Fallout 3's Writing issues

[Purkake]

I'll just leave you to your obsessing then.

 

Again, I'm sorry, I really didn't know it was an actual... condition.

 

I've heard of this place called NMA, I think they have more people like you there, maybe they can help you?

Edited January 13, 2010 by Purkake

[TwinkieGorilla]

I'll just leave you to your obsessing then.

 

Thank you?

 

Again, I'm sorry, I really didn't know it was an actual... condition.

 

Troll fail, humor fail, condescension...win?

 

I've heard of this place called NMA, I think they have more people like you there, maybe they can help you?

 

Been there in one form or another since "before the fall" and have many great friends there, but thanks anyway.

[Oner]

The Fact is that Fallout 3 is a sequel. It has the story elements and continuation of some of those story elements and a modified version of the Special system of the previous two games, as well as the game is set in a post-apocalyptic world following The Great War between the US and China. To say that it's nothing like Fallout is moronic.

That description fits (or rather, doesn't differentiate from) a gaiden (spin-off) game too, like Tactics. That said, 'nothing like FO' is a bit extreme, even when talking exclusively about gameplay.

 

Sigh... a well spoken critic of Fallout 3 and all the senseless ragers drive him/her off.

You don't have to be 'driven off' to go and laugh at others' tattoos. I don't have to be driven off to eat breakfast.

 

 

@Purk: Haters have the NMA crowd (who aren't here) and Twinkie. Hater haters have mkreku, who joins the NV weapon balance discussion -where people talk about the pros and cons of both the FO 1-2 and 3 approach- in the other thread just to shout 'stop dissing fo 3 already' in a rabid, foamy-mouthed manner. Hater haters aren't much better. Both parties (Hell, 99% of the internet - I actively try not to, but I'm human too) LOVES to skim over facts just so s/he can bash whatever he wants and call the "opposition" idiots. For all their opinions and over-zealousness everyone here (Twinkie and mkreku too) are discussing and talking about what they perceive as facts. OTOH I've seen a thread on NMA which was about (I'm not kidding) bashing F3 and Beth because there are no groin shots. Not liking F3 is one thing, but I've yet to see anyone with such a low IQ here.

 

@some other people: "Stop the hate already!" and "Stay on topic!" being repeated certainly won't add to the discussion. Honestly speaking, while mods doing their job is a good thing, this thread does "belong" to Writeguard, if he decides to indulge in gameplay discussion then so be it. The important thing of a thread is (IMO) it's theme, not it's title. Besides, I've rewritten the @Purk part of my post so many times, it probably has nothing to do anymore with what I originally wanted to tell to him, so derailing is kinda natural, and not just for me.

There's only so much people can say about writing, while gameplay options and variables are much easier to remember (and check up) than N/PC quotes. Not to mention that ripping one, two or three conversations out is not a good representation of either good or bad writing, experience says humans remember what they liked and disliked the most, not the stuff in between.

 

@everyone: Before the release of FO 3, Todd Whatzisname already said they didn't give a damn about the writing, so dissing it is being captain obvious while defending it is retarded. Not to mention that for something they didn't care about, it certainly has some good parts.

 

 

You made me write a lot. You all owe me ice cream.

Edited January 13, 2010 by Oner

[RPGmasterBoo]

I leave you for one night people and this thread degenerates into hell.

 

@to the guy who said that saying Fallout 3 is not a sequel is moronic: reread the post until repeatedly until you get it you get it. I can get a plumbers outfit, and grow a moustache and eat spotted mushrooms but that doesn't make me f-ing Super Mario.

 

@Oner: you could have dropped in with that tidbit on the writing sooner.

 

Final word: There are people who think what Bethesda made wasn't great but that it was sufficiently fun. Okay, I actually envy you since I had to deinstall the game in horror and had nothing else to play . Anyway, that's a legitimate standpoint, cos having fun can excuse just about everything.

I was luckily never a fan of Fallout, thus the game wasn't exactly my apocalypse, but I still consider it sh!t since I'm rarely put off so much by a game that I have to chuck it from my hard drive.

 

But that's all history now. Here's how things stand:

 

1. I firmly believe that Bethesda can't make anything better than Fallout 3, and they'll just continue raping the franchise for all its worth. In fact I find the grind filled Elder Scrolls gameplay model hopelessly obsolete after Bioware/Black Isle/Troika/CD Projekt Red games. Thus, I don't give a sh!t about anything Bethesda makes because their target audience is obviously someone else.

 

2. I think Obsidian can make a good game in the franchise, though I'll reserve that judgment until the first screenshots start rolling in. I surmise that the fate of permanently continuing from the scraps of bigger studios doesn't exactly make the Obs people brim with delight and enthusiasm, but they'll probably do their best.

