Why do people think Fallout 3 was actually good?

[TorontoReign]

Opinion is factually wrong?
Novac doesn't react to me taking their sniper from night shifts at all, no one has any issues I helped kill someone that works towards running the town (something that would have been an easy solve, showing them the bill of sale)
Goodsprings becomes dead after ghost town gunfight and the powder gangers are just as much in a bubble
jacobs town has like 1 quest and telling the ncr go away
Leigons camp? You mean the cove or the fort? The fort is beyond retarded, they take your weapons when you get there lol They at least do feel like the most active group in the mojave.
The world is dead and lacks believable interaction, something most of the series is lacking. The issue I take is NV isn't better at having its npcs act like living people following a logical through-line towards me and is worse when it comes down to running off on my own. It's alot easier for me to stop thinking about it when the game gives me some shit to explore, rather than things just halting after I finish some shitty fetch quest lol.
I never said 3 isn't retardly silly as well, lol thats why I like 1 for its story best.
3's intro does not stop you from doing things however you see fit when you play the game. So its the same as 1, nv etc when it comes to player choice. Sorry if you think I need to care more about the main story in a open world game that encourages not doing that for most of the time in a playthrough.
I'm not here to tell you your wrong pointing the issues out in 3, I agree with most of them, but if you wanna tell me new vegas doesn't have those same issues I'll call foul.
Liking any off the fallout games is taking the good with the bad, and I'd like NV best if 3 wasn't in a more interesting area. But they have the same problems if your not setting the low bar of "its better then the other game that did this poorly" I like both of these games despite these flaws, but I don't look at things critically to make excuses for the one I prefer.

Now that I know for sure you are a Bethesdafag all of your points about New Vegas fall to pieces. You like the world design better you just said. You literally just repeated the same fucking shit kids like you (not 22) have repeated time and time again.

I have two friends that love Fallout 3. They were in special education at school and have IQ's of under 100. You are right there along with them but I hope you grow into your brain soon.

 

[Deleted member 98605]

Now that I know for sure you are a Bethesdafag all of your points about New Vegas fall to pieces. You like the world design better you just said. You literally just repeated the same fucking shit kids like you (not 22) have repeated time and time again.

I have two friends that love Fallout 3. They were in special education at school and have IQ's of under 100. You are right there along with them but I hope you grow into your brain soon.

His points are somewhat alright. I complain about that, too. The 'second layer' of quests/third layer and so on. But again - NV was rushed. I'm glad we got anything at all. Goodsprings easily could had been 'starting home town uwu so cute so safeee', but they decided 'eh, gangers up the road, these folk just want to lay low' and went with that.

Anyway for OP...what do I like about F3...uh....some of the maps? Like on an individual level, case-by-case. That's about it, I mean, I can immerse myself in FPS no problem so that wasn't a complaint for me....

 

[TorontoReign]

Point is he registered two accounts because he is trolling. He is afraid to be the only one in here debating since he is a dumbass. He needed a butt buddy to feel safe. He is likely really young.

We are essentially debating against a zoomer.

 

[Paladin Hank]

You have Fallout and you have Fallout 2. That's it. Anything else in the franchise is retarded and made to make a quick buck, yes, even NV.

New Vegas is retarded? Are you sure we played the same game?

If some fuckface ever plans on making Arcanum 2, I will sharpen a broomstick and drive to his house. The rest will be in the newspapers.

There was a planned sequel for Arcanum called "Journey to the Center of Arcanum" but unfortunately since Troika shut down it never happened. I'd love to see Tim Cain and Leonard Boyarsky make a sequel in the future but obviously nothing will ever replace the original.

 

[Deleted member 116891]

New Vegas is retarded? Are you sure we played the same game?

Different generations of glittering gem. I fully understand that people can dismiss FNV purely on the fact that its an FPS and it was made in Bethesdas engine. Fallout belongs in quasi-isometric. Anyone who likes NV has to accept that compromise, and some refuse to.

