Unpopular Fallout Opinions

James Snowscoran said:
- I think FO3 is a pretty decent game, though not good enough that I'm likely to ever bother with the DLC or replaying it.
Click to expand...
Broken Steel works a bit to fix fallout 3's ending (its still shit though, just slightly less smelly shit). The Pit is also decent story wise and has one of the few examples of a legitimately difficult significant choice in the game. These may be worth checking out.

Point Lookout is meh. If you were gonna look at the above 2 DLC then could be worth

Don't touch anchorage or zeta with a 10 foot pole, irredeemable garbage.
 
To be honest, while i don't think it is completely awfull, i find SF massively underwhelming compared to the cities who came before, who were underwhelming compared with the middlegame cities.
 
James Snowscoran said:
whereas killing the overseer is just executing an unarmed man in cold blood.
Click to expand...
Amata will still be upset with you if you give overseer all of your weapons and killed him after he start shooting at you though.
Beside, unarmed or not, he is still responsible for allowing guard to kill Jonas and everyone who try to leave the vault, like the couple you see been shot to death by guards.
But the point is, the overseer is the only person you should consider not to kill because it will upset someone, while death of others hold very little to no value compare to him.
Talking about the value of life.
 
Well you can kill Burke who's just sitting on a chair or numerous others with Evil Karma and you gain karma for shooting them in public and it's considered a good thing. Colonel Autumn is another one of those "special" characters besides the Overseer who you can spare and consider the importance of human life after plowing through dozens, possibly hundreds to get to them.

So many characters in the narrative are completely and utterly disposable, like the guards, or old woman who dies in the cafeteria, or the couple who both get shot trying to escape the Atrium and never mentioned again. But with some characters, often leaders of the groups who initiate the whole thing, are the only people that count as real characters in the narrative. I'd already shot 6 or 7 people, killing one more isn't going to desensitize my Lone Wanderer anymore.

Don't get me wrong, I know why they do it. Any game which is combat focused has this disconnect between the narrative told through the story and the narrative told through the actual game play. If the primary game mechanic is killing, then you have to have things to kill and fight.
 
The Man From Nowhere said:
Well you can kill Burke who's just sitting on a chair or numerous others with Evil Karma and you gain karma for shooting them in public and it's considered a good thing. Colonel Autumn is another one of those "special" characters besides the Overseer who you can spare and consider the importance of human life after plowing through dozens, possibly hundreds to get to them.

So many characters in the narrative are completely and utterly disposable, like the guards, or old woman who dies in the cafeteria, or the couple who both get shot trying to escape the Atrium and never mentioned again. But with some characters, often leaders of the groups who initiate the whole thing, are the only people that count as real characters in the narrative. I'd already shot 6 or 7 people, killing one more isn't going to desensitize my Lone Wanderer anymore.

Don't get me wrong, I know why they do it. Any game which is combat focused has this disconnect between the narrative told through the story and the narrative told through the actual game play. If the primary game mechanic is killing, then you have to have things to kill and fight.
Click to expand...

Even when you consider that Bethesda seems to think killing shit is how you advance plots the escape from V101 makes no fucking sense. I mean, let's put aside the fact that no security force in their right mind is going to shoot first and ask questions later in a Vault environment. The game is wholly inconsistent time and time again about the "killing = plot advancement" mechanic. While I know better than to expect good storytelling from Beth by now I would at LEAST expect CONSISTENCY, but they can't even deliver THAT.
 
a721402 said:
But the point is, the overseer is the only person you should consider not to kill because it will upset someone, while death of others hold very little to no value compare to him.
Talking about the value of life.
Click to expand...

To be fair, i make sure to never kill anyone in the vault. I grew up with those people. They're family.
 
naossano said:
To be fair, i make sure to never kill anyone in the vault. I grew up with those people. They're family.
Click to expand...

Really? The game doesn't do too much to get you attached to security, short of the one dude who comes to your birthday party. I mean, not killing the rest of the vault inhabitants is understandable because they're not even the ones trying to knock your block off, but I had no compunction whatsoever about holing the asshats in the process of murdering every vault dweller with the temerity to step outside their unit.
 
SiriusShenanigans said:
What's up with that? What did the shi ever do to you?
Click to expand...

You ask respectfully for an audience and they send you to the best guarded location in northern California to steal some high-tech schematics for them. In return...you don't get an audience, instead they ask you to act as a fucking contract killer on their behalf.

There's also the nonsense with taking Chip's spleen and they even murder Badger if you're unlucky :(

I format their PC every time. By contrast, the Hubologists are just hanging around their own place and you don't need to deal with them at all if you don't want to. They won't bother you if you don't bother them.

a721402 said:
Amata will still be upset with you if you give overseer all of your weapons and killed him after he start shooting at you though.
Beside, unarmed or not, he is still responsible for allowing guard to kill Jonas and everyone who try to leave the vault, like the couple you see been shot to death by guards.
But the point is, the overseer is the only person you should consider not to kill because it will upset someone, while death of others hold very little to no value compare to him.
Talking about the value of life.
Click to expand...

