Fallout 3 should take off where Fallout 1 ended.

[Brother None]

Perhaps you should simply look upon my idea as something that could have happened. I would be very interested to see what the developers could come up with should Vault 13 have been over run and dipped. What would have become of the world? Would it remotely look like the world did in Fallout 2?

And I don't see how it's necessary to rip up a perfectly good storyline to introduce a concept you could also introduce by moving the game a couple of miles westwards.

BTW.
I treat this thread as a theoretical discussion or an idea for fan-made mod/game, not as serious proposition for official Fallout 3.

This is Fallout 3 Suggestions and Ideas, not a Modding Forum, so this thread is about Fallout 3.

 

[Jarno Mikkola]

Sorry Kharn, but since the idea is already here,

The only thing that bothers me about the story line is that you didn't kill the master, it has to be killed:
For you to have any kind of influence for the world that you would make.
So that the new super mutant army isn't controlled by a lunatic if you aren't in it.
The mutants are quite invulnerable, if they have many bases.

So the vault dweller killed the master by blowing up the nuke,
but he disappeared and no one has seen him for a quite some time. And the supermutants got the location of vault 13 from some where. So you are waken up by your commander, (the lieutenant from the F1 military base) your skin is little arcing and it has it has a lot of big warts. Well you are a supermutant, and like most you don't remember much, just doing some dealings with water merchants and killing some rats to get to an abandoned vault,...
Now your first mission is to attack vault 13, but not killing too many dwellers to get most to be dipped, then you get to go to a towns that haven't heard about the supermutants and you will be able to influence who it plays out... then the story has a point where you have to come and stop an assault from an unknown source to the military base(an enclave attack to the not blown up military base).

Ps it would be possible to make a mod that would construct to these ideas;
1) Make armors that would make you look like supermutants,
2) Modifing all the weapons to be ably the rules of fallout, as you are a supermutant.
3) Make maps for the mod.
Pps, it was meant that the player is the vault dweller that destroyed the cathedral but didn't do the military base, and got dipped.

 

[Endless Void]

At this point I think this thread has to be moved to modding forums

 

[RPGenius]

Something where you could input what endings you got for each town, and it would alter your game reality would be nice. Like you siad anything from Fo2 that wouldn't be affected would stick as it was.
That could well include a ending for 'Got Dipped.'

 

[Sorrow]

At this point I think this thread has to be moved to modding forums

I second that.

 

[Sander]

I don't. The topic clearly says 'Fallout 3' and it was created here as well. As such the topic starter wants this to be about Fallout 3. And thus it stays here.
Also, we don't like contentless posts like that, Sorrow. Telling us you agree with someone is rather useless.

Regarding the idea, I dislike the idea of making Fallout end in a certain way. I really disliked that about Fallout 2, but to then change that again would go against canon, as Kharn mentioned, and it'd be rather irritating as well.

But the idea to play a Super Mutant could well be great, if it was used properly. Jarno's suggestions smell heavily of mission based gameplay, which is absolutely not what Fallout needs.

 

[RadRaptor]

But the idea to play a Super Mutant could well be great, if it was used properly. Jarno's suggestions smell heavily of mission based gameplay, which is absolutely not what Fallout needs.

The only thing that bothers me about the story line is that you didn't kill the master, it has to be killed:
For you to have any kind of influence for the world that you would make.
So that the new super mutant army isn't controlled by a lunatic if you aren't in it.
The mutants are quite invulnerable, if they have many bases

I think that if you start creating a story that keeps the militairy base in one piece but destroys The Master, you end up either creating a paradox or just simply ruining the Fallout time line

It could not really be considered an alternative timeline and not quite a sequel either. It would be a mix of both and I think that'd be exactly what Fallout players are looking to evade.

My idea simply rests on a (rather neglected) choice the player was able to make in Fallout 1. That would involve keeping The Master alive, because it's his vision. You would also need to keep the Militairy Base intact because you need the FEV vats.

Remember that Super Mutants have their weaknesses; they are generally not very bright and they are sterile. You could either change all this or you could use it against them, the future of both human kind and Super Mutant kind would lie in your hands if you play your cards right whilst in Fallout 1 or 2 you didn't really have a choice. You were forced to save the people you lived with.

That's why I liked the dipped ending so much! You could throw it all away and turn against the very people who relied on you. Might sound harsh, but it could be part of the role you're playing!

As for the mission-aspect of a Super Mutant dominated Fallout 3:

The player could end up doing his own bidding. For example; when he would try to find a way to de-evolve FEV he wouldn't do The Masters bidding and he'd probably end up in one underworld after another trying to earn a buck whilst tracing down knowledge and people willing to help whilst staying as far away as possible from Super Mutants who might be looking for his/her whereabouts.

