Side-antagonist?

I believe you could work with him. He was pretty evil, and wanted to nuke several human settlements. He was also responsible for the born Ghouls.

http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Willem_Clark

Ahyeah that guy.
Would so join him.

But was he really evil?
I mean, his goal was to nuke towns with radioactive bombs so that the people either died or turned into ghouls themselves.
So basically, his goal was the same as Masters.
To unite people under the same race.
So that there would be no more bigotry.

I dunno, kinda evil, maybe, but I dunno, maybe being a ghoul is a step up.
Think about it, regeneration from radiation and eternal life.
Sure everyone would look like their face got placed in a meat grinder but besides that it could be a good thing for humanity.
Like, to evolve. The next step in human evolution.
So I dunno, not "evil" really, a lot less moral yeah but I wouldn't call him or his goal evil.
And hell since they figured out how to create Born Ghouls it would mean that reproduction could be made possible as well.
I dunno, I'd probably side with him.

*sigh*

I really hope FO4 isn't more of this Oblivion crap and is more like Van Buren. (I loved Oblivion but Fallout isn't Oblivion.)

Don't forget Ghouls are sterile too! XD

Yeah, but they were researching a way around that, with some success. There were three Ghouls at the Reservation (Clarke's base) who were born as ghouls. One of them was a companion IIRC.

Hm.

;)

I love Van Buren!!!!

I normally just browse these forums but signed up just to let you know that you, and everyone like you, are sad and pathetic to cling so desperately to a game that will never come out.

You do realize that VB got cancelled, and you will never ever play it right? What point is there in comparing either FO3 or NV to it? Why can't you just enjoy the games for what they are?

FO1 and 2 were great games, and guess what? So are 3 and NV.

Edit: Also, I forgot you own or worked on or even contributed ANYTHING to the Fallout games, thus making you capable of deeming a game "worthy". Maybe Bethesda should have hired you to make sure their products are good enough

I don't mind Ven Buran material recycle into "Westcoast spin off"; after all it is still created for Fallout.

...

So wishing they would make a game more similar to what was'nt released makes you sad?

The story is the point in comparing it, why can't people like you understand we want the game to be similar to what it was BEFORE.
Fallout 3 was a horrible game, but New Vegas is closer to Van Buren.

So, now, everyone like you that just sign's up to insult someone, is sad and pathetic. :stare:

No it makes me sad that people can't accept change and move on. Thats just life man, things change and more often than not theres nothing we can do about it wether we like it or not.

Me, I can appriciate that Bethesda and Obsidian tried their best to make 2 great games that I think embody the classic Fallout games 10-fold. And you never even played VB, for all any of us know it could have been a horrible game!

I don't know you but I'm gonna guess you're one of those people who either didn't play FO3 at all and says how horrible it is, or you played and let your bitterness over VB taint and therefor ruin what was a great experience.

Seriously, I want to know why you think FO3 was so bad, if you'd be so kind to enlighten me

Oh, lord. Now you've done it. Cue the auto-response laundry list of things that were 'bad' about F3.

Sir, ma'am -- There are people on these boards who are so entrenched in Bethesda/F3 hatred that they will damn elements in F3 that they praise in F:NV ( My favorite is how the same people who complain F3 turned Fallout into a FPS go out of their way to praise Obsidian [because some people working on F:NV are Fallout high priests so they cannot do wrong] for improving the FPS elements in New Vegas. Cracks me up) and now you've gone and encouraged them.
They don't understand, they refuse to understand and they will never understand. Rather than celebrate the availability of 4 great games they will just complain about how changes ruined the series.
This happens any time an entertainment property undergoes a change; Star Trek fans, Doctor Who fans, fans of any entertainment that they were so touched by that they regard the originals with an almost religious awe and any change as sacrilege -- they are always going to be with us, and they will always share a strange type of superiority complex and a total unwillingness to accept that sometimes things change but the originals are still there.
Enjoy the responses.

To the above mentioned Fallout Faithful -- I'm not trying to flame you guys. I'm exactly the same way about people writing about deceased author's characters. These wretched, brainless new Dune books, the Robert E Howard pastiches and the endless Lovecraft regurgitation should all be burnt if you ask me. Seriously, I know how you feel. But you guys need to examine the sense of smug superiority you project -- it's pretty over the top. Just sayin'.

The story was ripped off completely from the first games, the gameplay svcked because you were forced to use VATS to actually hit anything (and do damage.), the sidequests were bad, some of the VA's were horrible (Liam Neeson, I forgive you.) and the BoS in that game were just horrible.

I don't know how the story can be "ripped off" of one that already exists in the francise, thats like saying "dude that episode of Lost totally ripped off the story from...that other episode of Lost". I'm sorry to say but almost every book, movie, tv show or anything ever has borrowed from or been inspired by other works. To damn an entire game on that alone is preposterous.

