Impressions thread for negative impressions

Actually settlement is important for both Fallout and TES.
Settlements are playing important role for quest hub, buying supply and place for gaining information.

For Fo1,2 they are good model of how to use settlement.
For NV since they copied Fo1's waterchip part, actually plays good role.

TES 2 and 3 is a good game. not good as Fo1,2 but still good.
For TES4, cities plays good role. but there are plenty of other problem(EX: quest marker, level scailing etc) so I don't think it's good game though.

but for fo3, only megaton and rivet city plays it's role.
other place? nah.. they are just trash. each place has only 1~2 quest. and actually we don't have to go most of place since there are any reason to go. for other games they give you a reason to go other settlement or while moving to other quest object, you can discover it. but for fo3, no.
while doing mainquest, you can only discover 20% of whole game. + I don't think fo3's dungeon is good or quest is good.
so I can say fo3 is just trash.
 
Why anyone would want to live in Capital Wasteland, place WITHOUT WATER (derp)

They are not without water.. They just need more clean water.

and full of people wanting to kill you: raiders, super mutants, Enclave, slavers, a lot of dangeorous mutants.

There are raiders pretty much everywhere but the slavers came "recently" if i'm not misstaking. I think they set up their base due to the pitt needing slaves.
The enclave? Seriously? They kinda show up in the end of the game..
And the supermutants is not something i'm that good on but didn't they start to mass when they ran out of FEV? So basicly they have been going downtown for just a few years meanwhile rivert city has been going for 20+ years?
And besides deathclaws that aren't great in numbers i can't say that they have to fear much of the mutated wildlife.


It isn't like in Fallout 1/2 with ALL california having few cities.... Capital wasteland is completely overpopulated, and with monster,

F1 had a town with not so friendly ghouls a military based swarming with super mutants and one of the bigger towns even had a fucking camping ground for deathclaws. Have you even played the games?


who want to take out all human race.

F1 and 3 had the same evil green men wanting to take your ass for a dipp.


Place being war zone for 200 years, WHY!?
It's so hard to go like 50 km east and then be like 50x more safely, without mutants and that one-big-band of raiders (that's another story, I'm wonder how they reproduce).)

It has not been a warzone for 200 years and NCR/Shady sands have some problems with raiders in both games. I can't say i like it in any games besides the first one but raiders are a part of every Fallout game.


Answer is easy.
It's Beth, you know, because who cares about such stuff like logical distribution of the population...

I guess my previous points fits here aswell.


Second, in FO1/FO2 there always was background how specific city gained food.

Besides seeing some random farms in the minor settlements and i didn't see any background that i can think of? Please enlight me if you like i may have forgotten!

Fallout 3? No food, no crops, ANYTHING.

So you missed all the Brahmins, farms and the fact that some people even hunt mirelurkers and even farming them? Not to mention a note in "inser random name for the fire ant town" that the guy was trading ant meat to get a gun and ammo.

Goodsprings - bighorners, crops.

True.. But!

Primm - crops.
Novac - crops and brahmins.

Where did you see any farming in these 2 places? Novac did have 1 guy with a few brahmins but thats about it.


And even your post provides 0 arguments...
0 specifics

And you are talking random jibberish out of your ass.


Dont shit, but super mutants from f2 were mostly friendly,

1 town was friendly.. Yeah and most people in the world are French!

and those fanatics didn't wanted destroy everything at time,

No they where just groups gunning down people for the fun of it!

How Megaton survived with only 3 guards?

How can Novac survive with only 1 at the time and max 2? And they are attacked by ghouls raiders and legion from west and east while their tower is facing west! Unless you want to flood the game with guards this is just a gameplay related thing.



And I will not even say anything about Rivet City, city, what is for 200 years under super mutants siege, but hey, people want to live there!

As i said before. The mutants went downtown a "few" years ago to find a new source and Rivert City has not been around for "200 years". If you are going to complain then stop pulling shit out of your ass.

On a side note they are not even attacked by super mutants if my memory serves me right?



Ah, I forgotten. It's better to live there, than near nuclear bomb...

Megaton is not on my top 3 list so to say so i can't say it's the best planned town.. :roll:


And Arefu and all others villages, are villages. 5 people and you want to call it town or city?

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/settlement


Just look at FNV, one big city, zero bullshit.

