Notes: Text Wall. Spoilers. Exercise caution. Without protective eye wear, EXTREME eye damage could result.


================================================================================
==============================================================


The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

Introduction

Well then, having completed Fallout 3 today, I felt compelled to write my afterthoughts on it. A lot of what I will say has probably already been said, but some of it I feel is new. Everything I noticed or thought worth mentioning as I progressed throughout the game has been noted, so most of these observations are in chronological order.

Also, some background info on myself people may or may not find useful. I'm 20 years old, and I am both an avid PC gamer, and a fan of the original Fallout series. (One and Two, the second being my favourite) I'm also a regular at NMA. To some here, that bit of information is probably enough to label me a Fallout 3 hater. That is not the case. Being a middle aged gamer, being old enough to appreciate content and not be swayed by eye-candy , but not old enough to disregard the mindless, yet fun aspects of games, I think this puts me in an interesting position to judge Fallout 3 as impartially as I hope to. I will leave the final judgement up to you however.

The layout of my little review is based on the classic western film, The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly. As noticed, it has been preceded by an introduction, and will be succeeded by a conclusion. So, without further ado, I give you, my thoughts on Fallout 3.


The Good

Art:
Something that struck me as soon as I started the game, and by that I mean from windows, not actually playing it yet, was the art. The slides on the menu were very very appealing. Some of it was random, some of it was informative, and some of it was mildly humorous. In game, however, this was taken a step further with all the 50's references, with actual vehicles, houses, and a decent '50's atmosphere. Kudos to the art team. They did a good job at immersing me into a 50's world, both graphically, and through writing on random newspapers, billboards and so on.

While the radio stations I think were out of place, the 20's-50's music also added to the retro atmosphere. Its nice being immersed in something not purely graphical.

Effort:
Its easy to see a lot of effort was put into this game. Having taken four years, I would expect so. For starters, the game is probably bigger than both Fallout 1 and 2 combined, although set in a smaller region. There are many more maps, many more locations, a bigger world to explore, and a bigger diversity of areas. Effort was definitely put into world design, that's for sure.

There are also many side quests, some of them pointless, some of the funny (Lug-Nut and the Naughty Nightwear comes to mind), and some of them are just boring dungeon crawls. Still, a lot of variety, freedom of exploration and so on. Good score overall. As explained latter though, all this inspiration seems lacking in the main quest.

Pre-War Organisations and Vaults:
A good direction I think Bethesda took with Fallout 3 was its depiction of pre-war organisations. From RobCo to Nuka-Cola, to Corvega and Lob Enterprises, and not to forget the devious Vault Tec, Fallout 3 expanded on the Fallout world of greedy and immoral corporations, with many of their headquarters based where the game is set. Score for Bethesda.

Also, I liked the addition of extra Vaults in Fallout 3. Fallout would not be Fallout without Vaults. Still, I wished there were at least some that survived somehow, either through being a control vault or one where the experiments did not result in the demise of all the vault's population.

Combat:
Its not quite an FPS, yet its not an RPG either. VAT's was born through the need to reconcile both of these. For somebody playing on a low end PC, VAT's was definitely a life saver when it came to small crowded spaces with lots of enemies and a particularly annoying FPS (Frames per second) score. I only played from first person perspective, and thought it was a passable shooter experience. VAT's made the game interesting when needing to quickly dispatch dangerous enemies, and unlike many of my NMA counterparts, the exploding heads did not bother me too much, I actually enjoyed seeing it every time. I only wish it happened a little less often. With a luck of two and constantly scoring criticals, it did have me wonder.

Weapons:
I liked the variety of weapons in Fallout 3. Many of the original series weapons were replaced or absent altogether, but made up for with Chinese weaponry, custom based weapons (awesome by the way), large variety of grenades and mines and unique weapons. Also, melee characters were well rewarded.

