Fallout 3, The General Debate Topic

Mr Krepe

Water Chip? Been There, Done That
And I know, you've had loads of debate topics and your probablies sick of them, but I genuinely wanted to debate about the positives and negatives with other people, not whinge about how bad it was, or praise how good it was, I just want to share opinions.

Okay, i'll start at locations, in my view I thought some of the locations were well thought out, but I don't mean all, I just said some. I liked the ideas of Rivet City and The Underworld, I also liked the Pitt in the DLC, mostly because of the depth and detail you can get out of just asking about the settlements history to any of the NPCs. Even to say though, most of the other locations were averagely thought out like Oasis and Evergreen Mills, any other things related to locations and what I have said you want to debate over just join in! And before you say were only talking about locations, i'm just using it as a springboard to start the debte.
 
I liked where they were heading whit the NPC-s. They felt like the most realistic fake people that i ever saw. At least when they stayed quite. My heart got all warmed up the first time i stole a weapon. The guy returned, notice that one of the guns is missing and yell "Thief!" or something like that.
 
Interesting idea, now we can exchange all the threads in the modding forum for a single one named "Modding, the general debate topic"...
 
I'm not sure if your being sarcastic or not, because if your not i'm extremely worried, and if your being sarcastic, I don't want to seem nasty or anything along those lines, and i've only been here for a month, but i've noticed quite a bit of you guys a slightly grumpy in a way, or have I not got to know you guys yet?
 
Khan FurSainty said:
I liked where they were heading whit the NPC-s. They felt like the most realistic fake people that i ever saw.

Ha. I thought the little goo balls in "World of Goo" had more personality than any npc in FO3.
 
Mr Krepe said:
I'm not sure if your being sarcastic or not, because if your not i'm extremely worried, and if your being sarcastic, I don't want to seem nasty or anything along those lines, and i've only been here for a month, but i've noticed quite a bit of you guys a slightly grumpy in a way, or have I not got to know you guys yet?

For feck's sake, it's "you're", a contraction from "you are". See the apostrophe there? You invented the language, use it, don't misuse it.
 
Sorry about that I was in a hurry to type, little brother wines to mam if don't let him go on the laptop before he goes to bed.
 
Mr Krepe said:
I'm not sure if your being sarcastic or not, because if your not i'm extremely worried, and if your being sarcastic, I don't want to seem nasty or anything along those lines, and i've only been here for a month, but i've noticed quite a bit of you guys a slightly grumpy in a way, or have I not got to know you guys yet?

I was sarcastic and many of us can be pretty grumpy, although we tend to grow on people who stick around. It's just that we dislike "general" topics in this forum ever since the days of the game's release when people would just start up a new thread and post the same vague impressions and opinions that many others had already posted before them in similarly vague threads. At this point there is much less risk of clutter, but there's also still sort of little point to posting general impressions threads or "discuss whatever about the game" threads as opposed to purposely dealing with specific subjects in the various threads devoted to them.
 
Per said:
Mr Krepe said:
I'm not sure if your being sarcastic or not, because if your not i'm extremely worried, and if your being sarcastic, I don't want to seem nasty or anything along those lines, and i've only been here for a month, but i've noticed quite a bit of you guys a slightly grumpy in a way, or have I not got to know you guys yet?

I was sarcastic and many of us can be pretty grumpy, although we tend to grow on people who stick around. It's just that we dislike "general" topics in this forum ever since the days of the game's release when people would just start up a new thread and post the same vague impressions and opinions that many others had already posted before them in similarly vague threads. At this point there is much less risk of clutter, but there's also still sort of little point to posting general impressions threads or "discuss whatever about the game" threads as opposed to purposely dealing with specific subjects in the various threads devoted to them.

''my impressions of fallout 3''

This is essentially that thread, except semi-cunningly disguised as a real debate.
 
Mr Krepe said:
i've noticed quite a bit of you guys a slightly grumpy in a way, or have I not got to know you guys yet?

Nope, we're all just grumpy.

Per said:
Interesting idea, now we can exchange all the threads in the modding forum for a single one named "Modding, the general debate topic"...