Also, Van Buren would have been better, given it has become the legend of what everyone wanted in their personal Fallout game, the perfect spectre, if you will.

 

[Paladin Hank]

Different generations of glittering gem. I fully understand that people can dismiss FNV purely on the fact that its an FPS and it was made in Bethesdas engine. Fallout belongs in quasi-isometric. Anyone who likes NV has to accept that compromise, and some refuse to.

Also, Van Buren would have been better, given it has become the legend of what everyone wanted in their personal Fallout game, the perfect spectre, if you will.

Still, claiming New Vegas is "retarded" simply because it's an fps is a bit close-minded. I would have preferred Van Buren too, but I'm not at all disappointed with what we got instead.

 

[Black Angel]

Still, claiming New Vegas is "retarded" simply because it's an fps is a bit close-minded.

Well, have you tried comparing New Vegas's FPS mechanic with other FPS games? That's where the retardation opinion came from. Granted the game *tried* to hybridize a gameplay mechanic of FPS-RPG.... alas it doesn't really succeed to do it and fail to satisfy an FPS fan or an RPG fan. Like TheOtherManInTheRoom said, you had to accept that compromise to truly like New Vegas, and not really caring for the quality of either the FPS or RPG mechanics. I'm indifferent to New Vegas, but I will always, *always* prefers Fallout 1&2's gameplay mechanic over NV's any day.

 

[FDO]

When your only other worthwhile experience of a fps is a other hybride rpg\fps, vampire bloodlines, NV's shooting gameplay just feel like a more recent iteration of the same so I am indifferent as well with no other fps style to compare it to. Well, I did play Deus ex last year but saying I played guns blazing would be a lie so, it doesn't advance me much in the understanding of why fps players find Vegas's shooting mediocre or terribly bad.

 

[Black Angel]

When your only other worthwhile experience of a fps is a other hybride rpg\fps, vampire bloodlines, NV's shooting gameplay just feel like a more recent iteration of the same so I am indifferent as well with no other fps style to compare it to. Well, I did play Deus ex last year but saying I played guns blazing would be a lie so, it doesn't advance me much in the understanding of why fps players find Vegas's shooting mediocre or terribly bad.

Play STALKER to know what I mean.

Hell, if you've played competitive FPS before like Counter Strike, or played some hardcore FPS like Doom, you'll know what I mean.

Obviously, it won't matter if you're not into FPS in the first place. In which case, you just need to accept the compromise that NV's gameplay is just mediocre and won't stand up to any other pure FPS or pure RPGs.
And while I haven't really encountered any worthwhile FPS-RPG hybrid, I've had my share of Action-RPG hybrids and the best of them all were Gothic, and right after that is a tie between Kingdom Come: Deliverance and Mount&Blade.

 

[Paladin Hank]

Well, have you tried comparing New Vegas's FPS mechanic with other FPS games? That's where the retardation opinion came from. Granted the game *tried* to hybridize a gameplay mechanic of FPS-RPG.... alas it doesn't really succeed to do it and fail to satisfy an FPS fan or an RPG fan. Like TheOtherManInTheRoom said, you had to accept that compromise to truly like New Vegas, and not really caring for the quality of either the FPS or RPG mechanics. I'm indifferent to New Vegas, but I will always, *always* prefers Fallout 1&2's gameplay mechanic over NV's any day.

In the end it boils down to personal preference. Some people like FPS-RPGs, others prefer "old-school" isometric RPGs. I'll always have a slight preference for the latter but if the story and writing of the former is engaging I'll enjoy it regardless.
In the case of New Vegas I'd argue it offers as much if not more roleplaying possibilities than Fallout 1 and 2.
1) You can play as a diplomat, a gunslinger, a psychopath, etc and the world will react to whatever decisions you make, just like Fallout 1 and 2.
2) You can side with multiple factions, or betray them, in which case they will attack you on sight. You can also disguise yourself as a faction (a pretty interesting mechanic that isn't altogether that useful but adds a layer of depth to the game).
3) Additionally there are a lot more options for skill-checks within dialogue so that most skills don't feel useless (as was the case for Barter in Fallout 1 and 2, for example) and you can also fail skill-checks which often leads to pretty funny situations and adds another layer to the mechanic.
4) Companions are also much more in-depth than they were in Fallout 1 and 2, and will react to whatever decisions you make, and even leave your party if they disapprove of your actions.