Communism and the Chinese:
Another interesting direction Beth took. I liked the large numbers of Chinese spies, remnants, Vault 112 simulation commandos, and so on. Their weaponry also made sense seeing as they had a large presence in the D.C area. I think Communism was well explored in Fallout 3, something I always felt was missing in the original series, giving the paranoia of the 50's and McCartheism. Liberty Prime's taunts were priceless.


The Bad

Megaton Crater and Bomb:
One of the first things that struck me as I entered this strange settlement; the story of its creation. People think its located on a crater because of the bomb dropping, (which is strange, seeing as unexploded bombs do not create craters) but it was actually because of a plane crash there. (Parts of aircraft are indeed used to make the walls of the settlement.

Well, I have news for the level designer. Plane crashes DO NOT result in massive craters. Level design is still something I am going to expand on here, so bear with me. More to come.

Vaults:
For me, the eeriest vault was vault 92. No survivors, an interesting love story, deserted yet monster infested place, eery (may have something to do with the fact I have seen White Noise) and ironic as I re-entered it to find the music book for Agatha whilst listening to her playing the violin over the radio, just as the original vault-dwellers would have when they were being subjected to white-noise.

It worked for me because it was believable. The other vaults record experimentation beginning almost immediately after the vaults were closed, and then the immediate failures that followed. While I was scared [censored]less in Vault 106 due to the hallucinations, having survivors there broke the spell for me. Same applies to all other vaults. How the hell does Gary reproduce? How did the survivors survive in all those vaults seeing as the people to maintain them were either mutated/insane/dead, for a good 200 years? Assuming the only ones left were the test subjects and all the technicians, overseers, scientists and technics were all dead, how did food, water and heat production continue? Their continued existence just doen't make much sense, as eery as their presence may be.

Size of settlements:
OK, so I was quite pleased with the sheer number of settlements in Fallout 3, far greater than in the other series. However, one important caveat, cities of 3-8 inhabitants are NOT settlements. They are at best isolated groups of dwellings, tribes or neighbourhoods. Rivet City is the closest we have to a city, and Megaton the closest to a town. The rest of these 'towns' cannot be called such. How they defend themselves, with their populations of 5-6 against the hundreds of raiders and super mutants that roam the capital wasteland is beyond me. Frankly, Beth dropped the ball with the civilian population of this wasteland. Creating some true ''cities'' would not have been much to ask for, giving the towns and cities in the original Fallout series. Not to mention the state of these 'settlements' is rather dilapidated for places that have existed for almost 200 years. Ever think of cleaning your street buddy? Get some of those rocks out of the way....

Watered down factions, or nonsensical ones:
OK, now this one is important. Firstly, why did Beth feel the need to recycle the original Fallout factions, giving the distance between where the original Fallout's are set and where Fallout 3 is? The Brotherhood have been reduced to a generical 'good guys' faction, while the Enclave to the stereotypical 'bad guys'. The ''Good Fight'' - really? Do we have to have this little epic battle between monsters and knights? Why is there always an epic battle between clearly defined 'Good' and clearly defined 'Evil'. Why not a choice between the lesser of two evils? In Fallout one, the Brotherhood of Steel were no heroes, they were just a military cult selfishly devoted to preserving technology without any thought towards others. The fact their aim of destroying the mutants coincided with yours was a coincidence at best.

I am very happy Beth had the decency to create the Outcasts as at least a nod to the original Brotherhood and their selfish intentions. The raiders are another nonsensical faction. They make sense insofar as they [censored], pillage and plunder, but not in that they are psychotic ruthless maniacs with a fetish for rotten flesh and senseless gore.

Seriously, raiders in the original Fallout's had reasons. They terrorised, pillaged, exerted pressure for NCR, and so on. In Fallout 3 they just seem like they were added in there as the 'medium class' enemies to occupy the wastelands and buildings. Also, who the hell likes being around rotting corpses? Are they also satanists by any chance? Their whole attitude to bodies, torture, decomposition and so on makes no sense whatsoever.

