I'd be okay with it.

Were you implying that it wouldn't be okay? I wasn't sure.

..but it is, you cant factually judge concept like story writing, it is by its very nature something you can only have a opinion of.

Your post is an opinion though.

Did you apply somewhere to make reality conform to your own opinions? If so, where can I sign up? Life would be much simpler.

Sure, that's an overbroad generalization. Of course, it's a counterpoint to the blind belief that "old" automatically equates with "awesome" that's espoused by the other side.

Well, people seem to prefer easy to digest fun to something deeper, so I'm not surprised

Plot holes are not an opinion. Illogical nonsense throughout the world is not an opinion. Focus on narrative/adventure or free-roaming/exploration is not an opinion.

Weak.

Too many things are sacred for Bethesda. Including a mainquest for example. Or the iconic elements of the setting that for some reason need to appear when they wouldn't have to.

Bethesda is an image company. They wouldn't diverge from their image unless for little side-experiments. That's not a bad thing btw. It's just that you can't really ascribe to them any kind of radical willingness to generally forsake their precious formula.

Of course Pete is a typical American PR guy who lacks imagination and blows up issues to unrealistic proportions. You have to stay level-headed, otherwise his emphasis will lead to false implications.

I mostly agree with AiTenshi.

Sorry but his speech is just shallow pvssyr and not really worth to read into...

Today I learned people still have an amazingly difficult time coming to grips with the fact that their own opinions aren't reality.

Damn, I thought people grew out of that when they turned 16.

Uhhhh.... without trying to derail this thread, It's burnout man. This isn't exactly the same as RPGs from Black Isle and gamesas. What exactly would you want deeper in Burnout?

Interesting idea. Imagine a gamesas game with no main quest. Often, I find myself doing the mandatory starting quest for the MQ and then completely abandoning it and coming back to it after I've done some other work and exploring. So I don't find the concept too farfetched.

Part yes part no, a persons relations to these are a opinion and ultimately in the bigger picture it is still a opinion you have of a games writing.

By your logic my opinion that Fallout 1 & 2 main quests are cliche, fantasy RPG save the world plots with a coat of rusty paint a fact about the games writing.

Have you even considered that's because they keep finding those thing to still be good ideas every game, rather then they just start off thinking the game is going to be that way?

The fact that they make a multiplayer mode for basically every game they make, only to scrap it every time, shows that they just test everything, every time they make a game, regardless of if it worked before or not.

Its a difference of

"The game HAS to be this way from the get go!"

and

"Is this still fun?"

That's not true. You chose an investigative quest to check against a more-or-less straightforward "kill something" quest. You have no desire to be fair or even.

Proof? Arefu.
You can potentially start it in Megaton, when Lucy West sends you on a letter-delivery mission to Arefu.

After arriving ar Arefu, you get forced into talking with the mayor/sheriff Evan King. He's jittery because of a recent attack and initially nearly blows you up (by accident). He asks you to check on the residences for him, to make sure everyone is safe.
The Ewer and Schenzys are fine, though dislike Evan's "hide in a hole" approach to things. The Wests are dead, however. With a high enough medicine skill, you can discover that not only are they dead, but have their throats bitten, with human teeth marks and very little blood.

Reporting back to Evan, he bemoans the situation at Arefu, and then asks you if you saw Ian West. You hadn't, and King surmizes that the gang, the Family, took him away. He then sends you yo find them, highlighting three possible locations.

Hamilton's Hideaway is one if the locations, and if you passed a speech check with Three-Dog or found Dad without his help, he can give you a key for a stash here. Otherwise, it's nothing special.

At Northwest Seneca Station, a Ghoul named Murphy can tell you of a back entrance in the station to the Family's hideout, and offers a repeatable quest to give him Sugar Bombs for caps and samples of Ultrajet.

Eventually, you hit Meresti, and need to pass the guard (Robert). You can shoot him or talk to him to get past (though shooting makes the Family hostile.) Getting past him requires a speech chek, bribe of 100 caps, or having Lucy West's letter. Inside, you are pointed to Vance. He's taken Ian under his wing, but refuses to let you meet with him, at least initially. If you can't pass a speech check, he points you to some terminals to learn of what he's trying to do. Or you can speak to other members of the Family to learn where Ian is kept, behind a door next to an unhackable terminal. You'll need to find the password.

Again, shooting is an option, and is required if you steal the password.

Eventually, you speak with Ian. He'll tell you what happened at Arefu, and you can try to convince him to leave the Gamily. If you can't pass the speech check or have the letter from Lucy West, you'll be forced to leave him there. Unless you shot the place up.

You can then relate what happened to Vance, and come up with a solution to stop the attacks on Arefu. If you can't pass the checks, Vance agrees to stop attacking Arefu. If you can pass the checks, you can exchange him leaving, or orotecting the town, in exchange for bloodpacks. Or you can just shoot Vance.

The mission is complete when you return to Evan King, with or without Ian. If you made a bloodpack agreement with Vance, show it to Evan, and he will accept the terms. Once done, Vance will give you a Sishkebab blueprint, offer caps for bloodpacks, and you can ask him to teach you how to drink from bloodpacks to get more health.

And, of course, Lucy West will thank you for delivering her letter.