One thing that New Vegas doesn't have is a "dumb" option like in Fallout 1 and 2, but this is mainly due to time constraints and how long it would take to implement such a mechanic within the game.
SPECIAL stats are also less important than they were in Fallout 1 and 2 and due to the nature of the game you can still be good with guns if you're good with first person shooters even though your actual gun skill is low, which necessarily makes the game a lot less difficult and challenging than Fallout 1 and 2 (Hardcore mode makes the game a little bit harder but it's still fairly easy even then).

In conclusion, Fallout New Vegas is a different kind of RPG than Fallout 1 and 2 but just as complex and deserving of praise.

 

[FDO]

One thing that New Vegas doesn't have is a "dumb" option like in Fallout 1 and 2, but this is mainly due to time constraints and how long it would take to implement such a mechanic within the game.

It's not like it's exactly fascinating to play anyway, it lock you from most of the content and options, and personally the dialogues never seemed funny to me. It gets old really fast. Sure it's logic to have dummy dialogues and so on if you make a character with less than 4 intelligence, but for what it is it is indeed a pain in the back to script a 'dummy' situation to go with everything else. Not to mention writing the actual stupid lines, or try to make it really interesting.

 

[Paladin Hank]

It's not like it's exactly fascinating to play anyway, it lock you from most of the content and options, and personally the dialogues never seemed funny to me. It gets old really fast. Sure it's logic to have dummy dialogues and so on if you make a character with less than 4 intelligence, but for what it is it is indeed a pain in the back to script a 'dummy' situation to go with everything else. Not to mention writing the actual stupid lines, or try to make it really interesting.

True, but it's still a nice touch and can lead to some hilarious situations, such as these:

It also makes the game a lot more challenging.

 

[Black Angel]

2) You can side with multiple factions, or betray them, in which case they will attack you on sight. You can also disguise yourself as a faction (a pretty interesting mechanic that isn't altogether that useful but adds a layer of depth to the game).

That's more because Fallout 1&2 are less about factional conflicts and power-playing as New Vegas did it, and more about personal journey of the player character across the wasteland. New Vegas simply took the factional conflict part of Fallout 2 (NCR-Vault City-New Reno) by having NCR coming out on top and pitting them against the new factions in Mojave Wasteland.

3) Additionally there are a lot more options for skill-checks within dialogue so that most skills don't feel useless (as was the case for Barter in Fallout 1 and 2, for example) and you can also fail skill-checks which often leads to pretty funny situations and adds another layer to the mechanic.

This is because the devs didn't utilize the RPG mechanics of Fallout 1&2 much in regards to content, that I'll admit. However, Fallout 2 TC mods such as Fallout 1.5: Resurrection and Fallout of Nevada showed us how great the GURPS-like system of the SPECIAL is if used and implemented correctly. With New Vegas the devs are more or less aware of the strengths and weaknesses of the SPECIAL system, although they had difficulty adopting it into the new template which is why it neither seems good or bad. Just mediocre as an RPG.

4) Companions are also much more in-depth than they were in Fallout 1 and 2, and will react to whatever decisions you make, and even leave your party if they disapprove of your actions.

Unfortunately, you're limited to having one human and one nonhuman companions. You can't have an army of followers like you could in Fallout 1, 2, and even Arcanum. Mods can fix this, but there's no companion banter because of this design decision, e.g companions don't acknowledge each other except on some occasion like a companion you want to recruit acknowledge you already have a follower because of the one only limitation.
When it comes to Fallout companions, I preferred Fallout 1.5: Resurrection because the companions acknowledged one another and would banter from time to time. Heck, even Arcanum has companion banters, interwoven into one another with quests and contents.

