The aspect of Fallout 3 that i liked better then New Vegas

Keep in mind that we also saw very little of Caesar's Legion, what we saw was only the front line. A lot of what CL does is probably just for the intimidation factor, I doubt they're really that hardcore Roman back in Arizona.
 
Might be that way or it might be not. But that is no reason to come up with own explanations the game lacks. We can only assume how Legion controlled towns and regions look and how close the usual Legion citizen feels connected to their ideals and principles.

*Edit
Walpknut said:
The NCR and the Enclave are also very influenced by a specific pre war society, and they dress and act and have titles based on them, The Legion was founded by a guy that didn't like USA pre war society and tought the Romans were betetr so he mixed different aspects of various eras of the ROman empire and slowly made tribes that he and his initial group conquered, I don't see a problem there.... probably more in-depth exploration of the Faction would have helped.
Though the NCR is more a political system with admittedly a close conection to the Californian area which comes though from the region as it is much more likely that a town located in the area of California calls it self "New California" then suddenly a Chicaggo or Washington based group calling it self "New Californian Republic". The Capital wasteland is also named that way for a reason I guess - Or so I assume. Just as the location of San Francisco is called even after the war the same way and New Reno based on Reno.

No one will dispute that there are references and similarities. But the NCR is more a combination/republic with a high diversity inside of many people which might not even know more about California than that it is a name of the past. I also have not seen many indications which really refer heavily to the pre war Californian history. Except for the flag and the fact that they are a democracy (while California was a state and not a republic). They might not have more connection to the pre war state like the US today with the hellenistic system where many names have the their roots in it but are not seen exactly in the same way. (Parliament, Senate, Republic, Democracy etc).
 
We see guys like Vulpes and the leader fo the Praetorians who act pretty normal and don't use the roman thing that much other than for titles, and seem to be on it with as much knowledge as Caesar Caesar himself isn't all roman, he uses the terms but he is pretty much casual about his things, The Legate is a crazy guy that takes it at heart, but we are todl by everyone in the Legion that he is only a warrior and they can't allow him to take control fo the Legion anytime soon.
 
I must be the only one who thinks nearly every aspect of NV is that of a dumbed down FO3.


Oh man... don't even get me started on those multiple uninteresting shacks, invisible walls, linear story progression, static everything, five second fetch quest, poorly implemented interaction between factions, the disappointing strip, recycled dialogue ("Patrolling the Mojave almost makes you wish for a nuclear winter"), and god forbid they some how managed to come up with a worse plot than "Quest to fix the giant purifier!".


I will say that the Vaults in FO:NV and the companion interaction are leaps and bounds ahead of FO3.
 
Pathlessbullet said:
I must be the only one who thinks nearly every aspect of NV is that of a dumbed down FO3.

Yes, yes you are.

-----------------------------------------

Ex.

NPC: So we fight the good fight on the air with our voices.

PC: [Intelligence 6] Are you saying you fight the good fight with your voices?

NPC: I can see that you are very smart.

+33exp.

------------------------------------------

It doesn't get much dumber than that.
 
"Oh man... don't even get me started on those multiple uninteresting shacks, invisible walls, linear story progression, static everything, five second fetch quest, poorly implemented interaction between factions, the disappointing strip, recycled dialogue"

Wait are yo utalking about Fallout 3? because it reads like you are talking about Fallout 3. Linear story progression? did you play New Vegas more than once?

" and god forbid they some how managed to come up with a worse plot than "Quest to fix the giant purifier!"
Yes I gues activating a Hi tec water filter is more complex than a war for a region that would shape the future of the Post apoc USA following on events from FO1 and 2.
Where do this people come from?
 
Walpknut said:
"Oh man... don't even get me started on those multiple uninteresting shacks, invisible walls, linear story progression, static everything, five second fetch quest, poorly implemented interaction between factions, the disappointing strip, recycled dialogue"

Wait are yo utalking about Fallout 3? because it reads like you are talking about Fallout 3. Linear story progression? did you play New Vegas more than once?