But if he chooses to solely do The Masters bidding then perhaps the player would end up feeling like a militairy man simply following orders. Well, that's a role you'll play then and that's why it is an Role Playing Game.
You shouldn't be forced to play those missions unless you really want to. In which case the game might start to look more like Fallout Tactics and somewhat (Not entirely!) adapts to the gamestyle the player is looking for?

 

[Jarno Mikkola]

Jarno's suggestions smell heavily of mission based gameplay, which is absolutely not what Fallout needs.

That's why I think that a mod would be the best answer, and you can co around the mission based thing by a storyline changes and sub-missions, like a mission of getting a water-chip in Fallout, you really didn't even need to get it, but it helped to have a goal, even if it isn't necessary to achieve it.

So the over all mission should be like save the world(for the race, the supermutants or to see the (de)light and kill them all), but you have to have sub-mission at first that gives a cue where to go and what to do, ALA do you want to dib the all vault dwellers by trading with slavers, attacking the vaults, or sabotaging their vaults and be at the entrance waiting for them with open arms.
But then you have to have twist that comes for whit in or form out, like a betrayer of the leader, so you can choose what to do, do you kill... or do you save the humanity and kill the rest of the supermutants and shoot yourself.

The master is dead, we killed him already, so he is DEAD.
But that doesn't say anything about the followers, or Morpheus or his kind, nor does it say about the mutants that destroyed the hub.

 

[Sander]

RadRaptor: you still haven't explained why you are so fiercely for altering canon if you can just bypass that problem by moving it to a different location. Changing something just for the sake of change is silly and never leads to good things.

Regarding the 'missions': the problem I have with receiving missions and then executing them (perhaps in multiple ways), or bypassing them, is the fact that this will just lead to the player being lead along a path. Sure, there is the option to deviate from this path, but in the previous games there wasn't even a path, just a small clue and a big mission you started with.

 

[zioburosky13]

Reading RadRaptor's post, what I got in my mind is this:

"In Fallout, if PC decides to join The Master, he will always get dip and that's the bad ending. What if you could expand the possiblity of becoming a mutant? Say to find a way to solve mutie's problem and confront the waste as a different creature?"

Just my thought.

 

[Lumpy]

I don't think making different time lines would be a good idea. Even if one game in the series has multiple outcomes for different locations, only one should be considered canon. Besides completely screwing any kind of history page, it wouldn't make much sense either.
As for being able to play different races, it would be a good idea to be able to choose between human and ghoul. But it would be much harder than in most RPGs. While in most fantasy RPGs races are treated equally, and even if there are differences between the races, they are minor, in Fallout, a human is regarded completely differently from a ghoul, and they'd basically have to write most of the dialogue twice.
Same for Super Mutants. If they were to put playable Super Mutants in, they shouldn't be available at character creation, rather a human PC should be able to become a Super Mutant. And depending on his radiation level, the Super Mutants intelligence should be determined.
Then again, I can't see Bethesda writing all the dialogue three times, so I'm just dreaming.

 

[RadRaptor]

adRaptor: you still haven't explained why you are so fiercely for altering canon if you can just bypass that problem by moving it to a different location. Changing something just for the sake of change is silly and never leads to good things.

Regarding the 'missions': the problem I have with receiving missions and then executing them (perhaps in multiple ways), or bypassing them, is the fact that this will just lead to the player being lead along a path. Sure, there is the option to deviate from this path, but in the previous games there wasn't even a path, just a small clue and a big mission you started w

I don't think any sequel to Fallout 2 would make for a good storyline. I think that by giving the Super mutants another chance, you can create an awesome game and stay true to the Fallout genre by simply building on a very interesting timeline.

Why do you insist on a linear sequel? What does that have to do with canon? As far as I see it, canon is established by the player. By the way he thinks he should play.

Why does the manual state Dogmeat got zapped by the electric fields? He didn't get zapped when I played, I had him survive by trapping him behind force fields. It was a choice I made. I wish they hadn't stated in the manual that he got zapped, because it ruins my efforts to have him saved and it doesn't match up with the canon I made Why give a person so much freedom and in the end decide what he should have done and cause him to think his actions were all in vain?

You see, Fallout 3 could very well be taking off where the Vault Dweller got dipped because it's an interesting point of view and because it allows the player to continue what they wanted to do in Fallout 1.

I don't see in why they should build on the crumbled foundation that's called Fallout 2 - Do you want more Enclave soldiers? More talking Deathclaws? More sex addicted Super Mutants?

Why not give the Fallout 1 time line another chance to prove it self by taking it in another direction? Why insist on canon when it could be just as interesting to break free from your linear thinking and establish another type of future? I think it would be very interesting and I certainly would like to get a chance to think as a Super Mutant!

I hope that explains my motivations to 'breaking' the Fallout 'canon'.



