The good aspects to Fallout 3?

I love all the little secrets you can find throughout the game. For example, I never knew that in Jury Street Station, there's a doctor disguised as a raider working on a way to make Mole Rat Meat tasty. Once you get to the end of the tunnel you can find his machine, which mixes Mole Rat meat and Wonderglue together to make Mole Rat Wonder Meat, which is a lot better than the standard meat. Of course, every time you want to make it, you have to go back to the machine and pop the ingredients in, but I thought it was a neat secret. And there's tons more secrets like that.

Another thing I like is the Slavery aspect. I like using the mesmetron to hypnotize people, steal all their stuff, and send them packing to Paradise Falls in their underwear. That's great fun, especially with the amount of people you can enslave. For instance, I always enslave Tammy, that drunk bitch whose an abusive mother to her son in Rivet City. It makes her son hate me but I think when he grows up he'll thank me for it. Lots of little stories I can come up with involving the good ole' mesmetron.

I like the Law Bringer and Contract Killer perks as well, becoming a sort of mini-bounty hunter is really fun, though I wish the Contract Killer perk had an exclusive quest like the Law Bringer perk does.

I also really like Point Lookout. I think it's my favorite DLC of the bunch. I know a lot of people hate it but since I live near the swamps of Mississippi it reminds me of home. Wearing a confederate hat, coveralls, wielding a double barrel shotgun, getting drunk off moonshine and high off the local flora is just like home. In all seriousness though, the giant dilapidated state fair, the plantation house Desmond lives in, the insane cult of that one old fart in that mansion, that kinda stuff exists here. And I like quoting the Bible with that one missionary lady, it's too bad you can't save her from the tribals. Stupid scripted death sequences. :c I was surprised the DLC took place just north of DC, I thought it took place in Louisiana considering it takes 30 in-game days to get there.
 
Sn1p3r187 said:
Well that makes sense. But everyone in the Capital Wasteland even 10 years after the great war knew Super mutants were a really big threat. I simply don't see how Vault 87 hasn't been destroyed and how the settlements in the Capital Wasteland haven't come together to make a task force or an army to fight back the mutants.
Click to expand...
Better question. Why all those poeple just did not leave Capital Wasteland? At least they would get fresh water, get rid off many raiders... and the worst of all, Super Mutants. But hey, its better to stay there and pray to the damn nuke. :D
 
Ninja said:
I wanted it but he fell into the purifier and I couldn't get it. :cry:
Click to expand...
You can get it when you first meet him by glitching the crosshair through the door. Thats what I did to get it early on when I was on PS3. What a nightmare that port was.
 
Earth said:
Let's not go nuts.
Click to expand...
I shouldn't judge a book on it's cover, but... even just looking at Fallout 4 I can tell it's a better RPG than 3. Not that it means much, but... we got multiple endings, so... that counts for something...

TBH, Fallout 3 wasn't as bad as many people say it is. It's still awful, but not completely awful. It's only mostly awful. I like the FPS aspect, and DC was sorta interesting visually. I also liked the ideas MZ had, but it's execution actually was completely awful. The Pitt had some interesting dilemmas, but it wasn't that great.
 
Ben Soto said:
I shouldn't judge a book on it's cover, but... even just looking at Fallout 4 I can tell it's a better RPG than 3..
Click to expand...
The fact that the dialogue choices always consist of:
X: Sarcastic
Y: Info
B: Mean
A: Nice

Automatically means Fallout 4 is less of an RPG than 3. Multiple endings don't mean anything if they are just there to pick one faction at the very end and get an ending tailored to that one choice.

Fallout 3 allowed you to say things to characters the way you wanted to say it, whereas Fallout 4 forces you to choose from those four options and not even know what is going to be said, and on top of that it will be said in one tone of voice by one voice actor so you can't even say the dialogue the way you would want to say it. You can be a totally mean character and the voice acted protagonist will never reflect that, whereas text-based dialogue choice easily does this.
 
Irwin John Finster said:
The fact that the dialogue choices always consist of:
X: Sarcastic
Y: Info
B: Mean
A: Nice

Automatically means Fallout 4 is less of an RPG than 3. Multiple endings don't mean anything if they are just there to pick one faction at the very end and get an ending tailored to that one choice.
Click to expand...
SARCASTIC (X)
 
You know, while I dislike how FO3 went against everything the original games were about, I've got to admit, with a bit of work it could have been a great game. They did some really good stuff:

  • Lots of opportunities for less-combat orientated characters: This was quite well done to be honest. While New Vegas did it better, considering FO3 came first this is actually quite impressive. Like seriously, Megaton's main quest consists of using the Explosives skill to disarm a bomb, like seriously the main quest of a town requiring no combat whatsoever is impressive, I mean even in FO1 most quests were requiring you to get in to some sort of a fight. Plus, they did put a lot of opportunities for using the Science skill as an alternative to combat. Like, a lot of the time you would come across dungeons where hacking turrets and getting them to fight by your side(Something which 4 for no reason whatsoever dumped)
  • Allowed you to be a dick: I know a lot of people criticize Fallout 3 for its black and white moral decisions, but to be fair Fallout 1 didn't have that many moral decisions. Like there was pretty much "Help a friendly shopkeep who was nearly assassinated, or some asshole who wants to kill him because it would benefit his business(To be fair, Junktown would have prospered under Gizmo had they not changed the endings around to benefit good deeds)", "Side with a group of fascist law enforcers, or an oppressed group simply demanding not to be exterminated.", ECT. , While the Master was a much more grey villain, Fallout 3 isn't far behind 1 in moral decisions, and Vault 101 had a good moral decision at the end, and from what I've read The Pitt too if you side with Ashur. But what I love is that you always have the option to be a dick, like you can help a group of bullies pick on your best friend, or blow up an entire town(Which is another reason as to why Megaton shouldn't have the Forgiveness feature), or kill a prostitute because some asshole barkeep told you to.
  • A lot better for Exploration: While in Fallout 1 and 2 there were loads of empty tiles, Fallout 3 makes sure to make tons of Pre-War places you can scavenge. Plus not to mention they all have their own backstories, a lot of which really benefit the whole dictatorship theme of the time.
  • Lots of cool redesigns: Some of the redesigns were quite good. Like Mr Handys went from being Minecraft Squids, to quite practical looking robots, and Sentry Bots look cool as well. Not to mention Plasma Weapons look a lot more Comic Book style Sci Fi.
 
