Real question: Does it bother you that Fallout 3 is canon?

[Nas92]

Actually, the Oil Rig wasn't targeted not because its Enclave HQ was "secret"- the whole WORLD knew about the platform -but because it was the only remaining source of crude oil in the whole world. Whether or not China was aware of the base on the Oil Rig was never clarified, but it was also irrelevant, because they didn't want to destroy their one and only source of future fuel- assuming they ever survived to take it from the US.

And yes, it was clearly stated that the Vault 87 Mutants DID bring abducted humans to the vault to be turned into Super Mutants. The absurdities in their presence and the scope of their threat is the SCALE of the vault, compared to the original (real) source of Super Mutants; Mariposa. Mariposa had vats of FEV that filled an entire warehouse-sized level of the military base. It had ample resources to create generations of Super Mutants, and it did. Vault 87 just had ambiguous tanks of their specially modified FEV that was administered in test chambers. Had the vault been designed SOLELY for containing FEV, it might seem possible for them to keep enough for the generations of mutants to follow, 200 years later, but like all vaults it had a large civilian population housed in recreational facilities. A stockpile of FEV to allow for generations of "civilian" Super Mutants that get mowed down on a regular basis yet maintain a sizable population to SOMEHOW legitimately affect the entire surrounding area and prevent it from recovering that entire 200 is not a matter of improbably. It's nigh-impossible, not to mention stupid as hell.

Wasn't the whole Great War about "if I can't have it, no one else can"? I mean they were basicaly unleashing armageddon, I don't think they were thinking about the future. If they had been thinking about the future there never would have been a Great War in the first place.
The vaults in general are bs. I mean Vault 13, for instance, should have been a lot bigger. For obvious reasons they couldn't make them as grand as they were seen in the Vault-Tec ads even in Fallout 1 and especially in Fallout 3. The in-game vaults are probably just a small portion of what they are in-universe, so Vault 87 is plausible if you imagine that behind a secret door is the main part, you just can't access it. Same with all the other vaults.

 

[SnapSlav]

That's just an excuse. There's a clear difference between being able to look at details defined in the backstory/lore and rationalizing them, and just saying "It's not real, so blah blah blah". This debate has been torn to shreds on other games' boards, namely fantasy RPGs where a patch rebalances one class and suddenly all the users jump on the bandwagon to argue why it's "unrealistic". Daggers aren't REALLY daggers, they're shortswords, but you can't talk about the physics of daggers and armor because there's MAGIC, so your argument is futile! That's a pitiful excuse. Suspension of disbelief doesn't demand that all logic be suspended, just logic as we KNOW IT, in certain, specific circumstances. In the example given, rebalance to ACTUAL weapons should make perfect sense to address with very real physics, despite the existence of magic; that's where your suspension of disbelief begins. When players take IN-GAME details about the vaults and rationalizes them, you're simply pretending the in-game details are invalid when you say "Well that's just an inaccurate representation of the real thing." The Vats weren't shown in full in either cutscenes or the actual map, yet we still know they were several (classically depicted as 3) massive containers of FEV that filled up an entire warehouse-sized space.

And no, the point of the war WASN'T to kill everyone; that was just what happened. Assuming Richardson's account of the sequence of events was accurate (not that it is), and China struck first with the US barely able to react, then it WOULD have been possible for there to be an actual victor in the exchange. It goes the same with all warfare; no group EVER commits to conflict with the goal of mutual demise. Even if defeat is practically a given, troops and resources are committed for the goal of victory.

 

[Nas92]

Thing is, in Fallout 3 there was basically no way for them to show a grand hall with sealed containers of the airborne FEV and V87 Super Mutants lining up without tecnical issues. It would have been "cool"(as in Bethesda cool) and would have made Vault 87 a lot more plausible, but it was not possible, especially with how the whole main plotline was rushed like hell.