" and god forbid they some how managed to come up with a worse plot than "Quest to fix the giant purifier!"
Yes I gues activating a Hi tec water filter is more complex than a war for a region that would shape the future of the Post apoc USA following on events from FO1 and 2.
Where do this people come from?


Sounds like you play Fallout for the overall subpar story. I play Fallout for something more than three slightly different ending quest and barren uninteresting environments. With FO3 Bethesda was at the very least creative with its environments. Tucked within the Mall you find a WW trench like setting between the SM`s and Talon Company? Glorious.


Getting shot in the head and tracking down some guy in a suit across the desert is hardly a better plot than turn on the giant purifier.
 
Comparing the inciting incident of New Vegas with the climax of Fallout 3, eh?

More like: Getting shot in the head and tracking down some guy with a distinct suit across the desert is hardly a better inciting incident than running after daddy while your home goes into a massive crisis resulting in multiple deaths.

In either case you are wrong.
 
Oh man... don't even get me started on those multiple uninteresting shacks

Which are different from the countless empty ones in FO3...how exactly?

invisible walls

Annoying indeed, but present in FO3 as well.

linear story progression

...ehm...excuse me? Regardless of what you think of it, how can a plot with 4 intersecting branches be linear...? And (since you are comparing it to the previous game) how wasn't FO3 story non-linear exactly?

static everything

Elaborate, becuase here and here you can see consequences to your actions.

five second fetch quest

And countless complex ones, with more depth and in greater number compared to FO3.

poorly implemented interaction between factions

Elaborate. At least FO:NV had factions and interaction between them.

the disappointing strip

True.

recycled dialogue ("Patrolling the Mojave almost makes you wish for a nuclear winter")

"Yes, there's a lock, and yes, I can see you eyeing it", "can't you be more careful?", or something like that. Seriously now, it's a technical limitation.

But even if the above mentioned stuff was all true the overall balance, combat, dialogues and RPG mechanics (and other stuff) are "dumbed down" compared to FO3? Really?
 
Of ocurse, the thign about Fallout is not the setting,is not that your actions all affect your game and ending, no its about finding mooks that are there for absolutely no reason at all, malls that should have absolutly nothign inside afetr 200 years, towns with no way of surviving that have been around from the begining of the post war, man thats glorious.
 
Garden of Eden Creation Kit.

Forced Evolutionary Virus.

Robobrain.

I can keep going...

I think we need to stop focusing on the specific inconsistencies that prevent the Fallout world from being a real world. It will never be. It was never meant to be. What made Fallout special and what continues to make it different from other franchises is how well they were able to adapt the high fantasy concept into a background more relevant to us today.

Do we trash how impossible Dragon Age's world would be? How about Mass Effect? No, because they don't closely resemble our familiar world.

All four games have inconsistencies. You have to criticize based upon the merit of their character and story development. I can let a few economic problems slide if the characters and artistic environment presented are fascinating. This isn't a simulator. It's imagination.

BTW, most of the points people seem to bitch about are most definitely technical limitations. You can do much more on a isometric 2d map much more quickly than you can with a high-powered 3d engine. The entire scope of things are getting larger and larger. Each game should be viewed as a building block.
 
BobNotHerbert said:
I think we need to stop focusing on the specific inconsistencies that prevent the Fallout world from being a real world. It will never be. It was never meant to be. What made Fallout special and what continues to make it different from other franchises is how well they were able to adapt the high fantasy concept into a background more relevant to us today.

Do we trash how impossible Dragon Age's world would be? How about Mass Effect? No, because they don't closely resemble our familiar world.

Wrong examples and comparisons. Sure, FO is sci-fi but it's not Star Trek or Lord of the rings, it has much more connections on the real world than those (mutations aside). Engines need fuel, food decays, buildings collapse and so on. We criticize Beth because making a reasonably believable world was perfectly possible but they just didn't care. Take for example energy: in FO3 it just come from nowhere, in NV you can see that camps and small settlements use batteries and small generators. Was it really that hard to do?
 