Vampires and Zombies. I will expand on this later, but the whole Vampire theme just sounds like an attempt to broaden the target demographic, and feral ghouls (read zombies) were a cheap shot to add yet another filler enemy, this time to the many dungeonesque metro tunnels in the capital, not to mention to make the game a little more ''survivor-horror'' style. Not cool Beth, not cool.

Level Cap/Forced Ending:
Seriously, what the hell? This was one of my biggest gripes with Fallout 1, I was exhilarated with Fallout 2 for doing away with both, and then Fallout 3 comes and reinstates them? I was having fun exploring the wasteland and avoiding the main quest till I hit this brick wall called level 20, and then having to finish the game and not being able to play afterwards.

I should be able to get all perks and experience point and play God after the main quest is finished if I want to. I should not be limited, when it would be so easy to make it continue. An official Beth statement to this is that ''All games end''. Well, yes, games do end. But if you notice, some allow you to play after you end them, the predecessor being one of them. The ones that allow freeform play afterwards tend to be the good ones too. Bad move.

Dubious morals/priorities/hypocrisy:
Right, this one is not directly pointed at Beth, more towards the United States and its ridiculous rating system. But Beth also has some blame for not having the balls to do what its forebears did, and for creating the publicity that would have made it impossible to do otherwise.

Firstly, we have exploding heads, gore, albeit in a cartoon fashion, tortured victims hanging from walls, organs splattered on the floors, quartered and mutilated people, drugs (under different names), drug use, alcohol, slavery, basically all that is wrong and bad and all that as seen by mainstream society, and ONE person in the entire wasteland to have 'six' with?

What the hell? You are telling me that its okay to have violence, swearing (including by children!), horror, torture, alcohol and drug use, but not six in a game? The most natural act of the above, but that is not allowed? What kind of society do we live in? The prosttute in Megaton was the only one you can 'sleep' with, and I mean that in a literal sense as all you do is go to the same bed she does and sleep, not 'sleep', but click sleep and sleep. No special fade out, just the same sleep fade out as usual. I spoke to many NPC's in the game where it was alluded you would get some, only for a dead-end response. It was almost as if these were originally women you could sleep with and at the last moment Beth decided to pull the plug on it. Seriously, giving the depravity of the previous games, I'm not impressed with Beth on this one.

Also, a strange thing I noticed in Little Lamplight. Princess has a crush on McCready because he punched her in the face? Is that even possible amongst children? It seems to me like an advlt emotion of submission, humiliation with sixual undertones that is somehow present in a a child. Strange.

Missed Opportunities:
To be specific, vehicles. The original Fallout's had me bugged on this one, with Fallout 2 partially correcting it with the Car you can get, although even then its pretty rare. I was happy with Fallout Tactics for introducing vehicles on a scale imaginable for a post-apocalyptic wasteland, only to have Fallout 3 revert to the pedestrian only wasteland.

Seriously, its been 200 years, and not one mechanic can fix a car or a motorbike? You are telling me the Enclave can devise power armour and keep vertibirds repaired and in flight, but not have one single jeep or hummer? Brotherhood of Steel can get a 30 meter robot back in action, but not fix a car? Hmmn...

Level Design:
While most of the levels designed in Fallout 3 were of good standard, one particular location stood out to me like a sore thumb. Raven Rock. Seriously, who the hell came up with that?

Its the most disjointed, non-sensical layout for a continuity of government bunker I have ever seen. Had the enclave built it themselves maybe I would be more willing to believe it, but it was a pre-war location to which the Enclave migrated to. Where are all the barracks, mess halls, broadcasting rooms, control facilities, relaxation areas and so on expected of such a building? Cell blocks, a very very very simple and ugly 'war room', living quarters and strange corridor layouts do not characterise military bunkers. I suggest they look up what fallout and nuclear bunkers actually look like.

Prologue ? Epilogue ? Narration
OK, so the intro was mediocre, with a very cheesy ending. It was longer than Fallout's one and two, but shorter than tactics, which while good, went on for too long. I also felt Fallout 3's ending went on for too long, and that the narration was a bit forced. But what particularly annoyed me was the ''Because in vault 101, no one ever enters. And NO ONE, EVER LEAVES!''

