Fallout 3 Spoilers

[GreasyDogMeat]

You can find Vera wandering the ship. She's a young woman in a summer dress. I take it this is all after the ants?

 

Also, does anyone know if we can reach any better status than "Savior of the Wasteland?" If not, I'm going to start sending my scrap metal to the Undercity instead of Megaton. I figure I want both to do well.

 

I've probably given over a hundred scrap metal to Megaton for free. I'm sure way over a hundred.

 

Finally, I was thinking of giving that desperate guy who wants to get laid the 30 nuka-cola quanta for the Nuke Cola Challenge quest. Will that cost me karma? I don't see why. He's desperate, but I'm not doing anything underhanded and, hell, if she sleeps with him for getting her the cola, why is that bad? One of the bad things about these games is that they're sometimes so random in what they consider good or bad. Overall it's made sense so far, but I don't trust it.

 

I never once gave scrap for free in Megaton and I've reached 'Last, Best Hope for Humanity'. I think its a combination of what you have done and how high of a level you are. Have you by chance reached level 20?

[random n00b]

I do wish there was some sort of follow-up to it where you could "officially" confront the ghouls in dialogue afterwards.

Um, I think there is, actually. I kinda broke the quest, because I gave Roy an armed grenade (which he was none too happy to accept, the ungrateful bastard) immediately after finding out he had murdered Tenpenny, which led to the very bizarre outcome of every ghoul and human in the tower going missing, save for his ghoul girlfriend. And her, you can confront about what happened. She's somewhat surprised and yet lukewarm on the issue, and you still get bad karma for killing her though. But I read that if you allow Roy to live, he gloats about the deed later.

 

 

Anyone know if there's any use for red and blue pass cards? What about those old metro tickets?

Passcards are useless as far as I can tell. Metro tickets are useless for the most part too, but sometimes, if you reactivate a Metro Protectron, they will ask for your "ticket, please". If you don't have one, they attack. Edited November 8, 2008 by random n00b

[Starwars]

Um, I think there is, actually. I kinda broke the quest, because I gave Roy an armed grenade (which he was none too happy to accept, the ungrateful bastard) immediately after finding out he had murdered Tenpenny, which led to the very bizarre outcome of every ghoul and human in the tower going missing, save for his ghoul girlfriend. And her, you can confront about what happened. She's somewhat surprised and yet lukewarm on the issue, and you still get bad karma for killing her though. But I read that if you allow Roy to live, he gloats about the deed later.

 

Yeah, but it kinda feels like the situations "stalls" in a way that feels a bit... unsatisfying in terms of playing the game. One can "solve it" by killing the ghouls afterwards of course but it just doesn't give that sense of justification since... Well, I assume the game won't "recognize" the action. The content sort of ends there. Tenpenny Towers will stand forever dormant, you know?

 

I think a better way of handling this would've been to have the ghouls move in and live peacefully while the game goes on, and then talk about how Roy eventually killed the tenants in an ending slide.

[random n00b]

Yeah, that would have worked too. But that way, the player would never get the satisfaction of blowing the lying, cheating, murderous maggot farm to pieces!

 

You are probably right about the game not acknowledging the latest developments - Three Dog keeps barking about how the ghouls killed everyone in the tower, but no mention of Roy's death, or the fact that the tower is empty now... but as I said, I think the quest is kinda broken in my game.

 

It may just be me, but I love this kind of twisted resolutions in games. That's why, unlike most people I know, the Prince ending of Bloodlines blew me away. Ahem.

Edited November 8, 2008 by random n00b

[Starwars]

Oh yeah, don't get me wrong. I think having the ghouls take over the tower despite the fact that the player tries to accomplish it "peacefully" is awesome and most definetely Fallout-ish. It's definetely one of the best resolutions in Fallout 3 I've seen. It just gets a bit weird since the quest kinda "stops" like that.

[Aristes]

This is the sort of stupid crap I hate about these kinds of games. Okay, so in the Nuka-Cola quest, a fetching young lady wants to have 30 nuka-cola quanta in order to fill her nuka-cola machine. She intimates that he male friend (not a romantic interest) has protected her in the past and that he's been a great guy to her. When you leave, he accosts you and (at least playing a male) insists on knowing what you were doing. If you're even halfway decent about it, he'll then confide that he wants to have sexual relations with the young woman. At that time, an optional quest to get the 30 bottles of quantum for him instead. So, since I didn't get an answer here, I decided to save and try it. I didn't figure that was cheating since the whole idea of karma one way or the other is pretty damned slim in this quest anyhow. Yep, you lose karma for giving the colas to the horny guy. Now, I don't think we should take a karma hit from helping him. It's not like he's a raider. ...And he really did get the colas for her. He commissioned me to get them, I gave them to him, and he gave her the colas. Hell, I would have put in a good word for him. He saves her, doesn't insist on sexual relations, doesn't rape her, and protects her. So, the young man is trying to soften her heart and sleep with her? Good Lord, men everywhere are EVEEEEEL! How stupid can you get.