One thing that New Vegas doesn't have is a "dumb" option like in Fallout 1 and 2, but this is mainly due to time constraints and how long it would take to implement such a mechanic within the game.

It's not like it's exactly fascinating to play anyway, it lock you from most of the content and options, and personally the dialogues never seemed funny to me. It gets old really fast. Sure it's logic to have dummy dialogues and so on if you make a character with less than 4 intelligence, but for what it is it is indeed a pain in the back to script a 'dummy' situation to go with everything else. Not to mention writing the actual stupid lines, or try to make it really interesting.

How funny the dialogues are to us are subjective, and what's wrong being locked out of content and options? Do you also complain a full fighter character can't silver-tongue their way from dialogues with NPCs? I know it isn't exactly the right arguments to be made, but try to look it from that angle. I'd agree having literally 90% of the content locked is too extreme, but that's where Tim Cain fixed it in Arcanum where playing a dumb character is viable thanks to a combination of Beauty stat-reaction modifier and having Vergil as a companion.

In conclusion, Fallout New Vegas is a different kind of RPG than Fallout 1 and 2 but just as complex and deserving of praise.

It can't be as complex because NV's RPG mechanics was a compromise between a half shooter and a half RPG. The only praise NV deserve were for everything else, but not its implementation of the SPECIAL system and its RPG mechanics.

 

[Paladin Hank]

there's no companion banter because of this design decision, e.g companions don't acknowledge each other except on some occasion like a companion you want to recruit acknowledge you already have a follower because of the one only limitation.

This is admittedly unfortunate but probably due to time constraints and Obsidian wanting to focus on more important things. Still the depth of the companions themselves makes up for it.

It can't be as complex because NV's RPG mechanics was a compromise between a half shooter and a half RPG. The only praise NV deserve were for everything else, but not its implementation of the SPECIAL system and its RPG mechanics.

When you think about it, the RPG mechanics of New Vegas are quite similar to Fallout 1 and 2's. Almost all of the skills in New Vegas, such as Lockpicking, Stealth, Speech, Barter, etc are taken directly from F1 and 2 and serve the same function. The only really different thing about it, as you've mentioned, is the implementation of the SPECIAL system and the way it affects combat. In that way I'll admit that New Vegas's combat mechanics are far less deep and interesting than F1 and 2's.

Otherwise I agree with everything else you've said.

 

[Black Angel]

When you think about it, the RPG mechanics of New Vegas are quite similar to Fallout 1 and 2's. Almost all of the skills in New Vegas, such as Lockpicking, Stealth, Speech, Barter, etc are taken directly from F1 and 2 and serve the same function.

Not really. I said this once before, but you know how in Fallout 1&2 you can right-click mouse button to switch between movement cursor and interaction cursor? And then with interaction cursor, you can hover upon an object, hold left-click, choose between few options, one of them being skill index, then click on one of the skill to use it to interact with the objects? This particular mechanic is the reason why Fallout 1&2 are such great RPGs, and because it's missing in New Vegas it would never be as complex RPGs as its predecessors.

And while NV have almost all of the skills of Fallout 1&2, in the former they aren't as interwoven into the moment-to-momentary gameplay as well as in the latter. Lockpicking and hacking are restricted into a minigame where the RPG mechanic only involve of letting you attempt it or not and nothing else. Steal doesn't have a skill, instead merged into Sneak for whatever reason. You can't use Repair and Science skills manually to interact with objects like you could with Fallout 1&2's freeform interactivity, the same with Doctor and First Aid (merged into Medicine, probably the only sensible skill-merging Bethesda did with the series) and you can't use them to manually heal yourself. And I think having it increases the amount you can heal with stimpak is a largely useless compromise when you can just bring up your Pipboy and spam the stims in the meanwhile.
Some of this can be fixed with mods. But I'd prefer if a game is great regardless of mods in the first place.