 

Up until then, I see no point in discussing Fallout 3. If the world has moved on from Fallout 1 & 2 then it has just as moved on from Fallout 3, even more so because of how mediocre it is.

 

-Battle control terminated-

Edited January 13, 2010 by RPGmasterBoo

[Oner]

@Oner: you could have dropped in with that tidbit on the writing sooner.

I did, months ago, on the Beth forums too.

[jero cvmi]

Here's something you may not realize about me and due to no real fault of your own: I am not a "gamer" but a Fallout obsessive. I don't play video-games very often and when I do, based on recommendations...since Fallout, I've not felt the same. There have been some which have come close (Baldur's Gate, Arcanum, Planescape, VB:M, Deus Ex) but I'm just not that into games to talk about anything other than Fallout or it's successors.

I can totally understand that, as I too stopped playing games for years after i first finished fallout 1 & 2, the bar had been set just too high (according to my personal taste) to get interested in anything else. I only started gaming again when i discovered these games you quoted years later while browsing forums looking for info on fallout 3.

I guess i fall into the Fallout Obsessive category as well... *shrugs* it's not a condition, it's pretty much expected when you don't like a specific genre of entertainment (like gaming) too much, but find something very unique and different that stands out to you (like fallout) to care about this one and ignore all others. I know people who love Vespas or Citroen 2CVs, while they're not all that much into motorcycles/cars altogether. Because Vespas/2CVs are different.

 

If you had enough other games to play maybe you wouldn't have time to obsess about Fallout?

Sure thing, but how many Vtm:Bs and PS:Ts are there?

 

@everyone: Before the release of FO 3, Todd Whatzisname already said they didn't give a damn about the writing, so dissing it is being captain obvious while defending it is retarded.

 

Words of wisdom.

[WriteGuard]

What does your detailed analysis of the SPECIAL system's different implementation have to do with your hyperbole?

 

It's nice to discuss games, even old games, but does endlessly spewing out the same tired old arguments really add anything to the conversation? All the things discussed here have been discussed over and over again before. Funny how that only happens to a few specific games here...

 

Instead of lamenting over FO3's flaws, try expanding your horizons. There are a ton of awesome and interesting indie games like World of Goo, Portal or Machinarium.

 

I established this specific strand to discuss the writing in Fallout 3. And, by and large, the discussion went well. Some good points were bandied on both sides of the proverbial trenches (i.e. support for some aspects of FO3 Vs. Complete dismissal of FO3's writing as crap middle schoolers could best).

 

at some point it reverted to an all out smiting of Fallout 3. Oh well.

 

But at the end of the day, this is a FO3 specific message board topic. We will lament of FO3 and it's flaws as long as this is the topic. criticism of that fact is misplaced.

[WriteGuard]

I leave you for one night people and this thread degenerates into hell.

 

 

Final word: There are people who think what Bethesda made wasn't great but that it was sufficiently fun. Okay, I actually envy you since I had to deinstall the game in horror and had nothing else to play . Anyway, that's a legitimate standpoint, cos having fun can excuse just about everything.

 

I think this may represent the crux of the argument. If, like RPGMaster you had a generally bad first impression and experience with FO3, you are more apt to dismiss it and find fault.

 

If you had a generally favorable first impression of FO3, or at least had "Fun" playing it, you're more apt to defend it, or at minimum, find value in some of it (more like me, and some other's represented here.)

 

We all bring prejudices, consciously or unconsciously, into a situation. These prejudices color our view of FO3. Regardless of this, we all agree, at some basic level, with the following statement:

 

Fallout 3 could've been a much better game and we hope FO4, FO:NLV are better games.

[Oner]

We all bring prejudices, consciously or unconsciously, into a situation. These prejudices color our view of FO3.

Sorry, I don't, at least in F3's case. It had the chance to impress me, but failed.

[WriteGuard]

We all bring prejudices, consciously or unconsciously, into a situation. These prejudices color our view of FO3.

Sorry, I don't, at least in F3's case. It had the chance to impress me, but failed.

 

You precisely made my point. By being unimpressed by FO3, you imbue a natural bias into the conversation. We're not necessarily talking about extremes (I LOVE it or HATE it), we're talking about a subtle bias that sways your overall perspective.

 

I'm touching on something that's much larger than Fallout. Bias is something we all have. Whether it is intentional or not, our brains structure works on creating pattern recognition through descrimination.

