FO: NV

[TwinkieGorilla]

If I understand Oner right, the main questline is linear, even if it allows you some leeway in how you approach it. What the main quests in FO1 and 2 do better is give the illusion of non-linearity, which FO3 does very well until the choice at the end. Like Wombat says, all fiction is illusion. That doesn't mean it can't be meaningful on a personal level or even convey truths about our existence. Just means that the difference between Zork and Fallout is the how well the design team disguises the fact that we're only allowed to do what they permit us to do in the first place.

 

I'm a huge Zork fan, by the way.

 

well then this is all just esoteric, abstract, semantic nonsense then, idn't it? none of this changes the fact that regardless of "what" or "how" you call what FO1 & 2 did right in regards to quest structure (amongst so many, many other things) the fact remains that FO3 did not.

 

also,

[GreasyDogMeat]

Play through Fo1 again.

 

I'm currently playing it again, for like, the 30th time since I got it back in 97-98'.

 

The main quest may have followed a linear path, but the many sidequests are the parts that stuck to the nonlinear exploration aspect. A larger more in depth main quest that is linear + a world full of awesome side quests - I like it and Fallout 3 did it right. Now if Obsidian can do the same and deliver a better main story I'm set.

 

Bah... what am I saying... thats a given.

[bhlaab]

The only freedom and nonlinearity in Fallout 3's main quest is "You can either do exactly what we tell you or not do anything at all"

 

It's good that you can skip a huge chunk of it by going straight to

the Tranquility Lane vault

(I'm really surprised they didn't lock the door TBH) but after you reach that point it's a complete roller coaster ride.

Why can't I get into Vault 87 early?

Why can I not avoid being kidnapped by the Enclave?

Why do I have to join the Brotherhood of Steel?

 

Face it, the game is much more concerned about showing off (melo)dramatic moments and action sequences and telling a very specific story that they gave up any pretense of player freedom. They make this game that's suppossed to be about a huge, open world where you can do anything. But as soon as it comes to story, suddenly I'm reading from a script and they get mad if I try to ad lib.

 

Compare this to Fallout 1, where the second you step out of the Vault you can make a straight line for Necropolis and pick up the water chip, no problem. Hell, in the Necropolis you can (emphasis on CAN not WILL) be captured and taken straight to one of the (quote/unquote) "end bosses" of the game!

[Aristes]

Naw, I think FO3 got non-linear right until the end, which was just sucky. I think the worst part of the game was the end, and that ending is what killed the non-linearity for me.

 

The perception is king. That's what non-linearity is, brothers. It's the perception of freedom. If you're going to blow your non-linear wad by presenting a two choice ending, like FO3 did, then at least make the two questions sensible!

 

Hey, I'm a non-abashed fan. I just think the ending sucked. Specifically, I think the two choice ending and the flash forward to the consequences that followed.

 

I liked the fact that the last boss wasn't some mostrously tough ugly. I liked the fact that we managed to complete something. I liked the fact that we could even avoid combat if we had enough speech skill. I just thought that the way Bethesda presented it was lackluster.

[bhlaab]

Play through Fo1 again.

Reducing the number of key events to 5-6 instead of 70 and filling the space with sidequests counts as non-linear because...?

Or that you can choose in which order to complete the objectives, or go for the Super Muties from the start?

Or do you mean the ability to ignore it completely?

 

The quests and events themselves won't change, despite what you do (except the thing with the water merchants I guess) in game.

 

Note: I mean these questions seriously, it's 1:35 AM here, and my brain refuses to work overtime.

 

The idea of true non-linear story design is to have NO key events.

Whether you want to argue that Fallout 1 has key events or not, less of them does indeed make the game less linear.

 

The perception is king. That's what non-linearity is, brothers. It's the perception of freedom.

 

I disagree entirely. You make it sound as though non-linearity is some unattainable thing. Non-linearity is simply not putting up artificial barriers and making all reasonable player decisions possible.

(For the sake of argument, "reasonable player decisions" means anything that fits within the game's ruleset.)

 

Artificial barriers. For example: the insurmountable radiation in front of Vault 87, unkillable NPCs, and doors that can't be opened yet. These are all special cases set up by the designers that circumvent the game's ruleset to keep the player in line.

 

Obviously, 100% freedom is impossible. It would be UNreasonable to complain that you can't use pieces of driftwood you find among the wasteland and build yourself a log cabin. But that's not the kind of thing we're talking about here.

[Tagaziel]

Play through Fo1 again.