 

[FDO]

How funny the dialogues are to us are subjective, and what's wrong being locked out of content and options? Do you also complain a full fighter character can't silver-tongue their way from dialogues with NPCs? I know it isn't exactly the right arguments to be made, but try to look it from that angle. I'd agree having literally 90% of the content locked is too extreme, but that's where Tim Cain fixed it in Arcanum where playing a dumb character is viable thanks to a combination of Beauty stat-reaction modifier and having Vergil as a companion.

Of course not, characters builds not being able to do the same things and options changing in consequence of this, and of course in consequence of the player's choices is a big mark of a promising RPG. What I meant is what you said about the 90%, there is almost no real special content aside from almost everyone telling you they don't deal with 'retards'. I spend most of my time in Fo1in2 files lately, I see constantly how the NLowOptions just lead to automatic dialogues ending, no quests and, subjectively speaking, a boring game. It could be different but speaking from a design standpoint, I should have added that unless you are really motivated by working on the 'dummy' build, the best would be to set a automatic minimum to intelligence stat, players just coudn't make a (that much) dumb character.
That way it would make sense that there is no retarded lines and 'fuck off, moron', answers type. And it save you the trouble of having to design reactions to stupid chars while you can work on every other characters builds instead.

And I am not complaining you know, only expressing thoughts crossing my mind, it help me think.
Other than that, I agree with your other points.

 

[Paladin Hank]

Not really. I said this once before, but you know how in Fallout 1&2 you can right-click mouse button to switch between movement cursor and interaction cursor? And then with interaction cursor, you can hover upon an object, hold left-click, choose between few options, one of them being skill index, then click on one of the skill to use it to interact with the objects? This particular mechanic is the reason why Fallout 1&2 are such great RPGs, and because it's missing in New Vegas it would never be as complex RPGs as its predecessors.

Don't get me wrong I love Fallout 1&2 as much as you do but I fail to see why this mechanic makes them better RPGs than New Vegas. It's just a different type of RPG.

Lockpicking and hacking are restricted into a minigame where the RPG mechanic only involve of letting you attempt it or not and nothing else.

If you ignore the minigame (which I personally hate), lockpicking is almost the same as Fallout 1&2, except you can't blow up doors with dynamite (which is admittedly unfortunate but not that big of a deal).

Steal doesn't have a skill, instead merged into Sneak for whatever reason.

It kind of makes sense, you can't really steal something from someone without being stealthy about it.

And I think having it increases the amount you can heal with stimpak is a largely useless compromise when you can just bring up your Pipboy and spam the stims in the meanwhile.

That's true. However medicine is still useful in dialogue and quests (for example to remove Caesar's tumor). In my opinion it would be far better if the pip-boy didn't stop time, because it would make combat a lot more engaging and challenging.

Overall I personally prefer Fallout 1's isometric gameplay over New Vegas's FPS mechanics but I still consider them both equally excellent RPGs.

 

[FDO]

It kind of makes sense, you can't really steal something from someone without being stealthy about it.

Yep, but being good at stealth doesn't necessary mean you are as agile with your hands to pickpocket stuffs. The first sure can help the other but it still isn't the same craft. In general, having more skills to consider in which spending your points may insure that you won't end up with a character good at everything. And that is a problem in NV if you have high intelligence and\or maybe perks gifting extra skill points.

At a certain point not that late in the game, you just start spending points in skills you don't care about or aren't in character because you already are too skilled in the character main trades. One could say that covering each of the most useful skills in Fallout and Fallout 2 is just as possible, but I would answer that it require meta-gaming, especially in 2. I doubt many players walked in Fallout the first time and succeded in a almost 'optimal' playthrough without even trying. While in NV, it was basically my impression, there were few opportunities or skills checks I missed, as I realized later.

