Jump to content
The Community Blog (An Invitation)

Fallout: New Vegas

WorstUsernameEver
 Share

Recommended Posts

Amentep

Amentep

Posted
Posted (edited)
If you have Colonial Marines fighting aliens, within that context a lot of liberties can be taken and the plausibility maintained. But if you have some guy in a cape suddenly swoop down from the sky and start punching out the aliens with firsts of steel, then you've blown your context all to hell and no one is going to even try to buy into the illusion. Unless you've got a damn good explanation that makes it plausible within the context.

 

Don't try to fight the irresistible lure...

 

Being a bit more serious, let me put it this way - if your setting already contains a number of high powered concepts, how does adding a different high powered concept make it "more ridiculous"?

 

I think this is the point where I'm having trouble following you.

 

Its a bit like saying that 557 rabbits are okay, but 558 is just CRAZY! The distinction in how they're different is lost on me.

Edited by Amentep

I cannot - yet I must. How do you calculate that? At what point on the graph do "must" and "cannot" meet? Yet I must - but I cannot! ~ Ro-Man

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gromnir

Gromnir

Posted
Posted

actually, we thinks that a side-quest with a caped supermutant vigilante/nutter could work quite well in a fo game. give the 'hero' a kinda invulnerability and a weakness to a certain kinda toxic/radioactive goo or element? why not? maybe slow should suggest to josh.

 

HA! Good Fun!

"If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."Justice Louis Brandeis, Concurring, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927)

"Im indifferent to almost any murder as long as it doesn't affect me or mine."--Gfted1 (September 30, 2019)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Amentep

Amentep

Posted
Posted

Fans of Fallout 3 would claim that Obs were reusing Bethesda's ideas (Antagonizer/Mechanist), I'm sure... :sorcerer::p

I cannot - yet I must. How do you calculate that? At what point on the graph do "must" and "cannot" meet? Yet I must - but I cannot! ~ Ro-Man

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nemo0071

Nemo0071

Posted
Posted
Fans of Fallout 3 would claim that Obs were reusing Bethesda's ideas (Antagonizer/Mechanist), I'm sure... :sorcerer::p

Ignorance is a bliss, as they say... But don't worry, they'll learn the truth.

 

When they're ready. :p

 

/mystery

"Save often!" -The Inquisitor

 

"Floss regularly!" -also The Inquisitor

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nemo0071

Nemo0071

Posted
Posted
Superman is a total ripoff of the Mechanist!

You mean Iron Man? :p

 

Also,

 

Supermutants = The Hulk

 

:p

 

Nonono, wait, that's not what I meaAAARGH IT BURNS!! :sorcerer:

"Save often!" -The Inquisitor

 

"Floss regularly!" -also The Inquisitor

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Undecaf

Undecaf

Posted
Posted
Superman is a total ripoff of the Mechanist!

 

Who would've thought that Fallout 3 would become such an influential product that it inspires people back in time. :sorcerer:

Perkele, tiädäksää tuanoini!

"It's easier to tolerate idiots if you do not consider them as stupid people, but exceptionally gifted monkeys."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oner

Oner

Posted
Posted (edited)
Superman is a total ripoff of the Mechanist!

Who would've thought that Fallout 3 would become such an influential product that it inspires people back in time. :sorcerer:

Pfft, facts are for 40 year old gamer kids.

Who bothers with release dates in this day and age anyway?

Edited by Oner

Giveaway list: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1DgyQFpOJvyNASt8A12ipyV_iwpLXg_yltGG5mffvSwo/edit?usp=sharing

What is glass but tortured sand?
Never forget! '12.01.13.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Undecaf

Undecaf

Posted
Posted
Superman is a total ripoff of the Mechanist!

Who would've thought that Fallout 3 would become such an influential product that it inspires people back in time. :sorcerer:

Pfft, facts are for 40 year old gamer kids.

Who bothers with release dates in this day and age anyway?

 

I guess there is always a selection of few heathens hiding behind a bonsaitree.

Perkele, tiädäksää tuanoini!

"It's easier to tolerate idiots if you do not consider them as stupid people, but exceptionally gifted monkeys."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WorstUsernameEver

WorstUsernameEver

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1) we specifically mentioned "plausible" and rationale as opposed to real.

 

That's kinda the point though. Nukes and orbital laser are perfectly fine as ultimate weapons in Fallout but many feel that using them for killing raiders.. strains hit a bit.