Also, I don't think whoever started the war actually expected to survive it, let alone get something out of it. They were throwing everything at the other side and the other side, especially if it was the US, was sure to be able to react. Even if there was a chance for there to be a victor, they and the rest of the world would have been at a state where collecting the spoils of war wouldn't have been worth it anymore. Whoever started the Great War was clearly at a position where they thought it didn't matter, they were losing so they would chose mutual demise instead of only their own.

 

[Beavis]

Thing is, in Fallout 3 there was basically no way for them to show a grand hall with sealed containers of the airborne FEV and V87 Super Mutants lining up without tecnical issues. It would have been "cool"(as in Bethesda cool) and would have made Vault 87 a lot more plausible, but it was not possible, especially with how the whole main plotline was rushed like hell.

Also, I don't think whoever started the war actually expected to survive it, let alone get something out of it. They were throwing everything at the other side and the other side, especially if it was the US, was sure to be able to react. Even if there was a chance for there to be a victor, they and the rest of the world would have been at a state where collecting the spoils of war wouldn't have been worth it anymore. Whoever started the Great War was clearly at a position where they thought it didn't matter, they were losing so they would chose mutual demise instead of only their own.

They should have done more to explain that humans were being taken there to be made in to mutants, and as another poster pointed out any human would have been instantly killed by the radiation at the front entrance.

As for the great war I agree, you don't unleash nuclear bombardment without expecting nukes to come back your way. This is the reason the cold war was a cold war and why the US or Soviets never struck first.

 

[TorontoReign]

Thing is, in Fallout 3 there was basically no way for them to show a grand hall with sealed containers of the airborne FEV and V87 Super Mutants lining up without tecnical issues. It would have been "cool"(as in Bethesda cool) and would have made Vault 87 a lot more plausible, but it was not possible, especially with how the whole main plotline was rushed like hell.

All it would have took is maybe a few lines of dialog to explain things better. They don't have to show anything really. In New Vegas you see a very small amount of Securitrons underground, but you get a sense of scale, ya know? Fallout 3 could have done that. Of course Fallout 3 is canon, will stay canon, and thinking otherwise is silly. Fan canon is just as valid, so whats official doesn't matter if you give it no weight. Make up your own personal canon if it makes you feel better I suppose. Fallout 3 didn't break canon any worse than Tactics did, it was a decent game at times, but as a RPG it really felt lacking. It doesn't bother me that Fallout 3 is canon in the least bit, but it does bother me that people think the game is so fucking awesome. I feel that a majority of the people that were introduced to the series through Fallout 3, probably have a slightly skewed perspective on the canon, since they didn't play the originals in their heyday. The outdated complaint only goes one way you see. We played the originals when isometric RPG's hit their peak, suffered a little through Tactics shifting to all combat/less RPG, barely made it through the POS console shitstorm, and then Fallout 3 popped up. The shiny new graphics appealed to lots of NEW people, many of them wondered how anyone ever played the isometric titles since they were "like so old school and no one likes them anymore", and all of these new fans rose against the old ones. The bitterness is really obvious from both sides, but everyone is different. To think I once slightly enjoyed Fallout 3... How anyone puts that game on a pedestal is beyond me. The lack of love for New Vegas is upsetting (I loved it).

Thank VB for New Vegas...

 

[Beavis]

I got into the series through fallout 3 also, I enjoyed it a lot before I knew what I was missing. I played new vegas and found out what I was missing out on in terms of story and dialouge.

I still like FO3 for what it was, its a adventure game with RPG elements. I'm hoping bethesda took notes from new vegas and incorporates a lot of the things obsidian added for fallout 4.

 

[Akratus]

I got into the series through fallout 3 also, I enjoyed it a lot before I knew what I was missing. I played new vegas and found out what I was missing out on in terms of story and dialouge.

I still like FO3 for what it was, its a adventure game with RPG elements. I'm hoping bethesda took notes from new vegas and incorporates a lot of the things obsidian added for fallout 4.