Reducing the number of key events to 5-6 instead of 70 and filling the space with sidequests counts as non-linear because...?

Or that you can choose in which order to complete the objectives, or go for the Super Muties from the start?

Or do you mean the ability to ignore it completely?

 

The quests and events themselves won't change, despite what you do (except the thing with the water merchants I guess) in game.

 

Note: I mean these questions seriously, it's 1:35 AM here, and my brain refuses to work overtime.

 

There are only two key events in the game - blowing up the Cathedral and Mariposa, both of which can be accomplished in at least two ways.

 

You're blind if you can't see the non-linearity.

[Oner]

There are only two key events in the game - blowing up the Cathedral and Mariposa, both of which can be accomplished in at least two ways.

 

You're blind if you can't see the non-linearity.

-Overseer sends you out

-Buy water from merchants (optional, but still there)

-Get the water chip

-Overseer tells you to kill stuff

-Mariposa

-Cathedral

 

And maybe someone could argue a few more in there.

 

You could choose which mutant base to tackle first, and you could join the Master if you wanted. That's far from what I call non-linear. It's just less linear.

I see bhlaab understands what I mean.

 

And if you missed the note on the end of my post, then you're the blind one, not me.

[Starwars]

-Overseer sends you out

-Buy water from merchants (optional, but still there)

-Get the water chip

-Overseer tells you to kill stuff

-Mariposa

-Cathedral

 

Water from merchants, getting the water chip and Overseer tells you to kill stuff are all optional.

 

You can also join the masters army and get dipped instead of saving the Vault of course.

[TwinkieGorilla]

FO1 & 2 are about the drive, not the destination. FO3 could have been this, because the world is dense enough, if the main quest wasn't so forced and hasty. at no point does it ever side-track you and put you out in the world or give you much reason to explore. i personally felt like once i started the MQ there was a hand on my back pushing me along until i was staring at the very ending of the game going "wtf just happened? this is Fallout 3?"

[Oner]

getting the water chip and Overseer tells you to kill stuff are all optional.

Most people won't know these are optional on the first playthrough.

[Purkake]

getting the water chip and Overseer tells you to kill stuff are all optional.

Most people won't know these are optional on the first playthrough.

 

Fun fact: Most people(over half) also don't know where their heart or lungs are located.

[Oner]

My char had science tagged, so..

That aside, fortunately for them, the Vault needs a chip, not lungs, which, while harder to find, doesn't necessitate self mutilation.

[bhlaab]

Most people won't know these are optional on the first playthrough.

 

That doesn't mean they aren't optional. Most players will always do what they're told, but it takes a special game to allow them to do the opposite.

[Oner]

Most people won't know these are optional on the first playthrough.

 

That doesn't mean they aren't optional. Most players will always do what they're told, but it takes a special game to allow them to do the opposite.

Never said that isn't the case.

[TwinkieGorilla]

Never said that isn't the case.

 

yes you did. in your sleep. i heard you.

[Oner]

Never said that isn't the case.

yes you did. in your sleep. i heard you.

FAIL, I mumble in sleep, not talk.

[GreasyDogMeat]

FO1 & 2 are about the drive, not the destination. FO3 could have been this, because the world is dense enough, if the main quest wasn't so forced and hasty. at no point does it ever side-track you and put you out in the world or give you much reason to explore. i personally felt like once i started the MQ there was a hand on my back pushing me along until i was staring at the very ending of the game going "wtf just happened? this is Fallout 3?"

 

Don't know why you would feel that way. Left the main quest and didn't come back to it until I had explored every inch of the wasteland and completed every sidequest.

 

If anything I felt more pressure in F1 to complete the main quests due to the time constraint. Heh, I remember when I first got Fallout, how the days (ingame) blew by so fast, put me in a panic "OMG Where is the water chip... gotta find it NOW!"

[bhlaab]

FO1&2 aren't even about the drive, it's about trying to find out where the destination is.

 

Fallout 3, yeah, it's a huge open world. But if you're following a quest you always know exactly where you're going to end up. I don't think the fact that you can ignore the main quest and do other things instead makes it a nonlinear game (in terms of story) because the quest itself is incredibly linear and the fact of the matter is you're not going to get an ending without following the proper procedure.

 

Of course, I'd say that Fallout 1 is a lot better than this than Fallout 2 as well, but maybe I just haven't replayed FO2 enough to figure out what's optional and what isn't.

[entrerix]

anyone have any guesses what the hook will be in the new game?

