Fallout 3 appreciation thread

Why does this game get so much hate here? I thought it was the best in the series.

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallout_(series)
fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Three-Card_Bounty
fallout.wikia.com/wiki/You_Gotta_Shoot_'Em_in_the_Head
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

I would like to know why they removed the random encounter stuff from New Vegas.

It's the worst in the series, destroys already established lore. Isn't really a Fallout game. Enclave is supposed to be dead from the events of FO2 and the BoS has no business being muh paragons of moral virtue.

It's people memeing. The story is rather shitty and linear though.

>established lore

Nobody played those old ass games you dinosaur. Bethesda made the series a house hold name.

It's babby's first Fallout game. Only true plebs hold it in any sort of high regard.

Mostly the story and setting. Gameplay is fine for what it is.

It's still better than FO4.

>I thought it was the best in the series
>but I didn't play anything but FO3

You're not too bright, are you?

Well for one thing, the companion path finding is embarrassing.

Kill yourself.

Best in the series meaning 3, NV and 4. Not 1 and 2. 1 and 2 are outdated.

Just end it already.

Oh boy, another FO3 thread that needs to rely on bait for replies.

WHY CAN'T THEY JUMP?

I loved the atmosphere of the capitol wasteland, somehow felt more "post apocalyptic". I enjoyed fallout 3 a lot, I actually liked the story because I actually cared about the dad in the game (Liam Neeson). Mainly I'd say i'm pretty biased, this game is a huge nostalgia fest for me.

wasnt that chapter of the brotherhood basically cut off from the rest, which is why the outcast existed?

Fallout isnt a Post-apocalyptic game.

the better question is what in the fuck were they doing so far east. bethesda seemed to have a problem creating new factions, or they were scared to.

Mainly because only recently have there been an influx of you faggots who were 10 when it came out, and praise it because it was the best experience you could have at the time, I guess. Which is sad.

So the rest of us who aren't in our early and mid twenties like New Vegas and the older titles more.

You OP is obvious bait, but I will say it's a nostalgia kind of game I enjoyed, since it was my first Fallout game and introduced me to the rest of the franchise.

Of course it is.

This is a fair thing to say, you would think they would stop in Chicago or maybe the Pitt and not go towards a completely destroyed city.

But Lyons Brotherhood was told to us many times that they are not really the true brotherhood of steel, and the outcasts were an ok representation of the actual brotherhood

>Nostalgia for Fallout 3

Its a post-post apocalyptic game, even just reading about the prior games and playing new vegas people should get that

Fallout 3 will be 10 years old next year

>I thought it was the best in the series.

But that's New Vegas.

So your age when you discovered it?

>Why does this game get so much hate here?

The writing sucks. Karma is represented in black-and-white extremes, and the game constantly pushes you into the arms of the Brotherhood, which is portrayed as being infallible and wholly pure in its motives.

Fallout 3 had a great atmosphere, but that's about it.

>30+ years old on Sup Forums

neck yourself

33 here. I thought it was a neat concept but then I played the game and realised how horribly made it was. I'm glad I at least gave it a chance.

I'll never understand these posts.

>doesn't understand these posts
stub your toe you pile of monkey poo poo.

>it's after after the apocalypse, not after the apocalypse

i was probably 12, im 21 now.

Im also not that guy you replied too

>I would like to know why they removed the random encounter stuff from New Vegas.

It was replaced with the Wild Wasteland perk. It's more or less the same thing, although the game doesn't do anything quite as generous as giving you a deathclaw gauntlet at the start of the game.

Just normies who spend too much time here.

>outdated
>not fallout 3

Lolwut

...

I can under liking it if you prefer it's more neutral towns and cities rather than every place talking about or having some sort of tie in with NCR vs Legion, but it's otherwise pretty piss poor and loved due to being a lot of peoples first fallout. It's hard to let go of something that was your first

>Fallout isn't a Post-apocalyptic game.
Okay...then what do you call a game that takes place after the world has been destroyed in nuclear fire then dumbass?