I think the opening is great. Not fantastic for future playthroughs, but for an introduction and for learning game mechanics, it's ideal. I think it's paced pretty well. You spend just enough time in the vault settling into things, shooting radroaches and passing speech checks to get comfortable, so leaving the vault itself seems like a huge deal. Then it throws you out into the wasteland with nothing but a pistol and a police baton. That moment when you leave the safety of the vault and see the ruins of DC spread out in front of you is one of my favourite moments in gaming, and it's a real shame Bethesda didn't follow up on that with a well-written and coherent game.
 
While some don't like her, I personally love the Moira Brown Quest. She has an honest goal, to write a book to educate people to better survive the wasteland. Now, does that make a lot of sense seeing how the person she's asking to write it probably got out of a vault an hour ago... and it's been 200 years since the bombs dropped meaning people should know this stuff by now... no?.. (Really they could of thought of some way to do this. Maybe have an excuse for there being another vault where people need to know this stuff.) But it's a fun quest that has some variety to it, it uses a lot skills to get different results in rewards and can use at least some creativity in getting stuff done. If it were the model for how quests were done in Fallout 3 I would of actually really enjoyed the game. Would it of been great? Probably not, every quest being like that would of made them sort of MMO-ey in fetching, doing tasks, and such, but at least it had you DO something, rather than go to point A and shoot. You Go to point B and Do X Y or Z, and then maybe have a skill check and you're one your way. Also I didn't mind how she was written. Most characters in 3 I consider dumb to the point they should be dead, but Moira being alive and dumb makes sense to me. She looks like she was written to be that dumb, it was intentional I feel. She's not some dumb character we're told is smart, she's a chick that's gullible, good-hearted, but decently book smart, just a little scrambled.
 
Honestly, the atmosphere was pretty good. It's probably the most post-apocalyptic of all of the Fallout games after you leave 101. The landscape is decimated and there's next to no civilization anywhere and the only ones there are struggling to survive.

They nailed the apocalypse atmosphere pretty well with the ruined buildings and destroyed towns with hardly anyone in it.
 
Meh...I prefer the apocalyptic atmosphere of the original Fallout. There's just something so...desolate about some of the bombed out cities.

People talk about the atmosphere in Fallout 3 alot but it just feels superficial to me. Almost every old building is still standing, as if it was just hit by the blitz yesterday, and nobody's situation makes any sense so any kind of actual atmosphere involving people is spoiled.

Do you know what would have been really affecting? There being only ONE building still standing in the Downtown DC area, like the Washington Monument or Capitol Building or something.

The world just feels like a toy to play with, not a world you would struggle to survive in.
 
I guess it varies from person to person. I personally wouldn't want D.C. to be just one building and nothing else because then what would be the point of having the setting be D.C.? There'd be nothing to explore if everything was a giant crater. The game would feel empty but not in a good way, in a "there's no point going out there" way I guess.

While I do believe the D.C. we got was a bit too intact, I wouldn't want it damaged to realistic levels either.
 
I gotta agree with you on that. In reality I don't think D.C would really be standing after a nuclear attack. It's too intact and kinda destroys the believable factor for me and goes against some realism Fallout put in place. I mean if my hometown got hit my nuke there really wouldn't be anything left standing. Not even the Acme smoke stack or the cell tower. It would really look like it was leveled altogether. D.C would really be the same way.
 
Earth said:
Meh...I prefer the apocalyptic atmosphere of the original Fallout. There's just something so...desolate about some of the bombed out cities.

People talk about the atmosphere in Fallout 3 alot but it just feels superficial to me. Almost every old building is still standing, as if it was just hit by the blitz yesterday, and nobody's situation makes any sense so any kind of actual atmosphere involving people is spoiled.

Do you know what would have been really affecting? There being only ONE building still standing in the Downtown DC area, like the Washington Monument or Capitol Building or something.

The world just feels like a toy to play with, not a world you would struggle to survive in.
Click to expand...
go with dark souls 3 apocalyptic feel, ash ash and ash

post post post-apocalyptic indeed
 
Big No said:
I guess it varies from person to person. I personally wouldn't want D.C. to be just one building and nothing else because then what would be the point of having the setting be D.C.? There'd be nothing to explore if everything was a giant crater. The game would feel empty but not in a good way, in a "there's no point going out there" way I guess.

While I do believe the D.C. we got was a bit too intact, I wouldn't want it damaged to realistic levels either.
Click to expand...

Well...they could always make it in isometric...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top