Physics? You know, the thing that makes driving happen.

What are you even talking about? There is almost nothing else but pages upon pages of text in Fallout 1/2. The combat is simplistic, exploration is nearly nonexistent, and minigames are there just because some programmer was bored. Wasteland 2 is something where the focus is clearly split between combat and writing, for example. That's not an opinion, that's simply what it is.

And what now? Where in this thread did I express any opinion on the quality of writing? Why do you keep arguing with something unrelated?

And by the way, if you think any Fallout game had a "save the world" plots, I suggest actually playing them and paying attention.

Its by playing them I came to that conclusion, if you take a step back and look at the core concepts, it follows classic fantasy RPG tropes, starting of with naive, fresh "hero" who lived in his/her home town there whole life is suddenly thrusted into a quest to save there home (conveniently being the only one that can do it) all the way over to the classic early/mid point reveal of a big bad which the hero must face or his/her home, and the world is doomed.

Don't get me wrong, Fallout 1 & 2 had some good writing, but honestly in retrospect, not any better then Beth writing for 3, different indeed, but not any better.

That's even worse.

The only thing worse than sacred ideas is the inability to think (or implement) of new ideas.I don't think you or Bethesda would descend to the fatuity that their core ideas can't be improved upon?

These ideas are sacred because Bethesda still thinks they are the best/ideal way to develop their games, it's exactly because Bethesda thinks these ideas are still fun over the course of decades that they are sacred.In the same way the prophet Mohammed is sacred because of his continued relevance in the Islamic world, were a satirical picture is their anathema. While the deity Thor or Horus are no longer sacred because they are no longer needed to live the right or the ideal life.

Also isn't it in the nature of those that cherish the sacred to find excuses for its continued existence?

Like a litany of game mechanics still being fun over decades or a parable in a book still being moral for centuries (according to its adherents)?

Just a quick question, have you played the older TES games? Like Morrowind or Daggerfall, or even Oblivion?

Ah, there's an opinion. Whether something's better or worse... That's an opinion. And a poor one, I must say. Consult http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=27085 if you actually believe Fallout 3 is a well written game. And I'm off.

But my dad is stronger than yours

Who said anything about not improving the things they have done before, or not adding any new ideas?

And no, Bethesda's thinking that these game design are still fun is NOTHING like anything religious wise. That's such a terrible comparison I was actually slightly disgusted and insulted when I read it.

Another one of those? When will people learn that you're not suppose to think about BGS' stories?

Just smile and nod as it goes in from one ear and out the other. Anything more is just wasted effort and brain power.

Al the sarcasm quotes has... yadda, yadda. Just tell me where to kill and loot everything

On Fallout 3: The plot was extremely "save the world". Well, not save it. "Make the world better. Or don't! Because a computer told you to act like a dike, I guess."

The DC wasteland was a really cool place. They could've done better than the water purifier.

In my opinion, the conflict could have been something more dire. As that article posted stated, the citizens didn't seem too thirsty to me. (Except for those Good Karma dispens- I mean homeless!)

Whats funny is that I've seen people dismantle that entire thing point by point, all 5 pages of it.

Some more glaringly idiotic points made

-He says we are never given a reason why Eden would want D.C., or the water purifier, yet Eden outright tells you why when you talk to him.

-He also questions why The Enclave would want the purifier/D.C. wasteland when its all irradiated and nothing grows, when the whole point of the purifier is to change that.

-He asks why the BoS doesn't just give out tech and protect caravans if they want to help people. The game outright says Lyons barely has the manpower to hold the Citadel, and that the Outcasts stole a large part of their weapons and armor when they left.

-He also mentions that the super mutants aren't a threat to any humans, so why are they bothering fighting them, when its said the reason they aren't is BECAUSE the BoS is constantly fighting them.

-He says the BoS should just camp the subway exists, when, again, its sated that Lyons lacks the manpower to do such a thing.

-He claims Eden's plan is to use the water purifier to pill the river with FEV irradiated water, Eden wants no such thng, and they say several times the purifier isn't meant to clean the river.

-He asks how the FEV would irradiate the water when the purifier is meant to purify it. However the purifier was only meant to remove radiation fro m the water, not FEV.

And this isn't even all the stuff he gets wrong on ONE PAGE.

And fallout 1 and 2 weren't?

It's dumb statements like this that make people think the first two games were amazing, when they weren't.

You're killing the master in one, the guy who wants to turn every human into a mutant to make them better, and in 2 we're killing the enclave who are notoriously hostile to anyone who isn't them. These aren't examples of a strong plot. At all. They could have done better with both villains, but they chose to follow classic RPG tropes of unknown hero kills the bad guys. At least I got to be an evil guy and kill all the good guys in 3.

But yes, let's make ignorant statements like FO3 is the only title with a cheesy "saving the world plot.

Stop projecting, I NEVER said that Fallout 1 and 2 weren't "save the world". They are.

Sometimes I think you have a little crush on me, stop giving me a hard time for things I never said.

I've corrected you twice now.

If that constitutes projection or a crush, I imagine you don't get out much. Getting proven incorrect =/= any sort of interest.


If you're going to criticize 3 for being "save the world", yet giving the others a pass you're doing a very bad job at making a point. Just a friendly tip for you.