A New Fallout Game/Mod

[GreasyDogMeat]

FO3 is fun (very fun at times) ~but its the wrong kind of fun (and not a worthy substitute IMO, given the context).

Hah, its one of the best kinds of fun I've had in a long time. Nothing is stopping people from replaying the classics. Worthy substitute is also debatable. Beth has the rights to the franchise now, anyone with any familiarity with their previous games who had watched the trailers should have known this was not going to be another turn based isometric rpg. F3 has likely brought in far more fans than another isometric sequel would have. Just look at the Beth boards and the gazillian newbies who are now interested in the classics after their first taste of Fallout was 3.

 

Risks and changes to franchises are taken from time to time. The original Baldur's Gate, one of my all time favorites, plays very different to the turn based D&D games of the past like Pool of Radiance, but its also a very good game. F3 has changed the formula quite a bit, but its still a damn enjoyable game.

 

I've seen franchises I loved taken in directions I hated. Instead of just purchasing the next title and bitching about how much life sucks I gave up the franchise (or bought it anyway because mods would save it: Fallout 3).

Edited August 10, 2009 by GreasyDogMeat

[Gizmo]

The old timers remark I meant as in long-time fans of the franchise. The whole "kids today can't appreciate how we did things back in the day" talk may hold true for some, but it doesn't account for everyone. There's plenty of examples right here of people who were fans of the originals and actually enjoyed FO3. If some kid from the Halo generation can't get over the "ugly" graphics of Fallout, well then, it's his loss.

 

Its true, there are fans that find what they enjoyed of it in Fallout 3, but the fans they made FO1 for don't find much...

The game series was to be the best implementation of

on the PC (and though Steve Jackson ultimately pulled the license, they kept it fairly close though they changed the system a bit).

 

The Fallout series depicts a PNP RPG as though played with miniatures. Where is that in FO3? (and the combat was for sake of the system, not to simulate first person gunfights ~the combat system is gone as well).

 

The game also featured a bit more consequence to player choice in just about everything (and did not erase your mistakes and experiments after 3 days).

 

The only thing they got right IMO is the landscaping and clutter ~That part of FO3 is superb, the rest is forgettable

Edited August 10, 2009 by Gizmo

[GreasyDogMeat]

The game also featured a bit more consequence to player choice in just about everything (and did not erase your mistakes and experiments after 3 days).

Uh, in F1 (I love this game, but I have to make this point) the game often wouldn't even acknowledge your choices. I think people remember the awesome slideshow ending of F1 and how it talked about the consequences of your actions, then play Fallout 3 which removed the slideshows and somehow twist this into a situation where Fallout 1 & 2 had these incredible changes to your actions and F3 was completely devoid of it. F3 often gave as many options to sidequests, but it lacked the slideshow at the end (a big mistake which Beth deserves crit for) to show a lasting consequence.

[Gizmo]

The game also featured a bit more consequence to player choice in just about everything (and did not erase your mistakes and experiments after 3 days).

Uh, in F1 (I love this game, but I have to make this point) the game often wouldn't even acknowledge your choices. I think people remember the awesome slideshow ending of F1 and how it talked about the consequences of your actions, then play Fallout 3 which removed the slideshows and somehow twist this into a situation where Fallout 1 & 2 had these incredible changes to your actions and F3 was completely devoid of it. F3 often gave as many options to sidequests, but it lacked the slideshow at the end (a big mistake which Beth deserves crit for) to show a lasting consequence.

I agree the Slideshow should have been implemented and the player's actions tracked and given consequence.

 

There is (rightly) a sliding scale at work with the comparisons though... Fallout 1 was built to run on a Pentium 90MHz system with 16MB ram. FO3 was built to use as machine with 32x the ram and 30x the MHz (though there is more to it than the numbers).

 

FO3 should have been 10x the game in every respect, but its not and was never intended to be.

[GreasyDogMeat]

There is (rightly) a sliding scale at work with the comparisons though... Fallout 1 was built to run on a Pentium 90MHz system with 16MB ram. FO3 was built to use as machine with 32x the ram and 30x the MHz (though there is more to it than the numbers).

 

FO3 should have been 10x the game in every respect, but its not and was never intended to be.

 

I just laughed... hard! Have you played any recent sequels/remakes to old franchises that are 10x their original!? Please point me to this latest game!

