War... war never changes.



No, that would be Brotherhood of Steel.

Yes indeed i have not and i make efforts to learn about fo1 fo2 but the new fallout i would like to think i know what im talking about i have had a 11 breakthroughs in fo3 and 4 in fonv and play them daily (800hrs in fo3 just under 200 in fonv).I'm sorry for giving fallout a generalization as the older fallouts and the newer ones are nothing a like so any generalization i make will probably be incorrect.But i'm not incorrect about the new fallouts the current fallouts may i add.

:rofl: Oh that's good, that's really good, oh I like it a lot!
The only ghing I liked from Fallout 3 was the Talon Company, just everything about them I liked, but they were implemented, like all other factions in Fallout 3 (EEEEVVVIL Enclave, White Knight BoS) very badly.

Heres just a question that I think is sort of interesting, what would you guys think of Fallout 3 if it wasn't considered part of the Fallout series and was sort of a "spin-off" or just a homage to Fallout? Would you like it better?

as to the guy who says that fallout is all about exploration, I hate to say it but its not. Personally I like how Fallout 3 took the approach into more to being about atmosphere and exploration but its not the approach the originals took.

^^^ I've been pushing that since 2007; I'd have no problems with it at all ~It IS a spin off in every practical sense but officially.
If that were the case (and what was intended), FO3 (by any other name) would be a favorite with no ill feelings at all.
The only regret I have about it is that it sits in the #3 spot and prevents a different FO3. :shrug:
*(and that it influenced New Vegas, and WILL influence all future Fallouts.)

I would like it. I'd rather FONV be considered the third fallout. It'd be better if it didnt go west coast, west coast, east coast, west coast. It would make more sense to just earase FO3 from canon so that the seiries continues to slowly move east rather than suddenly jump to a seperate story.

Or Bethesda can reboot the series and create their own Fallout Lore

To an extent... they did.

I would HATE that! If they were to do that might as well start a new franchise called apoclypse or something and just leave Obsidian with Fallout. though i doubt they can leagally do that.

Thats interesting. I think thats maybe where some of the conflict between the Fallout 3 lovers and those that much prefer the originals originates and its because the perception seems to be that everybody hates Fallout 3 as a game and thinks it totally svcks because its not fun. Rather though, alot of those people who say they don't like Fallout 3 have more of a problem with the fact that its supposed to be the very similar to the originals if its a Fallout game as its billed.

That, and an expectation of what are almost like tenets of the series. Fallout basically played with double edged rules and that affected the PC and NPC alike. Special was closely linked to what the PC could accomplish and influenced everything in the game ~Fallout 3 is about bumping stats 'til they're 'almost perfect'. Perks in FO1 were cheats that usually bent the standard rule a bit in the players favor. (like adding APs for maneuvering, or dropping the cost of inventory). FO3 had a contest with about 17,000 entries for fan made perks. (lot of junk, lot of duplicates, and stuff they already thought of).... In the end they picked Grim Reaper Sprint ~get your regenerating APs back instantly if you kill the a guy with VATS. :banghead: (and then there was 'nuclear anomaly'.) Arguably these also bend the rules in the players favor... but its just a different corporate culture behind the game now; (and making it for a different market... one that primarily never heard of Fallout before ~and expects TES40k). The only folks that would notice the differences, are the ones who would buy a part 3 based on rep...(and its completely different). :bonk:
My Epic Raspberry was Fallout 3 :shrug: ~ I expected a game derived from Fallout 1&2 that played a lot more like a Sci-Fi "The Witcher" than a Sci-Fi TES.

Now now now not so fast, I never said that we should treat it like that of which we do not speak of (ahem..Boradam ) because I generally think that that game is mocking the idea of Fallout and a 1950s post apocalypse in general. Fallout 3 at least tries to emulate the originals and creates an amazing apocalyptic atmosphere.

that of which we do not speak basically just screams "HELL YEAH! NUCLEAR WAR!! BIG GUNS!! NAKED WOMEN!! HEAVEY METAL!!" or something like that.

I think it would make people alot happier if Fallout 3 was considered to be a seperate "spin-off series" (but still respected in some ways) or maybe even an alternate Fallout universe (talk about confusing...an alternate alternate universe...) which keeps the spirit of the series but has its own unique lore.