 

For what it's worth, I think the ploy should succeed. The only thing about it that I don't like is that he's too damned stupid to approach her in a straightforward manner. ...But that's not evil, it's just immature. I guess I've been pretty happy with how the karma mechanic has worked in the game, so I can't complain too much.

[Dark_Raven]

Karma is wacked in this game, they need to work on it. As I mentioned about it with the cannibals and someone mentioned it with the Tenpenny tower/ ghoul quest.

[Aristes]

I missed the cannibal one, so I'll go back and look. I haven't read much of the tenpenny tower stuff because I haven't done that one yet. As a rule, I disagree with options that take away from my karma when I think that a reasonable person of good will would make the choice. This karma stuff is always hard to get right. ...But helping a guy woo some chic doesn't seem like it warrants bad karma.

[GreasyDogMeat]

I ended up killing the cannibals and I didn't receive negative karma. If the cannibals confront you and attack you for investigating what goes on in their shed/basement then you SHOULDN'T (and I didn't) receive negative karma, however if you attack them first without finding out what goes on in their shed/basement then yes you will (and I think should) receive negative karma.

 

The Tenpenny Tower quest really bugged me though. Absolutely no excuse for receiving negative karma for killing the psycho ghoul leader Roy. He outright told me his plan of unleashing feral ghouls on the tower and asked me for help. I can perfectly understand receiving negative karma for attacking and killing his two followers, especially his girlfriend ghoul who seemed rather sweet and naive. Him though, he was as evil as evil gets. It was incredibly ironic that even though Tenpenny IS a bastard, he was more open minded about the ghouls, willing to let them live in the tower if you could convince certain citizens of the tower to agree with letting the ghouls move in.

 

That quest put a real sour taste in my mouth, but it was quickly washed away, so to speak, by other quests. That and I assassinated another evil ghoul living in Underworld in a clever fashion and didn't receive any negative karma for him. Even got a finger to take back to the Regulators, which I should have also found on Roy's body.

Edited November 10, 2008 by GreasyDogMeat

[Gorgon]

Yeah that was stupid, the ghouls clearly said they wanted to kill all the inhabitants. Tenpenny tower wanted to be rid of them. Lesser of two evils, since I could find no way to compromise or had too little in speech, was to kill the ghouls. Massacre avoided right, no, you get negative Karma.

[random n00b]

Yeah, I guess the player should be rewarded for shooting up random people which he cannot convince to see his way, or when he cannot think of a solution to a problem that doesn't involve some good ol' fashioned slaughter. I mean, preemptive justice, all the way!

[Gorgon]

As I said, they had a plan to kill everyone in the tower.

[thepixiesrock]

At first I was like, "What the heck I am protecting the people of Tenpenny Tower" but then I thought about it and really, the reason I did it was because I didn't want to live in the tower with a bunch of ugly messed up looking people. So maybe I deserved the bad Karma.

[GreasyDogMeat]

Yeah, I guess the player should be rewarded for shooting up random people which he cannot convince to see his way, or when he cannot think of a solution to a problem that doesn't involve some good ol' fashioned slaughter. I mean, preemptive justice, all the way!

 

You could make that same argument for every single villain in the game. Why do I get positive karma for killing Tenpenny? Maybe it would have been possible to talk to him and convince him of the error of his ways. I guess you shouldn't receive positive karma for killing anyone because there MIGHT have been an alternate solution.

 

Roy had a horrendous fate planned for every single person in Tenpenny Towers, devoured alive by feral ghouls. Its quite possible there may have even been children in Tenpenny Towers that would be eaten alive as well (which Bethesda conveniently removed from the tower to make slaughtering the tower inhabitants less morally reprehensible). Its nothing more than ridiculous butchering of the karma system to pass out negative karma for killing Roy but positive karma for killing Tenpenny.