 

I would say the graphics are ATLEAST 10x better.

[Gizmo]

There is (rightly) a sliding scale at work with the comparisons though... Fallout 1 was built to run on a Pentium 90MHz system with 16MB ram. FO3 was built to use as machine with 32x the ram and 30x the MHz (though there is more to it than the numbers).

 

FO3 should have been 10x the game in every respect, but its not and was never intended to be.

 

I just laughed... hard! Have you played any recent sequels/remakes to old franchises that are 10x their original!? Please point me to this latest game!

No actually ; I've long since given up on recent titles, but bought FO3 for use of the GECK.

 

I would say the graphics are ATLEAST 10x better.

The engine is great, and the land is awesome... (but I still think the art design was better in FO1, the heads were better IMO ~despite the 229 color limit and the fact that they had to take the 3d models and render them out as still frames).

 

~and I would have preferred the Mr. Handy droids to look a bit more like this...

 

And the Enclave to look more like this...

Edited August 10, 2009 by Gizmo

[GreasyDogMeat]

There is (rightly) a sliding scale at work with the comparisons though... Fallout 1 was built to run on a Pentium 90MHz system with 16MB ram. FO3 was built to use as machine with 32x the ram and 30x the MHz (though there is more to it than the numbers).

 

FO3 should have been 10x the game in every respect, but its not and was never intended to be.

 

I just laughed... hard! Have you played any recent sequels/remakes to old franchises that are 10x their original!? Please point me to this latest game!

No actually ; I've long since given up on recent titles, but bought FO3 for use of the GECK.

 

I would say the graphics are ATLEAST 10x better.

The engine is great, and the land is awesome... (but I still think the art design was better in FO1, the heads were better IMO ~despite the 229 color limit and the fact that they had to take the 3d models and render them out as still frames).

 

~and I would have preferred the Mr. Handy droids to look a bit more like this...

 

And the Enclave to look more like this...

 

IMHO Mr. Handy looks a bit too shiny/clean, but the enclave armor looks awesome!

[Gizmo]

IMHO Mr. Handy looks a bit too shiny/clean, but the enclave armor looks awesome!

Thanks..

 

This is the game sprite...

 

And an alternate texture...

 

Have you played any recent sequels/remakes to old franchises that are 10x their original!? Please point me to this latest game!

I dunno 'fer sure just yet... but this is what I'd point to...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H2kNTGYdKu8

 

 

The first two (as with Fallout 1 & 2), were 3d models rendered as 2d sprites, on a 2d battlefield.

 

If Bethesda had taken this approach... I'd not need another game for years. : :

(which is perhaps... why the big studios don't often make games with this approach )

Edited August 10, 2009 by Gizmo

[RPGmasterBoo]

Just to clarify, I'm not even a fan of Fallout 1 and 2. I admire them for their originality and uniqueness, but that's about it. All the criticism I have for this F3 stems from its failings, not from my expectations for it.

 

How anyone can praise that moronic, piece of rubbish that is Fallout 3 is beyond me. No story, no characters, broken rpg system, too easy, total lack of atmosphere, bad as a shooter, bad as an RPG... the list goes on an on. Hell I even had to use the console to pass a game breaking bug with a locked door, something that I haven't done in years.

It might have been better than Oblivion but that wasn't really hard to achieve was it?

 

Much of the game just doesn't make sense as the guy on NMA pointed out quite well, and while it might be playable or even enjoyable provided you could switch your brain off it has nothing of what made Fallout 1 so great, or for that matter anything else to be proud of.

Except graphics, yaaay.

[213374U]

You got it backwards. FIRST you play the game, THEN you pan the game. Not the other way around.

[RPGmasterBoo]

What are you talking about? I completed F3. If you mean the NMA guy, he reviewed it fairly, even spent more time playing it than most since their review was about 2 weeks after the major game sites.

[213374U]

What are you talking about? I completed F3.

Did you? Then what are these lies about the game not having a story, an atmosphere or characters?

 

If you are going to be a troll, at least be a little subtle about it.

[Guest Slinky]

Just to clarify, I'm not even a fan of Fallout 1 and 2.

How anyone can praise that moronic, piece of rubbish that is Fallout 3 is beyond me.

