Should NCR collapse and the games return to the West Coast?
- Thread starter CT Phipps
- Start date
Carbon Dated and Proud
SarcasticGoodGuy
*R O T T E N*
Wish I had friends in Canada, they could send me syrup and stuff.That's what my friends say.
CT Phipps
Carbon Dated and Proud
If we set it in Calgary, it would be just like New Vegas! Except cold!
RevBladeZ
First time out of the vault
How about a game set in NCR where your choices would determine whether it collapses or not? Would be much more interesting than just being told that one of the biggest players in the wasteland collapsed. Though knowing how games work, NCR not collapsing probably ends up being canon. Still, an excuse enough to revisit some old locations in California.
SarcasticGoodGuy
*R O T T E N*
Maybe not a full collapse, but I can see the NCR losing significant chunks of territories- but to small independent towns rising rather than being held down by the bureaucracy and taxes of the NCR.
CT Phipps
Carbon Dated and Proud
Eh, that's pretty much New Vegas isn't it?
Izak
I Shot The ALBATROSS
The NCR doesn't completely collapse if you choose another faction.
CaptJ
The Rival of Roquefort Hall
You can nuke the NCR, Caesar's Legion, or both. The game really shouldn't let them forgive you after that. Did Ulysses attached a bunch of tags saying "From [Player name]. Fuck you."?
cordelionreaver
Where'd That 6th Toe Come From?
They forgive you if you do it before getting the Platinum Chip. Its stupid and one of the reasons I don't like Lonesome Road.
How do people know what happen at the Divide? Only two people were there and Ulysses is either going to die or sit around doing fuck all.
Dr Fallout
Centurion
Uhh... that seems to fixed on the player... they should be able to solve it or continue it but ultimately the NCR is still declining.
CaptJ
The Rival of Roquefort Hall
Like I implied, it didn't make sense; but at least, it has an impact. It is a lot better than the no faction system and no karma system in FO4.
Skyrim had you assassinate the emperor and it barely changes anything.
Also, I heard that Fable 3 had the evil choices be a method to earn funds to build some defense system. If you do all the good choices and fail to raise enough money to build the defense, most of the population dies but they love you. If you do the evil choices, people will hate you.
My point is "If the game couldn't give a shit about what happens in it, why should I?".
SarcasticGoodGuy
*R O T T E N*
Fable 3 could've had a groundbreaking C&C system. It was a pretty sub-par game and an even worse RPG, but its problem was that both combat and loot were easily exploitable.
You buy one property, wait a day, buy two more. Then four. Then eight. It multiplies fast, so you can easily save everyone and be loved. Coupled with the fact being as evil as possible in the Throne room only nets you ~3 million (you start out with <300k and need a total of 6.5 million to save everyone), you basically have to exploit the game's systems to get the best ending. And its not really an exploit, because at the end of the game the narrator mentions what you've done.
Dr Fallout
Centurion
Sounds better then anything Fallout 4 has.
SarcasticGoodGuy
*R O T T E N*
Honestly what little C&C Fable 3 has is miles ahead of Fallout 4. You can destroy an entire lake that's been in every single game, and as a result there will also be a huge mine system beneath it.
You can bring back child labour in the factories, convert an industrial estate into a steampunk-esque waste treatment plant which removes the smog from the area.
You can destroy a village's defenses and allow werewolves to takeover.
You can cut down an entire forest- nearly every single tree is replaced by a stump and you can recruit more people to be lumberjacks. This loses you the support of the mountain tribals but the money earned outweighs the loss of tribals. It's funny because the one thing they got right in Fable 3 was giving you better (monetary/gear) rewards for being evil, at the expense of being unliked by your subjects.
I'm not recommending the game though, Fable 1 was barely an RPG and Fable 2 was an adventure RPG lite. Play those two if you have the time.
Zerginfestor
dear god, the scrapping
Hell, I'm betting most people in the Fallout universe (not 3 or 4) would probably actually BURY the fucking thing, pissing their pants in the process as they hope to hell that the 200-year old warhead and it's most likely sensitive trigger doesn't activate and awaken "mankind's wrath within". Would make more sense of people to flip their shit if the player equipped and showed a Fatman, to which would probably have the entire settlement aiming their weapons at him/her and begging with a shaky voice to put the damn thing away. Better to let the giants sleep then to wake them again, eh? :p
Dr Fallout
Centurion
Damn... if they did it well... I would definitely play it. It sounds like such a good idea but... ah well, it seems shit.
SarcasticGoodGuy
*R O T T E N*
I grew up playing the Fable games, really saddening to see another case of great concept and terrible execution- bloody Molyneux and his "innovations".
Fallout 4 on the other hand has neither. A re-hash of Blade Runner mixed in with a faction war against an army of super-soldiers, incredibly inferior robots, a handful of cowboys, and some people that spend their time giving a shit about robots when they should be surviving Bethesda's unrealistic >200 year nuclear holocaust.
Society advancing? No, no, no- it's about shooting and looting.
Dr Fallout
Centurion
I honestly don't care about the Fable part (sorry) I just really like the idea of running a kingdom without the obvious RTS emphasis.
SarcasticGoodGuy
*R O T T E N*
Nothing to be 'sorry' about, the first two games were about fulfilling prophecies (although Fable 1 did this much better, Fable 2 was the kind of game where you wanted to get the main story over with to do everything else) and they tried something new with Fable 3.
In case you don't know what the innovations of Fable 3 I'll give you a quick run down:
Weapon types now consist of Pistols, Rifles, Swords and Hammers, as opposed to : long swords, hammers, maces, short swords, katanas, rifles (w/ 3 subtypes), pistols (w/ 3 subtypes), and crossbows from Fable 2.
Every weapon is a legendary! In Fable 2 each legendary had a unique model and effect. In Fable 3 literally every weapon is a legendary that changes shape depending on how many of each enemy you kill. Everything ends up looking undead because they're the most common enemy.
You literally cannot die- this was carried over from Fable 2 (and was my biggest gripe with the game) but you can't die in combat, you just get back up immediately.
Magic is overpowered- hardly any enemies use magic and when they do it is weak af. You on the other hand can insta-win the game with just lvl 1 magic- as most spells deal knockback you can spam it now that they removed mana.
Random expressions- when interacting with villagers in F1 and F2 you could select any interaction from a wheel, whereas in F3 it gives you a random expression. Want to befriend this burly blacksmith? Kiss him.
No consequence as King- didn't mention this earlier but if you're the king the guards will not react to anything. You can kill as many people as you want and they'll do fuck all about it. The only reason you're king/queen in the first place is because you held a revolution.
The only thing they improved was the world building. It adds to the lore and there are reasons as to why enemies from previous games don't show up, and why there's virtually no contact between countries. If the rest of the game was good, this attention to detail would've been appreciated (because the game would've been playable).
Dr Fallout
Centurion
I've seen that somewhere before.
Hmmm... sounds familiar. 
What can I say? Either magic is underpowered or overpowered. Even Morrowind had this problem after a while.