So.. Goldspring/Novac/Nipton/Primm etc doesn't exist?

And speaking of the ohh so grand stripp.. The entire shit was built by house and several raider factions.. So i guess people should keep away due to raiders?


Random jibberish. I was going to make some real life comparisons but then it hit me.. Why should i bother with people that doesn't even know what the fuck they are saying and i should try to somewhat nice instead of calling you an idiot :|


Alesia said:
And what's funnier is how accepting the FO:3 fans are of the illogical bullshit. Like when I started writing my LW fanfic I got so many negative comments about how I changed the world to make sense. Such as adding farms and stuff around Megaton. In my universe they grew crops, had brahmin, made and sold leather goods, produced weapons, had more guards, etc... Guess logical survivability is lame and not post apocalyptic enough

I'm not a F3 fanboy but i can't stand trashtalking when the people that are doing the trashing are wrong! And i love how you guys complains about x in F3 but x in F1/2/NV is totaly fine where i complain about pretty much everything that is wrong in all the games.

And there is more ways of getting food than farming.. Unless of course you are a vegetarian amish person? :lol:
 
I dislike illogical inconsistency in all 4 games, but only in Fallout 3 does it overshadow the logic needded to suspend disbelief. Or rather, it kills my disbelief out right.

Of course the best direct comparison is made between Fallout 3 and New Vegas. Now let's establish what useful tools of survival are present in New Vegas.

-Plants can grow, wild ones as well as crops.
-You can scavenge for these plants like the Broc Flowers, Corn, Wheat, Peanuts etc.
-NCR Sharecropper farms, as well as some outlying farming establishments.
-Trade could come from the rest of the NCR, obviously not now as the trade line is closed down, but the opportunity is there and they do wish to reestablish it.
-Trade in between Mojave traders/tribes/towns of any goods needed for survival.
-There is fresh water to be found like in goodsprings.
-Water is being pumped out of lake mead by the NCR.
-The Followers of the Apocalypse help out with medical supplies in New Vegas
-Scavenging of supplies, food and water, in old world places.
-Brahmin and Bighorners are herded all over the place, and used for meat, hide, milk etc.
-Hoover Dam provides water and electricity.
-The Poseidon solar installation provides electricity.
-OSI researches into food production and wants to retreive the secrets of the plants of vault 22.
-Wild creatures can be hunted, like Geckos, Lakelurks, Molerats etc.

So, the game is set up as having both developing and already in place infrastructures.

Now let us compare that to Fallout 3:
-All water is irradiated, the sea included, except for magically fresh water found in mysterious bottles all over the place. And an illogical water purifier is being built by a retard.
-There's one brahmin per town, none for some.
-Some trading, of mostly guns, armor and medicine.
-Kids in caves can eat cave fungus.
-Maybe people hunt on some molerats.
-I guess Iguana's on sticks magically appear in shops.
-Scavenging.
-Cannibalism, maybe.

Now I'm sorry, but I simply can not find anything in Fallout 3 that could even make it seem like I could suspend my disbelief regarding any matters concerning infrastructure.
 
Unlike the previous posters i do agree with you in most of the things you said!

But keep in mind that Rivert city is producing some food in the lab unless my memory serves me wrong and Arefu has a farm outside of the town and there are quite a lot of farm land to the east.
Alltho i'm not sure who they belong to to be honnest.

And the scavengeing part for food/plants etc is more of an gameplay addition and New Vegas had quite a few of those that i wish F3 had or some mods could add.. Ish.

Little Lamplight makes no sense at all and that is one out of maybe 3 places i wish they would never have thought of..
 
The problem with your insistence of the farms and plants from FONV merely being an added gameplay mechanic that simply wasn't thought of at the time of FO3... is that it completely disregards all the great lengths that Bethesda took to reinforce their message that the barrenness of the Capitol Wasteland was PURELY INTENTIONAL. They WANTED to convey the "message" that it was a harsh place where survival was difficult, and the mere "choice" of eating a meal to recover from your injuries (seriously, WHY???) but taking in rads versus maintaining a low rad count at the cost of your health was supposed to be a tough decision for players. The environment of the Capitol Wasteland was intended to be as bleak and lifeless for "immersion"'s sake. Only it was that very bleakness and lack of life that completely broke that immersion entirely. People naturally gravitate towards various places because there are reasons to go live there. If the ENTIRE Capitol of the US was unlivable, then, y'know, people WOULDN'T LIVE THERE!