 

Even if the player does go the extra mile to try and smooth things over between the two groups Roy still ends up murdering Tenpenny and eventually all the human inhabitants. While I reloaded at this point to kill the bastard Roy, I probably would have received negative karma for killing the murderous ghouls who had now taken over the tower.

 

I don't mind the irony of the situation. What I do mind is the asinine use of the karma system to reward a player who kills seemingly more open minded bastard while punishing a player who kills an even more wicked bastard who doesn't even hide his evil intentions.

 

Roy was in no way some random victim. He makes his intentions clear and plans on slaughtering everyone in the tower whether you help him or not. The only thing talking things over accomplishes is making it easier for Roy to infiltrate the tower and murder it's inhabitants.

 

Might as well also receive negative karma for shooting a raider about to kill a wastelander because you attack the raider before he had a chance to pull the trigger and kill the wastelander. Maybe he wasn't REALLY going to shoot that wastelander.

[Aristes]

I'm not sure that RN's comments were really meant for the whole tenpenny tower thing. (I still haven't found it and I've played this game A LOT.) I think he might have meant the whole thing with the cannibals. In that case, I agree. If the cannibals were hiding their activities and the PC had no reason to know what was going on, then bad karma for murder. If the PC knows what's going on, then good Karma for getting rid of a murderous bunch.

[random n00b]

You could make that same argument for every single villain in the game. Why do I get positive karma for killing Tenpenny? Maybe it would have been possible to talk to him and convince him of the error of his ways. I guess you shouldn't receive positive karma for killing anyone because there MIGHT have been an alternate solution.

 

Roy had a horrendous fate planned for every single person in Tenpenny Towers, devoured alive by feral ghouls. Its quite possible there may have even been children in Tenpenny Towers that would be eaten alive as well (which Bethesda conveniently removed from the tower to make slaughtering the tower inhabitants less morally reprehensible). Its nothing more than ridiculous butchering of the karma system to pass out negative karma for killing Roy but positive karma for killing Tenpenny.

Yep, killing Tenpenny for no good reason and not getting bad karma (further, you get a finger!) is a design mistake. But you can't extend that argument any further, really. And Roy's plan is completely ludicrous and unfeasible without inside help which, other than the player, he has a fat chance of securing. And, of course, you have the advantage of hindsight - after the player helps the ghoulies move in, it does look like Roy's darker nature won't get the best of him after all. So yeah, he's an evil bastard. But yeah, he's also quite innocent at that point in the game, which justifies the bad karma for killing him. I'm not saying that killing him may not be the best thing to do. What I'm arguing is that it's neither the right thing to do, nor justifiable from a "good" character roleplaying standpoint, since there are other venues open. The fact that he has planned the demise of the people in the tower is immaterial, and using those plans as an excuse to kill him is not justice, it's murder. Killing a would-be murderer is still murder. You are basing your decision on and justifying it with hindsight, which is metagaming, and as such, not a factor the devs considered when designing the choices available to the player.

 

Why can't you people deal with the fact that not everything is supposed to have a happy ending, regardless of the player's efforts? The quest is meant to leave a bitter aftertaste for those playing a good character. There's this constant whining asking for more adult themes and games less sanitized for kids, and when a game presents a few dark moments in this vein, a reaction like this isn't uncommon. A somber, depressing post-apocalyptic setting, in which everyone ends up living in the house of chocolate at the end of Gingerbread Lane? Um, okay.

 

 

In that case, I agree. If the cannibals were hiding their activities and the PC had no reason to know what was going on, then bad karma for murder. If the PC knows what's going on, then good Karma for getting rid of a murderous bunch.

This is the way it goes for most of the game, and it's the way it goes with Roy. Tenpenny seems to be the exception for some reason, giving you good karma whenever you kill him for whatever reasons. I'm inclined to believe it's a design oversight or a bug.

[GreasyDogMeat]

I'm not sure that RN's comments were really meant for the whole tenpenny tower thing. (I still haven't found it and I've played this game A LOT.) I think he might have meant the whole thing with the cannibals. In that case, I agree. If the cannibals were hiding their activities and the PC had no reason to know what was going on, then bad karma for murder. If the PC knows what's going on, then good Karma for getting rid of a murderous bunch.

 

Oh... in that case I agree 100%.

 

As for Roy being innocent at the point he asks for your help in his scheme, I disagree. If you were to transplant that situation to modern times, turn the player into an undercover cop, Roy into a mob boss and the crime into a 'hit' instead of unleashing ghouls on a tower I believe what he said would be enough for an arrest. Being the wasteland and wasteland justice being what it is... Its similar to how Burke is 'arrested' when you run and squeal to the sheriff about him wanting to blow up Megaton.