I like the religious/spiritual tone of the game. Like the naming of "The Oasis", or how the father quotes bible verses etc. Made the game feel really emotional and real, of course in this post apocalyptic setting people will hold onto any beliefs they can

Everything you claim is harmful to the lore is and has been explained many times before, faggot.

Is Tranquility Lane the closest that gaming has come to Twilight Zone?

They want civilization to be back and you exit the vault and you quest to become the under secretary of transportation.
You would set tolls and make sure paperwork is filed in a timely fashion.

Very exciting stuff.

Not true at all. Take off your rose tinted glasses for once obsidiot.

because being ambushed outside every metro or, god forbid, the vault at the start was annoying at best and gamebreaking at worst

>Fallout 1 and 2 literally say "A Post-Nuclear Role-Playing Game" on their boxart

shut the fuck up

This. I know full well that Fallout 3 isn't the best Fallout, and it certainly hasn't aged too well. But like I said, It was my first Fallout, and got me into the series and lore as a whole. I pumped in some good time into Fallout 3 and it's DLCs before New Vegas came along.

And this isn't a good thing. The next fallout game should ideally be closer to the nuclear war and bring back the grimdark nature of fallout 1.

It won't be devoid of civilization or adventure though, randall clark's journal is enough proof for that

No it hasn't, stop lying.

Doesn't karma exist in New Vegas? Regardless it's just a system they used to make distinct playing experiences between good and bad players, and there's nothing inherently wrong with that.

New Vegas did everything it could to push you into the arms of House or the NCR. They were literally going out of their way to make The Legion evil and make Yes Man an afterthought.

When it boils down to it, New Vegas improved a bit on 3, but not by a lot, or at least not as much as you people claim.

Kys

When/where

Give me an example.

Explained with some bullshit excuses Bethesda wrote in for no other reason than to wave away all the continuity errors.

Everyone here idolizes hbombercuck.

In game most likely, you need to be more specific though. You're speaking too generally.
Again, what continuity errors. And at least they gave a reason instead of just rebooting the franchise and not giving a damn at all

...

Ghoulification happening instantly and not due to long term exposure to radiation and/or FEV

GECK was turned into a terraforming laptop device and not a kit with some seeds and a fusion reactor.

Pre-War Jet

There's basically two broad classes of things that fans of the old games disliked about it. First was the abandonment of the complexity of tactical combat and interaction with the environment where everything the player does has some kind of appreciable resource cost. It was far from perfect, being a kitbashed GURPS, but it did what it set out to do and proved quite influential in its own right. The gunplay in 3 is easily the worst of the three new Fallouts. The margin between it and New Vegas is narrower than either of those games and 4, but by the standards of any competently constructed FPS, it's a mess. Meanwhile a lot of the urgency that drove combat in Fallout 1 and 2 is lost due to just how easy it all is.

The other thing was the change in theme, tone, style and sense of presentation. It really doesn't feel like a Fallout game, and it doesn't really build on or meaningfully continue anything in the first two games so much as it recycles them and does so badly. That would get a lot of the old guard's dander up, no question.

On to appreciation - the best part of every Bethesda game is the hiking sim, and Fallout 3 is their second best in my opinion. They're very good at making it. Also, there's a lot of unsung brilliance in object placement to hide culling planes and prevent pop-in. Given how tiny the memory pools they had to work with and no plan for multiple builds, it was and still is quite impressive. More open world designers could learn a lot about how to hide memory limits just by walking around that game.

bos being out of character
enclave still existing
capitol wasteland being a nuclear shithole with almost no reconstruction or society and it looks like the bombs fell a week ago
it's basically a soft reboot, it continues nothing from previous games and requires no knowledge of them.

Agree with the second 2 points, but wasn't fallout combat always a bit clunky? I didn't play fallout 1 until after I played the 3d ones, but I played fallout 2 as a kid and it was pretty frusturating getting bursted 100-0 by some dude with an auto weapon that had no counterplay

There used to be floating around the net some screenshots indicating the game took place just a few decades after the bombs dropped. Effectively they were writing a Fallout 1 for the East Coast. But then...well, some dumb shit happened.