Mind you, I'm not denying that Fallout has always been on the silly side, since Fallout 1 (again, though, the silliness was subdued for the most part), but there's a balance that's difficult to strike that I feel hasn't been reproduced in Fallout 2 (too much self-awareness) and in Fallout 3 (too much of a contrast between the juvenile humor and the juvenile grittiness).

Also, it seems that we have two very different views on the setting, since I could never envision a super-hero quest in Fallout (and in fact, I hated the Fallout 3 quest).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raithe

Raithe

Posted
Posted

The silly was restrained for the early fallouts? The game box came with a "this game is rated mature due to violence, drug use, and extreme use of monty python references" sticker on it... :sorcerer:

"Cuius testiculos habeas, habeas cardia et cerebellum."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WorstUsernameEver

WorstUsernameEver

Posted
  • Author
Posted
The silly was restrained for the early fallouts? The game box came with a "this game is rated mature due to violence, drug use, and extreme use of monty python references" sticker on it... :sorcerer:

 

I was actually talking about Fallout 1.

And honestly, stickers aren't game content, so it's not like you're making a particularly vaild point. :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gromnir

Gromnir

Posted
Posted (edited)

the notion that fo1 were restrained is more a result o' hardcore fan revisionism than any sorta observable quality. the hardcore fallout element does have a tendency to think that the fallout setting were fully realized and near perfect as imagined in fo1, and any subsequent additions or changes were unnecessary or even heretical.

 

"Also, it seems that we have two very different views on the setting, since I could never envision a super-hero quest in Fallout (and in fact, I hated the Fallout 3 quest)."

 

*chuckle*

 

in any event, getting back to your original point, we think it should now be clear that an element on this board continues to raise plausibility as an argument, no?

 

furthermore, we thinks that the notion o' fallout 1 as canon or using as a measuring stick for some gut-level notion o' propriety is equal suspect. for some elements o' the fallout community, the only way for a developer to satisfactorily do a fallout game is to make it resemble fo 1 as near as possible. we suspect that an ultra-faithful recreation would lead to complaints o' excessive staleness and paucity of creativity from even the hardcore faction.

 

btw, in our estimation, fallout:tactics were not a failure 'cause o' furry deathclaws and psychic beastmasters... or the reaver-dance random encounter. fallout:tactics suffered from numerous gameplay issues... and many such issues were tied to the use o' the original and broken special system. fo:t were actual a pretty fun game until you reached higher levels and had to deal with robots, but the robots sucked not 'cause o' their incompatibility with fo canon, but because o' gameplay issues.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited by Gromnir

"If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."Justice Louis Brandeis, Concurring, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927)

"Im indifferent to almost any murder as long as it doesn't affect me or mine."--Gfted1 (September 30, 2019)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WorstUsernameEver

WorstUsernameEver

Posted
  • Author
Posted
the notion that fo1 were restrained is more a result o' hardcore fan revisionism than any sorta observable quality. the hardcore fallout element does have a tendency to think that the fallout setting were fully realized and near perfect as imagined in fo1, and any subsequent additions or changes were unnecessary or even heretical.

 

I dunno I played it again and finished it again just something like 2 weeks ago, maybe, just maybe I know what I'm talking about.

Also, I liked Fallout 2, and think it was an interesting take on the setting, but the tone was very much different from Fallout 1.

Fallout 1 took itself seriously, Fallout 2 didn't.

I also think that, from the sound of it, New Vegas is doing it right, they're focusing on the right things.

I'm perfectly aware also of the fact that FO1's setting was far from all-realized. Heck, Tim Cain and Chris Taylor couldn't even agree on the origin of the ghouls!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gromnir

Gromnir

Posted
Posted (edited)
the notion that fo1 were restrained is more a result o' hardcore fan revisionism than any sorta observable quality. the hardcore fallout element does have a tendency to think that the fallout setting were fully realized and near perfect as imagined in fo1, and any subsequent additions or changes were unnecessary or even heretical.

 

I dunno I played it again and finished it again just something like 2 weeks ago, maybe, just maybe I know what I'm talking about.

 

 

 

 

 

our mistake. if you actually played the game then you clearly must have some kinda special knowledge. am betting that you is the only person on these boards that has played fo. clearly yours is the enlightened pov.

 

*chuckle*

 

as for the following: "Fallout 1 took itself seriously."

 

no doubt the bloody mess trait were added as a serious and scathing commentary of Tipper Gore and the family values movement o' the mid 80's and 90's... or not. sorry, but am gonna have to disagree that fo took itself serious. is simple that you took fo 1 as serious.

