Things that Fallout 3 did right!

TheChosen1 said:
Dialogue, quests and skills do not automatically make it into an RPG.
Click to expand...

The whole notion of "RPG elements" as though mechanics are the things that define roleplaying games (and not, you know, opportunities for roleplaying) is just laughable.

Like name any single "RPG element" you see in a video game, and I guarantee I've played at least one tabletop roleplaying game that doesn't have it (including "you have a character", that one was weird and experimental.)
 
Dang you guys have pretty strict definitions of what an RPG is, not that it really matters anyway
 
frajaq said:
Dang you guys have pretty strict definitions of what an RPG is, not that it really matters anyway
Click to expand...

Any game that is about roleplaying is an RPG, as far as I'm concerned.

It's a pretty loose definition, since it covers everything from New Vegas to that penguin LARP I was in that one time.
 
The loose description of what makes an RPG is actually fairly interesting to think about. At its most basic, by definition, it's "a game about roleplaying", which would mean in most cases it's something determined by how the developers want it to be perceived and not necessarily what it really is (which is why we often see games branded as RPGs that are more alike to adventure games of the past). At the same time, there are universal elements which are expected of any RPG, but can also fit on other genres. Batman: Arkham Asylum has leveling, skills, character customization - all "RPG elements", but no one would call the game an RPG. So those features aren't really what make any game a roleplaying game... but an RPG that didn't have those features would probably feel lackluster in some way.

So it's more of a sum of the parts than any individual feature or group of feature. You can't define an RPG as a game which has the classical RPG elements because some of them may not have all those elements, and there are games of other genres which feature them anyway. The reality is that it's how the game mechanics are framed in a way that leads to roleplaying the character(s) through them.
 
One of the best things about Fallout 3 was that it was fun as fuck to explore, sometimes I entered a random cave/tunnel and ended on a new DC district with cool destroyed buildings, or hell, unmarked quests like the one were you rescue a BoS recruit behind enemy lines.
 
You didn't need A mod to remove player character voice.
Mods were free.
More than 4 dialogs options. Complete sentences.
No living ghoul in the fridge.
 
Power Armor training. i think it is, in theory, one of the best ideas from Bethesda. The problem is the way they actually put it on the game. Not enough ways to get said training, and the fact you are the only one in the whole wasteland that needs training. If you need training to wear it, you shouldn't be able to put that armor on any random guy that you stumble across.
 
Things that Fallout 3 did right.
Click to expand...

As far as Fallout specifically goes, I can't name a single thing.

PossibleCabbage said:
The whole notion of "RPG elements" as though mechanics are the things that define roleplaying games (and not, you know, opportunities for roleplaying) is just laughable.
Click to expand...

It's the mechanics that (optimally) produce those opportunities - narrative and world interactivity and reactivity, possibilities to express and get a response for different types of characterbuilds - playing roles in your head whilst playing a computer game does not make the game an RPG, it's just the player doing his preferred makebelieve.
 
I can. IMO what [pitifully] little they mapped of the wasteland, looks about exactly as what one might expect (and hope to see); and with that single aspect, I say they were spot on, if not perfect.

The only thing I liked about FO3 was wandering into the wasteland alone; (wishing it were a different game when wandering out of it).
For the most part, I thought the art design was pretty good, minus a few glaring exceptions.

PossibleCabbage said:
...as though mechanics are the things that define roleplaying games...
Click to expand...
Mechanics are just about the only thing that matters. One could imagine "Papillon:the RPG", and so long as the mechanics were sound, it could be a decent RPG... a tad boring [in the hands of an uncreative studio], but could be valid nonetheless.

The mechanics of a game are like a cake; and the fiction is but the icing, and decorations on top.
Would you seriously have it the other way around?

Put it another way: Consider the mechanics as base hamburger, while the story (and even FPP exploration) is like the condiments. By itself the meat is perhaps rote and unsatisfying, but a meal made of only the condiments ~that's hard to stomach, and is nothing but empty calories.

FO3 is mostly empty calories.
From what I hear, FO4 is rotten mustard.
 
Last edited:
Gizmojunk said:
I can. IMO what [pitifully] little they mapped of the wasteland, looks about exactly as what one might expect (and hope to see); and with that single aspect, I say they were spot on, if not perfect.

The only thing I liked about FO3 was wandering into the wasteland alone; (wishing it were a different game when wandering out of it).
Click to expand...

There's that, but the problem I had with it was that I was constantly interrupted by... what ever was "behind the next hill".

Gizmojunk said:
For the most part, I thought the art design was pretty good, minus a few glaring exceptions.
Click to expand...

I can agree with that, but only looking at it in isolation. As part of the whole it doesn't save much when the rest makes trying to appreciate it a drudge.
 
Last edited:
Kohno said:
As far as Fallout specifically goes, I can't name a single thing.
Click to expand...
THIS

Now in is own merits... Hmmm... Well, it did bring Fallout and the "Bethesda formula" to the popular scene and not with much marketing, but looking with hindsight it wasn't such a good thing, as it ruined the core and heart of Beth's franchises.

- In a more positive view, it does present itself really well following the classic Fallout's principle, in exploration-progression wise i mean.
Probably these are locked, but there is a huge deal going on about finding places X and Y, like Vault 87, but after subsequent playthroughs you can get there no probs. This was lost in Fo4 as there was either none or barely any misticysm of hidden locations, main or side ones.
There's the friendly lil' town next door to get you started with the lore and quests, although that's the "Startville" trope of RPGs anyway.

- It just needed a push or an electroshock to the writer to make the Enclave amiguous and not need to be left for CT.Phipps to headcanon over, but that's not a trait, just a Maybe

- NPC's had SOME character to them. Of course, that means that i somewhat liked James a bit in the way that one can feel however they want about him and it shouldn't be out of place. Him getting himself killed for a retarded reason for a stupid cause belongs in the Story department.

- Charon is a companion that can throw grenades properly for once.

To say more i'll have to wait for that TTW update, the game is mostly blurry on me.
 
Prone Squanderer said:
So if you blow up Megaton and he says "I can't begin to tell you how disappointed in you I am" he isn't actually talking about the player?

Deep.
Click to expand...

The worst part is when people mention it as a sign that Fallout 3 does have choices and consequences, while it is a sign of the lack of consequences. Consequences aren't a casual line that doesn't change anything in the questline...
 
Fallout 3 brought the fallout universe into the public eye again, and for younger fallout fans like myself(currently 19), this was the first fallout game I ever had the pleasure of playing and I'm thankful it provided me with this opportunity.

I think design wise, Bethesda did a great job of making DC feel like an actual huge city. Rubble piles segmenting sections and having to travel via subway tunnels tricked you into perceiving the city as much larger than it actually is. I haven't played a ton of fallout 1 and 2, so I'm not sure if this idea is original to them (feel free to enlighten me, pals), but regardless I thoroughly enjoy this design choice.
 
Austin Stricker said:
Fallout 3 brought the fallout universe into the public eye again, and for younger fallout fans like myself(currently 19), this was the first fallout game I ever had the pleasure of playing and I'm thankful it provided me with this opportunity.

I think design wise, Bethesda did a great job of making DC feel like an actual huge city. Rubble piles segmenting sections and having to travel via subway tunnels tricked you into perceiving the city as much larger than it actually is. I haven't played a ton of fallout 1 and 2, so I'm not sure if this idea is original to them (feel free to enlighten me, pals), but regardless I thoroughly enjoy this design choice.
Click to expand...
:falloutonline:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top