"Fallout is a series of post-apocalyptic retrofuturistic role-playing video games. It was created by Interplay Entertainment. Although the series is set during the 22nd and 23rd centuries, its atompunk retrofuturistic setting and artwork are influenced by the post-war culture of 1950s America, and its combination of hope for the promises of technology, and lurking fear of nuclear annihilation."

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallout_(series)

>capitol wasteland being a nuclear shithole with almost no reconstruction or society and it looks like the bombs fell a week ago

But that's how a widescale nuclear exchange would affect the world. All that radioactive shit in the environment isn't going to decay until thousands of years later. And it's going to take more than a couple of generations to repair all the blown out power grids and restore assembly lines and other means of production.

New Vegas is the only thing that came close to 1 and 2.
FO1>FO2.

And that shit already happened in the original games and NV, that's what people mean when they say Fallout isn't post-apocalyptic or it's post-post apocalyptic. The immediate threat of the apocalypse has already passed and humanity rebuilt some semblance of society adapted to the new world.

Oh, absolutely. Combat in Fallout 1 and 2 is a mess. There are some hefty design flaws like not being able to control the companions properly (or at all in some ways) and the thing that's used to cover it up is a slot machine gore effect on every kill. It's pretty bad. Fortunately, it's only a small part of the game. The combat in 3 and New Vegas is also pretty bad, but it has a lot more lifting to do for overall game time so it's flaws are harder to ignore. 4 is in the same boat. It's less flawed than 3 and New Vegas for the most part but so much of the game is just unavoidable combat that its flaws become more noticeable.

The shitty gameplay keeps me from enjoying the 1 & 2. Those games should have been 3D like 3, NV and 4 instead of isometric and having to click where you want to go

I played F3 when I was 14 yo so I have a kind of nostalgic feeling about it. I used to love F3 and play all day long then FNV, TESV and F4.
But I can't lie today the game feels old and unplayable due the shit controls, so I only got the warm and nostalgic feeling about the experience of F3 but I will never play it again.
Also I don't play old games neither replay them, there's alot of new games to waste my time looking foward the past.

Jag skäms över min dåliga engelska.

>despite barely being able to talk without having an asthma attack, Harold apparently traveled across the entire continental United States on foot
>in a setting where going from California to Utah is considered a long and arduous journey
Most of Fallout 3's writing is just bland and dumb, but this is the only thing I remember that really irritates me.

>minute differences

>The immediate threat of the apocalypse has already passed

Are you sure you really understand the effects of a nuclear holocaust? It doesn't "pass." We'll be trapped on an irradiated husk with no way to deal with the extensive levels of contamination quickly destroying the food chain. Virtually all the water in the world would be contaminated. Virtually all soil, as well. Anything that manages to grow in that soil will also be contaminated. Everyone and everything will slowly die off from radiation sickness because there's no way to avoid coming in contact with it.

Are you sure you really understand this is a fictional game you're talking about?

minute differences

not interested in talking about realism in an alternate history post apoc game with talking mutants and ghouls

Why did this post get ignored?

not true because in fallout there are magic drugs that cure radiation sickness and chinese submarine babies genetically engineered plants to scrub the environment

There are over 10 years from the end of fo2 to the start of fo3. Excusable.

I like NV better than 3 but all of 3's quests actually had substance except for Agatha's song, unlike all of NV's quests. However, there were much much less quests in 3, so NV has more good quests in total.

In fact, Fo3 did quests like You gotta shoot em in the Head better than very similar NV quests like 3 card bounty.

I actually have no clue where this meme came from, this applies way more to fo4 than to fo3

when did todd let you off your leash hines?

It's okay but NV is better sorry :/

Too much read.

Out of time

what is "substance"? FO3s quests and side quests are fetch quests that don't effect the world, meanwhile FONVs quest has branching, and can be accomplished in multiple ways for multiple factions, even a shit ton of the side quests can effect the entire world and how certain people treat you, or how certain groups are benefiting/being harmed by your actions.

