Things you like from Fallout 3

I am not going to lie but this will probably give @CT Phipps some schadenfreude but I did like the atmosphere and environment of 3. However, I would also argue that the environment and atmosphere would have made more sense and be more impactful if the game took place 20-40 years after the war. Seeing the fall and the still burning ashes of the old world a few decades after the war would have been more impactful instead of 200 years when people by that time should have rebuild some semblance of civilized society.
 
RangerBoo said:
I am not going to lie but this will probably give @CT Phipps some schadenfreude but I did like the atmosphere and environment of 3.
Click to expand...

GASP!

:)

Thanks for admitting it.

However, I would also argue that the environment and atmosphere would have made more sense and be more impactful if the game took place 20-40 years after the war. Seeing the fall and the still burning ashes of the old world a few decades after the war would have been more impactful instead of 200 years when people by that time should have rebuild some semblance of civilized society.
Click to expand...

Eh, I take the view that they may have rebuilt some only to have it wiped out again. :)

The only problem is that prequels inherently suck.

Fallout 76's idea of being right after the War just doesn't seem to have the same stakes. Weirdly, I do think they originally planned for Fallout 3 to be set much earlier in the timeline before they decided they wanted to include the Enclave.
 
CT Phipps said:
The only problem is that prequels inherently suck.

Fallout 76's idea of being right after the War just doesn't seem to have the same stakes. Weirdly, I do think they originally planned for Fallout 3 to be set much earlier in the timeline before they decided they wanted to include the Enclave.
Click to expand...
I think it would have been different in Fallout 3's case. Mainly because 3 takes place on the East Coast instead of the West. Bethesda had a blank slate to work with and nobody knows what went on in the East Coast around the time of the original Fallout's. They had a lot to work with but instead chose to go the nostalgia route. Which is why I get so mad at 3 as I do with Skyrim. There was so much in the way of opportunities and ideas that Bethesda could have explored but they squandered it and played it safe. Sometimes the best ideas are ones where one takes a risk.
 
I kinda liked the unique weapons on Fallout 3 as well, most were pretty boring, oooh wow higher damage and condition and nothing else!

But some like the Miss Launcher were quite unique indeed and otherwise bizarrely 'good' for bethesda's quality.

Lincoln Rifle, while having a retarded reload animation, was kickass to use, nothing like blamming someone into salsa using an old lever action, before NV came out.
 
Some of the things I like about Fallout 3 was the world, but I do agree that the game should have been set around the same time as the original Fallout. It makes no sense that The Bombs got brought up at all given that its been 200 years since they actually got dropped. It would have been fairly easy to have the Brotherhood show up and not be some West Coast off shoot. I like the idea of Maxon calling his friends or other outposts and turning them makes sense and is a good idea, even if Fallout 76 horribly executed it. It would explain why the Eastern Brotherhood is so different from the Western Brotherhood if they were a group that was converted rather than one that migrated.

One thing that I think has been a missed opportunity that the series has missed in general is how the raiders work. The fact that they are all basically drugged out pyros annoys me. It would make sense that raiders would act like warlords and form protection rackets over farming villages and get paid in food and other tribute. The thing I like about Fallout 3 is that some parts of the map are depopulated either because the Super Mutants got them or the Slavers. The missed opportunity is that there weren't a handful of raider controlled settlements that are reasonably safe from attack, but the raiders are varying degrees of awful to the local population. The question for the player then being, do you try to overthrow the raiders because they are morally repugnant or do you let them stay in power because without the raiders they will be picked off by slavers and super mutants or get exploited by the merc company in the area.
 
I don't think anybody has ever said this before, um for me it's the art style you know, the aesthetic! There's something about it that's just really appealing to me, and quite frankly Fallout 4 was when I realized that Fallout 3's art style is superior in achieving the POST NUCLEAR APOCALYPTIC setting. And no matter what you think about Fallout 3, you gotta give credit where credit is due to Adam Adamowicz, he really brought the wasteland to life with his art style! :)
 
That is where I disagree. The art style and level design in Fallout 4 was the only good part of the game.
 
Fallout 3 reached a point where it crashed incessantly and was unplayable. I can't play it anymore and I kind of like that.
 
Fallout New Vegas did that for me so I don't think I will be playing it again either. Also fuck Obsidian.
 
xxdemonxspawnnxx said:
I like the Yao Guai. Probably the only balanced enemy in vanilla Fallout 3.
Click to expand...

Yeah but does the Animal Friend perk make Yao Guai your best buddies ?

As far as I can remember Fallout 3 or Vegas never crashed at all.

I thought the weather effects that were non existent needed improvement. Those dust storms, The raging static discharges and Purple rain would have actually brought some reality to the dullness.