Yet here we are, plopped into the center of a big open playground where children magically generate more children in a cave without any contact with the surface, save for meager scavenging. Where there's a "major" trade route traversed by traders that have no conceivable source for their own wares. Where radiation commonly permeates the surrounding environment 200 years after the Great War, despite the first game establishing that only *60* years later it seemed implausible for there to be any radioactive hotspots such as The Glow. Where retarded and cannibalistic mutants with no military training and no imposing firepower and a finite ability to create more of their numbers were somehow THE sole reason that the region was so desolate (yet an ARMY of much brighter, more driven, well trained, FAR more well-equipped mutants raiding the countryside didn't do much at all besides spark up rumors that most towns simply chose to dismiss as fairytale). Where Vaults intended to house 1000 people for decades were so tiny that they could scarcely fit 100... for 19 years... and they've been managing for 200, somehow.

The implausibility of the setting just broke it before it could begin telling its story. Some of the earliest games had to work around their hardware limitations to tell their stories by putting the bulk of it in manuals and letting tiny snippets in the actual games tie into the rest. But there was no such hardware limitation in FO3 that prevented the game from telling its story. It was INTENTIONALLY designed in counter-intuitive manners to tell a bad story that no one could believe. That shouldn't be overlooked.
 
They are not without water.. They just need more clean water.
That's why they should leave this place to some non-destroyed and get clean water from that. I asked, why and you didn't answered. What is point of them living there, if they can have better conditions to live in other places?

There are raiders pretty much everywhere but the slavers came "recently" if i'm not misstaking. I think they set up their base due to the pitt needing slaves.
Erm, not everywhere? Compare Capital Wasteland to other places?
Raiders in every destroyed house, every cavern = Capital Wasteland
California/Four States - Few big bands, and few small, most of them destroyed before 2277 happened,
IF Capital Wasteland would be as big as California, THOUSANDS of Raiders.
That logic is really pathethic, as all F3.

And the supermutants is not something i'm that good on but didn't they start to mass when they ran out of FEV? So basicly they have been going downtown for just a few years meanwhile rivert city has been going for 20+ years?
Super Mutants were attacking humans since 2077, so 200 years.
200 years and still people are living there.
Do you know why they ran out of FEV? Beacause they got too many people, who were transformed.

And besides deathclaws that aren't great in numbers i can't say that they have to fear much of the mutated wildlife.
Erm, no? If you're going from Megaton to Rivet City, you're gonna meet A LOT of random monsters.
From Shady Sands to Junktown - maybe (!) 1 (!) random encounter.
And now, what if distance beetwen Megaton and Rivet City, would be like beetwen Shady Sands and Junktown?
THOUSANDS OF MONSTERS...

F1 had a town with not so friendly ghouls a military based swarming with super mutants and one of the bigger towns even had a fucking camping ground for deathclaws. Have you even played the games?
???
AND?
That town is small, in compare to ALL california.
Every locaiton and all Capital Wasteland in overall is completely overpopulated with hostile creatures/humans.
Your argument is invalid... I mean, it only says there are 2 hostile places for thousands of km2... Dont shit?

F1 and 3 had the same evil green men wanting to take your ass for a dipp.
No? People of Capital Wasteland were fighting with SM since 2077... when SM shows up in California, they were instantly beaten by Vault Dweller and then BoS.
Capital Wasteland for 200 year haven't any protector, but stil, people are living there...

It has not been a warzone for 200 years and NCR/Shady sands have some problems with raiders in both games. I can't say i like it in any games besides the first one but raiders are a part of every Fallout game.
It was, look at my previous points, at last warzone beetwen super mutants vs humans, but if we look closely, we can see a lot of raiders/hostlice creatures and 0 (!) ZERO of infrastructure, so it must been a war zone, otherwise Capital Wasteland would be like NCR for example or Caesar Legion in terms of development.

In Fallout they had those problem, but it was solved. And raiders from Fallout 2 (I mean New Khans) could be oliberated in every moment by NCR Army Forces, but why they would want to do it, if helping squatters will not give them anything? Just look at worst F2 V15 ending, when squatters just vanished when NCR did nothing to help them. Ending not even mention Khans, because how state with 600k people in and biggest Army in entire post-war USA could care aboust some raiders, who are not even harming them?