I don't have any hope for that, Skyrim, Oblivion, Fallout 3 were all pretty bad. Especially Skyrim and that is their latest game. Fallout 4 is likely to follow and while it'll be pretty and have some snazzy new features, I don't think they will take anything from NV considering their track record with these previous three games.

Also, on the subject of Vault 87: There are indeed no areas filled with vats as in Fallout 1. But there is a large amount of rooms with air vents and systems. Perhaps the Vault researches figured out how to make the FEV airborne? The big question is how in the hell a military biochemical weapon was handed off to a private company. But, one can imagine all kinds of shady deals going on in the pre-war world and it's not unimaginable that someone handed it off to Vault-Tec as a favor, since Vault-Tec was quite a powerful company. Perhaps the/an officer in charge of handling FEV did it to secure a place in a vault for his family?

 

[SnapSlav]

It's not a question at all, and the mysteries you're proposing were actually confirmed IN-GAME to be false. The very nature of the Vault Behavioral Project and its ties to the Enclave made it perfectly clear that Vault-Tec, either willingly or without any choice, was in the US Government's pocket. The experiments conducted in 87 were always performed one subject at a time, in separate chambers than the rooms where the subjects (which survived) would be left "for observation". It wasn't administered like the mind-altering chems from 106, the experiment was performed in a completely different fashion. Simple exploration and observation of the in-game Vault, as well as cross-referencing all the data terminal entries with their descriptions of the events, made it all perfectly clearn.

The thing is, that doesn't make any SENSE from a Vault Behavioral Project perspective. It wasn't a social experiment that would have yielded any pertinent data for the Enclave's purposes, it was just an excuse for Bethesda to have Super Mutants on the East Coast without stretching the already-thinly-stretched notion of "Well, MORE radical remnants of the Master's army just migrated East!" They admitted this was the reasoning behind it, and nothing else. Uncharted 3 gets cut to shreds for having a few chapters take place on a cruise liner because the devs wanted to include it, but Fallout 3's lore contradiction goes under the radar when its devs do the exact same thing? No. It is what it is.

It CAN be possible that due to their ambiguous relationship for the Government to have "given" Vault-Tec samples of FEV. But according to the lore, it was barely past rudimentary testing when the bombs dropped as it is, was only EVER transferred from West Tek to Mariposa, and the whole notion that it got into Vault-Tec's hands didn't make any sense when FOBOS portrayed it, and hardly any more sense when FO3 got the same idea. Possible, but silly.

 

[Akratus]

It's not a question at all, and the mysteries you're proposing were actually confirmed IN-GAME to be false. The very nature of the Vault Behavioral Project and its ties to the Enclave made it perfectly clear that Vault-Tec, either willingly or without any choice, was in the US Government's pocket. The experiments conducted in 87 were always performed one subject at a time, in separate chambers than the rooms where the subjects (which survived) would be left "for observation". It wasn't administered like the mind-altering chems from 106, the experiment was performed in a completely different fashion. Simple exploration and observation of the in-game Vault, as well as cross-referencing all the data terminal entries with their descriptions of the events, made it all perfectly clearn.

The thing is, that doesn't make any SENSE from a Vault Behavioral Project perspective. It wasn't a social experiment that would have yielded any pertinent data for the Enclave's purposes, it was just an excuse for Bethesda to have Super Mutants on the East Coast without stretching the already-thinly-stretched notion of "Well, MORE radical remnants of the Master's army just migrated East!" They admitted this was the reasoning behind it, and nothing else. Uncharted 3 gets cut to shreds for having a few chapters take place on a cruise liner because the devs wanted to include it, but Fallout 3's lore contradiction goes under the radar when its devs do the exact same thing? No. It is what it is.

It CAN be possible that due to their ambiguous relationship for the Government to have "given" Vault-Tec samples of FEV. But according to the lore, it was barely past rudimentary testing when the bombs dropped as it is, was only EVER transferred from West Tek to Mariposa, and the whole notion that it got into Vault-Tec's hands didn't make any sense when FOBOS portrayed it, and hardly any more sense when FO3 got the same idea. Possible, but silly.