I am a fan of FO1 and 2, but I still don't think that FO3 is complete screwup. FO3 has sold really well and most likely won a few game of the year avards, so beth must have done something right. If you ask me, FO3 and Oblivion is meant to people who want to relax with something easy, simple and fun after a long, brain steaming day at school or work.

 

The thing I don't understand is why beth needed the game to be Fallout. What made fallout 1 and 2 so good was the athmosphere. The world was full of despair, violence, sex and drugs. The dialog was fantastic and I really liked the quests too. Why beth decided to buy rights to fallout, and then strip all those things off is beyond me. Why they didn't just make the game and call it The Elder Scrolls 5 - Post Apocalyptic Happy Happy Land?

 

Allthough, I don't think Obsidian would be now doing a fallout game if beth wouldn't have bought rights to fallout. Obsidian will most likely show how good athmosphere is done.

Edited August 10, 2009 by Slinky

[RPGmasterBoo]

What are you talking about? I completed F3.

Did you? Then what are these lies about the game not having a story, an atmosphere or characters?

 

If you are going to be a troll, at least be a little subtle about it.

 

Have you seen my father, the middle aged guy?

That story?

 

What characters?

The ones that have 2 lines of spoken text that a 5th grader would write better?

 

It does have an atmosphere of sorts. Something in the vein - kill everything that moves, because you really want to level up and see all these cool perks and because you like random body parts flying around, right?

 

Its juvenile. The only mature rated game I've seen designed for impressionable 14 year olds.

[RPGmasterBoo]

I am a fan of FO1 and 2, but I still don't think that FO3 is complete screwup. FO3 has sold really well and most likely won a few game of the year avards, so beth must have done something right. If you ask me, FO3 and Oblivion is meant to people who want to relax with something easy, simple and fun after a long, brain steaming day at school or work.

 

Fair enough, but when a casual action game that passes itself of as an RPG gets the same grades and praise as Fallout/Baldurs Gate its obvious that something is horribly wrong here.

 

 

The thing I don't understand is why beth needed the game to be Fallout. What made fallout 1 and 2 so good was the athmosphere. The world was full of despair, violence, sex and drugs. The dialog was fantastic and I really liked the quests too. Why beth decided to buy rights to fallout, and then strip all those things off is beyond me. Why they didn't just make the game and call it The Elder Scrolls 5 - Post Apocalyptic Happy Happy Land?

 

Allthough, I don't think Obsidian would be now doing a fallout game if beth wouldn't have bought rights to fallout. Obsidian will most likely show how good athmosphere is done.

 

Because the game would sell under the name Fallout. And there would be a justification for all the reviewers to rate the game absurdly high because they could rave on about how they were playing *that legendary game again*. Which was a mammoth sized lie, but there you have it.

[213374U]

Have you seen my father, the middle aged guy?

That story?

Yeah, oversimplification makes everything so much easier.

 

"Uh, I'm looking for a water chip/holy GECK, have you seen one?"

 

See, I can do it too!

 

What characters?

The ones that have 2 lines of spoken text that a 5th grader would write better?

Hmm. Apparently you missed President Eden, for one. I don't know about 5th graders, but if your own arguments are anything to go by, I doubt YOU could have written anything better. Just sayin'.

 

 

It does have an atmosphere of sorts. Something in the vein - kill everything that moves, because you really want to level up and see all these cool perks and because you like random body parts flying around, right?

What are you talking about? That's not the atmosphere. That's the character progression and rewards design. Atmosphere are things such as being jumped by a Deathclaw while exploring an automated distress signal you picked on the radio, or an Enclave Vertibird ambushing you while you stroll happily through the ruined National Mall.

 

 

Its juvenile. The only mature rated game I've seen designed for impressionable 14 year olds.

Seriously man. I'm supposed to be the resident elitist jerk. Don't steal my thunder, m'kay?

[Guest Slinky]

RPGmasterBoo, you can't trust the grades magazines and sites give to games today. Some grades are bought and many reviewers try to guess will the readers like the game or not, and give grades to them accordingly. Money speaks. And yes, it is horribly wrong but what you can do. And there is always the pont of view -factor.

 

And I still think FO3 would have sold just as much if it had different name. How many oblivion players even knew the existence of Fallout before FO3?

Edited August 10, 2009 by Slinky

[RPGmasterBoo]

Have you seen my father, the middle aged guy?

That story?

Yeah, oversimplification makes everything so much easier.