So you missed all the Brahmins, farms and the fact that some people even hunt mirelurkers and even farming them? Not to mention a note in "inser random name for the fire ant town" that the guy was trading ant meat to get a gun and ammo.
YEAH, 2 brahmins per Megaton is enough to satisfy their demands!
I was waiting for this argument, really. :clap:

How can Novac survive with only 1 at the time and max 2? And they are attacked by ghouls raiders and legion from west and east while their tower is facing west! Unless you want to flood the game with guards this is just a gameplay related thing.
Because ghouls are coming only from 1 place, pretty hard to miss? And from east, they're mainly protected by NCR, if someone can go past them, 2 snipers are enough.

+ sry for all errors.
 
to say this 2 very skilled snipers can wreak havoc and hold a position quite effectively even against numerical superior forces. That is of course, if we are talking here mainly about human enemies.
 
while it's better than linear shooter, it's not a shooter at all.
it's basically RPG, especially quest RPG.

then what is quest RPG?
the RPG that quest is main feature.
then what is quest?
it doesn't mean small tasks or chore that gives you some allowance or POS.
it's you own experience to beat the game.
The game gives you a goal like find water chip, find geck or find ugly idiot who shoot your head. but actually, it's not a final goal. the real final goal is hidden.
but you can still get information about final goals and eventually you can do something that affects other quests or goals and that makes player's experience differ from other player even you don't know about final goals. that's the big character of Fallout series, different people experiences different experience.

but how about fo3? the main goal is totally separated from other sub quests and no method to make different experience. it's big problem for Quest RPG.
quest marker is the most biggest problem since it give answer directly so player don't need to think how to do that and how to solve the situation differently.
it's totally sucks as quest RPG.
I even can say there's no aspect of game as RPG.
it's just another linear shooter.

but what about dungeons?
nope. if you want to see what is good dungeon, play Thief 1,2.
fo3's dungeon is just corridor for monster and treasure.
dungeon itself is decoration! not a main feature.
so dungeon is sucks.

there are many bad points of fo3 such as lore, story, balance, combat, quest design(for small tasks), ETC.
but for me, failure as quest RPG and dungeon game is the most biggest problem so other this is just optional.
there might be good story(maybe not), good choring(?), and other good things but that doesn't make big change.

actually, if I choose shooting game, I rather play STALKER series than fo3.
 
A bored-to-death-inspired re-play of FO3, a few thoughts

1. Decided to just "go with it", this time, and armor myself according to style, much like in Oblivion (where I "gave up", and just ran around in mages robes and whatever). Instead of worrying about damage, I guzzled down stimpaks. Mission: Try to run out of stimpaks!
2. Only looting ammo and medicine cases
3. Once again remembering the joy of random disappearances, Lucy West disappears as usual, I found Timebomb running around the wastes heroically battling yao guai. Keeping Sydney alive during that mission, she disappears once we're done. For a while I thought that ghoul bartender had disappeared too, but he had been locked inside the room upstairs.
4. Couldn't be half-assed with that stupid tranqulity lane, went right for that annoying woman and the abandoned house. Stupid dog-dad...
5. Dogmeat fell off Tenpenny Tower and died.
6. Systematic destruction of the stupid caravans by death claws, radscorpions, etc.
7. Death-claw spawning indoors
8. Giant Radscorpion spawning out of thin air litterally right on top of me
9. All brotherhood troops outside the talon company fort dead
10. Wedding quest in Rivet City fucks up 2 times, on 3rd it works. On 2nd I did a massacre, but loaded previous save.

Fun!
 
Okay, bit of a gravedig but whatever:

In Fallout 3, the community of... whichever one that was part of "Those"... dissappears. How does the Wasteland respond to a whole community disappearing?

-three dog mentions it over GNR until the player starts the quest.
-mentions from the chick in Rivet City who is Bryan's cousin or whatever if you hand Bryan over to her.

And that's everyone.

In Fallout: New Vegas, Nipton is destroyed by the Legion; the whole community gone. How does the Wasteland respond?

-Mr. New Vegas mentions it over his radio program.
-NCR officials at the Mojave Outpost mention it, expressing regret or shock (or both).
-Novac residents express worry that the Legion has moved this far from the Grand Canyon.
-the traders at the 188 make passing mentions.
-Legion officials mention it
-pretty sure even more people mention it. Can't think of them off the top of my head.
 
