Fallout 3, who is this for?

Brother None

Brother None

This ghoul has seen it all
Orderite
The recent bout of Fallout 3 news has elicited many varied responses. While it's quite a bit too early to make definite conclusions about anything, the outline of Bethesda's Fallout 3 is becoming more and more clear. And as this outline becomes more clear, the pertinent question offers itself; who are they making this game for, exactly?

NMA's Brother None dives into the wretched hive of scum and villainy that is PR-double speak to get to the bottom of what Matt Miller was talking about when he said that if "you are a fan who is adamantly against some significant changes to the way gameplay occurs in the Fallout series" you'll hate it, while if you're "a fan of the Fallout universe, of the unique look of the world, of the moral ambiguity, of the dark and often violent humor, and the invigorating branching story paths" you should be well pleased. Enjoy the read:

Link: Fallout 3, who is this for?

By coincidence, RPGCodex' Section8 covered the same subject, but much shorter; read Calling Fallout 3 into question(s) on the Codex.
 
Great article :ok:. I especially like how over two hundred people did voice work for pedestrians only in GTA:SA, and only like fifteen people did all of the voices for Oblivion.
 
I think one of the problems is that people have been putting way too much emphasis on the Googie style. Fallout didn't really have much in terms of Googie architecture at all. You look at the buildings and things, and it's Art Deco through and through.
 
Good to know there are some kinfolk sharing my concerns. Nice article, Brother, a great set of well supported arguments. I hope when people read my own, the answers they come up with are not unlike your own.
thumbsup.gif
 
I don't think anyone's put much pressure on googie at all. It's just always named in one breath "googie/art deco architecture", even though all the buildings are art deco, and googie was only used for billboards, signs and the like.

Cheers Section8. Your timing was horrific, tho' ;)
 
Good article, but I'd like to see some more analysis of the humour. You point out how Bethesda's examples miss the point, but then give a very vague description yourself which seems to imply you can't nail it down either. At least, that's how it came across to me.

I can't work who they're making it for. It seems that they're trying to trade on the cult status of Fallout, but selling it to people who never really played the original games. Like, 'these games were classics. Buy the latest one!' if that makes sense.

The combat is a huge disappointment. They had a real chance to be innovative here (and there's a slim chance we're missing some info about VATS - it might still be interesting), like Tim Cain said about FO1. But they went with the traditional RTwP model.
 
Good article. It could help sum up, for people that already don't know, the major differences between Fallout and a Piece of Shit named Fallout 3.

Anyway, if I could edit the article, I'd change the closing statement. They aren't making it for themselves, they're making it for console gamers while trying to appease us and still be remotely close to a Fallout sequel.

They are beyond redemption, though. The game is already shit. They should have made it exclusively for consoles and named it some spinoff title.
 
Mr. Teatime said:
Good article, but I'd like to see some more analysis of the humour. You point out how Bethesda's examples miss the point, but then give a very vague description yourself which seems to imply you can't nail it down either. At least, that's how it came across to me.
Click to expand...

That's more lack of space than anything (didn't want to make it too long, it already is to me). Two examples:

Dark irony:
FEV is designed to save civilized humanity (USA) from the barbaric hordes (China), but ends up the biggest thread to humanity. Twice.
Nuclear bombs were responsible for ending the world as we know it, but end up saving the world from the biggest thread to humanity (Oil Rig and Cathedral nukes). Twice.

Mixed expectation humor:
Something I never found funny ha-ha myself, but an example is the way Cabbot outside of the BoS would send you to the Glow and be shocked when you return. A lot of players thought his behaviour was funny, because it doesn't fit their paradigm.

If you think it's a big deal maybe examples can be edited in.
 
Maybe Todd and Pete are thinking about the humour in Fallout 2, which relied more on drugs and prostitutes, and missed the Dark irony stuff.
 
Brother None said:
Mr. Teatime said:
Good article, but I'd like to see some more analysis of the humour. You point out how Bethesda's examples miss the point, but then give a very vague description yourself which seems to imply you can't nail it down either. At least, that's how it came across to me.
Click to expand...

That's more lack of space than anything (didn't want to make it too long, it already is to me). Two examples:

Dark irony:
FEV is designed to save civilized humanity (USA) from the barbaric hordes (China), but ends up the biggest thread to humanity. Twice.
Nuclear bombs were responsible for ending the world as we know it, but end up saving the world from the biggest thread to humanity (Oil Rig and Cathedral nukes). Twice.

Mixed expectation humor:
Something I never found funny ha-ha myself, but an example is the way Cabbot outside of the BoS would send you to the Glow and be shocked when you return. A lot of players thought his behaviour was funny, because it doesn't fit their paradigm.

If you think it's a big deal maybe examples can be edited in.
Click to expand...

Well, a compare and contrast with Bethsoft's humour and the stuff in the original games might be interesting. But there's possibly too little info from bethsoft to make that comparison meaningful...
 