 

Its not that I can't deal with a 'bad' ending... its that all the evidence was there for a negative ending and the ridiculousness of receiving negative karma for putting down the ghoul who was planning it was lame. Now, if Roy had hid his true intentions and simply made a case that life in the wasteland sucks and that they desperately needed shelter and asked for the player to talk to Tenpenny and work something out and he still ended up killing the inhabitants, THAT would be an ironic outcome to the quest. As it is, Roy comes off immediately as a psycho. I didn't feel Roy deserved to move in to the tower, but I felt sorry for his two followers and bothered to convince the tower inhabitants of letting the ghouls stay.

Edited November 11, 2008 by GreasyDogMeat

[random n00b]

As for Roy being innocent at the point he asks for your help in his scheme, I disagree. If you were to transplant that situation to modern times, turn the player into an undercover cop, Roy into a mob boss and the crime into a 'hit' instead of unleashing ghouls on a tower I believe what he said would be enough for an arrest.

Good thing you are not a judge, then. Material evidence is needed for a conviction... otherwise, threats is the most they can charge anyone with. And Roy isn't a well known criminal with a past record of violent deeds, that the player knows of.

 

 

Being the wasteland and wasteland justice being what it is... Its similar to how Burke is 'arrested' when you run and squeal to the sheriff about him wanting to blow up Megaton.

Good example, only it doesn't work in your favor. The Sheriff clearly states that Burke's being arrested (not summarily executed, along with acquaintances), until things can be cleared up. Not only that, but Burke has a much better chance of setting off the bomb than Roy has of letting his ugly friends inside Tenpenny's.

 

 

Its not that I can't deal with a 'bad' ending... its that all the evidence was there for a negative ending and the ridiculousness of receiving negative karma for putting down the ghoul who was planning it was lame. Now, if Roy had hid his true intentions and simply made a case that life in the wasteland sucks and that they desperately needed shelter and asked for the player to talk to Tenpenny and work something out and he still ended up killing the inhabitants, THAT would be an ironic outcome to the quest. As it is, Roy comes off immediately as a psycho. I didn't feel Roy deserved to move in to the tower, but I felt sorry for his two followers and bothered to convince the tower inhabitants of letting the ghouls stay.

No, that doesn't work either, because Roy is willing to let the player try and convince the residents of the tower to let him and his friends move in peacefully. His "plans" can also be very easily construed as being simply the result of his frustration at being treated as less than human. He does let on a few hints, but he isn't a dead-on bad guy at first, he even admits he may be prejudiced himself. I'm not arguing he isn't a psycho, but he does a good work at hiding it. If he was so obviously the devil incarnate, why didn't you shoot him on sight, instead of trying to solve the matter peacefully?

 

It's quite plain that the player is meant to be deceived by Roy in this matter. As usual, hindsigh + reload give the player the godlike ability to go back in time and see through his deception with uncanny clarity. Bah.

Edited November 11, 2008 by random n00b

[~Di]

I hated the Tenpenny Tower quest. There was no way to save the people of the tower without incurring huge negative karma hits, even if the mediation option had been carried out to its end. On future playthroughs, I'lll do the mediation option all the way through but refuse to tell Roy about my success. It's the only way I can think of to avoid the slaughter or negative karma hit that follows the logical progression.

 

So far, the first quest that seems irrevocably illogical and broken.

[random n00b]

So far, the first quest that seems irrevocably illogical and broken.

It's neither illogical nor broken.

 

Either suck up the karma hit for being a vigilante, or accept that the best intentions need not yield the best results.

 

Or don't get involved at all.

[GreasyDogMeat]

1-Good thing you are not a judge, then. Material evidence is needed for a conviction... otherwise, threats is the most they can charge anyone with. And Roy isn't a well known criminal with a past record of violent deeds, that the player knows of.

 

2-Good example, only it doesn't work in your favor. The Sheriff clearly states that Burke's being arrested (not summarily executed, along with acquaintances), until things can be cleared up. Not only that, but Burke has a much better chance of setting off the bomb than Roy has of letting his ugly friends inside Tenpenny's.