In Fallout 1 you were also completing missions. You were sent out with the mission to find the Water chip, until you actually got the chip, anything else was considered secundairy. Wheter you like it or not, the player will always be pushed in a direction one way or the other. Eventually, the player ended up with either betraying his vault or destroying the people who sought for him/her to betray the vault.

"In Fallout, if PC decides to join The Master, he will always get dip and that's the bad ending. What if you could expand the possiblity of becoming a mutant? Say to find a way to solve mutie's problem and confront the waste as a different creature?"

Floaters make easy targets, no thanks.

I do not quite understand what you mean with your idea, if you are dipped, you most likely agree with the Super Mutant's point of view since the Vault Dweller did it voluntarily. Others may not have been so lucky, though and I doubt they would like to be dipped over and over until they've got a good mixed batch of genes?

As for being able to play different races, it would be a good idea to be able to choose between human and ghoul. But it would be much harder than in most RPGs. While in most fantasy RPGs races are treated equally, and even if there are differences between the races, they are minor, in Fallout, a human is regarded completely differently from a ghoul, and they'd basically have to write most of the dialogue twice.
Same for Super Mutants. If they were to put playable Super Mutants in, they shouldn't be available at character creation, rather a human PC should be able to become a Super Mutant. And depending on his radiation level, the Super Mutants intelligence should be determined.

The intelligence should be determined by the S.P.E.C.I.A.L system, because otherwise you'd just take a hell of a lot of Radaway before getting dipped and kind of cheat your way out of becoming an idjit.

Fallout is not a fantasy RPG, though, I don't think you should be so blasphemous.

I wonder why so many people insist on being able to choose to play different races, this would make the game far too large considering the amount of writing that would have to be done. I think it is best to stick with one race per Fallout sequel so that the developers can fully concentrate on that one race and getting rid of all the bloody bugs, ofcourse.

I merely mentioned finding a way to de-evolve FEV as a path the player could take. It doesn't necessarily have to end that way, he could as well get himself or many others killed.

 

[Sander]

I don't think any sequel to Fallout 2 would make for a good storyline. I think that by giving the Super mutants another chance, you can create an awesome game and stay true to the Fallout genre by simply building on a very interesting timeline.

Why do you insist on a linear sequel? What does that have to do with canon? As far as I see it, canon is established by the player. By the way he thinks he should play.

There you go. Now care to explain why you'd possibly want to destroy the canon the player himself established in the previous two games by forcing a result on him?
Also, I never said anything about it having to be a linear sequel. It could be a prequel, it could be in the Fallout world but on the West Coast, it could be anything as long as it doesn't start contradicting canon.
Plus, why would every possible sequel to Fallout 2 have a sucky storyline? That's just plain silly.

Why does the manual state Dogmeat got zapped by the electric fields? He didn't get zapped when I played, I had him survive by trapping him behind force fields. It was a choice I made. I wish they hadn't stated in the manual that he got zapped, because it ruins my efforts to have him saved and it doesn't match up with the canon I made Why give a person so much freedom and in the end decide what he should have done and cause him to think his actions were all in vain?

As I have already explained, I thought that was one of the suckiest parts to Fallout 2. But, as I shall say again, why force a new ending on the player that he probably won't be happy with either? Why do this if you can completely circumvent the problem?


[quote="Raptor"You see, Fallout 3 could very well be taking off where the Vault Dweller got dipped because it's an interesting point of view and because it allows the player to continue what they wanted to do in Fallout 1.

I don't see in why they should build on the crumbled foundation that's called Fallout 2 - Do you want more Enclave soldiers? More talking Deathclaws? More sex addicted Super Mutants?

Why not give the Fallout 1 time line another chance to prove it self by taking it in another direction? Why insist on canon when it could be just as interesting to break free from your linear thinking and establish another type of future? I think it would be very interesting and I certainly would like to get a chance to think as a Super Mutant!

I hope that explains my motivations to 'breaking' the Fallout 'canon'. [/quote]
What you don't seem to understand is that this is just as bullshit as forcing the ending in Fallout 2. And another thing you seem completely unable to grasp is that there is a possibility to move Fallout 3 to another time and to a completely different region, meaning that you entirely bypass all of these canon problems you have problems with.

In Fallout 1 you were also completing missions. You were sent out with the mission to find the Water chip, until you actually got the chip, anything else was considered secundairy. Wheter you like it or not, the player will always be pushed in a direction one way or the other. Eventually, the player ended up with either betraying his vault or destroying the people who sought for him/her to betray the vault.

As I've already said, in Fallout 1 and 2 you got 1 (one!) mission, with one (1!) very small hint to start with. At some point, a second 'mission' was added in both games, but again there was only a slight hint as for how to continue. This is not the same as receiving several clear missions from The Master in order. That's what I meant by mission-based gameplay.