Where do you want to see Fallout 3?

[Morbus]

When first I say in VDweller's post a quote concerning Fallout 3 map... Wel...

Todd Howard claims that Fallout 3 will be one of the most original and violent titles ever and will be set in a familiar US city.

I kinda wondered: is it possíble to make a real Fallout game in such a "small" place as a city is? I mean, I did love travelling through the wastelands, looking for random or special encounters... Besides, the Wasteland itself is a very important part of fallout lore, and I still can't accept very well a Fallout game without the wasteland. But is it possible?

Well, my personal opinion is... yes, it might possible to create a Fallout Role-Playing game that doesn't set in the wasteland too, and only takes place in a city, only if Bethesda could make a decent game. It's like, a city is a very large place, depending in how you look at it. Surely fallout 1 and 2's cities were not that big, but they weren't needed to be anyway. But still, a city is very large, and can have many different places to roleplay, and, of course, depending on the storyline, you could very much have a Fallout game set in a city like LA, Mexico or New York if (and then again) Bethesda could make a decent game, wich I don't believe they can.

But, in what concerns the topic's title itself, many people (including me, not now but sometime ago) dream of a Fallout game where you could travel to any place in the world, with like vertibirds or even space and other awesome places full of fallout lore and shit. Yeah, I kinda like the idea, and I think it would fit well with a decent storyline and stuff, but... it wouldn't be a Fallout game anymore. Fallout's are meant to be set in US territory (IMO), because it was there they were born, from the cross between the right winged 50's american way of life, and from the very ecense that comes out of american culture, land and people. An "over the world Fallout" would surely be a great game, but not a Fallout one, I think...

And what do you?

 

[SuAside]

"lewl, teh city 17 is teh kool. let's try that!"

but seriously: yes, a city can be interesting enough to base a whole game there. see the various fanfics written about a single city, or V:tM-B for instance.

however, Fallout, to me is a great deal about visiting smaller communities, struggling to survive. all rather isolated, but still linked together by the odd caravans, braving the wastes for some meager profit. this with only few real 'big' cities like the Hub, where people meet to trade (i hated New Reno, NCR & San Fran). in my eyes, citylife would be a mean existence. while smaller towns dont really mean an easier life, it would mean easier accessability to primary resources (food mostly).

i think trying to focus FO3 on a single city would greatly influence the mood and setting of Fallout. i doubt it could be that convincing as FO1 was.

 

[Sorrow]

IIRC cities in Fallout (1?) 2 are scaled down.

 

[SuAside]

of course they're scaled down... or did you think a 'big' city like the Hub really had 100 citizens? or that there is a casino per 50 inhabitants in New Reno?

duh! you take it into account.

 

[Dovla]

Personally, I hate the idea.

As most of the major cities would have suffered direct hits, they would have been rendered uninhabitable, dangerous places to be scavenged for old tech and whatnot by experienced and well equipped explorers. Perhaps there would be groups of semi-feral humans/ghouls seeking canned foods and bottled water in order to survive, or raiders using surviving apartment blocks as bases for their defensive value, but I just don't see how an irradiated, ruinous and dangerous urban environment would seem like a good place to fledge a post-apoc society in.

I would like to see at least one large city included in the game as a quest area though.

 

[Lumpy]

Maybe there was a misunderstanding. I think they already said that Fallout 3 would be a big world RPG.
And I agree, a game set in a single city can be a good idea. But that doesn't work for Fallout.

 

[Morbus]

but seriously: yes, a city can be interesting enough to base a whole game there. see the various fanfics written about a single city, or V:tM-B for instance.

I thought about it when i was writing, i just forgot to mension it in the post Yes, it's very much like it.

i think trying to focus FO3 on a single city would greatly influence the mood and setting of Fallout. i doubt it could be that convincing as FO1 was.

I plainly agree. Still, it doesn't mean FO3 will be abad game only by being set in a single city... At least i don't think so. Mainstreaming the game is a much worse issue than it me thinks...

As most of the major cities would have suffered direct hits, they would have been rendered uninhabitable, dangerous places to be scavenged for old tech and whatnot by experienced and well equipped explorers.

Well, i agree, but i also think that specific fact could be used to produce a nice and intresting storyline... I personally love scavenging I'm studying arqueology, as some of you may know

Perhaps there would be groups of semi-feral humans/ghouls seeking canned foods and bottled water in order to survive,

Much like Necropolis... Well, seen that before didn't we?

or raiders using surviving apartment blocks as bases for their defensive value, but I just don't see how an irradiated, ruinous and dangerous urban environment would seem like a good place to fledge a post-apoc society in.