Playing NV on hardest level just made blowflies fracture your arm for the 50th time.

3 dog was good in F3 but with it turning to a FPS with tons of available pick ups it pissed me off in the end.

Also the storyline was piss poor. OK Dadda I will catch up with you in 6 or 7 months time Yaaawn
 
Richwizard said:
New Vegas runs just fine. Must be user error. :P
Click to expand...

If you mod it a certain way to where you can enjoy it after 1000 hours (I did everything, there is nothing to do) it will not run for longer than a couple hours without crashing. If a game will not run for a couple hours without crashing it is not worth playing obsessively.
 
Played for 250 hours and maybe crashed three times and got like three or four bugs. Its current state is much better than at release and it's better than basically every other Bethesda release.
 
It's just as bad as Fallout 3 (crash wise) and the memory leaks are still in the starting areas for some fucking reason. Actually when I played Fallout 3 at launch on console it crashed less than New Vegas at launch on console. Eat those anecdotes.

Seriously I wish you guys would stop sucking New Vegas dick the game has good writing and C&C and it is still unbearable to play without mods due to jank. I challenge anybody still playing it to play it vanilla for longer than 20 hours. Also let me know if it crashes.

Better yet play the original Fallout games without the mods that make those bearable in 2022. Does anybody play F2 without the RP? Do you remember when you did? Fallout 3 brings about some decent nostalgia when I think back tbh. I played it while in the Army when I really needed something mindless but also OCD ridden. That was it. Those style of games just don't offer much year after year. New Vegas is one of them but it has shit loot so you need to mod in more loot and don't me started...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
TorontoReign said:
It's just as bad as Fallout 3 (crash wise) and the memory leaks are still in the starting areas for some fucking reason. Actually when I played Fallout 3 at launch on console it crashed less than New Vegas at launch on console. Eat those anecdotes.
Click to expand...
And when i played Fallout 3 it was constantly crashing and bugging out while New Vegas on the same laptop barely crashed and bugged out. Maybe stop playing games with a shitty rig. And Fallout 3 is basically unplayable in Windows 10 while New Vegas runs just fine in it.

Eat those anedoctes because i have no reason to lie.

TorontoReign said:
and it is still unbearable to play without mods due to jank.
Click to expand...
TorontoReign said:
I challenge anybody still playing it to play it vanilla for longer than 20 hours.
Click to expand...
Reread my post to know how bullshit that is because i played for 250 hours. Do i need to play more to somehow reach the same state you played at?
 
Me either. I also edited my post as you posted that. Point is F3 hardly ever crashed for me on console while New Vegas crashed like a bitch on both. Fallout 3 did crash horrible on PC though FOR ME. So it wins in those regards because I was able to play it without crashing on 360 back when it came out. Likely because I had a job and could not play for longer than one hour. New Vegas crashed so much my wife was asking me if I need to return it and get another copy not knowing the game is a piece of shit that just happens to have good design.

If you manage to turn a Ford Ranger into a dragster good for you but it is still a piece of shit.
 
TorontoReign said:
Me either. I also edited my post as you posted that. Point is F3 hardly ever crashed for me on console while New Vegas crashed like a bitch on both. Fallout 3 did crash horrible on PC though FOR ME. So it wins in those regards because I was able to play it without crashing on 360 back when it came out.
Click to expand...
Yeah, New Vegas had a shitty launch, what of it? So did Fallout 3 because even on the 360 it was buggy and crash prone. Maybe you need to replay in that console because i find it hardly to believe that it never crashed when people were bitching about how broken it was back at release, regardless if it was pc or console.

The huge difference is that NOW New Vegas runs far better than Fallout 3 regardless of platform. So Fallout 3 won jack and shit in the end since it's still a broken piece of shit.

And if we are gonna whine like bitches about jank in New Vegas and that's a reason to not play it, then all of them are unplayable. The first two Fallout games have a bunch of jank, even at the time, and yet they are still great.
 
Nobody is whining like bitches you are getting butthurt because I talked bad about a game you like while talking positive about a game you do not like. I simply posted that F3 crashed less (WHAT I LIKED FROM FALLOUT 3) and your asshole got all bloody. The first two games were broken at launch as well which is kinda a thing with RPG's I guess. The deep dark secret is Fallout 1 and 2 are not as great as everyone here claims them to be and Planescape Torment is a better game even with the shit combat. *raspberry noise*

I should not have to be like "But ya know they had less time to work on it blahblah"

Basically this is things "I liked about Fallout 3" not things that are definitive facts that Norzan can peer review on all systems on the planet to determine if it crashed more or less because he is autistic.

+1 I don't really have a cart in this race so don't bother carrying on that was literally all I wanted to say. You guys can debate whether shit is better than vomit.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top