 

3-No, that doesn't work either, because Roy is willing to let the player try and convince the residents of the tower to let him and his friends move in peacefully. His "plans" can also be very easily construed as being simply the result of his frustration at being treated as less than human. He does let on a few hints, but he isn't a dead-on bad guy at first, he even admits he may be prejudiced himself. I'm not arguing he isn't a psycho, but he does a good work at hiding it. If he was so obviously the devil incarnate, why didn't you shoot him on sight, instead of trying to solve the matter peacefully?

 

It's quite plain that the player is meant to be deceived by Roy in this matter. As usual, hindsigh + reload give the player the godlike ability to go back in time and see through his deception with uncanny clarity. Bah.

 

1-Well, it seemed fairly obvious to me that Roy would have done it had the means been on his side of the gate.

 

2-Its likely the only reason Burke was 'arrested' was because it was the player's word against his. If you immediately draw your weapon and blow Burke's head off after he makes his proposition you don't get in trouble and you get positive karma. Roy was ready for the invasion and it was just a matter of figuring out how to get the gate open (where the player comes in), just as Burke needed an outsider to get close to the bomb. I really don't see Roy as being massively different. The situations seem very similar to me.

 

3-First time I talked with Roy I actually did shoot him, but then I saw the negative karma and assumed there must be a 'better' way to handle the situation. Reloaded and tried the diplomatic approach which had an even worse outcome to wiping the ghouls out (despite the karma system telling me otherwise). Reloaded again and went with my original instinct: shoot em' in the head and live with the karma consequences. He might be slightly less of an obvious villain than Burke, but hardly by much.

 

Also, female characters CAN talk Burke out of blowing the town up by using the Black Widow perk.

[random n00b]

1-Well, it seemed fairly obvious to me that Roy would have done it had the means been on his side of the gate.

As I said, it's immaterial, even if it were that obvious. If that were the rule to follow in court, prisons would be full of people who "had plans" to kill someone, as in, they stated once they would do it.

 

 

2-Its likely the only reason Burke was 'arrested' was because it was the player's word against his. If you immediately draw your weapon and blow Burke's head off after he makes his proposition you don't get in trouble and you get positive karma. Roy was ready for the invasion and it was just a matter of figuring out how to get the gate open (where the player comes in), just as Burke needed an outsider to get close to the bomb. I really don't see Roy as being massively different. The situations seem very similar to me.

Another design oversight, that with the player being allowed to shoot Burke in a crowded bar. Should a design fault dictate mechanics throughout the game?

 

And Roy is as "ready for the invasion" as he is ready to take over Raven Rock and the Citadel. He simply cannot do it without the player's help. If he could, he would have already.

 

The case is fundamentally different in that the sheriff doesn't go in guns blazing. He goes in and arrests some guy who could just walk up to the nuke and set it off, for all the sheriff knows. Roy cannot do the equivalent with Tenpenny's. You are just playing vigilante with the ghouls. That's okay, but you have to deal with the consequences.

 

 

3-First time I talked with Roy I actually did shoot him, but then I saw the negative karma and assumed there must be a 'better' way to handle the situation. Reloaded and tried the diplomatic approach which had an even worse outcome to wiping the ghouls out (despite the karma system telling me otherwise). Reloaded again and went with my original instinct: shoot em' in the head and live with the karma consequences. He might be slightly less of an obvious villain than Burke, but hardly by much.

Because the karma system doesn't deal with results. It deals with player actions. The link between those two is intentionally broken in this quest. Despite the player doing all in his power to make the wasteland a better place for everyone, sometimes it just doesn't work out.

 

 

Also, female characters CAN talk Burke out of blowing the town up by using the Black Widow perk.

So then, your real beef with the quest isn't that it's broken or that the karma thing isn't dead-on. It's simply that you don't have full control over the outcome, and that even reloading, metagaming, and otherwise cheating won't yield your desired outcome and leave you with that warm, fuzzy feeling. Yeah, that's such a shame. Edited November 11, 2008 by random n00b

[GreasyDogMeat]

Uh, no captain sarcasm. My disappointment stems from the quest being 'karma broken'. I only mention the ability to use the black widow perk to further point out the evilness of Roy, where the only way to prevent what he does is with a bullet to his brain, while many of the other villains in the game like Tenpenny and Mr. Burke who (according to the karma system are more evil) can be talked out of their evil deeds with certain perks or skills.

 

I understand the point of the quest. The problem is, you can't have somebody in their 'muahaha I'm uber evil and I eat babies' speech tell you he's going to eat babies, but he just needs you to unlock the gate to the carriages and then pass out negative karma for blasting the evil baby eater. Now, if said baby eater said he wanted to check on the babies and asked you politely to unlock the gate for him then went in and ate said babies, THAT would be clever twist and a nice lesson about sometimes you can't trust people and the world sucks etc.