Uncharted 2 and 3 aren't a decade apart in release dates, that's why it's more obvious. The majority of Fallout 3 fans won't question anything lorewise, being that it is their first Fallout game.
The approach Bethesda had to Fallout 3 is quite saddening. You're quite a bit more knowledgable about Fallout 1,2,3 in game lore, which is why my propositions wouldn't work. It's been an especially long time since I've played Fallout 3 or even bothered to remember much about it.

But it's quite sad when: "They just went over there." is the best they could come up with. The games that bother me most are the ones with quite a range of potential hooks to explore e.g. corporate warfare and such, yet none are followed up adequately. Fallout 3 is one such game.

(But did you see the note on a computer in the vault tec dc hq about the vending machine? [spoiler:68efa847a0]There's a warning to employees not to stuff feces in broken vending machines[/spoiler:68efa847a0] One of the few times I've laughed out loud because of a game.)

 

[Stanislao Moulinsky]

The thing is, that doesn't make any SENSE from a Vault Behavioral Project perspective. It wasn't a social experiment that would have yielded any pertinent data for the Enclave's purposes

In a roundabout way it does. It could have been a test to see how long normal persons would accept BS explanations from authorities without challenging them ("all those people died by accident, honest"). Of course that's not what Bethesda was aiming for.

 

[Yamu]

So, here's another question, then: Assuming (as we have to) that F3 is going to remain canon and that the series will be in Bethsoft's hands for the foreseeable future, in subsequent titles, would you rather see the inconsistencies of F3 rationalized/smoothed out, or would you prefer that they were just completely glossed over (much as New Vegas did in the few places where it touched on them-- "Yeah, some stuff happened. I'm not going into too much detail. Let's talk about something else now")?

 

[Courier]

I'm still hoping for "it was all a Brotherhood of Steel initiate training program that took place inside one of those virtual reality pods".

 

[SnapSlav]

I'm still hoping for "it was all a Brotherhood of Steel initiate training program that took place inside one of those virtual reality pods".

That's why Taggart simply would NOT let the courier anywhere near those VR pods, no matter what he did for his chapter. He knew the simulation was too ridiculously humiliating to present to anyone who hadn't been raised by the dogmatic and sheltered auspices of the Brotherhood, otherwise their breaking out in laughter would spoil the whole training for the rest... ;D

 

[CyBeRdEmOn]

and hunting with spears. SPEARS!

Maybe they ran out of bullets? Or just got tired of scaving for ammo when they could just as easily use spears? Maybe their guns stopped working? There are a vast number of explanations, although it is kind of strange they seemed to regress back into primitive behavior, but if we were stripped of our modern convieniences I'm sure we'd do the same in due time. Especially after a generation or two.

On the issue of Fallout 3 being canon: I'm not entirely sure why so many on NMA dislike FO3, while I rather enjoyed it. All I can say is that its better to have new canon then none past Fallout 2. As Fallout fans, I think we should be greatful that Bethesda brought the series back and actually cared enough to make a new game, instead of criticizing them for not being 'canon enough'. Quit being butthurt and enjoy the game..at least it isn't FO:BoS

 

[Stanislao Moulinsky]

All I can say is that its better to have new canon then none past Fallout 2.

Even if the new canon is shitty, ridicolous and doesn't fit with the old games? Ask Star Wars fans what they think on the matter.

As Fallout fans, I think we should be greatful that Bethesda brought the series back and actually cared enough to make a new game

There were other studios interested in the license, the series would have been brought back one way or another. Beth was just the fastest bidder.

Also who cares if they "cared enough to bring the series back" if the end result is bad? This isn't school, you don't get points just for the effort.

 

[SnapSlav]

On the issue of Fallout 3 being canon: I'm not entirely sure why so many on NMA dislike FO3, while I rather enjoyed it. All I can say is that its better to have new canon then none past Fallout 2. As Fallout fans, I think we should be greatful that Bethesda brought the series back and actually cared enough to make a new game, instead of criticizing them for not being 'canon enough'. Quit being butthurt and enjoy the game..at least it isn't FO:BoS

That's ENTIRELY the wrong mindset to have. Liking something has no relevance to whether it is good or not.