 

also: I remember thinking that the father character in F3 would turn out to be the big bad at the end, having turned himself into a new "master" in hopes of ending the need for clean water and all the deaths that are caused by such a need.

 

"my wife wouldn't have died had she been dipped, and now son, I will dip you so that you won't die either!!!"

 

some idea on the father going nuts to try and save the world by making us all mutants under 1 shared mind.

 

I was really disappointed to be wrong and have the enclave be the villains. autumn was about the least impressive villain I've ever seen in fiction, a very far cry from the master or frank horrigan.

 

I'd actually like to see another frank horrigan type character show up, it was one of the few things from the originals that didn't get a new facelift (for better or worse) of some sort in F3.

 

I guess we didn't get geckos either. or those squigly floaters. or wanamingos.

 

Maybe we'll see some of these bad boys in New Vegas?

[Purkake]

anyone have any guesses what the hook will be in the new game?

 

I'll take a wild guess and say it will involve a vault and you having to leave it. Just a shot in the dark, though.

[entrerix]

hope not, I'm actually kinda wondering if they'll have us be a tribal this time. the even games we play tribals, the odd games vault dwellers (yeah I know there is no number 4 on new vegas for some reason)

[Purkake]

hope not, I'm actually kinda wondering if they'll have us be a tribal this time. the even games we play tribals, the odd games vault dwellers (yeah I know there is no number 4 on new vegas for some reason)

 

How about something a bit more original? You can't expect that from Bethesda, but maybe Obsidian could at least try?

 

Also, vault > tribal.

[entrerix]

was anyone else really confused by the ending narration of F3 referring to your character as the "lone wanderer". It sounded like they were trying to come up with a generic call for the character like vault dweller or chosen one, but just gave up and had perlman say lone wanderer. Did any character in the game ever refer to the PC as lone wanderer?

 

I loved those dialogues in F2 where you could proudly and somewhat idiotically identify yourself as the "chosen one". (I think it was renesco who would then think you were "touched in the head" if you made the claim to him.)

 

oh yeah, and they seriously need to bring back the text box. I dont care if kids today think its outdated, I still like it. (and heck, music from the 40's might be called outdated by people who think fallout is all about new and modern - but to me fallout is about retro, not new and shiny)

 

 

*disclaimer - entrerix really liked fallout 3. So please no one complain about my complaints, they are complaints of love not hate.

[Purkake]

was anyone else really confused by the ending narration of F3 referring to your character as the "lone wanderer". It sounded like they were trying to come up with a generic call for the character like vault dweller or chosen one, but just gave up and had perlman say lone wanderer. Did any character in the game ever refer to the PC as lone wanderer?

 

I loved those dialogues in F2 where you could proudly and somewhat idiotically identify yourself as the "chosen one". (I think it was renesco who would then think you were "touched in the head" if you made the claim to him.)

 

oh yeah, and they seriously need to bring back the text box. I dont care if kids today think its outdated, I still like it. (and heck, music from the 40's might be called outdated by people who think fallout is all about new and modern - but to me fallout is about retro, not new and shiny)

 

 

*disclaimer - entrerix really liked fallout 3. So please no one complain about my complaints, they are complaints of love not hate.

 

*hint - I don't think anyone is going to complain about finding flaws in FO3, considering the general opinion around here

Edited June 22, 2009 by Purkake

[bhlaab]

was anyone else really confused by the ending narration of F3 referring to your character as the "lone wanderer". It sounded like they were trying to come up with a generic call for the character like vault dweller or chosen one, but just gave up and had perlman say lone wanderer. Did any character in the game ever refer to the PC as lone wanderer?

 

I loved those dialogues in F2 where you could proudly and somewhat idiotically identify yourself as the "chosen one". (I think it was renesco who would then think you were "touched in the head" if you made the claim to him.)

 

oh yeah, and they seriously need to bring back the text box. I dont care if kids today think its outdated, I still like it. (and heck, music from the 40's might be called outdated by people who think fallout is all about new and modern - but to me fallout is about retro, not new and shiny)

 

 

*disclaimer - entrerix really liked fallout 3. So please no one complain about my complaints, they are complaints of love not hate.

 

Three Dog called you the lone wanderer over the radio all the time.

 

hope not, I'm actually kinda wondering if they'll have us be a tribal this time. the even games we play tribals, the odd games vault dwellers (yeah I know there is no number 4 on new vegas for some reason)

 

No, in every game divisible by 3 you play as The Prisoner