Nipton's sacking was related to New Vegas' main quest wasn't it? main quest events tends to stir more reaction from the game world's npcs than a mere side quest like "Those!" would have.

It's like how every single guard/citizen/merchant/beggar in Oblivion would not shut up about the destruction of Kvatch, an event witnessed in the main quest, but the completion of side quests, even the daedric ones that causes great harm to settlements, barely gets a few passing comments in the nearest inn and tavern.

Plus it wasn't made very clear as to how 'big' or significant the Grayditch settlement was to begin with: talking to the kid Bryan will make it sound as if there were no more than six people -his father, Doc Lesko, and their neighbor the Brandices- in total living in the empty town.
It does in turn make you wonder just who was that wastelander that comes to you in a random event warning of the fires burning out in Grayditch, or maybe he was just passing wanderer himself.

That said I do agree that the game world's reactions to your deeds tends to be severely lacking in Fallout 3, even for the main quest.
For example I can not recall a single wastelander commenting on Liberty Prime, even though the tin can giant went on a rampage clearing out Enclave troops for two weeks in the whole Capital Wasteland. Was the sight not impressive enough for them?

Megaton's destruction does yield a couple of unique random events, such as Scavengers that comments on the sighting of the nuke detonation, and some other ghoulified survivors from the blast that attempts to ambush you at times, but indeed the impact of the consequences stretches Far too thin for the disappearance of one of the biggest and oldest settlements in the game.

Tenpenny Tower was an interesting exception in my opinion, the whole quest, not the least was the whole secluded environment, was built with the idea to mock the game's own karma system.
Although that could have been an unintentional goal from the designers, too.
 
Copy past from a Beth forum post.
It could help the next time the subject is brought up.

-----
About the fast-travel, or the teleport, which describe better what it does, it is currently completely broken from a design/immersion stand-point.
I know it was discussed earlier by other people, but i crossed my mind so many times that i need to write it down. Feel free to disagree
In my opinion, it was only designed from a convenience stand-point, a convenience for the player, but also for the devellopers.
Many solutions could exist to solve this crippling issue. That's what this thread is about. I provided a suggestion on an earlier suggestion thread, so i won't repeat it here.
But i feel the need to point out issues the current system provide. (non hexaustive list)

- I hear that teleport is optional. But what are the alternatives ? Currently, the only option to speed up travelling without teleporting are the train between McCarran & the Strip and the boat between Cottonwood & the Fort.
These provides alternatives for like 1% of FoNV. There are no alternatives to it in Fo3.

- About other world-space like DLC, there is the fact they are mostly DLC, not present in the Vanilla game. A multi-region game would offer more diversity of locations/climate/cities. I can't wait to try The Witcher 3 and see what they do with that.
There have a "door" between world-space, you just don't go toward any point of any world-space instantly. But there is no danger during the travel, and you can teleport to the world-space entry-point. Anyway, Beth love continuous gameworld, so Multi-region system is not something we could expect with them. But hoping doesn't hurt.

- About alternatives traveling system, since the current teleport system as no cost/drawback/penalty, the devellopper simply assume that they don't need to bother implementing proper travel-system/caravans/cars/train/boat/whatever.
If you can be anywhere in a second, without any cost, why bother with alternatives that won't bring you anywhere or cost something ? Simply put, the current teleport system prevent far better and more immersive systems to simply exist, not even mentioning thrive.

- No matter where you are, you are always a button away from you stronghold, safe house, favourite town. You are always safe/comfortable. Sure, you will have to survive the current fight to be able to teleport. But once you did, even if you have 1 HP left, zero stimpack, zero ammo, and high level of radiation poisoning, you are one button away from the doctor, your stash, the necessary trader.
It removes a feeling of danger, the need to watch if you have enough stuff in your inventory to travel, if the ammo/healing you bring will be enough for the upcoming danger. You won't have to be in panic to reach the next chest, hoping to find a stimpack or two. You never consider doing local quest first, because you don't have enough stuff to afford traveling.

