No, the content should be whatever is needed for character concepts. It's an RPG, after all. Developers have to allow players to play the player's character concept or they won't have customers (and are not making an RPG regardless of what they claim).
Bullets are not scarce for small guns, not at all, and the AI have infinite ammo no matter what they use. It's only energy weapons that are shafted, just as pure casters and ranged characters are shafted in TES. It's poor design for an RPG, that's the point I am making that needs to be addressed (and has been by modders, but it would be far better for Beth to address their own bias).
Also, what is happening in one locale is not the same as another, just like right now in our world.
BTW, I saw Gizmo replied to my post yesterday but the threads are filling up too fast. Basically, I suggest that people go back and reread the interview that Todd Howard gave after Beth acquired the FO IP. I'm paraphrasing from memory, but he basically stated something to the effect that they (he and the others at BGS) were fans of the original and wanted to relaunch the franchise with that in mind. FO3 was the result. They made the very logical business decision to incorporate as many iconic elements of the original games (FO 1 & 2) in order to maximize the potential for success. It worked. Now they can take the FO world wherever they wish. Gizmo was claiming that my points didn't make sense, but they match what Todd said regarding their intent and they make perfect sense from a business viewpoint. Businesses are looking for maximum ROI, not catering to the niche hardcoe followers of lore. This is true for any IP, not just FO. It doesn't matter if hardcoe lore followers like the result or not as long as the ROI is maximized due to appealing to far more people who are not hardcoe lore followers. Some people do not like BGS and the games they make, but many people do, thus they have become successful as a game developer. That's life.