I mean, c'mon, how cheesy is that? The little music crescendo with the narration also didn't help. The fact that clearly your father entered the vault and then left, followed by you, makes this rather pointless.

The epilogue is even worse. A slideshow that screams 'rushed through development' comes through, and you are left none the wiser about how your actions affected the wasteland. I abolished slavery, gave the Union the memorial, disbanded the raiders, wrote a book, destroyed the enclave, disarmed a bomb, not to mention countless other feats, and the game doesn't even acknowledge any of that? What was the point? I wanted to see how these actions affected the world in the long run!

C'mon.... Fallout 1 and 2 had between 2-5 different endings for each city and faction, and Fallout 3 ignores all that and concentrates solely on the main quest, which even then is already pretty limited? Seems like laziness to me Beth...


The Ugly

Inconsistencies:
OK, this is probably the main problem with Fallout 3, and its a pretty big problem. Unlike Fallout 1 and 2 that relied on verisimilitude to make the world believable, Fallout 3 really does require suspension of belief to make the plot understandable or acceptable.

Firstly, Little Lamplight. This is a town located right next to the super mutant main base, and has been for the past 200 years, and some how they magically hold back the hordes? I mean, REALLY? You are telling me the BoS are having a hard time fighting the ''Good Fight'' (Don't get me started on that one) with power armour, laser weapons, Gatling guns and so on, getting their asses handed to them pretty bad, and a handful of kids with rifles, pistols and a flimsy gate, walking distance away from the main base of the mutant horror, cannot be conquered? You're kidding right? All the more ironic about Little Lamplight is that its the only town with a belieavable system of food and water production, almost like a vault. Yet, the proximity to the mutant base totally nuls that.

Secondly, while I think the nod to Lord of the Flies nice, and the story of how all the kids were left behind is particularly interesting, it still doesn't explain how this has been happening for the past 200 years... how are these kids reproducing? Assuming they have children as soon as they are of biological age, which can be as early as 12, then that gives max 4-6 years before the parents are expelled and the babies are cared for by the community. Fallout 3 completely overlooks this discrepancy, I mean, if six is bad, then imagine under-age six among children.

Radio Stations. A strange idea in a world where people are preoccupied with survival, water, food, and so on, a dispensable luxury. Still, I must admit I enjoy listening to the good old tracks while walking the land. What annoys me is people saying Enclave Radio, and this includes Sara Lyons, is a pre-war recording, when clearly Eden mentions the holocaust, current events, mutants, ghouls, the BoS and so on.

Another inconsistency is that of Slavers. As mentioned before, watered down faction? Where are all these slaves? Who buys them? I see no ''cities'' in Fallout 3 employing slaves, they are almost non-existent throughout the game. And somehow there you have it, Paradise Falls, a big slaver central shipping of slaves to imaginary buyers. If you want to include slavery in a game then put the effort to include the nitty gritty aspects of it too, not just the superficial elements.

And again. The setting. Does anybody else get the feeling all this is happening like 20 years after the bombs fell? I mean seriously, there is one tree yet to grow back from the ashes, grass is non-existent (bringing into question a plethora of problems which will be addressed further), wooden houses are still intact, shanty towns, not cities, shanty towns, dot the landscape, and people have yet to discover how to get cars to work.

I mean, really, 200 years have passed? Previous Fallouts had cities, not burnt out settlements in the middle of rubble, but cities, with clean streets, electricity, newly built housing, walls, plumbing and so on, and the east coast somehow has none of that. How computers in the middle of the wasteland function for 200 years is beyond me. Or that buildings and supermarkets are still stocked despite being in an area where survival is primarily through scavenging (more on this later).

Really, this world does not make sense. The roads are great, I really can believe they have been there 200 years. They disappear into the sand, are broken up, they feel like they have been baking under the sun for centuries. Yet, wooden houses do not. They would not last that long. Neither would computers left unattended, with inexplicable power sources. I suspect towns would start to develop and reconstruction would have taken its course. Not to mention farming. All this was present in the previous games. I would have no problem if this was set 10-20 years after the holocaust, but 200, its asking me to believe a little too much.

