Why is Fallout 3 called "Oblivion with guns"?

Do you think Fallout 3 is just gamebryo with guns?

  • Yes!!

    Votes: 24 85.7%

  • No

    Votes: 4 14.3%
  • Total voters
    28
No point of bashing SMs in F3 if they are not so different than F2. Anyway plenty of raiders/scumbags who are actually intelligent beings are hostile and mindless in all fallouts, so I dont see the issue with SMs. Many human NPCs in F2 are dumber than a brahmin too
 
mfkndggrfll said:
No point of bashing SMs in F3 if they are not so different than F2. Anyway plenty of raiders/scumbags who are actually intelligent beings are hostile and mindless in all fallouts, so I dont see the issue with SMs. Many human NPCs in F2 are dumber than a brahmin too
Click to expand...
They are different. The supermutants in FO3 are effectively mindless orcs, and only ever attack on sight—excepting Fawkes. But they also should not exist in FO3 (except as a few Unity veterans. Refugees that eventually ended up on the East Cost, if any made it at there at all)—that's the main problem with them. Supermutants were a local anomaly on the West Coast; as with FEV; and Jet for that matter.

But Bethesda cherry-picks from the fiction to fill out their own skewed parody of the setting with established Fallout series content—rather than inventing their own new content* for the new region.

* Arguably they kind of did this, in a very unfortunate way, as both the supermutants, and the Brotherhood (also needlessly stuffed in from the West Coast) are included—along with the Enclave, and are nothing like the original bearers of those names.

The supermutants were powerful, but almost all were infirm, and pitiable. They had a wretched condition imposed upon them. They all seemed to be in pain. More like the late Andre the Giant than Lou Ferrigno. The SM's in FO3, are muscle-bound copies of the Hulk, with no depth to them.

All the Supermutants in Fallout had names.
 
Last edited:
mfkndggrfll said:
No point of bashing SMs in F3 if they are not so different than F2. Anyway plenty of raiders/scumbags who are actually intelligent beings are hostile and mindless in all fallouts, so I dont see the issue with SMs. Many human NPCs in F2 are dumber than a brahmin too
Click to expand...
Except they are different. In Fallout 2, a lot of them are intelligent. In Fallout 3 99% of them are just mindless ogres.

You have some of the worst arguments i ever seen from anyone. You blatantly ignore parts of other people's argument that completely debunk your "arguments". Then come up with nonsensical crap, just to argue for the sake of arguing.

Welcome to my ignore list.
 
How many intelligent SMs are in F2 compared to F3?

And to Gizmo, right so thats 1 part of the lore butchered. Though in action they provide enjoyable combat encounters, where in F2 they make you reload your save. Never when I encountered a SM in F3 did I ask myself ''Why wont this guy conversate with me'' ''Why is he hostile''

I prefer them reusing SMs than creating a new specimen of mutant with no solid lore background just for the show.

F3 made the slavers more credible and gave them a nice town with a background. They did some good things for the lore.

In the end when you criticize the game for being 'Oblivion with guns' you should be happy that its not 'Skyrim with guns'
 
Last edited:
@mfkndggrfll Just because SMs in F2's random encounter don't want to have a chat and drink some tea with you, it doesn't outright mean they're unintelligent. Are any hostile humanoids unintelligent just because *gaps*, they attack you in random encounters? I think it's your brain that is not capable to understand Fallout 2, rather. Retard.
mfkndggrfll said:
In the end when you criticize the game for being 'Oblivion with guns' you should be happy that its not 'Skyrim with guns'
Click to expand...
We're not happy with Skyrim with guns, yet Fallout 4 exists.
 
MFK.....

You had the ENTIRE TOWN of Broken Hills for one. You had Marcus. And since we are more talking about LORE, we need to include the Lou and the one in Necropolis.

You also conveniently forgot to mention the ENTIRE TOWN of Gecko, filled with talking, very human like ghouls. Great dodge there.

Just because there are random hostile ghouls or SMs doesn't mean, 'Eh fuck it, it is the same as the PoS', that was F3.

The slavers have already been explained.

They do not need to do SMs period, because as others have clearly stated, it doesn't make sense, AKA, LORE BREAKING.

The whole point is it is still a form of Fantasy/Elder Scrolls with Guns, Oblivion, or Skyrim, or whatever the fuck.
 
Last edited:
SMs in F1 and F2 aren't automatically hostile. If the SM from the Unity believe you are aligned to them, they'll leave you alone while the ones in 2 have no point to be hostile save for remnants of the Master's Army lashing out due to a lack of purpose.

mfkndggrfll said:
F2 just made a super-super mutant as antagonist because they couldnt come up with anything smarter?
Click to expand...
Actually Frank is a result of Enclave experimentation with the FEV virus. They tested it on an indoctrinated individual in the Enclave and successfully created an intelligent Super Mutant that was far stronger than the usual stock and still retained their intelligence. Why he is the only one is a result of Enclave not tolerating more freaks like Horrigan and possibly due to not being cost effective.

EDIT: If 3 wanted to be creative, they should have made a new race of creatures that serve the purpose of being orcs and ogres rather than claiming the yellow-skinned brutes were SMs.
 
mfkndggrfll said:
F3 made the slavers more credible and gave them a nice town with a background. They did some good things for the lore.
Click to expand...