- No matter where you are, you are always a button away from every trader, and then, a button away from the point you came, ready to come back. Even with the lower carry weight possible, you will still be able to loot every dead body you come across (or helped dying), loot it, sell the stuff to the trader, come back, loot the next body etc...
You don't have to care about your carry weigh, you never hesitate about what you should loot, or hesitate between looting and leaving. You won't have to throw away on the ground a valuable item, in order to pick a potentially better item, or a same value item than serve another purpose. It remove you the need of many choices.

- Also, most of the local safehouse are never actually used more than once. If you are a button away from the best safehouse, why bother with the others ?

- You don't have to consider an exploration that is cohesive with the locations you are currently in. For instance, you are in Freeside. It would make more sense to go to Westside, from there, as those location are quite close and may offer a nice comparison. But with the teleport system, you can be instantly in Goodspring and choose to explore Sloane.
Sure, it doesn't mean that the develloper will necessary put locations close to each other that wouldn't make sense so close, or location far from each other, that would make more sense if they were closer. But if you can teleport and explore locations at random, instead of going for the most logical way, you are less likely to notice if those locations are consistent, put in the right place near the right locations.
So you could miss some great worldbuilding work, or won't notice some poor or completly broken worldbuilding, which would make some develloper believe that they don't need to think about worldbuilding. That feeling is not all over the place, but quite there in Fo3, when you have a shack of two people, near a raider stronghold, a village complaining about their security, but making no mention of the secure city two miles away, people starving, two steps away from an unlooted food stor, some ennemies too far away from their stronghold, and unable to cope with the others ennemies, but still there, a faction building surrounded by locations full of feral ghoul, that can't breed, but are still there, despite being in the way of people that do travel and are hostile to them.
Sure, teleport doesn't force develloper to drop those stuff. But players that teleport with no logical path are less likely to notice when if it is badly done. If they were more likely to notice it, develloper would be more likely to think twice about the world they build, where are the locations, how they fit with the closer ones.

- On a lesser not, the same could be said about quests. It makes sense that the NCR ask you to reach other bases that are quite far, to provide informations or ask for stuff, as they are aknowledged as far, and they are unable to travel there.
But going the other end of the global map, to plant a bug near a Mirelurk nest, it doesn't seem very logical, as there could be nest far closer. If there were no teleport, if would be likely that Moira's tutorial quest would have been closer to Megaton. If you don't teleport, you would be likely to have local quests, that don't involve going too far, are directly related to the place, and other quest that involve travelling, because those who send you simply couldn't go that far or because they involve other factions that have their own local areas.

- If you don't teleport, you are more likely to come back in some place you wouldn't if there was teleportation. If you didn't like these place would be more likely to complain about them, or to lose interest. Which mean that develloper would be more carefull about the location they add, making sure they are interesting enough to be glad to come back, or at least not bored by them.
There would be less generic locations, less unimaginative locations, less locations that lose any purpose once you seen them once. Maybe not all the locations, but the locations you are the most likely to go more than once would be greatly improved. The remote locations or those that are sideway could still be generic dungeon crawler, but dev would think twice about where to put them. Then again, it would improve the world-build.

- As a side not, for those who consider that manual savegame are OP, having to think more carefully about the location you explore would counter the desire of removing it. A manually savegame won't save you from earlier poor choices. But this is a side note, i am fine with manual savegame. I don't want the game to choose when to save instead of me.

- Last, but not the least, the current teleport system have no lore reason to be here. If there was, it would be likely to be inconsistent. Every time you use it, it feel like you are breaking the immersion.

Sure, everything i am saying is 100% arguable. That's what thread in which people share opinions are about.
But be certain that i am not making this up. I am not trolling. I am not trying to be hostile for the sake of it.
It depict the actual opinion i have about the current system, after many hours. I could still be wrong, but be assured of my good faith.
I want those who support the current teleport system to understand why some people are agains't it. Those supporters could still choose to disagree anyway.
Also, if you are intested in the subject, you can be free to provide solution that would tweak the instant-travel instead of removing it.
But in my opinion, the current teleport system is convenient for the player, but is even more convenient for the develloper.
It encourages the lazyness, reduce the need for many better features or deeper thought. Sure it doesn't forbid using them, but remove the need of some of them or reduce the chance of casual noticing the lack of them, or their bad handling.
If you are professionnal enough, you could still try to put them. If you are too lazy, the teleport system help you to hide it.