My next point is the economy and survival of these 'settlements' in Fallout 3. Firstly, you cannot tell me they have been living off pre-war packaged food. Food doesn't keep that long, and even if it did, from all that scavenging it would have vanished long ago. Yet they are all still present in shelves on stores throughout the wasteland. Strike one. Then you get no grass, vegetation, or anything of the sort. So there is basically no farming whatsoever in Fallout 3. The hydroponics thing in Rivet City is the closest we have, and I'm somehow supposed to believe it feeds the entire wasteland with vegetables? Strike two. Also, with no vegetation, what do Brahmin live on? Cows eat grass. Mutated cows with two heads and 8 stomachs should supposedly also consume grass. Where is the water? I do not see one purifier or clean river in that wasteland. Heck, would a well have been much to ask for? Yet people inexplicably exist in a desolate world. Strike three. I'm all out of strikes, and yet, there is more.

Lets take Fallout 2. You had a settlement that trade medical technology, one that traded gold, one that traded uranium, one that traded electricity, and one that traded fruit, vegetables, and so on. You can see how each of these would link, and how there is a dynamic economy here. Yet, Fallout 3 lacks any of this. There are like 3-5 traders in the whole wasteland, with one guard each, when there are raiders, mutants and god knows what around. Fallout 2, as you approached larger cities with larger caravans, guards had combat armour, laser rifles, mini guns, etc. It was feasible they defend themselves from large threats. Yet the caravans in Fallout 3 seem to do perfectly fine without them in an equally hostile environment. Go figure.

Then we have Fort Constantine, with a large arsenal of nuclear weapons, and some random Sat-Com Dish, with micro nuclear launching capabilities, and not one single interested faction other than Talon Company? Where are the Brotherhood Outcasts all over these places? Why doesn't the enclave care about the awesome power of destruction contained within these places? Or the BoS in general? Strange.

Dialogue:
Moving on, this is massive problem number two for Fallout 3, dialogue. I can understand people who have not played the previous games, as today's standards for dialogue is generally not high in games, but when you compare Fallout 3's dialogues, they are truly laughable.

I will start with a quote from Emil that to me says it all: ''Dialogue was not a battle we wanted to pitch''. That pretty much says it all for me regarding Beth's priorities within the game.

Investing in intelligence, charisma and speech have almost no noticeable effect within the game. All you get are chances in dialogue to pass or fail, and some extra lines. For somebody with speech 100 and intelligence 10, I still find myself communicating with others with all the skill and charm of a door knob.

A good comparison here is Fallout 2's ending on the oil rig with the biologist, or fallout 1's debate with the master, to Fallout 3's conversation with Eden. The first two involve detailed, logical, rational and intelligent points, based on evidence (sterility for Fallout 1, humanity's ability to evold and adapt in Fallout 2), to discredit your nemesis. Fallout 3's goes more or less like this: ''I will not install the FEV, you know you are right because you know you are right, circular logic, that does not compute, destroy yourself, OK then, buh bye''

Voice-Acting is mediocre at best, with only a few exceptions. That is not much Beth's fault, but more the problem of voice-acting every NPC in the game. Fallout 1 and 2 reserved voice-acting for special characters, while Fallout 3, voicing every character, makes them all sound similar, boring, and cheap to be fair. With all the money invested in marketing it does not surprise me voice acting wasn't a strength of the game. Add that to stiff and unimaginative facial expressions by all characters and you have lifeless NPC's. There are very few memorable NPC's in Fallout 3 compared to previous games.

Main Quest:
And now for the icing of the cake, the main quest.

I will begin at the end, where I think we can all agree it was the worst possible ending in a computer game I have seen for a while. Seriously, you have to sacrifice yourself? Its not bad enough you have been outcast from your vault and have no family or friends, but now you also have to die? A bit too far maybe?