Yes and no. There are some isotopes that can take basically forever to stabilize, but the 'if you so much as look at it you'll have six different kinds of cancer including ones we'll be discovering in you' radiation sheds from isotopes with half lives measured in seconds. Meaning they turn into something relatively innocuous long before those vaults get evacuated. Getting drinkable water out of an irradiated riverbed is as simple as sifting the radioactive material from the water. No special steps required, just charcoal and sand filters, distill it if you must, but it's unlikely you'll have microbes to worry about. Nuclear winter is a myth, and natural erosion (especially after two centuries) would see most radioactive material contained in some surprising places like the bottom of the ocean. The real problem, again with a surprising solution, would be the byproducts of nuclear decay. Stable but toxic heavy metals built up in the soil (the direct byproduct of U-238 decay is Lead-206) would not only prevent healthy plant growth, contact with such material can be potentially lethal. The solution is that nature has a way of cleaning itself up. Insects and plant life can easily leech these materials from the soil. They already do it in real life.
Tl;dr. That's about the size of it. The original is almost 8,000 words long. Good reading, mind. But still lengthy.

As someone who was introduced to the series by fallout 3 and absolutely loved it at the time, I'm not sure how anyone could like it over new vegas


Even if you are one of those people who are like "RPGs are gay i just wanna shoot people lol" (despite playing an RPG) new vegas has the same gunplay with far more weapons and armor, and 4 has better gunplay than either (though unfortunately not as much weapons/armor)

Ghoulification was always an iffy topic that never was explored in depth or set in stone, but even in 3 it is implied Ghoulification occurs through chronic exposure as well as acute exposure

You got me there, but it's always possible that there were multiple variants of G.E.C.K. devices and prototypes, with the East coast control vaults given the more state if the art models.

Jet was retconned in 4 not 3
The BoS in the East are under control and influence of a defected elder who felt the Brotherhoods strength could be used to help. Even in game you see outcasts who left Lyons fragment group because they still believed in the original creed of the brotherhood and didn't want to play white knights

There was nothing to suggest the Enclave only existed on the West Coast and we're knocked out completely in Fallout 2.

Nuclear fallout can last hundreds of thousands of years depending on the severity of it, so it's reasonable the place could still look like an irradiated dump considering the Capitol of the U.S. would've been target #1 in the great war. Civilizations were trying to be rebuilt, but the lack of clean water anywhere in the region crippled that progress to a crawl, sorry Bethesda didn't put a patch of corn and a well next to each city in game.

Its the worst by far, at least fallout 4 has a somewhat decent survival mode.

Tale of Two wastelands is the superior fallout.

Even in Fallout 1 there were towns and shit being built
In Fallout 2 there was that fuckhuge city built around the vault and that was like 40 fucking years before fallout 3
It's pretty obvious they're not going with the realistic "it would take a millenium to recover" and based on the canon of the games they were managing really well relatively short after the bombs dropped, so it makes no sense for why the capital wasteland is still a wasteland

>cherry picking

Fallout 3 is as old today as Fallout 1 was to Fallout 3 at release.

Look at all these GREAT new vegas quests...

no THAT is cherry picking

FO3 doesn't even have any quests as indepth as FONVs that actually effect the world in a logical manner depending on how you complete them.

Anyone who thinks 3 is better than New Vegas knows nothing about video games and needs to leave.

...

You obviously didn't get the Child at Heart perk.

doesn't flocking matter when FONV still has 50% of its quests way better designed than anything FO3 ever accomplished. why don't you post some quests from FO3 that are half as in depth, with half as many options, and that can effect the world or how NPCs treat you?

fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Three-Card_Bounty
fallout.wikia.com/wiki/You_Gotta_Shoot_'Em_in_the_Head

Two quests: same premise. NV has better quests than 4 because it has a higher NUMBER of good quests, not a higher PERCENTAGE.

Republic. Of. Dave.