Honestly I was quite pleased with the 'ticketbot scenario' I laughed out loud when I read it the first time. The idea of a 200 year old bot rolling out and asking 2 supermutants "tickets please" is just proposterously funny. Watching it waste them shortly afterword would add a little bit of darkness to them humor, something I could see fitting into either FO game.

I agree though that a lot of the artwork we've seen from FO3 is generic and it lacks the feel of a 'Junktown' or 'Shady Sands'.
 
Great job, both of you guys. Perfectly summed up my feelings about F3.
Brother None said:
Dark irony:
FEV is designed to save civilized humanity (USA) from the barbaric hordes (China), but ends up the biggest thread to humanity. Twice.
Nuclear bombs were responsible for ending the world as we know it, but end up saving the world from the biggest thread to humanity (Oil Rig and Cathedral nukes). Twice.
Click to expand...
And an obvious one. Saving the vault just to be kicked out of it.

Makagulfazel said:
Anyway, if I could edit the article, I'd change the closing statement. They aren't making it for themselves, they're making it for console gamers...
Click to expand...
They ARE console gamers. :evil:
 
It is kinda hard to describe Fallout's humor in just one sentence. Heck. I never really even paid that much attention it it myself. While the situations in the first Fallout just happen to be funny, at times, Fallout 2's humor often come off as being lame and/or dumb (hur hur dat funny...).

For the most part I just enjoyed playing the games. Fallout 1 more than the sequel. Namely because all the new models in Fallout 2 seemed so out of place.

Anyways, about the humor.. One event I found particularly funny is playing a low int character, and when you're talking to the BoS guys one of them gives you some Rad-X and they're like, "No no not now! Wait until you get there." xD

I do like that they're trying to add a small sense of "horror" to the game. There was always something scary about the super mutants. Especially when you get the bad ending where you see the overseer pummeled by them (although I mostly found it amusing). That's one good example of the dark humor.

Well at any rate it is shaping up to be a decent bargain bin $20 FPS. If it wasn't Fallout 3 then I wouldn't mind all the changes, but it just feels like they're betraying the fans.

I don't get it... why pay $3 million for the license, and then make your own vision of it? Are they that bad at coming up with their own style of game? So far they've basically paid $3 million for SPECIAL and Vault boy. PLUS they've angered the fanbase, which will be damaging to their sales. If it hadn't been Fallout 3 then it would have sold more copies. Don't mess with something if you can't get it right...

Rename it to Fallout: A post apocalyptic survival horror game while you still can Bethesda.... or something like that.
 
love it, Kharn.

That preview gave you kids enough material for months.

A few other issues

  • why is the survival/horror aspect being emphasized?

Did I play a different version of FO/FO2 than the kids at BethSoft did? I don't remember this ever being an important theme in Fallout. Communities, otoh, were...

  • the first extra-vault town we're introduced to is a 'beneath the planet of the apes' easter egg

I think this point stands alone pretty well. I guess I could mention that they wipe said town off the map after what seems like a quick dungeon crawl.

  • consistency in design

they "streamline" SPECIAL by reducing the # of skills, fine. they take the "radiated" condition and emphasize it by giving it it's own meter rather than just a general "you're radiated" warning/effect element. (Q: if I keep this meter sustained at a low level will I build up resistance maybe even get some mutant MAGICKA? beastlord status, here I come!)

the nuke catapult shits the bed pretty mightily on that front as has been mentioned several times in several places in a variety of ways.
 
Slaanesh said:
Makagulfazel said:
Anyway, if I could edit the article, I'd change the closing statement. They aren't making it for themselves, they're making it for console gamers...
Click to expand...
They ARE console gamers. :evil:
Click to expand...
As spadthebad pointed out, when Todd pantomimes playing a game in the Game Informer video interview, he pretends to be holding a gamepad.

4qyf9qt.jpg
 
I knew it ever since Iv seen the Fallout 3 Trailer, thank you Brother None for expressing that which I failed to describe but was disturbing to me about that game, and im glad im not the only one who sees that ( which will hopefully drive Bethseda to think twice and turn from that path of heretics they have taken) .
 
hehe, reading the title automatically gave me a flash of Jackie Chan singing:

"Fallout 3!
What is it good for?
Absolutely nothing!"

:)

either way, great article. cuddoes to Kharn & his editors. ;)
 
Well, I honestly think there's some positive amongst it all. The way the PR is being done is pretty nasty, and that stirs up a lot of hostile feelings - I can only hope Bethsoft change their attitude here. But the game looks a lot better than FOBOS. The robot scenario isn't that bad, and there are some (un-evidenced) statements in there that give hope.

So, yeah. I still dunno.
 
Tannhauser said:
Slaanesh said:
Makagulfazel said:
Anyway, if I could edit the article, I'd change the closing statement. They aren't making it for themselves, they're making it for console gamers...
Click to expand...
They ARE console gamers. :evil:
Click to expand...
As spadthebad pointed out, when Todd pantomimes playing a game in the Game Informer video interview, he pretends to be holding a gamepad.

4qyf9qt.jpg
Click to expand...

Haha, what a fucking chod. This picture made my day. I wonder what he does when he imagines sex. Bends over?
I stand corrected.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top