The surrender dialogue is an odd one indeed. (I think surrendering should have earned you a scripted execution but whatever.) And there's no denying the overseer is a massive asshole responsible for multiple deaths. It's still a situation you can walk away from without violence as long as you don't make a point of arming him with your entire arsenal. Note that I'm not endorsing any specific action the player might choose to take in that situation, I'm just pointing out why I don't think it's such a stretch for Amata to make a distinction between killing guards in self-defense and executing her father.
 
Cliffy McEdgeface said:
Really? The game doesn't do too much to get you attached to security, short of the one dude who comes to your birthday party. I mean, not killing the rest of the vault inhabitants is understandable because they're not even the ones trying to knock your block off, but I had no compunction whatsoever about holing the asshats in the process of murdering every vault dweller with the temerity to step outside their unit.
Click to expand...

Especially after literally beating your dad's pal Jonas to death (incidently one of the few people in the vault who actually seems to like you, even with your weird pariah status). Overseer's terminal states he deliberately encourages zealousness in his guards and tolerates groups like the tunnel snakes, rather than putting them in their place.

Think about why he's got the vault locked up as well. Good old vault tek orders. I felt no qualms about offing these nutcases.
 
hag said:
What the title says. Excluding opinions pertaining to FO3/FO4's quality and lack thereof: this is not unpopular (at least with regards to NMA).

Inspired by this thread.

  • I find all the human companions in F:NV (base game) are dislikable.
  • The Think Tank is unfunny.
  • I'm not impressed by Legate Lanius or the showdown with him.
  • Tangentially, I don't find Caesar's dialogue anything profound. He name-drops Hegel once and people are blown away? Please.
  • The first quarter of F:NV is superior to the rest.
  • FO2 is neither the best nor the quintessential Fallout game.
  • FO1 is superior to all its successors.
  • The Master was essentially a good person.
  • There should be very few Pre-War buildings left intact.
  • In fact, the Pre-War world ought to be deliberately enigmatic.
  • I can't take Ulysses seriously.
  • Joshua Graham is the only good thing to come out of the Legion.
  • The Enclave sucks.
  • The concept of Vaults being social experiments is not only stupid, but also cheapens the ending of FO1.
  • FO2's tone is obnoxious.
**SEMI-FACETIOUS**
  • Van Buren got what it deserved. "Belle" is nothing but sheer idiocy.
Click to expand...

I agree with almost every single one of your points -- minus the first quarter NV thing (prefer midgame, first few hours are too samey every playthrough), and the pre-war building stuff, depending on the time period. Plus Cass, Boone, Raul, and Arcade are tolerable. You're right about the Hegel namedrop, but I still enjoyed Caesar's dialogue. I wish there had been more of it. The utilitarian ruthlessness and wild wacky pseudo-Roman simulation of Caesar's Legion becomes that much more plausible when you find out it's the brainchild of some intellectual. It also adds a bit of motivation for a laconic civilised player character to sympathise with the Legion, when otherwise there's not much to say for it. I often picture my PC being tempted by Caesar's vision, or at least the character of the man behind it, or of the discrete pleasure of being in on Caesar's ambition.
 
Octavian said:
What do you mean by FPS? Would you consider NV an fps?
Click to expand...

First person shooter. As far as combat goes, New Vegas (just as Fallout 3) doesn’t offer all that different experience from Serious Sam (except less fun as an FPS). And the game is full of combat.

What would you consider "done right"
Click to expand...

It can mean many things, really. There’s no one simple explanation. From VATS having been designed more as an actual ”combat mode” with a variety of features instead of a panic button to respond to the decidedly clumsy FPS experience, to lesser focus on bullet sponging vice accuracy, to more (and of greater variety of) environmental/universal interaction and skillchecks.

But chiefly, higher (and closer to the classical RPG roots) emphasis on character systems their implementation and effect on both, gameplay design and experience across the board.
 
Having played both games again recently for a video project, I still maintain the opinion that Fallout 3 is just as bad (if not worse) as Brotherhood of Steel.
 
Octavian said:
Elab? Thats an interesting opinion.
Click to expand...
Both games completely misunderstand what Fallout is about.

Both games feature drastically different gameplay than the original.

Both games feature laughably dumbed down rpg mechanics.

Both games feature brain dead writing.

What gives Brotherhood the advantage is it functionally works. I still can't go into a large number buildings in downtown DC without the game crashing my 360.
 
That sounds like a fair assessment based off what you've experienced. I've never played POS and don't really plan to either since every time I see it, it's like 30 bucks. 30 USD for a PS2 game that was loathed and probably only has that price tag because it's older and has the name Fallout on it? No thanks. I'd buy it for 5 bucks just to see how the game was firsthand.
 
Squadcar said:
That sounds like a fair assessment based off what you've experienced. I've never played POS and don't really plan to either since every time I see it, it's like 30 bucks. 30 USD for a PS2 game that was loathed and probably only has that price tag because it's older and has the name Fallout on it? No thanks. I'd buy it for 5 bucks just to see how the game was firsthand.
Click to expand...
I don't recommend spending that much on it. I snagged it a few years back for like 10 bucks when I was in my Fallout collecting phase. I'm surprised to see it's that high.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top