Well, I do... Look at how Half Life 2 handles city 17? Well, it's a huge post-apocalitic city and still has an intresting (yet streamlined) storyline. Now change the city to fallout lore, open it and there you go. Obviously, there would have to be huge spaces of uninhabited places, that would serve as the desert, or the wasteland, where we'd randomly encounter thugs and stuff. It's not THAT difficult. Besides, the city is not only buildings and buildings, it's also large gardens, highways and the boundaries with the wasteland too. Maybe we could venture into the wasteland a bit, just to find it's a death desolated place where it'd be very difficult to survive.

One think that is now worrying me is: how the heck will they put multiple (i'd like so) vaults into one single city?

I would like to see at least one large city included in the game as a quest area though.

Yes, of course, a game like fallout will never be enough, and no matter how much they do it will never express everything there is to know about fallout lore. Still, it highly depends on the scale of analysis, and/or the pettyness of the quests and shit. (i think i explained me right)

Maybe there was a misunderstanding. I think they already said that Fallout 3 would be a big world RPG.

REALLY? Now that's a relieve Do you have some quotes or something?

And I agree, a game set in a single city can be a good idea. But that doesn't work for Fallout.

That's what we're discussing right here 8) Why doesn't it work?

 

[Sander]

Well, I do... Look at how Half Life 2 handles city 17? Well, it's a huge post-apocalitic city and still has an intresting (yet streamlined) storyline. Now change the city to fallout lore, open it and there you go. Obviously, there would have to be huge spaces of uninhabited places, that would serve as the desert, or the wasteland, where we'd randomly encounter thugs and stuff. It's not THAT difficult. Besides, the city is not only buildings and buildings, it's also large gardens, highways and the boundaries with the wasteland too. Maybe we could venture into the wasteland a bit, just to find it's a death desolated place where it'd be very difficult to survive.

One think that is now worrying me is: how the heck will they put multiple (i'd like so) vaults into one single city?

Ehm, what?
Are you fucking high?
City 17 was nothing like *anything* in Fallout. It had a high-tech oppressor with huge robots and lots of firepower against a small, armed revolution. It was also focused on 'Ooh, shiny' with a rather boring storyline. It wasn't even post-apocalyptic, since there never was an apocalypse.

 

[SuAside]

One think that is now worrying me is: how the heck will they put multiple (i'd like so) vaults into one single city?

one military (BOS-ish), one Civil Defense (hence public) and one commercial Vault Tec style (private)?

hup, you got three vaults. but i dont like the idea...

Ehm, what?
Are you fucking high?
City 17 was nothing like *anything* in Fallout. It had a high-tech oppressor with huge robots and lots of firepower against a small, armed revolution. It was also focused on 'Ooh, shiny' with a rather boring storyline. It wasn't even post-apocalyptic, since there never was an apocalypse.

C17 was nothing like fallout, but it was post-apoc Sander.

aliens take over the world, with the exception of a few huge cities run by the aliens, all the land has become nearly impossible to live in (headcrab infestations, wandering zombies,...). these cities themselves are slowly being reduced to rubble as the alien taint grows. fuck, humans can no longer reproduce due to some weirdass dampening field thingy that never really gets explained & is used as a way of population control.
i think it qualifies as post-apoc.

 

[Morbus]

Ehm, what?
Are you fucking high?
City 17 was nothing like *anything* in Fallout.

Of course it's not! And I'm not comparing the two settings. I'm comparing conceptual executions of two different environments, more precisely conceptual desing of building arranjement and placement. Don't be prejudiced against people who just name city 17 ok? I was talking about it in conceptual terms of level desing. City 17's desing has nothing to do with, for instance, New Reno's desing, but still, New Reno's desing has a lot to do (IMO) with, for instance, Amn's desing (from Baldur's Gate 2), and they completely different sets. Back to the question, whil New Reno is small and very condensed, City 17 is huge and large, and has like "deserted zones". That's what I was talking about: conceptual desing, not lore.

one military (BOS-ish), one Civil Defense (hence public) and one commercial Vault Tec style (private)?

hup, you got three vaults. but i dont like the idea...

Neither do I, and that's what I was talking about: how could one possible hope to effectively blend multiple vaults into an urban environment like a city?

 

[Sander]

Of course it's not! And I'm not comparing the two settings. I'm comparing conceptual executions of two different environments, more precisely conceptual desing of building arranjement and placement. Don't be prejudiced against people who just name city 17 ok? I was talking about it in conceptual terms of level desing. City 17's desing has nothing to do with, for instance, New Reno's desing, but still, New Reno's desing has a lot to do (IMO) with, for instance, Amn's desing (from Baldur's Gate 2), and they completely different sets. Back to the question, whil New Reno is small and very condensed, City 17 is huge and large, and has like "deserted zones". That's what I was talking about: conceptual desing, not lore.