I think I see what you're saying Per, everything that can be said or debated about this game, (positive / negative impressions threads and the countless of 'personal opinion' threads) it has been said,

Although my initial response is that this should be locked I see no reason for an all out mass debate (I love using that phrase when I get opportunity!) as long as the posts don't start getting snippy or aggravated. On that note, my input;

I think FO3 was a great game for a character advancing First Person Shooter (hereafter: FPS) the graphics are very good, although I have experienced several game breaking glitches which should have been ironed out before release. The main plot line was far too linear for my liking offering no real choice no matter how trivial which affected the outcome of things. The side quests (and they very much were SIDE quests) were an interesting deviation from the grind of just plodding through the main story, but again have no real effect in game or indeed effect on the progression of the character (blew up Megaton? killed everyone in Tenpenny tower? got bad karma? simple! just help out the folks at rivet city and free a few slaves and bam! no more feeling bad about all the innocents you've slaughtered!) regardless of who you kill (no not the invincible ones, they cant die... duuuh!) there is no effect in game. Sure you might loose a few quest options, but I'm pretty sure it'd be possible to go through the game killing everyone on sight without repercussion, because those that are invincible are plot-line.

Thus it boils down to an unimaginative FPS game, with unbelievable characters (Arefu situation) and unbelievable settings which for the most part seem unsustainable or simply irrational (Temple of the Union) It's been mentioned elsewhere that once played, this game offers no playback capability (even good / bad characters, the 2nd play-through is a chore more than anything) unless serious modding is applied and you can flip some caps for the DLC's.

In my mind a good game should be one that can be played and enjoyed a good number of times, has suitable and enjoyable content without depending on user input and one that leave you feeling happier for having played it as a good example GTA:San Andreas. FO3 falls short of meeting any of those four needs and as such I would if asked to rate this game give it 43% (and that's not just an arbitrary number picked at random, I sat and thought about things)

edited for minor grammar-nazism
 
Okay, i'll try to stay on you guys' good sides now. But anyway, seem so someone joined in, I think i'll do a decent block.

Along the main quest lines, I personally thought the it was alright, but it had no depth, it just felt hollow to me, even though I played FO3 before FO2. Also the NPC's were empty as well, pretty much every member of the same faction had the same dialogue. The side quests had no real effect on what you did, oh look I blew up megaton, but rivet city wouldn't mind for some reason. Quests and NPC's = 32% Effort

Graphics wise, I thought it was alright, lighting, terrain, and effects were well thought through. Clothing and Armour skins I thought were good to, but not well thought through. Graphics and Skins = 71% Effort

Equipment, like weapons, armour and clothing were, what I thought was good, and the unique ones were fun too. It's just that some were a let down, because a lot of them were similair (Power Armour, Outcast Armour, Lyons' Pride Armour come to mind) = 54% Effort

Overall Average Effort = 52% Effort

I hope my overall evaluation shines on you guys. Some of you may find this crazy, but don't worry my current FO2 evaluation average is 76%
 
I'm not saying Fallout 3 was without it's faults, and i know RPG wise it wasn't as deep, as realistic or any of that stuff and F1 & 2. But tbh, i enjoyed the game. It was quite nice to see the Fallout universe that i love so much from the 3D POV. Some of the missions were interesting, as was the main story line and i think they kept some interesting places/people in there too. Although i'm pissed off that they killed off Harold, bastards. It was clearly a game that's meant to appeal to a wider audience, and after just purchasing the franchise i don't blame them for trying to make some money out of it really and the game could have been a lot worse, it just focused on different things to the first 2.


Yeah, in summary, RPG wise not as good, but still an enjoyable game if you forget about the odd inconsistency.
 
What I really miss in F3 besides the mechanics of character creation, and combat mechanics is :

The lack of a town which is well thought out. A town that reacts to the player actions - not only those directly connected with the town but to the world generally. A town which evolves with player actions. Inhabitants who like or dislike player for each action he takes.
A settlement which reacts to and somehow depends on the state of other settlements out there.
In F3, there are some good NPC to NPC dialogs, and such minor details in the towns of F3, but in my opinion there is not enough of them. It just feels like F3 is lacking some of that depth or in other words "substance" of the prequels.

I did a Fallout 1 - > 2 - > 3 marathon lately. I must say that this lack of substance in F3 is sometimes just a feeling, that has evolved because of mythologizing F1 and F2 substance through the years - at least that's what i see in my case.

However while playing the trilogy - I still felt like "this is not enough Fallout in Fallout game damn'it" when playing the 3rd one.