They don't have much background.

Grouse's dad was boss some time ago, then Eulogy took over. At one point they met Puppet Dweller. Their only clients are Evergreen Mills and Pitt raiders. They always pay the same amount of caps, doesn't matter if slave is a raider with crippled legs or healthy Enclave grunt.
Have I missed something?
 
By background I mean Paradise Falls and the whole settlement. I think its better than a house made of junk with a Slaver's Guild sign outside and a single relevant NPC inside.

@DarkCorp But I think its wrong to call it oblivion with guns in a diminishing manner like oblivion is a bad thing.

I didnt mention the ghouls because why would I? Every fallout game has talking ghouls, nothing to add here.

IMO the whole SM thing is pretty much the equivalent of movies showing fire/sound in outer space, it doesnt really make sense but in the end it fits in the theme and can be easily overlooked. Its like a James Bond movie showing the guy holding his breath under water for 5 mins, its not realistic but it doesnt hurt that much in the end.
 
Last edited:
I dont see how except for the gameplay change. Im damn glad Bethesda made F3 rather than some random low budget studio. If anything it brings an equal amount of good and bad. The New Vegas you people love so much wouldnt even exist if it wasnt for F3.
 
MFKD

By itself, Oblivion is still a simplified Elder Scroll game, inferior to Morrowind or even Daggerfall.

But lets ignore that, F3 was a terrible SEQUEL, as in it was NOT IN THE SPIRIT, of the originals. It is no so much that Oblivion was shitty, (read above) so much as lumping fantasy into a PA game.

Sure F3 had talking ghouls but F3 also had RUNNING, 28 days later, Dawn Of The Dead, cheetah zombie, ghouls. THAT IS the problem. While Necropolis did have hostile ghouls, they were most likely part of Sets asshole faction with the occasional mentally unbalanced ghoul. Even then, they weren't 'zoombies'.

It doesn't hurt that much in the end, FOR YOU. Maybe you just don't care as much for spirit and accuracy to the originals as we do? It is not just un-realistic, I mean, carrying a mini-gun isn't realistic. The issue is breaking ESTABLISHED LORE. It is not only un-realistic but LORE BREAKING.

Even though I disagree, I can atleast enterain that we have understandable differences as the slaver argument could be construed as un-realistic, to take your side. Thing is, at the very least, the slaver situation in F2 did not break established LORE.
 
mfkndggrfll said:
I dont see how except for the gameplay change.
Click to expand...
That by itself is plenty; (and for me it is paramount).

Im damn glad Bethesda made F3 rather than some random low budget studio.
Click to expand...
I would have preferred for Troika to have tried—and failed miserably, over even modest success in the style Bethesda trussed it in. At least then the series would have had the honest attempt at a sequel, instead of the being falsely paraded for sale under the auspice of the Fallout series' earned reputation.

The New Vegas you people love so much wouldnt even exist if it wasnt for F3.
Click to expand...
I have read posts that agree with you here; and they consider it the game's one redeeming aspect.

*Personally, I like everything about its world environment; except the scarcity of it. I don't care for any of the NPCs, or dialogs; and that's telling. I had hoped that they would match the likes of Thaler in the Witcher... no such luck.
 
Last edited:
I love New Vegas, but it only existing because of Fallout 3 doesn't stop me for thinking Fallout 3 is a terrible fallout game, one of the worst sequels ever made and just a terrible game in general. Not gonna give it any sympathy points just because a game i love exists because of it.
 
mfkndggrfll said:
Im damn glad Bethesda made F3 rather than some random low budget studio.
Click to expand...
I would prefer a low budget studio.

You don't need an individually modelled face for every character, or a fully 3D open world, or every character to be voiced to make a good Fallout game.

A lower budget studio would have had a clearer direction and better design priorities.
mfkndggrfll said:
The New Vegas you people love so much wouldnt even exist if it wasnt for F3.
Click to expand...
Here's a thought: NONE of what makes New Vegas good comes from Bethesda.

New Vegas is good because of its design priorities from the originals, it feeling like a genuine sequel, it's RPG elements, and it's reactive world.

Bethesda provided the engine and assets, both of which were fairly shoddy.

True, New Vegas IN IT'S CURRENT FORM wouldn't exist without Bethesda, but you could have made an RPG just as good as New Vegas in any engine with any assets and have it still be as good a game.

Fallout 3 just limited New Vegas by forcing it to use the style of Fallout 3. Fallout 3 was not what made New Vegas great, New Vegas was great because of a variety of factors which could have easily been done by a smaller budget studio.
 
MFKD

The asshats who made FPOS also said that we should be thankful because if we gave them business, they might make a worthy successor. Guess what they were in the process of doing when they shut down? FPOS 2.

Bethesda bought the Fallout IP and pimped it out to its creepy uncles with bow, makeup, the works.

Like others have said, it would have been better if Troike, HELL, even if OBSIDIAN got its hands on it. ME was a pretty damned good game and if I HAD to make Fallout an FPS affair, I trust Obsidian more than I trust Bethesda.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top