The forbidden tranquility of Fallout 3 was an atmosphere like no other game has ever matched. It was everything the apocalyptic world deserves: freedom at the price of uncertainty, peace at the price of loneliness. Each community and individual strives through this darkness in their own way, often twisted by it. A simple stroll through a building no quest will point you to can provide the harrowing backstory of a man or woman or family you never knew, but somehow sympathize with.

Will Bethesda remain loyal to this style?

I feel that Obsidian did not. I am fine with that. Vegas is a different part of the world with its own problems. These problems at times were very dark and very interesting, as was the varying atmospheres from the Wild West to the 1950's style Las Vegas. But as Gotye sp brilliantly put it, "You can get addicted to a certain kind of sadness." While New Vegas was an excellent game, I feel it failed to satisfy that addiciton. Fallout 3 was all blackness with hope flickering helplessly in the center. You had the choice to fan it, ignore it, or stomp on it. I don't feel it was quite that way in New Vegas--- I think there were too many flickering lights of hope. Am I wrong in this? Is the future of Fallout bound for the model it established in 2008, or is the world about to make a steady climb toward renewal?

Its the end of the end of the world as we know it!

It's been 200+ yers since the war that annihilated the planet. It's high time people started moving on. FO1, FO2, FOT, and FNV have shown that humanity is moving forward. While FO3 has humanity at a standstill or even moving backward. Like it or not, FO3 is the black sheep of the herd.

This has been discussed to death. To put it simply, 200 years after bombs, and no progress was a serious problem with FO3. Obsidian did right for the wasteland, 200+ years later, with civilization coming back in some form or another, and things were starting to rebuild. FO3 just felt like it should have been earlier, like Bethesda should have started FO3 around the time of FO1 or 2, rather than 200 years after the fact, with absolutely no movement at all in the way of progress.

Bethesda screwed up with FO3, it shouldn't have looked like it did, unless they places it just 60 or so years after the Great War. New Vegas and the Mojave, looked more like it should after all this time.

Go play Fallout and then re think that statement. Also go play Fallout 2 and Tactics while you are at it.


I sure hope not. Fallout 3 screwed things up. It isn't consistant with the Fallout series. It isn't consistant with reality. Its a damn mess. Also have you noticed that the game takes place 200 YEARS after the Great War?

Like I said so play the originals, you will see things differently.

Dr.Strangelove is right this topic has been talked to death. There is an on going topic about this here ==> http://www.gamesas.com/topic/1357964-do-you-prefer-a-destroyed-dangerous-wastelandas-seen-in-fo3-or-a-more-civilized-wasteland-thats-rebuilding-itself-as-seen-in-fonv-thread-2/

I appreciate the concern with where Fallout 3 should have taken place, but I would rather focus on the kind of game it was.

We already have an active thread on this subject, lets use that one.

http://www.gamesas.com/topic/1357964-do-you-prefer-a-destroyed-dangerous-wastelandas-seen-in-fo3-or-a-more-civilized-wasteland-thats-rebuilding-itself-as-seen-in-fonv-thread-2/