Yeah, FOBOS was practically universally bad, both as a game and as a Fallout title, but that doesn't make something else good if by itself it's still bad. FO3 is largely judged on its own merits when it's criticized, and when the originals are used as measuring sticks, it's because of the numeric sequence in the title Fallout 3, which means the prequels SHOULD be relevant. FO3 having bad gameplay, bad graphics, and horrendous quest design is all due to FO3, not the originals. Likewise, FO3 having great atmosphere isn't because of the originals, it's because of FO3. The story isn't bad on its own, until you consider it a sequel and then compare it to the stories of the previous titles, in which case the story suddenly becomes unoriginal (when it's by the same studio, that's unfortunate, but when another studio is behind it, that's just plain ripping-off the great ideas of others).

Blindly asking for "new" without ANY inclinations toward "quality" is exactly what companies like Bethesda and Blizzard have been capitalizing off of, and it only results on more, BAD games. Warcraft II was widely held as a critically acclaimed RTS title, both in mechanics and in story, and Blizzard negated all of that when the next installment in the series actively said "Yeah, that didn't really happen!" As Stanislao mentioned, the same happened with Star Wars, where much established lore was destroyed by "new" ignoring "quality" and just making bad ideas that replaced the good ones. Reviving the series, while commendable, isn't even something we can attribute to Bethesda, because as it's been pointed out many times already, it would've happened without them either way. But by thanking them for something that they're not only simply lucky to be "responsible" for, but also actively contradicted much of the material you're so grateful to them for "revitalizing", you're essentially showing gratitude for being spat in the face. That's a bad outlook.

I enjoyed playing FO3 a bunch, too. But that didn't make it something that it's not. It's an alright game, with glaring faults. It's just not a good Fallout game.

 

[Deleted member 62454]

This is like when Valve releases a new Counter-Strike: OMG AK47 SPREADING IS A THOUSANDTH OF A MILLIMETER TO THE RIGHT!!!, I HATE YOU VALVE!!!, THIS GAME IS SHIT!!!
It happened with 1.5, 1.6, CSS and is happening now with CSGO, the same overreacting every new version.

FO1, FO2, FONV, all are far superior in many aspects, but Fallout 3 is also a good game, just consider it as a reboot and it's done.

 

[DevilTakeMe]

This is like when Valve releases a new Counter-Strike: OMG AK47 SPREADING IS A THOUSANDTH OF A MILLIMETER TO THE RIGHT!!!, I HATE YOU VALVE!!!, THIS GAME IS SHIT!!!
It happened with 1.5, 1.6, CSS and is happening now with CSGO, the same overreacting every new version.

It's nothing like that.

FO1, FO2, FONV, all are far superior in many aspects, but Fallout 3 is also a good game, just consider it as a reboot and it's done.

But it's not a reboot. A reboot would retell the story without acknowledging the existence of previous versions. Fallout 3 references and uses some of the events of Fallout 1 and 2, and then New Vegas acknowledges much of the changes made in Fallout 3.

 

[Deleted member 62454]

It's nothing like that.

I'm referring to the overreacting with things barely relevant against the enjoyment you could have with the game. Also, many of the game flaws are fixable.

But it's not a reboot. A reboot would retell the story without acknowledging the existence of previous versions. Fallout 3 references and uses some of the events of Fallout 1 and 2, and then New Vegas acknowledges much of the changes made in Fallout 3.

I said, JUST.CONSIDER.IT.

 

[Walpknut]

You are equating major plot holes within it's own story and the story fo the rest of the games with "OMG AK47 SPREADING IS A THOUSANDTH OF A MILLIMETER TO THE RIGHT!!!, I HATE YOU VALVE!!!, THIS GAME IS SHIT!!! ".

And considering it a Reboot would be even worse.