Indeed, and did a great job... 200 years late in the timeline.
FO3 did a caricature of the setting though. Having played the originals... can you recall a 50's greaser like Butch in them? Was Butch (from in the original game) a 50's greaser? Can you recall anything 50's, that was not pre-war salvage? Any Elvis impersonators?, and beehive hair?

*All that was Vault Boy, and his 50's cartoon optimism while ducking and covering under a desk. The world was not what they thought when they sent him out of the vault.

I wouldn't say FONV is a bad game (it's actually pretty good). But in my eyes FO3 was better.

The intros in Fallout 1 and 2 had songs from the 50s and I just thought that it general they tried to have some of that feeling (but I agree that aside from the intros there wasn't much 1950s about them, which is where I sorta think the originals went wrong, but its just my opinon.)

I guess I just liked how Fallout 3 brought the 1950s aspect more into the Fallout setting. Thats something that I really think that they did right when they created the game.

Edit: Double post ignore

Question is... How can the original be wrong. There was a http://www.youtube.com/user/GizmoJunk#p/u/14/qfOVLdmEHkg that almost looked like Ultima Online. (it shipped on the CD).

They came up with the idea for a retro 50's paradise of the future ~blown to hell; and it would seem that the Vault Dweller emerges into the wreckage of someone else's 50's paradise ~lost.

Prehaps wrong is a bad word to use then. Maybe "what I think they could have done better" is a more adequate description. I just like how Fallout 3 expanded on that "1950s retro-future-paradise lost" motiff, its what really holds me to the game.

Fair enough. But in FO3, its still the 50's in everybody's head; its not lost, just destroyed and laying around in bits (that they are still living in).

Like I said, I like it for the 3d Fallout 1 style world/landscape... I just don't like to visit the towns, or speak to NPC's much.

I kinda like that "its still the 50s in everybody's head" it sorta gives me the feeling that the people are poetically clinging to what they must know was a world that was better.

Reminds me a bit of real history when the "dark ages" came about following the fall of Rome (in the west).

Edit:

Alright I can agree with that :foodndrink:

Not FO1, that was more punk, western if anything.
FO2 added to the 30's to 50's theme slightly.

The New Reno bouncers.
Joey was pretty much a greaser imo.
Finally in this short, short, very short list, the general B movie jokey card board set Science theme to the creatures and quests.

yeah the op is right, their is a lack of combat and enemy encounters in the game, combat is pretty bad in this game, the lack of it, no enemy patrols, the factions really don't fight each other at all until the very end, and another thing, i think obsidian didn't give enemies good weapons because they didn't want us being able to use the weapons which is lame, they might as given all the enemies bb guns, thats pretty much what they did, and anyone saying the "the quality not quantity" well as far as that goes, a raider running at me with a pool cue, or a powder ganger with a 9mm or a ceasers legion with a machette is NOT quality combat and in FO3 the enclave at least had some firepower, plasma rifles, sentry bots with missles, etc so the quality combat is pretty much missing until the very end of the game at the dam, thats the only place ceasers legion is ok to fight, the only place. so i hope they don't make another fallout game. bethesda does a much better job in their games with enemies to fight.

Its not that its not retro fifties ~it is... It just seemed (personally I mean), seems that the FO1 people would always be influenced by the pop-50's aesthetics ~no matter what.

If they built an Ipod, it would be a 50's styled Ipod... Not that they'd never think to build one because it was not made in the 50's. I would fully assume they had a 60's, 70s, 80s, and all the way to 2077 when the bombs fell. (just not ours... No woodstock, no hair bands, no tearing down the Berlin wall... ~just my opinion here...)

On topic (as we should be). :tops:
I'm thinking (granted I've not played deep into it yet), that the weaponry is perhaps a bit more realistically distributed? That the guy with the pool stick, is glad to have found it, and replace his broken pistol with it until he finds another? I like combat in RPGs, I like combat in FPS shooters... but I like RPGs that use combat as an option, not as 80% of the game.

but thats my point though. How can one make a "50s style Ipod"? Is it even in the 50s style then? (they did have the 60s, 70s, and 80s and that but it still stayed in the same culture as the 50s, so it almost seemed like the timeline wasn't advancing, except in terms of retro-futurism.)

but I also concede that its my opinion and respect yours.

http://i271.photobucket.com/albums/jj125/Gizmojunk/trpod.jpg (this is fake)

http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2006/08/31/your-telephone-of-tomorrow/ (this is not fake)