Stanislao Moulinsky said:
Wrong examples and comparisons. Sure, FO is sci-fi but it's not Star Trek or Lord of the rings, it has much more connections on the real world than those (mutations aside). Engines need fuel, food decays, buildings collapse and so on. We criticize Beth because making a reasonably believable world was perfectly possible but they just didn't care. Take for example energy: in FO3 it just come from nowhere, in NV you can see that camps and small settlements use batteries and small generators. Was it really that hard to do?


Speaking of which anyone else just LOVE the electro city mod, one of my absolute favorite "not just a texture upgrde" mod
 
No it's not hard to do, but it is not always necessary to force feed those elements down your throat to create an enjoyable game world. A lot of things can be boiled down to imagination. I don't need to be shown every single tiny detail to know that something just works.

Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed New Vegas much more than I did F3, but it shouldn't be completely discredited due to minor world-building complaints. Generators are the first thing that come to your mind? Really?

You can't look at the Capitol Wasteland and say Bethesda didn't care. There's a lot of heart in the entire world they created. It may not be completely in tune with what the first team believed in, but then again, Fallout 2, Fallout Tactics, New Vegas and even POS all brought a vastly different perspective every time.

There's a reason why the franchise has stayed fairly fresh for so long. Each entry has been drastically different from the next.
 
They didn't even bother giving any of the settlements basic infrastructures, not a single farm to be seen. They cared to add what THEY wanted, what THEY thought was cool, aliens? Why the fuck not? Aliens are cool, right?
 
BobNotHerbert said:
There's a reason why the franchise has stayed fairly fresh for so long. Each entry has been drastically different from the next.
I beg to differ.

Fresh is when you actually improve on the existing design. What Bethesda did was simply squeezing Fallouts gameplay/world in to the technology and gameplay of Oblivion with a focus on the later.

That is not a fresh try for new things but simply changing the game to appeal a different kind of gamers. Namely their fans. If they even care for their Fans to begin with which is also questionable in the case of Bethesda. Because they claim that they always love to do something completely "new" instead of building on the "old" stuff - So they alienated their "old" fans with Morrowind which was different from previous games and they alienated their Morrowind fans with Oblivion which was different from Morrowind - Hence why each game is set millions of years after the previous one. Because lore is not something you use for your game to make the world more believable but something they feel is just a "burden". Can be sometimes. But if it is part of the game then you have to pay attention to it. They decided not to with Fallout 3 (hence why it is on the westcoast).

Certain inconstancies happen. No one complains about those usually. That is not even the problem. The issue is that you have the whole Bethesdian Fallout game full of it. Starting with lulz locations like Little Lamplight and settlements that would not survive even 5 min. in the wasteland (regardless if they had farms or not). How they get the idea to call a shack with 3 or 4 people a "settlement" is something I don't understand. The only location which made somewhat sense were the Slaver-Town, Rivet city and Megaton. Because those locations looked like they could defend themself. Anything else was just pathetic garbage. And then on top of that you have the very railroaded quests, story and the poor writing. I think one of the first things they should have offered is the player the choice kill his dad. But hey! The whole game has to be about sacrifice. If it makes sense or not is not important.

That is how you get situations where "choices" feel forced on the player and not natural. Not to mention that Bethesda had not the balls to show the player the consequences of his "bad" choice in Brokenstill
 
BobNotHerbert said:
No it's not hard to do, but it is not always necessary to force feed those elements down your throat to create an enjoyable game world. A lot of things can be boiled down to imagination. I don't need to be shown every single tiny detail to know that something just works.

"Force feed"? What the hell are you talking about? :? It's not like characters in game were saying "look, look, we are using generators" or there were big arrows pointing at them. Designing a decently believable world doesn't take much more work than just throwing stuff in.

Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed New Vegas much more than I did F3, but it shouldn't be completely discredited due to minor world-building complaints. Generators are the first thing that come to your mind? Really?

It was just an example, the first that came to my mind. FO3 is full of this stuff, Bethesda quite obviously didn't care about credibility and logic.
 