Not even that, but the fact Fawkes is perfectly capable of going in there and doing it himself, yet says 'I would not take away your destiny from you''. What the hell? I just saved your ass from captivity for like 200 years and you will now not take away my 'destiny!' ???? Yeah, sure man, I could totally go in there right not and press those buttons, but becaise I DEEM IT YOUR DESTINY TO DIE, im going to let you do it instead. Hmmn, okay.

Beth responded to this by claiming NPC's were added after the main plot, so they had to tweak Fawkes by letting you die instead. Ha! I mean, would it not have been easier to just toggle radiation off in the GECK room , which, presumably, is why Fawkes is radiation resistant to begin with? To aid you in that quest? Incompetence? Hmmn... mark my words. I will not surprise me one bit if the next Fallout game, be it a DLC or Fallout 4, has the Lone Wanderer waking up on a bed or medical table after being somehow resuscitated from his radiation induced death, a realization that Fallout 3's ending was truly horrible by its own writers.

I actually liked the Giant Robot. I felt it was quite 50's style and reminded me of the Iron Man. However, his 10 minute killing spree in the city was kind of ... cool, but disjointed from the main story. Its like they had big plans for the robot at the beginning of the game and then had to end up be content with a little battle at the end. I don't know. I think there could have been more potential for liberty prime.

One thing that annoys me in particular is the recycling of the Fallout 1 and 2 plot. Fallout 2 had already gone some way recycling the plot of Fallout, so when Fallout 3 comes and does it again it kind of is annoying. I mean, by all means, continuity of the franchise ftw, but please, do come up with something that has not already been tried previously.

Lastly, Eden's plan is pretty stupid to begin with. He wants to infect the water supply right? To kill off all mutants. Well then, firstly, what is the point of his radio broadcasts? He does realise all its listeners will be dead as soon as they drink the water right?

Not to mention, unlike Fallout 2, where the virus was not optional, you inhaled it and died, in Fallout 3 people have to go to the river to drink the water to die. I mean, surely people would see people dying by drinking from the river and refrain from doing so right?

I mean it was radiated to start off with, then got clean, then people drink, and once more people die. What is the difference? People have survived thus far without that river, they can continue to do so without the Enclave diseased river.

Conclusion

Anyway, after a long long review of what feels more like a rant than anything else, I come to conclude this little 'article'. By all standards, this is a good game. Its probably one of the best to have come out in 2008, seeing as each year there are typically 3-6 good games out. So Beth has done pretty well with Fallout 3, as sales clearly indicate. While I enjoyed playing the game, I did not enjoy it as a Fallout sequel. I think this is where mainstream Fallout 3 fans and hardcoe fallout fans go their separate ways.

While Fallout 3 is a good game, it comes short in all areas that made the fallout series special, such as compelling main quest, intricate and thought out dialogue, re playability value, and believability, or in this case verisimilitude. These were indispensable factors in Fallout's success and cult following, and something Fallout 3 has done away with in the eyes of many NMA'ers. It has, however, concentrated on many areas with were not as essential to the original games, and which perhaps these days has a better return for money. I suspect the target demographic, console gamers, also has something to do with the inevitable watering down of the game. Still, the original Fallouts represent the pinnacle of gaming in some respects, so a watered down version is still bound to be good, just not as good.

All in all, its a good game. A very good game. I think we can all agree on that. But I suspect it will be forgotten by its legions of captivated fans long before its predecessors ever will be by those glittering gems of hatred.

================================================================================
===============================================================

So hows that, am I in the ball park?

KUDOS.
I found this review very very hilarious in some parts.While very informative and serious in others
Brilliant :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

EDIT-The part about little lamplight was one of them.
Also you see the wasteland captives,the super mutants capture them to create more of there own.(was about to talk about little lamplight then realized)Hmm just found about the INACCESSABLE main door.
Which leans on what you said about the ending.BUT thinking of that....if supermutants can withstand that much radiation....obviously they can being so close to the main vault door
How do the wasteland captives survive to be took through the inscanely high radiation levels and transformed into more of the supermutant horde.....hmmmm this review has made me think alot about those small details....thank you!