Area design, not conceptual design. Eyech.
Also, I think your memory might be failing because you started with 'Well, it's a huge post-apocalitic city and still has an intresting (yet streamlined) storyline' which implies that you like its storyline and post-apocalyptic setting, neither of which has anything to do with Fallout.
The only other thing you said about it was to 'change the city to fallout lore' and 'open it up' and you have a good Fallout setting.
Now, you never anywhere specified that you were talking about just the city layout. Because that is, simply, the only thing that could possibly be used in a Fallout game, and probably not even that.
You see, a nuked city would have way, way fewer erect buildings and a lot more rubble. That's just the layout. If you're talking about population as well, that would fit even less, obviously.

So, in short, your mentioning City17 was either irrelevant in every way, or wrong.

aliens take over the world, with the exception of a few huge cities run by the aliens, all the land has become nearly impossible to live in (headcrab infestations, wandering zombies,...). these cities themselves are slowly being reduced to rubble as the alien taint grows. fuck, humans can no longer reproduce due to some weirdass dampening field thingy that never really gets explained & is used as a way of population control.
i think it qualifies as post-apoc.

Since the apocalypse is still in progress, I don't think you can call it post-apocalytpic.

 

[Morbus]

Area design, not conceptual design. Eyech.

Sorry, my mistake

Also, I think your memory might be failing because you started with 'Well, it's a huge post-apocalitic city and still has an intresting (yet streamlined) storyline' which implies that you like its storyline and post-apocalyptic setting, neither of which has anything to do with Fallout.

Yes, I do like Half-Life storyline, out of my personal taste. That doesn't imply i compare it with every other game I talk about does it?

The only other thing you said about it was to 'change the city to fallout lore' and 'open it up' and you have a good Fallout setting.
Now, you never anywhere specified that you were talking about just the city layout.

Yes, I didn't and you misunderstood. I should have specified that, but I think everyone knows City 17 is not fallout-lore-wise...

Because that is, simply, the only thing that could possibly be used in a Fallout game, and probably not even that.
You see, a nuked city would have way, way fewer erect buildings and a lot more rubble. That's just the layout. If you're talking about population as well, that would fit even less, obviously.

Well... You have a point there. I agree with you, it wouldn't fit well.

So, in short, your mentioning City17 was either irrelevant in every way, or wrong.

It was worng, that's what you just proven and should have proven in the first place. thanks for correcting my mistake anyway, really.

 

[Sander]

Yes, I do like Half-Life storyline, out of my personal taste. That doesn't imply i compare it with every other game I talk about does it?

Considering the fact that this entire thread is about Fallout, in this context, it does mean that. It is otherwise completely irrelevant.

Yes, I didn't and you misunderstood. I should have specified that, but I think everyone knows City 17 is not fallout-lore-wise...

You'd be surprised what people do and don't think, and I can't read your mind, so hey.

It was worng, that's what you just proven and should have proven in the first place. thanks for correcting my mistake anyway, really.

You're welcome.

 

[Hotel California]

Partially I see only a few minor flaws in having a huge ruined city in which there are a few scattered communities. Perhaps if FO3 is a prequel this might be more believeable (or less due to nuke damage).

This would give a meaning to Oblivionesque travel. I wouldn't mind if it was a completely hand mapped city 12 miles in diameter, providing that in each deserted sector there was interesting stuff to do, little sidequests or stuff to scavenge. However, here is where on must use caution - it has the possiblity turn into a dungeon crawl and thats not always good.

 

[MrBumble]

Personally, I hate the idea.

Well...me too. Reminds me of Fallout : POS.
They better come with a convincing design and a HUGE place.

 

[Odin]

Where do I wanna see Fallout 3?

In the hands of someone else

 

[Roshambo]

BA-ZING!

Best. Answer. Ever.

 

[Morbus]

Considering the fact that this entire thread is about Fallout, in this context, it does mean that. It is otherwise completely irrelevant.

No it isn't... I was comparing two different cities because i thought they had some parts that were similar. But, has you said, a fallout city has much more rubble and less buildings, so it wasn't really irrelevant, it was wrong.

You'd be surprised what people do and don't think, and I can't read your mind, so hey.

Yeah, I guess

Where do I wanna see Fallout 3?

In the hands of someone else

Ahaha, that one was good I still want to wait and see how things come up. As first info starts to be made public we'll see... Well, one major hing they have to put in is children. Not that children matter THAT much (they do matter however), but not putting in children is just what I need to see they are indeed mainstreaming the game...