half-assed, but modifiable game we have now

mods bringing FO3 closer to our vision of Fallout

(And what would that vision of ours -considering that you fail to understand the setting of the original game- be, i wonder?)

And you can see that my false rantings about things wrong in FO1 are not easily dismissed either.

On the contrary, your suposedly 'false rantings about things wrong in FO1' have been pretty easily dismissed, you just haven't, or don't want to, realize it (yet?))

Now, given all those things you wrote and i quoted above, please do tell what you think of FO3. Is it a really good Fallout game and sequel?

As for the modding, well, maybe some of the modders around here don't find FO3 'inspiring' enough to dedicate countless hours of their lives to it? despite the super wonderful FO3 engine?

I was expecting users in an old Fallout fansite like this one to at least tolerate each other...

 

[Lexx]

It's impossible for modders to fix Fallout 3s problems, because too much is simply hardcoded and can't be touched. But this is just on the mechanical side. We still have the fugly story, the fugly characters and everything else that was simply bullcrap.

 

[Dario ff]

Please people, don't be such a trolls. Try to present your point as friendly as you can, I'm sick of seeing personal attacks here when someone tries to discuss something about Fallout 3.

Just so you don't get a bad reacion Kaucukovnik, I think a lot of people would agree that Fallout 3 could be modded and fixed. But that's kind of a popular catchphrase. "Modders will fix it". What's the deal with those ridiculous work spent on adding porn and stupid outfits, making everything green. The ones who find it inspiring to work with it maybe aren't interested in something like the F3C project.

But just look at this board's history, and at the other Fallout 3 Modding board I pointed out. Did you see the F3C project? It was appealing to everything you pointed out. But some people just don't like at all working with F3's engine. Probably because of the bad experience, or just the limitations(And dialog limitation is something insane).