 

As for Burke, the Fallout series has had a few examples of unlikable people who could be killed in a shoot out with no ill consequences from the townsfolk. Doc Morbid in Junktown, the moneylender in the Hub and a number of others. I've always taken it as 'wasteland justice' where the law was willing to look the other way for getting rid of the shady elements.

 

Honestly, listening to Roy's plan I didn't get ANY vibe of it just being the idle talk of a persecuted ghoul who was willing to settle for a diplomatic solution. The end of Fallout 1 was a rather similar twist, but it was infinitely better than this F3 quest. It would be like the Overseer telling you, at the very start of the game during the opening cutscene,

that once you left you would never be able to be come back and all you were working for would end up getting you sent away for good from your friends and family. Then you have a dialogue option that maybe if you are extra quick you can say. Overseer says he'll consider it and then the player is expected to be surprised when the Overseer kicks the player out even if they were extra quick.

 

 

Nothing wrong with the message, its in the delivery.

[random n00b]

Uh, no captain sarcasm. My disappointment stems from the quest being 'karma broken'.

Only... it isn't. You are getting bad karma for killing a rather bigoted and hateful person who, at that point, hasn't done anything wrong. No matter how you try to twist it, that's as far as facts go (facts which you have been blatantly avoiding to discuss). Killing him at that point is wrong, and the game reacts as it should. The fact that the karma system isn't perfect in other instances (Tenpenny, Burke) is irrelevant.

 

I only mention the ability to use the black widow perk to further point out the evilness of Roy, where the only way to prevent what he does is with a bullet to his brain, while many of the other villains in the game like Tenpenny and Mr. Burke who (according to the karma system are more evil) can be talked out of their evil deeds with certain perks or skills.

And we go back again to the root of the problem, the player's inability to talk Roy off his plan. Unless what you are suggesting is that being evil is a crime in itself, punishable by death. Pity we don't have "Detect Evil" in Fallout, eh?

 

 

I understand the point of the quest. The problem is, you can't have somebody in their 'muahaha I'm uber evil and I eat babies' speech tell you he's going to eat babies, but he just needs you to unlock the gate to the carriages and then pass out negative karma for blasting the evil baby eater.

How many babies has Roy eaten at that point, that the player knows of?

 

Also, you need to work on your strawmen.

 

 

Now, if said baby eater said he wanted to check on the babies and asked you politely to unlock the gate for him then went in and ate said babies, THAT would be clever twist and a nice lesson about sometimes you can't trust people and the world sucks etc.

Which is EXACTLY what the game does, only without babies. Roy's plan was to kill the humans all along, and he makes use of the player's good intentions for his own. To him, either way works for accomplishing his goal, but he doesn't know what kind of person the player is, so he presents him with choices acceptable to anyone. Would an evil character help him "check on the babies"?

 

Whatever.

 

 

Honestly, listening to Roy's plan I didn't get ANY vibe of it just being the idle talk of a persecuted ghoul who was willing to settle for a diplomatic solution.

Oh, yes. I'm sure you did read him perfectly the first time you spoke to him. Of course, there's no way to separate that from the wisdom conferred by hindsight, so such declarations aren't worth much. I knew the player was Revan before installing KotOR, too. True story!

 

 

The end of Fallout 1 was a rather similar twist, but it was infinitely better than this F3 quest. It would be like the Overseer telling you, at the very start of the game during the opening cutscene,

that once you left you would never be able to be come back and all you were working for would end up getting you sent away for good from your friends and family. Then you have a dialogue option that maybe if you are extra quick you can say. Overseer says he'll consider it and then the player is expected to be surprised when the Overseer kicks the player out even if they were extra quick.

And the only thing "wrong" with that is that it leaves the player feeling like he's been made a fool of and manipulated - part of the bitter aftertaste I spoke of earlier. It's an unfair comparison as well, since Tenpenny is just an inconsequential sidequest, and you are using the main quest of FO for your example.

 

It's an unexpected and very rare turn of events, and that's part of what makes it so good.

[Aristes]

Finally having broken down and read all the tenpenny tower stuff, I think it's the karma issue that's got folks so riled. For myself, I'll talk to him. If I figure I'd be fooled into helping him, I will. If I think I would see him as thoroughly evil, I'll kill him and suck up the karma loss like RN says. Either that or wash my hands of the whole thing.