These discussions are SO annoying. Fallout 3 had a linear story, not New Vegas, Fallout 3 had one outcome, one way to play. Oh, yeah, you could poison the water pointlessly for an extra sentence in the epilogue, wowee.

The courier gets shot in the head and tries to find the guy who did it-

This is not the story line of Fallout New Vegas. This is simply the opening premise to begin the game, to call that the storyline is fucking stupid. Clearly the story is about civilisation re-emerging and expanding. The imperialistic visions of two very different empires, the expansion across the United States which echoes the USA's original frontier thesis. It is about humanity on the rise, risking repeating history, it's about war. Don't over simplify the story to suit an inept argument please!!

Fallout 3 has a one dimensional story, the very premise of which is fundamentally flawed. After 200 years you would not need a water purifier. Especially a ridiculously over complicated machine such as the one you go to such lengths to activate. You could just just use sediment to purify the water but still, you most likely wouldn't even need to do that after 200 years. Fallout 3 has no depth to it what so ever. The map is simply a playground of locations that make little sense in a setting 200 years after a war. It was fun here and there but it is an inferior game.

I don't mind Fallout 3 fans preferring Fallout 3, makes no difference to me whatsoever. What pisses me off is every time some one comes on here to state their case their argument is so weak, their points often wrong, they say things that either make little sense or are just plain wrong. There never seems to be a valid point made.

I'll tell you what, the disappointment I felt at the scale etc. of the strip is nothing, NOTHING compared to my (and this was the same with all my friends) bitter disappointment on discovering that the great trading hub of the capital wasteland, Canterbury Commons, consisted of two habitable buildings. I was so gutted because I then realised that there were no real towns in fallout 3. The biggest is a big rusty tanker, which is not a bad idea I guess but it hardly makes up for the other 'towns' of two buildings and few people. Ridiculous, after 200 years? Forget about it.

How none of those towns had the infrastructure of human societies either is beyond me. No agriculture, no clear hierarchy of power, no regulated businesses and companies. 200 years after a nuclear war and human society would begin to reshape itself in a similar way to ebfore. Oh yeah, the republic of Dave, HA HA HA HA HA HA FUCKING HA.

Factions? In Fallout 3? What factions? Talon company? Reilleys Rangers, a couple of groups with a label. Yet no history, no future, no real point in existing, artificial, hollow, mickey mouse BULLSHIT.

...and I enjoyed fallout 3 at the time, was pissed off when I realised that I had grown to resent it and felt no desire to play it ever again.
 
Fucking aliens...........UGH. They take on little easter egg random encounter JOKE in Fallout 2, a fucking silly joke and make it part of the actual Fallout 3 story. Stupid.

I mean how many things happen to this lone wanderer, knight in shining armour douche bag? Spends all this time fixing his ridiculously over complicated, stupid water purifier, but still finds time to be beamed up to the mother ship and piss all over the Fallout canon and universe while he's at it.

'You can't look at the Capitol Wasteland and say Bethesda didn't care. There's a lot of heart in the entire world they created.'

I'm sure Michael Bay puts a lot of heart into tranformer films. AWWW it'd be SO COOL if we had all these raiders running around for no reason, plus these mercs, on a baseball field, in a stocked up mall, it'll be all like KABOOM POW KAZZAMO!!!!! ...and they'll be all like WHOOOOAAAAA, BANG BANG BANG, Awwww so cool, then we'll put the green orcs here, orcs that came from.... from... er..., just er, somewhere else, YEAH, that's it, somewhere, they'll be all like ROOOOAAAAAR, and it'll be like KABLAMO!!! BOOM!! SMASH!! BANG!! WALLOP!!!! Then these big helicopters come in to take the utterly unnecessary water purifier, then they'll fight these inexplicably, inconsistently benevolent knights of the post apoc realm, then they'll be all like WHOOOAAAA MAN, and they'll go BOOOOMMM!!!! BAZAAAAM! POW!!!

Yeah, heart and soul into the world.
 
the reall issue I have with all of this is that both Bethesda AND Bay exactly know what they are doing and they are happy/proud about it.

The comparison between Bay and Todd is not even that far away actually.
 
Back
Top