Diogo Ribeiro

Madness!

Why would an organization or enclave use it considering they have the resources to hire security, or even develop their own? They can spend money on a regular basis for personnel and technology, as opposed to a rotten bar downtown whose owner doesn't make enough to even hire bodyguards, but decided on a one time investment of widespread, relatively low cost security technology.

I hate everyone that forgot my birthday. You will rue the day, Obsidianites! :throwcowlbackwardsandwalkaway:

And if you're playing the character while assisted by mechanisms that effectively allow you to "be" the character, then you *are* the character, being exposed to these problems. There's no way around it, since the character perceives the gameworld through your interactions and vice-versa. So, foreknowledge excludes invincible NPCs to be a hand holding example, despite the fact they are, in fact, guiding the players' hand in terms of narrative direction and structure? Ok, if you say so. Locking down weapons because of violence isn't in line with a setting where everyone is on their toes after the terrorist attacks? Fine. Am I having a good day with all you forumfolk, or what.

It does; I agree with pretty much all complaints you've shared. My argument was different, though, which I already explained. Fine, I'll shut up and let others carry on. No point in discussing something no one cares about or thinks is ridiculous.

Why do you people ruin threads like these? Seriously. Can the whole group join in the secks?

And how old is the wood there? In addition to newc's questions, not the previous two posts.

In the interest of not bogging down this thread with quote games which lead nowhere and lose focus... newc, I didn't say there weren't ruined wooden buildings; just that should have been *some* measure of decay, or perhaps a bit more of it. From what I played it seemed to even out somewhat, but the idea of maintaining a certain visual identity eventually leads to wonder how time seems to have had little effect over some things. Of course, if it's not something that is particularly jarring to you, I undestand and respect that. So it doesn't bother you, specifically. Fine. Yes, good point as well. But as I'm sure you'd agree, discussing vegetation would be seen by many as a "silly complaint" as well, would it not? Which does make it hard to properly debate the function of PA aesthetics as they relate to previous Fallouts and moving far into the future. It's not so much a quibble about whatever quality, age or type of polygonal wood was used; or that I am all hot and bothered. I was simply disagreeing with Grom's idea that Fallout's setting was implausible and as such, anything that tags along for the ride is implausible as well and should not be held up to any such scrutiny.

Whoa.

Yes. That's where the realism would kick in I guess, but I'm actually fine with the abstraction it provides. It captures the feel of a wasteland (not that I ever saw one, if I discount my bedroom). But the more you situate it in the far future, the more it begs the question - when is it going to stop looking exactly the same as it did last time? And in this case, why does most of it still look exactly like it did 200 years ago? I actually felt it was a nice touch to include different locations (tower, hotel) as a form of settlement because those really do offer more protection, though.

I fully appreciate Uwe Boll for introducing a whole new scale of cinematographic quality and expectations. Ever since Boll, I've stopped using "Point Break" as an example of trash.

Great. Something like IWD comes along and I'm out of a gaming computer Thanks for the replies nonetheless, guys. If I ever get around to fixing or upgrading my PC, I'll hunt SoZ as quickly as possible.

I don't defend realism in games, newc0253. And I'm also not defending nor justifying past Fallout titles, as the lulz was everywhere. However, in a setting where Vaults were used to house human beings and shield them from damage, you still see wooden structures unaffected by time's passing as if they were as sturdy as the Vaults. There should have been some measure of decay and/or more alternate building materials, not necessarily because it would be plausible (because from what I'm reading, most people confuse realism with plausibility) but because as time passes in every Fallout title, cities generally grow and adapt to the best of their abilities. 200 year old wood doesn't come off as a good choice of protection in a gameworld where vicious raiders and mutants roam the countryside.

SW, your summary reminds me a bit of Icewind Dale 2. Is it anything like it?

It also had one of the best pieces in an FPS ever at the time, the muthafuda green thing you can never kill with weapons. It's actually an intelligent way to tackle a boss rather than a boring shootout (something Dark Corners of the Earth also did to goo effect).

I wouldn't argue for an arbitrary sense of plausibility; as such I don't really care about giant insects or such. But having wooden shacks still perfectly standing or computers still working 200 years after the war seems terribly farfetched even for Fallout's trademark goofiness. Well, the typical crpg was and still is terribly dependent of combat. Weightless gold sounds like a reasonable concession to me since it's a fluctuating resource; it needs to be hoarded earlier on but mostly loses value as you progress. Fixating weight on it at earlier stages would just bog down starting characters until they no longer needed it (which also varies depending on players and their play style). On the other hand, while weightless ammo shares a similiar process (unskilled characters are just going to burn through it so they need to carry a good amount), it will never stop being usefull to those who invest in ranged weapons; and there's also the case for different weapon types. In the end I suspect it's something most people won't mull over, but it certainly removes some of the management associated with combat.

Fair enough. Although there's something to be said about how, for instance, some ammo being weightless lessens the importance of prepping up for combat, and how VATS mode reduces damage dealt to characters (which I noticed even in my limited playtime).

So, the reasoning is what - if the originals were less than stellar in a given aspect, then there's no reason why Fallout 3 should be better in that regard? It's no less irritating, but it's equally appaling.

I'm not like that. I know I'm ugly, broken, scarred. Sometimes with a mean streak. And I'm not saying *I* would be a better choice for them, or anyone else for that matter. I'm the last person to consider a moral high horse. I'm speaking from experience - many of them had pretenders, nearly all of them cast aside for not complying to their notions of beauty and virility. And the ones that they did choose, abused them and left them without ever looking back. I know this because almost all of us lived in the same neighbourhood; it was common knowledge.

Dumbest thing ever? Can't really say. I *do* remember, once, having a crush on this girl named Eleanor. Being criminally shy and lacking in self-esteem, I couldn't muster the courage to tell her this. I could've kept quiet about it. But oh no, I had to screw it up. And gloriously at that, by offering her a ring. Of course, not having the courage to talk to her about it extended into offering her a present. So I asked my best friend at the time to do it for me. According to him, she held it for a while, thought about it but ultimately told him to give it back to me. This resulted in a strained relationship of sorts, along with the usual mockery by other female peers. Oh well. The epilogue was, when we met again a few years later, for some reason which I'll never understand, she was awfully nice. Told me I was "different" (probably because I no longer looked like an unkempt piglet). Talked to me for a long while. Then said goodbye, smiling at me in a way she had never smiled before. Never saw her again. And unrelatedly, all the girls who laughed and scoffed at me trying to offer the ring are nowadays sad, bloated has-beens who had all their romantic dreams and notions shattered. Maybe from chasing after the usual suspects and not paying attention to the ugly, but romantic, ducklings who would have probably treated them much better.

It's a natural step after the consolification of PCs.

And its is. It's just not as good as it could have been.

I hate it when a review contains major spoilers but doesn't bother to post a warning at the top. From what I read at the beginning, there were no major spoilers in there, at least for people who have followed the game's development for a while. He does warn of spoilers on another page, though, when talking of certain quests.

Because you'd sponteaneously combust just by looking at them, amirite?

Random review generators are so 90's.