 

[Black Angel]

Don't get me wrong I love Fallout 1&2 as much as you do but I fail to see why this mechanic makes them better RPGs than New Vegas. It's just a different type of RPG.

My point is that having more options to interact with the world, NPCs, and objects AND actually going through with it is what makes the better RPGs.
You keep saying they're different types of RPGs, but does simply being different means they're just as complex and deserving praise as you said? I've put my case on comparing how the RPG mechanics works on both templates, and as you can see New Vegas just don't have the complexity that Fallout 1&2 has.

If you ignore the minigame (which I personally hate), lockpicking is almost the same as Fallout 1&2, except you can't blow up doors with dynamite (which is admittedly unfortunate but not that big of a deal).

But they're not. You can use Force Lock, but that mechanic was deliberately designed in such a way that doing the minigames would be more reliable way of opening locks and hacking terminals.
And not being able to blow up doors with explosives are a BIG deal. Mind my wording, explosive, because not only dynamites can blow up doors in Fallout 1&2, but also grenades and molotovs.
I also remembered some instance in Fallout 2 where you can use crowbars to force open locked doors and containers, and vaguely remembered you can even use sledgehammer to do that. Hell, even Fallout 1.5: Resurrection (and maybe even Nevada) make it so that crowbars can be used to open ALL locked doors and containers.
Having More Options™ are a Good Thing™, especially if you happened to jam some locks.

It kind of makes sense, you can't really steal something from someone without being stealthy about it.

Not really, like FDO pointed out above. And if you played Age of Decadence (an RPG inspired by Fallout 1&2, and just as great if not more based on your taste in RPGs) and play the Thief questline, they explained how pickpocketing something from someone is less of being stealthy, and more about having skillful sleight of hands.

Though, I'd fault the lost of Steal skill to Bethesda, who were the ones who merged the skill into Sneak in the first place. I'd assume Obsidian probably want the skill back if they're not forced to use Gamebryo.

That's true. However medicine is still useful in dialogue and quests (for example to remove Caesar's tumor). In my opinion it would be far better if the pip-boy didn't stop time, because it would make combat a lot more engaging and challenging.

But I'd still prefer it to be useful in moment-to-moment gameplay, not only in dialogues and quests. It would've been one of the things that make it better RPG.

Overall I personally prefer Fallout 1's isometric gameplay over New Vegas's FPS mechanics but I still consider them both equally excellent RPGs.

Once again, they can't be equally excellent RPGs because one has more actual complexity and deeper mechanics than the other. And it seems you mistaken my arguments as being because Fallout 1 is isometric and New Vegas is FPP-TPP simply for the sake of it, which was not. My points was that the GURPS-like SPECIAL system was better fleshed and conceived in the Fallout 1&2 than New Vegas, and I'm sure I don't have to repeat it wasn't Obsidian's fault to have their hands tied to Gamebryo, didn't I?
And as I've said before, the only place New Vegas excelled at over Fallout 1&2 were the story, narrative, characters, and quests designs. And that was only because the devs are much more experienced and more or less aware of the strengths and weaknesses of the GURPS-like SPECIAL system in regards to the aforementioned aspects, but their implementation left much to be desired because of them having to adapt to the new format.

If I have to bring up an example of RPGs of higher quality than Fallout 1&2, it would be Arcanum where the RPG mechanics were much more tightly designed and implemented in regards to content. But since this is Fallout, then I'm just going to rest my case by saying Fallout 1.5: Resurrection and especially Fallout of Nevada literally wiped the floor with Fallout 1&2 combined when it comes to RPG mechanics, that New Vegas can't even join in the competition. And once again, it wasn't the matter of top-down isometric vs. FPP-TPP.

 

[CT Phipps]

So I just got done playing Fallout 3 and I have to say, I don't get why people think it's so great. First of all, there's no capacity for roleplaying.

Because it was miles better than Oblivion and a lot of fun to play?