Some odd "holes" in Fallout 3
- Thread starter Foobar
- Start date
Requete
First time out of the vault
It realy looks like the world 20 not 200 years after the bombs... The capital wastland shud look more like tribal vilige from Tactics than Mad Max2. It's pitty that Bet was too lazy to develop their own postapocaliptic world instead of dumbing down and castrating the fallout.
BTW what aristocratic brit like A. Tenpenny was doing in America 200 years after the war which stoped all intercontinetal voyages?
I know in F4 the British will be coming again....
BTW what aristocratic brit like A. Tenpenny was doing in America 200 years after the war which stoped all intercontinetal voyages?
I know in F4 the British will be coming again....
eddoctorwho
First time out of the vault
Well, it's also indicated by Dashwood (in his terminal in Tenpenny Towers) that Moriarty came over from Ireland. That's kind of odd.
Oh, excuse me. I didn't realize that it would be a typical thing for raiders and other folk to build homes some 200 years after a nuclear war to look exactly like a pre-war wooden home that got hit by a bomb a month ago.quant said:
I'm not so sure it's all that odd. The "commonwealth" to the north, beyond the playable area, has the facilities to produce androids. I would suppose that some areas aren't in complete ruins like D.C., and things like traveling from Ireland to America may be possible. Perhaps we just got stuck in the ass-end of the wasteland in FO3?eddoctorwho said:
Radioactive
First time out of the vault
eddoctorwho said:
It'd be unlikely that Ireland got hit by nukes right? well, think about some of the crazy people like Steve Fawcett we have around who get off on taking huge risks and such... maybe Moriarty was one of those Europeans who is sort of fascinated by the American wild west thing and maybe his dream was to go over to post-nuke America which he views as similar to that, to test his mettle and such *shrug* could probably pay someone off to bring him over in a boat and drop him off.
eddoctorwho
First time out of the vault
Radioactive said:
Ireland's pretty close to the UK (in fact, part of Ireland is part of the UK), so I imagine they'd be getting a heaping dose of radioactive fallout of their own.
That annoyed me hugely.Gandar said:The best example of this is the ending, which without giving any spoilers, pretty much forces you into only two real choices. Somehow it glazes over the blatantly obvious third choice of your mutant friend
It was only an hour prior to that (give or take) that Fawkes had performed the exact same task that the PC is being asked to undertake. And despite the fact that he's standing right next to me, and apparently likes me well enough, he's just going to stand there and watch...?
Great work, Beth, great work.
The only way a Fallout scenario makes any sense is if the whole world got bombed equally.eddoctorwho said:
If you leave any developed country unscathed, relocation and limited rebuilding would be done in less than a decade, I'll wager. I'm not saying everywhere would be re-built as new, but you wouldn't have people fighting for their lives in a destroyed wasteland.
Whichever country was left intact would doubtless begin a massive operation to round up survivors and establish settlements in safe areas. Word would spread quickly, and within a few years at most, people would have left the radiated areas.
DeadEye001
First time out of the vault
I don't know. Before the bombs fell, Europe was pretty much reduced to a bunch of nation states squabbling over resources, if you go by the Fallout introduction. Couple that with a nuclear exchange that would most likely irradiate the majority of Eurasia and North America... what's left? Africa and South America are full of countries with very little chance to develop 'massive operations' to round up survivors and such. Australia's out; the population couldn't support attempting to absorb whatever's left of 6 billion people, not to mention the logistics of such a small nation singlehandedly taking on such a massive international endeavour. I'm of the opinion that the possibility of any sort of global society would be gone, possibly for good.
eddoctorwho said:
NOW THAT would have been original! Bethesda should have made it 20 odd years after the war or even 90 (like the first fallout) and had it set somewhere in Europe. Or is that too STALKER-ish? heheh
Seriously tho, that's what they should have done.
UPDATE: Still playing Fallout 3 and enjoying the game immensely despite it's shortcomings. I agree with most of the criticism leveled at the game, but I am still having a blast playing it.
I'm planning to write up a review on it once I finish.
CrowbarDoom
First time out of the vault
Neither of those little problems ruined my enjoyment of the game. I think it is possible to be looking too far into things.
CrowbarDoom said:
Seriously, it does matter if the game world you play is inconsistent and has clearly things that make no sense at all. In Fallout/Fallout 2 computers, and may i remind you, WORKING computers or electricity were restricted to some settlements/factions with enough resources to acquire them. No electricity in ruined houses middle of nowhere. The world shallow in this one. . Plot holes and inconsistencies bother me, this is supposed to be an "RPG" not an FPS.
There's a difference between pure realism and an internally consistent world.el gusto said:
What, you just decided to register to post a one-liner that simply ignored the actual position people were taking?
deadsanta said:
While I agree with all of your points, this was my biggest pet peeve quest (with the obvious exception of The Family, which... yea).
I couldn't believe killing him was a karma hit, and you're actually supposed to help him. I ended up figuring out a way to get magic ant drugs and then, after successfully 'helping' him, I killed the queen. I actually would have preferred to let the queen live and kill the scientist.
Stupid karma. Might as well give me good karma for helping larpers who think they are vampires that kill off people in the wasteland. Oh, wait.
Hold on! in my opinion FO3 wasnt internally consitent with FO 1+2 anyway.. and yes there is funny enough a difference between pure realism and a virtual world.. for one if I i made someone's pants explode in the real world I might just get in trouble, thrown in jail with only a 25% lockpick skill with a 26% lock facing me.. i still dont understand your point tho, i guess thats cause im still a hideous freak of nature
The point is that realism isn't necessary, but a world that is internally consistent (ie. everything makes sense given the context of the environment) is.el gusto said:
That's why you can't just wave off everything with the note 'It's not realistic, realism is what you get in the real world'. It needs to be internally realistic.
Ehm, things that make sense given the context. As I've already spelled out.el gusto said:
In other words, flying alien space monkeys don't make sense in a fantasy setting.
Similarly, it makes no sense for a completely destroyed world to still have working computers lying around every three feet, including apparently 200-year-old working power supplies in every building, everywhere.