Thats actually an interesting observation I haven't seen debated much. It is a good point, hadn't thought of that. Not to mention the actual Vault itself seems devoid of FEV, I would not have imagined they stocked up for 200 years worth of experimentation lol.

I guess I should count myself lucky for never having played the previous Fallout games. I love the whole Fallout 3 world (but have similar doubts on computers, wooden structures and food supplies). I've never played a game where I'm constantly distracted from my current quest, just by exploring the world some more.

Maybe it's best to see this as a Fallout franchise reboot instead of a direct sequel, kinda like the new Batman movies.

Your about spot on there, would go into more detail but my bed is calling, maybe tomorrow.

Nice Work :thumbsup:

Good review, I like it. Many of the things you've highlighted are things that I've noticed myself, but it is a good read and you have written it very well.

Out of all of your list, my biggest problem is the survival of the current population, to me it doesn't make sense how they are still alive. Also if you not the amount of radiation you are given by the food and water, eating and drinking once a day would give you 10 rads after 20 days you'd be considered in that game to get the first stages of radiation poisoning, after 100 days you are dead. Where are all the sick people, or where is the supply or Rad-Away coming from? Where is all the food and water coming from?

So many of your points make complete sense, but the one above irritates me the most as I think of it as a survival settings, yet people seem to be just existing without trying to make sure they will be alive the next day/week/month/year.

Fallout 3 would have made more sense if they just called it a Pre-quel and changed the date....except for some attached lore that would drive a lot of players NUTS and hence end the world in some sort of implosion....

Well done, you have done a great job with the review, and it is obvious you have put a large amount of effort into this. Well done

I agree with almost everything you say. Almost everything, with the exception of your closing comment on why Fallout 3 will be forgotten long before the other 2 (at least, that's how I interpreted it, correct me if I'm wrong). The reason I disagree with this statement can be accurately summed up in one word: Mods. I'm not sure what system you are on; if PC, GET SOME MODS!!! They can, together, fix many of your problems with the game.

Fallout 3 is one of the most moddable modern games released. Because of the sheer number and quality of these mods, it is my belief that Fallout 3 will remain very popular for MANY years to come.

Again, well done on the review

Spent over an hour writing it, the dificult part was adding notes after every session of play, have probably done more than 100 hours of gameplay. Did all the sidequests and exploration possible before engaging on the main quest.

I'm playing this on 360 and have never played either of the other fallout games. This is probably good as I too would be constantly comparing them. But as it is, I have judged the game on its own. ( I got this game because Beth made Oblivion and I love that game.) There are many many (And I could continue all day with the many's.), inconsistencies with this game. The pathetic ending has been well discussed and hopefully will be at least somewhat corrected in future downloads. What it boils down to me is that I just plain enjoy playing this game.

Your review on this game is spot on. Hopefully, Bethesda reps read these threads and uses them to correct issues people discuss.( Which I am sure is a big reason why Bethesda has these forums to begin with. To get gamers reactions to the game.) Reviews like yours will do far more to nudge Beth to make corrections that a thousand of Threads that just say...."This game svcks." Or...."The ending is lame".

In my opinion, since you spent all the time to write such a comprehensive review, any future Fallout games or downloads should be free of charge for you. Thanks for your efforts.

This review is a huge nitpicking fest.

A sandbox Rpg/Fps of such a scale will have unresolved issues, it's inevitable, but Fallout 3 pulled this of 10x better than Oblivion.

It seems as though you started playing this with a negative mindset, due to Bethesda hate or because you wish Troika bought it.

x10 agree with alot of these points man, but as people have said before, you're doing ALOT of nitpicking.
And no replay value? That's just silly.

The game has plenty of flaws, don't get me wrong, but as a whole it IS just as good as the old Fallout games in many ways, even if I don't love it as much as a whole.