 

"Uh, I'm looking for a water chip/holy GECK, have you seen one?"

 

See, I can do it too!

 

What characters?

The ones that have 2 lines of spoken text that a 5th grader would write better?

Hmm. Apparently you missed President Eden, for one. I don't know about 5th graders, but if your own arguments are anything to go by, I doubt YOU could have written anything better. Just sayin'.

 

 

It does have an atmosphere of sorts. Something in the vein - kill everything that moves, because you really want to level up and see all these cool perks and because you like random body parts flying around, right?

What are you talking about? That's not the atmosphere. That's the character progression and rewards design. Atmosphere are things such as being jumped by a Deathclaw while exploring an automated distress signal you picked on the radio, or an Enclave Vertibird ambushing you while you stroll happily through the ruined National Mall.

 

 

Its juvenile. The only mature rated game I've seen designed for impressionable 14 year olds.

Seriously man. I'm supposed to be the resident elitist jerk. Don't steal my thunder, m'kay?

 

Then perhaps you should explain the unreachable depths, and nuances of the plot behind Fallout 3 because I think it went over my head.

Along with the Shakespeare quality characters, that spend their post apocalyptic lives writing survival guides, collecting nuka cola bottles, fighting for the rights of androids, playing DJ, nuking small towns and just finding ways to occupy themselves in general - with everything other than a useful, life sustaining activity. Or perhaps the fact that 200 years have passed and no one has run out of ammunition, despite WWIII going on. Or the nuka-cars that seem about as safe as a grenade with a pulled pin. Or the incredibly populated wasteland. Um, something wrong right there.

If that doesn't kill the atmosphere for you, then congrats - really.

[RPGmasterBoo]

RPGmasterBoo, you can't trust the grades magazines and sites give to games today. Some grades are bought and many reviewers try to guess will the readers like the game or not, and give grades to them accordingly. Money speaks. And yes, it is horribly wrong but what you can do. And there is always the pont of view -factor.

 

And I still think FO3 would have sold just as much if it had different name. How many oblivion players even knew the existence of Fallout before FO3?

 

That's right, and I dont trust them. And its happening more than ever, as games become more and more risky and expensive. However that shouldn't stop us from coming down hard on them and pushing for the type of game we would like to play.

 

Not many but the name gave the game "pedigree" and anyway I doubt the license cost them a great deal, with their budget.

[213374U]

Then perhaps you should explain the unreachable depths, and nuances of the plot behind Fallout 3 because I think it went over my head.

Along with the Shakespeare quality characters, that spend their post apocalyptic lives writing survival guides, collecting nuka cola bottles, fighting for the rights of androids, playing DJ, nuking small towns and just finding ways to occupy themselves in general - with everything other than a useful, life sustaining activity. Or perhaps the fact that 200 years have passed and no one has run out of ammunition, despite WWIII going on. Or the nuka-cars that seem about as safe as a grenade with a pulled pin. Or the incredibly populated wasteland. Um, something wrong right there.

If that doesn't kill the atmosphere for you, then congrats - really.

Ah, so we go from "a 5th grader could do better" to "that's not a plot worthy of Shakespeare!". It's quite plain, you don't have a leg to stand on unless you exaggerate rather obscenely. Pray tell, how many games feature a plot and characters worthy of praise, if you use the classics of literature as your standard? Really, tell me just one that compares favourably to, say (to use your own rhetoric) Henry VIII.

 

Bethesda's writing is pretty meh, but as far as video games go, it's not remarkable either way. Certainly not nearly as bad as you'd have us believe with your strawmen.

 

The rest of your arguments are unfair (FO1/2 characters didn't even sleep, much less work for a living) or simply feeble - we don't know the % of the population that was killed in the war, and more than a hundred years have passed. Also, people don't run out of ammo because they actually reused and produced it.

[RPGmasterBoo]

Ah, so we go from "a 5th grader could do better" to "that's not a plot worthy of Shakespeare!". It's quite plain, you don't have a leg to stand on unless you exaggerate rather obscenely. Pray tell, how many games feature a plot and characters worthy of praise, if you use the classics of literature as your standard? Really, tell me just one that compares favourably to, say (to use your own rhetoric) Henry VIII.

 

Bethesda's writing is pretty meh, but as far as video games go, it's not remarkable either way. Certainly not nearly as bad as you'd have us believe with your strawmen.