That is to say - I enjoyed it very much some times, but then again many times it just felt cut short.
 
hiya, me again, somthing happened to me while playing FO3 today i thought may bring some items of interest to this (and probably the wider world of gaming) discussion...

A.I and 'visibility' now granted in most games visibility is most likely down to some form of rendered direct line of visual contact, fair enough, others extend visibility into 'sensory information' such as splinter cell and the original Ghost Recon games, even shooters such as Rainbow 6 (the latter games) include a rudimentary A.I "i can hear you..." feature which surrounds audio clues of your whereabouts leading the A.I toward your position.

And so to the nub of my Fallout related issue, hiding and 'stealth' in a game which supposedly has a 'skill check' on how well your character is concealed at any given point, Fallout 3 would be a great contender in the world of stealth based game-play... Sadly my recent experience taught me otherwise (like I didn't already know that FO3 was hugely limited in this respect)

TLDR - hiding doesn't work

Long version:-

Imagine if you will the following. You're approaching an unknown but supposedly hostile area, your companion a brash ghoul has already been told to shut up a good number of times (seriously Charon.. we know its dangerous...) and you edge closer, taking the high ground on your approach to survey the area before deciding how to go about things.

Your trusty silenced .50 Cal Barret (thank you 20th century guns mod!) is nestled in the palms of your hands, not yet brought to aim, but waiting. You take your time reaching the cliff's edge, presenting the smallest profile you can and raise the weapons sight to your eye's to look at the valley floor. some way off you spot a military grade robot patrolling, but otherwise, the area is clear...

[also.. I do love a good story, don't you folks?]

ok, reality check time, I shot the robot, yes, my in game HUD said hidden, cool... I get the stealth bonus damage, great! but being the tough cookie he is the robot survived the shot. Now however my HUD reads caution... hmmm..

Sadly I knew all too well that the robot was making a bee line toward me, being that it now knows my EXACT position, because I shot it once. That's a fair enough thing if I was say, down the other end of a corridor but I wasn't, I was at EXTREME range (the model of the robot only rendered once zoomed in, I was behind cover (some rocks) I was using a silenced weapon have a sneak skill of about 100 (although I was in power armour so -75 from that) and it was (I use the term loosely) dark. but no, the robot goes on a 2 minute (might have been longer) trundle all the way round and up the cliff's edge just to get to me :x

here is a simple diagram of how silly this was
<center>
Image3-1.gif
</center>

This is a SERIOUS immersion breaker for me, I was at range, in what could be considered perfect sniping conditions yet the enemy homes in more accurately than most military missiles the US currently uses!

And as I mention in my preamble, this fault is present in many games, the all knowing "fuck logic and reason.. I'm the AI, I know where you are!" approach. Moments like this are a BIG fuck you directed squarely at the player, and its cause, in my opinion. poorly written A.I. I challenge anyone to go and play the original Ghost Recon (released some 9 years ago now) and tell me the AI on that is worse than this... it simply isn't, 9 year old AI that understands basic, in cover / out of cover or well hidden / not well hidden and a lot more besides. If a game almost a decade old can do it... why not a game in which 'sneaking' and being hidden is an actual quantifiable feature.

:postviper:
 
I like Fallout 3 a lot. Provided I just call it by some other name like "Apocalypse Survivor" or something like that. To me, it isn't a true Fallout game, but its good enough on its own merits to be called a good game.

As watered down as the role playing elements are, I think its a well made, fairly detailed and fun lite-RPG with shooter elements. It overcomes the sum of its parts, basically. I understand why it ticks off a lot of hardcore Fallout fans, and to be honest I was one of those haters that just yelled "THIS GAME IS SHIT >:(" the second it was announced, but I gave it a chance at a friends house and as Oblivion with guns, I think its a very fun game.
 
Ah yes, the Psycic AI in Fallout 3. Trying to do things with a stealthy approach in it proved much more frustrating then it was worth, given the laughable difficulty of the game, which most effectively considted of "Run up to bad guy, shoot him in face, repeat as nessasary." I think the most annoying bit of it is the how hilariously poor armor is at protecting you. I mean, I know that powered armor looks kinda old, but why wont it stop these raiders from huting me with wooden sticks? I mean, WOOD for christs sake. I would pay good money to see someone demolish a tank using nothing but wooden objects to beat it with.
 
Back
Top