 

is curious how it is the hardcore fans that seems most frequent to ignore the camp quality o' fallout. fallout is funny. fallout embraces some of the most ridiculous 1950's era tropes and combines with the most over-the-top aspects o' mad max/road warrior. the fact that some characters and situations is presented in such a serious manner actually increases the humor as the gravitas is clearly at odds with the setting.

 

*shrug*

 

fallout were funny... and the fact that some o' the most dedicated fans take it so serious makes it even more amusing to Gromnir.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited by Gromnir

"If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."Justice Louis Brandeis, Concurring, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927)

"Im indifferent to almost any murder as long as it doesn't affect me or mine."--Gfted1 (September 30, 2019)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WorstUsernameEver

WorstUsernameEver

Posted
  • Author
Posted
our mistake. if you actually played the game then you clearly must have some kinda special knowledge. am betting that you is the only person on these boards that has played fo. clearly yours is the enlightened pov.

 

*chuckle*

 

as for the following: "Fallout 1 took itself seriously."

 

no doubt the bloody mess trait were added as a serious and scathing commentary of Tipper Gore and the family values movement o' the mid 80's and 90's... or not. sorry, but am gonna have to disagree that fo took itself serious. is simple that you took fo 1 as serious.

 

is curious how it is the hardcore fans that seems most frequent to ignore the camp quality o' fallout. fallout is funny. fallout embraces some of the most ridiculous 1950's era tropes and combines with the most over-the-top aspects o' mad max/road warrior. the fact that some characters and situations is presented in such a serious manner actually increases the humor as such gravitas is clearly at odds with the setting.

 

*shrug*

 

fallout were funny... and the fact that some o' the most dedicated fans take it so serious makes it even more amusing to Gromnir.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

You're mixing the background of the setting which is quite silly and the situations presented in the game itself which are typical of the post-apocalyptic genre. I also don't understand what a humorous perk as anything to do with it.

I'm pretty sure that if you asked Hideo Kojima if he wanted Metal Gear Solid to be taken seriously he'd answer yes, and yet the game is full of over-the-top, 4th wall-breaking moments, and has even quite a few humorous items. By your logic that too is a silly game? (I'm not arguing about the quality of the game or how one may judge it, mind you)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gromnir

Gromnir

Posted
Posted

"You're mixing the background of the setting which is quite silly and the situations presented in the game itself..."

 

and you is acting as if the two is somehow insular and discreet.

 

"I also don't understand what a humorous perk as anything to do with it."

 

two points:

 

1) bloody mess were a trait in fallout... am surprised that a serious fo fan would confuse fo 1 and fo 3.

 

2) it is clear that you do not understand.

 

HA! Good Fun!

"If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."Justice Louis Brandeis, Concurring, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927)

"Im indifferent to almost any murder as long as it doesn't affect me or mine."--Gfted1 (September 30, 2019)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mkreku

mkreku

Posted
Posted

So we have a 50+ orc impersonator and a "tr00 fan" arguing over Fallout semantics now?

 

This thread is going places!

Swedes, go to: Spel2, for the latest game reviews in swedish!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nemo0071

Nemo0071

Posted
Posted

It's funny they never mentioned that the "new developer" is actually the, uh... old developer. :)

 

Also, I still can't get my head around this "shot in the face & born again" dilemma. Wouldn't it feel more natural if they had just beat the courier into a pulp? Both the 'facial reconstruction' and being found alive would make more sense...

 

Oh well, I guess it's a story thing. :down:

"Save often!" -The Inquisitor

 

"Floss regularly!" -also The Inquisitor

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WorstUsernameEver

WorstUsernameEver

Posted
  • Author
Posted

It's funny they never mentioned that the "new developer" is actually the, uh... old developer. :p

 

Also, I still can't get my head around this "shot in the face & born again" dilemma. Wouldn't it feel more natural if they had just beat the courier into a pulp? Both the 'facial reconstruction' and being found alive would make more sense...

 

Oh well, I guess it's a story thing. :)

 

Actually, consider two things :

 

1) There have been cases (plenty actually) of people who surviev headshots in reality too.

2) The medical science in Fallout's world is much more advanced, almost miracolous, compared to our.

 

So yeah, doesn't particularly bother me. Depending on who tried to kill you, the fact that they shot you in the head instead of beating you may be an hint that they're professionals, but that's just speculation. :down:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...