 

The rest of your arguments are unfair (FO1/2 characters didn't even sleep, much less work for a living) or simply feeble - we don't know the % of the population that was killed in the war, and more than a hundred years have passed. Also, people don't run out of ammo because they actually reused and produced it.

 

It was sarcasm but if you want reasonably deep plot and characters by video game standards, you've got Torment/Baldurs Gate II/Fallout games/Jade Empire/MotB/the Witchers story etc..

Compared to any of these F3 is a Saturday morning cartoon.

 

In every Fallout settlement it was obvious how the community functioned regardless of the fact that the NPC's didnt have work/sleep cycles. In F3 these things make no sense whatsoever, oh and lets look at the calendar - my, my its only been a decade, making a convincing gameworld must be arcane lore by now.

Given the stupidity of the NPC's its unclear how they survived those hundred years. Was farming too complex for game designers at Bethesda?.

Every post apocalyptic story tries to envision a sort of community that arises after the disaster, and to explore how life goes on. That's practically the point of the genre. Fallout 3 just says: bugger this for a bigger plasma gun.

[213374U]

It was sarcasm but if you want reasonably deep plot and characters by video game standards, you've got Torment/Baldurs Gate II/Fallout games/Jade Empire/MotB/the Witchers story etc..

No, it wasn't sarcasm. It was a fallacy around which your arguments are built. The only game in your little list whose plot was clearly much better is Torment... so much better in fact that the game is a cult title. The rest are simply adequate McGuffins that set the stage for the player do his thing ("oh yeah sure my village is about to die, but it's ok if I waste a bit of time pursuing a career as a pron star" or "yeah okay my soul was just ripped from me, but it's fine if I just go kill me some random dragons for loot").

 

 

In every Fallout settlement it was obvious how the community functioned regardless of the fact that the NPC's didnt have work/sleep cycles. In F3 these things make no sense whatsoever, oh and lets look at the calendar - my, my its only been a decade, making a convincing gameworld must be arcane lore by now.

Given the stupidity of the NPC's its unclear how they survived those hundred years. Was farming too complex for game designers at Bethesda?.

Every post apocalyptic story tries to envision a sort of community that arises after the disaster, and to explore how life goes on. That's practically the point of the genre. Fallout 3 just says: bugger this for a bigger plasma gun.

Finally, one bit of criticism that has merit. That took a while. Yes, you don't see people farming. Or farms, for that matter. But just like you imagined that people went to work, took lunch breaks, and went take a dump in all those games you mentioned, why don't you imagine that as well for FO3 and suspend your disbelief just as easily? I haven't been arguing that FO3 is the ultimate anything, or even the best of the series. I don't particularly like it myself. But look at your trolling just a few posts ago (NO story! NO characters!), and look at you now, struggling to find an actual, concrete flaw in the game that is so much worse in FO3 than in, well, just about any other game. Rhetorics are nice, but you need a li'l bit of substance, too.

[RPGmasterBoo]

No, it wasn't sarcasm. It was a fallacy around which your arguments are built. The only game in your little list whose plot was clearly much better is Torment... so much better in fact that the game is a cult title. The rest are simply adequate McGuffins that set the stage for the player do his thing ("oh yeah sure my village is about to die, but it's ok if I waste a bit of time pursuing a career as a pron star" or "yeah okay my soul was just ripped from me, but it's fine if I just go kill me some random dragons for loot").

 

Setting the stage for playing a role is what RPG games are about. In this F3 fails miserably, just as Oblivion did.

That's called choice. What mattered was that the main quest made at least remote sense.

 

Finally, one bit of criticism that has merit. That took a while. Yes, you don't see people farming. Or farms, for that matter. But just like you imagined that people went to work, took lunch breaks, and went take a dump in all those games you mentioned, why don't you imagine that as well for FO3 and suspend your disbelief just as easily? I haven't been arguing that FO3 is the ultimate anything, or even the best of the series. I don't particularly like it myself. But look at your trolling just a few posts ago (NO story! NO characters!), and look at you now, struggling to find an actual, concrete flaw in the game that is so much worse in FO3 than in, well, just about any other game. Rhetorics are nice, but you need a li'l bit of substance, too.

 

You have a vivid imagination. If you want a flaw I'd just point in the general direction of Fallout 3.