Finally, I need to mention that i actually do use the current teleport system. As i mentioned before, it is convenient, and i don't think there are real alternative to it.
I also think that many of Fo3-FoNV stuff, especially F3, are designed knowing exactly that they would allow teleport system. So they are designed around the idea that the distance is something non-existant.
If the current teleport system would be removed early in devellopement, i have absolutly no doubt that it would introduces many welcomed design change, that many would enjoy, including those who support the current teleport system.
So, yes i find fast-travel convenient, but i feel i lose many, many great things in a process of having this little button that makes no sense in context.

Whether the teleport system is removed or tweaked, it absolutly need to change.
The current system is hurting the design as a whole. It is not just an unconsequential side feature.
 
Helpful indeed. It mentions a few things about the "teleport system"'s inherent flaws that I felt but couldn't quite articulate.
I take it you posted this on those boards? I just noticed a similar slightly-off-grammar trend in the wording, so since you didn't specify the source, I assumed it could be you.
 
Recently wrote it on the official board of the current publisher. (that have all the sliding scale of old/new Fallout fans represented)
They talked about the subject a bit, then changed topic before i got involved.
But i bothered me enough that i needed to express it an efficient way, before i would forget about the reasons, but i doubt it will be answered.
Since these threads change topic pretty fast, i am pretty sure this would be brought up again here or over there so i would only copy-paste.
 
Last edited:
Recently wrote it on the official board of the current publisher. (that have all the sliding scale of old/new Fallout fans represented)
They talked about the subject a bit, then changed topic before i got involved.
But i bothered me enough that i needed to express it an efficient way, before i would forget about the reasons, but i doubt it will be answered.
Since these threads change topic pretty fast, i am pretty sure this would be brought up again here or over there so i would only copy-paste.


Well said regardless. Fast travel has taken a lot out of the exploration and challenge aspect. One reason I often disable it with mods. You can tell the games were designed with it in mind though. Just like they designed it with quest markers intended.
 
I always wondered if there were "invasive" enough mods that quite literally split up the world map so it was no longer a contiguous region, and could implement a map traveling system like from the original games. You'd still see that landmark on the horizon, but it wouldn't be something you could reach on that particular map. If you targeted a place with nothing to visit, it would generate a fairly small and nondescript section of wasteland, not unlike the originals. If the "exploration" aspect of the game had more closely simulated the originals in this regard, or fuck, simply had ANYTHING other than a small open world so that the land I'm covering doesn't feel so tiny, that would've gone over much better with me, I can say without a doubt. I have no idea if the engine could be finagled by a mod in such a way as to accomplish this, however. =/
 
I think Fallout-Doom, is one of the few products out there that actually might make television programs produced in the old German Democratic Republic(DDR) entertaining by comparison.

The problem with Bethesda's Fallout 3, lies in the fact that the writers and producers had a rather vague concept of what Fallout was all about and then decided that they were going to do their own thing, regardless of the previously established story. Now it has been argued that most of the younger generations have never played the original Fallout's and due to their "dated" nature and limited attention spans would never play them anyhow, which seemed to be Bethesda's strongest reason for crafting their story as they did.

I think the bigger problem lies in the fact that many producers and story writers are more interesting in putting out a product that appeals to an ADD afflicted generation, who only has time for loud noises and big explosions, and who couldn't be bothered to read. I mean realistically, Bethesda could have called their game Post Atomic War Zone: District of Columbia and I guarantee that they still would have had enormous sales, since they're selling to an audience who values violence and shooting over story and content.

The only reason why it's marketed as "Fallout" was to bring on board the older players who had once enjoyed the franchise, and who for the most part were alienated by Bethesda after playing through something they thought was going to be the long awaited next installment, only instead to turn out to be at best a stylish ripoff and at worst a terrible remake.

Fallout unfortunately is basically a dead franchise as far as the story goes, and though New Vegas did breath some life into the series, due to the damage caused by Bethesda and their rather tragic and otherwise uninteresting outing into the Fallout series, for the most part there is no saving Fallout, and it should just be allowed to retire itself like many other classic films, books etc.
 