[Oner]

Nope. I played the game, then found stuff simply lacking. See the ending for example: You're completely arbitrarily forced into a stupid sacrifice situation - is it stupid because of bias? no, because very badly "justified" -, if you choose the selfish option you get reprimanded - it offers choice... then judges me. A choice I made because the situation was arbitrary -, then the ending slide show: as I said, it reprimands you for your choice and, in comparison with the first two (hell, in comparison with Tactics) is simply..less. Does this have to do anything with bias? No. It's minimalistic and bar the last choice, unspecific. A simple matter of more vs less. Did that keep me from acknowledging the last part with the family photo and the nice music to be a nice touch? Nope.

That bias can exist doesn't mean everyone is biased about everything. Aaaand prejudice != bias.

 

+The people "biased" towards F3 hated the ending too.

Edited January 13, 2010 by Oner

[TwinkieGorilla]

I think this may represent the crux of the argument. If, like RPGMaster you had a generally bad first impression and experience with FO3, you are more apt to dismiss it and find fault.

 

Not really. The reasons people have issues with this game can be written out in great detail with factual examples. If things get emotional back here and don't always appear reasonable it's because we've all typed ourselves into exhaustion by now. There was a time the majority of my posts were exhaustive ones like this from last year:

 

"

I think bethesda has gone for an only positive system, everyone starts at the same level, so while having a low intelligence has no effect, having a high intelligence does have positive effects unlocking dialogue options.

 

 

Is this actually true? All I've seen is a higher intelligence modifying the percentage for a sucessful skill check which is a joke since somebody with a lower intelligence merely has a smaller percentage to make it, but they still have a chance (and really all they'd have to do is re-load until they get it right, no?). It doesn't actually unlock hidden dialog options like the original Fallouts did (and many attributes other than Int. would also unlock dialog options in Fallouts 1 & 2). You are right about one thing though: Bethesda really seems to have created a game that is a glorified hand-holding event and really feels like it's gameplay (not it's content) was made for an all-ages crowd. Something your kids can play and not easily die and become frustrated or something Granny can play when she comes to visit (time to decorate the house, Grandma!). Everybody starts at a positive place and before long every single character can accomplish anything. No room for failing anywhere because there's no room for individualization or specialization for your characters.

 

Edit: I do now seem to remember that sometimes even a rudimentary schooling in certain areas would give you the brackets around an option [science] or something but never did it actually look like the writers choose an answer which was something only a very intelligent or scientific person would say. They simply put brackets around a very generic response, such as the infamous: [intelligence] So you say you fight the good fight? Now is that something a highly intelligent character would respond with? The exact same thing the NPC said to them? Horrible, just simply horribly implemented.

 

This also applies to perks, having dropped the traits system with negative effects as a trade off to your perk, while they help flesh out the character a bit they can also lead your character down a path of become unplayable. It's not the same as Fallout 1/2, but it's different, that doesn't really make it better or worse really, just different.

 

 

No, it's actually lazy developing and makes the system simpler, easier and generally less interesting. I mentioned earlier in this thread how I experimented with Bethesda's implementation of the SPECIAL system by creating simultaneous characters and making them what would have been very different characters using the original SPECIAL system. Nothing really seemed to matter, none of my characters were really any better or worse off than others because of the stats or attributes I chose and I felt then that there was about as much reason to replay the game as there was any other linear story-based game (only this game had a fairly short and very under-developed story)."

 

And we're still stuck here without much else to talk about but the most recent development in the series, which is Fallout 3. I wanted to LOVE this game in spite of who was developing it. I even thought after a few days of playing it that it was good and I might end up loving it. Unfortunately, the more I played the game the more I watched it fail in front of me. Countless posts I've made explain why I feel this way in detail and it isn't because of some inherent bias or predetermined prejudice, trust me.

 

I'm touching on something that's much larger than Fallout. Bias is something we all have. Whether it is intentional or not, our brains structure works on creating pattern recognition through descrimination.

 

Bias is not really the word to use for people who can point to the exact problems with a situation they have.

Edited January 13, 2010 by TwinkieGorilla

[WriteGuard]

Bias is not really the word to use for people who can point to the exact problems with a situation they have.

 

Agreed. But that's not what I was addressing. I was addressing the overall view of the game and the colored commentary.

 

Factual, specific complaints about parts of the game are both valid and elucidating.

 

 

@Oner: I see your point. I enjoyed some aspects of FO3 and hated others, regardless of my overall opinion of the game. Though, I disagree with your view of the ending. If we're looking at this game mimetically (through a scope of how close it is to the morals, values and reality of "real life") then the ending works. We are so often put into situations in life that we have no choice in, and regardless of what we do, we are judged, often harshly and negatively. This is a Catch-22.

 

FO1&2 did do this better, though. It shouldn't matter how many soda bottles you collect for some crazy b!tch who lives under a freeway; that should be how you're remembered.