- The story is short lasting and paper thin unlike: Torment/BG/Witcher

- The characters are simplistic and often make no sense unlike: Torment/Bloodlines/BGII

- The system behind the game is broken

- The gameworld is not cohesive unlike: Fallout/ Gothic II

- The writing is mediocre unlike: Toremnt/BGII/ToB/MotB

- The interface is is impractical

- The combat is a mediocre shooter unlike: Deus Ex/System Shock/Bioshock

- The game is too easy/ the advanced equipment too quickly available to the player

- Bonus: It presumes to be the sequel to a game that did most of these things right

 

If you want in depth explanations read the NMA article. I finished the game and exorcised it from my hard disk a long time ago.

 

I agree, if compared to Two Worlds, Oblivion or many newer games, then Fallout 3 is fine attempt indeed. Otherwise it has nothing new, and what it does it does very much average.

Edited August 10, 2009 by RPGmasterBoo

[Purkake]

See, talking of affirmative bias, it's exactly this kind of attitude I don't get. Does NMA send out missionaries from door-to-door, preaching the gospel of Fallout 3 Hate? Does it stand behind everyone person when they're playing Fallout 3, whispering "this game is stupid" over and over in their ears?

 

Sometimes the hate seems to leak to other forums, such as this one here as seen earlier in this thread. My main point is that continuing to furiously say how bad FO3 is, has gotten old. Most people are aware of your general stance on FO3, some people still feel the need to tell everyone how bad FO3 is.

 

No? What does NMA do? Have a forum populated by quite a few people who loathe the game, quite a few who dislike it as a Fallout sequel (like me, I don't mind it as much as a game overall), and a few who like or liked it (like my fellow admin Michael Grizzly). The frontpage, with a few exceptions, is pretty much free from hateful remarks, so even that can freely be read by Fallout 3 aficionados without them getting annoyed by us daring to have a different opinion.

 

I don't have anything against the site, it has a lot of nice Fallout resources and keeps up the news.

 

And yet here we are, we stand accused, collectively, of "not letting people have fun". How exactly does that work? Can't stand the opinion of people on NMA's forums? Then don't read the forums. The kind of discussion you see here in this thread, smack-talking another community, we don't even allow that, so NMA is in no way responsibly for what people choose to post on other message forums.

 

I don't read the forums, as I said the hate seems to spill over to other places from time to time. I'm not accusing NMA, I'm accusing the people who use the slightest mention of FO3 to write two paragraphs about how bad it is and I'm personally tired of it.

 

But hey, you need people like me. You need people like me so you can point your fingers and say, "That's the bad guy." So... what that make you? Good? You're not good. You just know how to hide, how to lie. Me, I don't have that problem. Me, I always tell the truth. Even when I lie. So say good night to the bad guy! Come on. The last time you gonna see a bad guy like this again, let me tell you. Come on. Make way for the bad guy. There's a bad guy comin' through! Better get outta his way!

 

Huh? I'm pretty sure you can't tell the truth and lie at the same time. I'm not blaming you, I'm not even blaming NMA, I'm blaming the people who apparently can't stop themselves from being angry almost a year after FO3 was released.

 

*chews scenery*

 

You know, all that plastic isn't good for you!

 

EDIT: also what the heck? This is a FOnline thread? Awesome, but then why are we talking Fallout 3 and NMA?

 

Mr Boo started it, this is just the natural conclusion after mentioning FO3.

Edited August 10, 2009 by Purkake

[Gizmo]

Have you seen my father, the middle aged guy?

That story?

Yeah, oversimplification makes everything so much easier.

 

"Uh, I'm looking for a water chip/holy GECK, have you seen one?"

 

See, I can do it too!

One line out of context for each, and its true, there is not much difference, but when examined in context, you find that the FO3 line is typical of the whole, while the FO1/2 line is not.

 

If you want to compare dialog and plot then compare them, don't cherry-pick single lines that best suit your point.

FO1

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0134648/quotes

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallout_(video_game)#Plot

 

FO2

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0183066/quotes

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallout_2#Plot

 

FO3

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1073664/quotes

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallout_3#Plot

 

 

Huh? I'm pretty sure you can't tell the truth and lie at the same time.

This you just saw in the posts above, and done well too. Edited August 10, 2009 by Gizmo