VATS needed to hit anything? I enjoyed using VATS, it gave the combat more strategy and depth, and I'd prefer that over a run and gun fps. As for being able to hit anything, I kid you not, right before I came to check for a resonse I loaded up FO2 for old times sake and started a new game. I quit out of frustration because I literally could not hit a single thing in the beginning temple. I was swarmed with giant ants and scorpions and spent 10 minutes trying to hit them and not a single hit connected. I'm sorry but thats not very fun to me. Targetting their legs so that it cripples them while I line up and nail a perfect head shot that sends ant guts flying through the air? That sounds much funner. And a 3/4 isomnetric view isn't so great after all these years ya know.

Bad sidequests? Its been awhile but I remember the vampire quest being really cool, Oasis and Trainquility Lane were awesome, blowing up s$%# with Liberty Prime, releasing ghouls on the tenants of Tenpenny Tower, all of the Point Lookout DLC, the Wasteland Survival Guide....dude were you playing the same game as me??

And bad voice acting? That is something that is hardly a deal breaker and sounds like pointless nitpicking. I'm not sure what you mean by the BoS being horrible.

I'm sorry but those are all the lamest reasons I've ever heard, and to me you are just hating because your stubborn and stuck on the past

Okay, im stuck in the past if you dont mind with my "lame" excuses, go and play FO3, because im not gonna touch that piece of garbage again




Some people like it, if you dont,fine then, some of us started with the old Fallout, and not with the plain shooter of Fallout 3, and isometric is something that some of us still prefer, maybe its not fun for you, but it is for us

Any other "interesting" thing to say?

The Story's ripped off, they just COMPLETELY copy pasted the story from the first two games, the only thing different is they tacked on "daddy",
Fallout: Leave Vault (Tutorial) Find water supply (Project Purity), destroy the Super Mutant VATS to save zeh world. (Vault 87)
Fallout 2: Find GECK (Vault 87), help the BoS and America by destroying the Enclave! (BoS and Enclave.)
I would call this ripped off, and unoriginal, Episodes to a series connect with each other, and link together, they don't have the SAME [censored] STORY in the SAME [censored] WAY now do they?



Apparantly you have been playing a verison of failout 3 that was never released, Pff.
Yes, they were almost ALL horrible [censored] sidequests, the vampire quest was stupid, oasis could have been great if they did'nt kill harold off from the series, Traquility lane did'nt make sense Tenpenny tower was [censored], Point Lookout was [censored] too, but The Survival Guide must have been the one of the ONLY decent things in the game.
Also, I suppose your a fan of Micheal bay explosions coming from Transformer robots, Liberty prime was a stuid idea, and was just awful.

VATS was [censored], I'de rather try and play in first person and shoot manually than being forced to use a feature which makes you INVICIBLE to kill something.
At least in Fallout 1 & 2 you start out doing no damage, not hitting anything, but then you can hit things after you get better with a weapon, whereas Failout 3, you start a [censored] god, [censored].



Bad Voice-acting plays alot in a game, so you would still enjoy hearing a 7 year old voice every character in the game, every five seconds, saying the SAME [censored] line? Wow, just wow. Oh, just so you know, because since you quit after ten minutes of fallout, The BoS were'nt carebear fairies, they were'nt some goody-two-shoes faction, they were cruel, and agressive.



The lamest reason? You quit after TEN minutes of playing Fallout 2, just because you could'nt hit [censored]? Wow, talk about a lame reason, and to me your just a mindless fallout 3 fan that blindly defends it because it supposedly "revived" the series when other companies were bidding for it, and I bet they could have at least made an ORIGINAL story.

Bethesda NEVER revived Fallout, it just was the higher bidder, no more no less.

That's what I just said.

New Vegas = Mini Van buren with the bethesda treatment....

You aren't helping with the confrontational atitude




Name ONE COMPANY (that could've afforded it) that would've done FO3 better than Bethesda






and yes, they revived Fallout, your favorite series would've died and been remembered as a 2 really god rpg, 1 good spin-off, 1 canceled sequal, and the utter [censored] that was BoS

besides, I wouldn't have become a fallout fan if not for F3 and alot of people wouldn't, do we all hate the orignals? no Do we all thing F3 is inherently better? no but that's how we got here so stop being so [censored] smug.

Van Buren's story is different then New Vegas. The characters are different. The locations are different. The factions are different.

Troika games could developed Fallout too, without adding the Shooter element

And please, do nor call us smug, we are only putting our opinions


Van Buren have a different history, different locations, different plot, Caesar Legion was a minor faction and The BOS was in war with the NCR

Bioware, since you asked for one, you get one.



No, they did'nt, ZeniMax was'nt the only company to bid for Fallout.


That's good you are a fallout fan now, but you still would have (possibly) become a fan, seeing that other companies would have made this game.

Of course it's nit one or two wevalreafy have those... But I feel that it's like what FO3 shouldve been. It's deffinently more of a sequel to FO2 than FO3.

okay, I apologize for calling you smug, that was out of line



Bioware could've done it, but what faction would've been the main protagonist then? They're games stories have a tendincy to lean towards "Join a council, defeat great evil" but, wait that's FO3's story OMYGOD WE'VE DEBUNKED EVERYTHING