[J.E. Sawyer]

@Oner: I see your point. I enjoyed some aspects of FO3 and hated others, regardless of my overall opinion of the game. Though, I disagree with your view of the ending. If we're looking at this game mimetically (through a scope of how close it is to the morals, values and reality of "real life") then the ending works. We are so often put into situations in life that we have no choice in, and regardless of what we do, we are judged, often harshly and negatively. This is a Catch-22.

I think everyone expects (or hopes) to be judged by people in the game world. When the narrator judges your actions, it has a different kind of impact.

[Slowtrain]

@everyone: Before the release of FO 3, Todd Whatzisname already said they didn't give a damn about the writing, so dissing it is being captain obvious while defending it is retarded. Not to mention that for something they didn't care about, it certainly has some good parts.

 

 

Whether he said that or not, doesn't mean Fallout 3 and consqeuently Bethesda can't be criticized for that choice.

 

Frankly, if he did in fact say that, then my personal criticism becomes even louder and more vociferous.

[TwinkieGorilla]

I think everyone expects (or hopes) to be judged by people in the game world. When the narrator judges your actions, it has a different kind of impact.

 

What exactly are you proposing?

[WriteGuard]

I think everyone expects (or hopes) to be judged by people in the game world. When the narrator judges your actions, it has a different kind of impact.

 

Are you guys going to have the same "War...war never ends...." voice actor? That seems to be a continuous phenomena over the course of the fallouts.

[Lare Kikkeli]

I think everyone expects (or hopes) to be judged by people in the game world. When the narrator judges your actions, it has a different kind of impact.

 

Are you guys going to have the same "War...war never ends...." voice actor? That seems to be a continuous phenomena over the course of the fallouts.

 

Ron Perlman.

[Oner]

I think everyone expects (or hopes) to be judged by people in the game world. When the narrator judges your actions, it has a different kind of impact.

Exactly.

Except when it's played for laughs.

 

 

Whether he said that or not, doesn't mean Fallout 3 and consequently Bethesda can't be criticized for that choice.

 

Frankly, if he did in fact say that, then my personal criticism becomes even louder and more vociferous.

Certainly, I was just referring to the endless (if even today funny) [iNT] quotes and other examples. The writing is an admitted "crime", it doesn't need proving.

[Purkake]

The funny thing is that I didn't actually like FO3 all that much either, but not because of the writing or characters, but mostly because of the horribly depressing choice of color palette and because I don't really like sandbox games that much.

 

That said, it is still a perfectly functional and fun game that could never hope to live up to the standards some people set for it. The trick is to lower your expectations instead of hoping for the impossible. That's something I learned the hard way with Bioshock...

Edited January 13, 2010 by Purkake

[Oner]

That said, it is still a perfectly functional and fun game that could never hope to live up to the standards some people set for it. The trick is to lower your expectations instead of hoping for the impossible. That's something I learned the hard way with Bioshock...

'Cause something that's been done twice is impossible.

[Purkake]

Did anyone really expect an isometric turn-based Fallout close to FO1/2 once we knew that Bethesda was making it? Set your expectations according to the circumstances. FO3 could have been much worse.

Edited January 13, 2010 by Purkake

[Slowtrain]

.

 

That said, it is still a perfectly functional and fun game that could never hope to live up to the standards some people set for it.

 

 

I don't disagree with this, but at the same time I also think its completely fair to criticize a game for its failings.

 

Yes, FO3 is perfectly functional at its current levels. I think its a fun game. BUT it would be even more fun and worthwhile if the writing engaged me with the characters and the world. Make me feel something about this huge gameworld I am interacting with beyond just amusment at blowing up raiders with landmines and finding quantums.

 

I personally don't believe in just sitting back and accepting the status quo if it is something that I feel is or could be worthwhile and/or significant.

 

 

Fallout 3 is fun. With some improvements it could be much more than that.

[Purkake]

Oh, of course it could be better. I just tend to avoid the topic because pretty much all previous discussions on that topic have devolved into a very emotional discussions on how FO3 is a personal insult to some people and how it is a very bad game when it is actually pretty ok.

Edited January 13, 2010 by Purkake

[Oner]

Hah, the only thing I can never ever be accused of is complaining about the FP view.

I didn't really have expectations. Much less impossible ones (then I wouldn't call F3 a decent game). What I wanted was basically a decent-good story, the SPECIAL in action and the stat-dialogue thing. And exploring.

Exploring turned out to be boring(metro over metro over metro), the stat dialogue is...*cough* of varying quality *cough*, SPECIAL was already there, adapting it to FPS is some work but hardly unfeasible, and the story was cut together from the previous two games.

Of these only the SPECIAL is invariably connected to FO, the others jut lack general quality.