I think the bigger problem lies in the fact that many producers and story writers are more interesting in putting out a product that appeals to an ADD afflicted generation, who only has time for loud noises and big explosions, and who couldn't be bothered to read. I mean realistically, Bethesda could have called their game Post Atomic War Zone: District of Columbia and I guarantee that they still would have had enormous sales, since they're selling to an audience who values violence and shooting over story and content.
Bingo. It's a point of contention with many "oldschool" gamers who have critically taken notice of recent trends from (and openly admitted to by) game production companies to "mainstream-ize" their products. A trend rooted in an outdated system of artists needing funding for their craft and seeking out loans from sharks to afford their creation, ostensibly leaving the rights to their "employers". This having been invalidated as a "must have" process as of the wild success of Kickstarter and the indie-gaming boom, Greenlight, etc. But those who still utilize those old methods of getting their funding from the producers are bound by their will, and their will originates from a lack of gaming context. As is often brought up by these scrupulous gamers, the executives over at EA, Activision, or just about any of the big names, come from marketing backgrounds, food backgrounds, all backgrounds BUT gaming. They approach their duties with a backwards methodology because they have no context of how creating successful games works, hence the endless stream of "spunkgargleweewee" titles such as Medal of Honor and Call of Duty every. single. year. At once they produced amazing and memorable titles, but seeing the cash cow success of one particular title, they tried to "replicate" the circumstances for laying the golden egg once again, only to simply replicate a game genre, title, setting, or mechanic, failing to understand the core of what led to such a major success: the art of it. It's this methodology that's at the heart of why Dead Space became incrementally more action-heavy with each successive title, and why the most recent Survival Horror game (in a long time) to reach critical success was a small-scale production, Outlast.

FO3 was produced with a methodology that approached the subject material and simply "genericized" it into a mainstream mess. FPS is popular, let's make it FPS. A childish sense of what adult content is and "Grittiness" are big, let's casually toss in some rape and cannibalism mentions here and there. So on and so forth.

The only reason why it's marketed as "Fallout" was to bring on board the older players who had once enjoyed the franchise, and who for the most part were alienated by Bethesda after playing through something they thought was going to be the long awaited next installment, only instead to turn out to be at best a stylish ripoff and at worst a terrible remake.
That's giving WAY too much credit to the game because a "stylish ripoff" is what Bioshock was, and FO3 bares absolutely zero resemblance to BS1 in any regards. That being said, anyone who saw FO3 at such a dizzying height of "best case scenario" to confuse it with a "stylish ripoff" of the originals must be seriously delusional. XD
 
I am not sure you can say that Fo3 "killed" the Fallout franchise.

I don't intend to defend Fo3 in any way.
Also, i found Fallout:Tactics a very good game in its own way.

But since FoT, the franchise itself went further and further from its stenghts.
With FoT, it lost most of the RPG feature.
With FOBOS, it lost Turn-based, consistency and writting.
With Fo3, it lost isometric view, focus, the support of the original Fanbase.
FoNV in my opinion, is more than a breath, it is actually the first game in 13 years that actually tried to be a Fallout.
It IS, with no contest, a truly actual RPG, for the first time since 13 years.
It brings back many lost features (like reputation). It bring back the grey morality. It bring back the writting skills of Black Isles.
It is not Van Buren, it is not Fo1-Fo2, but coming after FoT,FoBOS, Fo3, it is a Revolution, it is a worthwile third game of the trilogy.
It sold millions of units, it is critically acclamed, and many of the NEW fans loved it.

Sure, it is not like the Fallout we used to play, but the spirit of Fallout is still there.
In my opinion, the franchise was dead before FoNV, the expetations were gone, but FONV brought hope back.

But although, i admit the game is still far from perfect.
I don't think i will replay it as much as i replayed the first two games.
Or at least, not as a completionist. Playing FoNV as a completionist is nighmarish, with all the useless places that come with that "Open World hiking wonderland".
 
When you bring something back by using the name on something entirely different... is it really bringing anything back?

If Fallout could be likened to Brussels Sprouts...then FO3 would be Marzipan made to look like Brussels Sprouts; lacking all the nutrition and flavor of the real thing, and filling
you up with sugar and food coloring instead... [an easy sale, no?] And as we all know... what kid refuses candy? (or loves Brussels Sprouts?)

The problem with FO3 was not that it was candy; it is that it presented AS BEING Brussels Sprouts. :x
So IMO, it doesn't matter how much money they made ~they were selling something else; not Fallout.
It can't count as reviving the series when it kept nothing from it except the wrapper.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top