Just a quick note/correction, if I may:


RE: Megaton Building Materials

If you talk to Manya she will tell you that the building materials were scavenged from a nearby airport, which would probably be Reagan as it's the closest to the location, and not the crashed plane. Also, don't forget that what she says is lore that was handed down from generation to generation. It's possible that many details have been lost in the telling and retelling.


RE: Comment on Console Release and Early Death

I'm a little confused as to why you think FO3 was released primarily FOR consoles, unless I'm not getting what you've written. Beth isn't going to make a lot of money on 360 or PS3 games. They'll make their most money on PC versions. Why? Because of the mods. People with PCs will continue to buy this game as more and more mods become available. Just like it is with Oblivion. Oblivion is one of the very few games that has not gone down much in price over the years since its release. It's still very popular.

Eileen

Geronimo57 This is all true what you say especial the stuff about - The Size of settlements, The Watered down factions, or nonsensical ones, The Level Cap/Forced Ending, The Missed Opportunities And The Main Quest. Plus More but I Forgot you sure can write a good review. Good stuff.

Why does everyone call a review unbiased when a review is always based upon personal opinion which of course is always biased according to their own personal take on it?

There can be no unbiased review since everyone is biased toward their own personal tastes and desires and views. We are all biased in one way or another.

Good review but with just as much bias as the next one.

Dialogue:
Moving on, this is massive problem number two for Fallout 3, dialogue. I can understand people who have not played the previous games, as today's standards for dialogue is generally not high in games, but when you compare Fallout 3's dialogues, they are truly laughable.

I will start with a quote from Emil that to me says it all: ''Dialogue was not a battle we wanted to pitch''. That pretty much says it all for me regarding Beth's priorities within the game.

Investing in intelligence, charisma and speech have almost no noticeable effect within the game. All you get are chances in dialogue to pass or fail, and some extra lines. For somebody with speech 100 and intelligence 10, I still find myself communicating with others like an average wastelander.

A good comparison here is Fallout 2's ending on the oil rig with, or fallout 1's debate with the master, to Fallout 3's conversation with Eden. The first two involve detailed, logical, rational and intelligent points, based on evidence (sterility for Fallout 1), to discredit your nemesis. Fallout 3's goes more or less like this: ''I will not install the FEV, you know you are right because you know you are right, circular logic, that does not compute, destroy yourself, OK then, buh bye''

Voice-Acting is mediocre at best, with only a few exceptions. That is not much Beth's fault, but more the problem of voice-acting every NPC in the game. Fallout 1 and 2 reserved voice-acting for special characters, while Fallout 3, voicing every character, makes them all sound similar, boring, and cheap to be fair. With all the money invested in marketing it does not surprise me voice acting wasn't a strength of the game. Add that to stiff and unimaginative facial expressions by all characters and you have lifeless NPC's. There are very few memorable NPC's in Fallout 3 compared to previous games.

This quote has really got on my nerves, because like about the other 500 people who used it, it is factually wrong and is totally taken out of context.

If somebody can supply me the link to the article, i would be much appreciated.

But anyway the article your describing isnt about the actual dialogue but actually the dialogue system, as emil talks about how they are going by a traditional dialogue system unlike Mass Effect.

Your also have a lot of other inconsistencies with your rant which are also explained in game.

Nice. It came so close to what I've been saying to people (IRL or forums) since October that I felt like I was reading my own writing there! :tops:

OK, firstly, I don't mind unresolved issues, as long as they are on the fringes/periphery of the game. As it stands, Fallout 3 pulls of the side quests with near perfection while lacking on the main quest, which I find unusual. I have never played Oblivion, nor do I know what Troika is. Like I said, apparently mentioning I frequent NMA gives people a carte blanche to label me as a Beth hater. Through that logic I could assume because you frequent this forum you are a Beth fanbody. But I have not done so, so please do not do it to me.

A huge nitpicking fest you say? I would gladly debate with you what points you think are incorrect or unfair in my review if you wish so. I don't particularly think the last three points are nitpicking seeing as they are integral to the plot of the game, but I will let you have the next move.



It has almost no replay value in the sense that the only thing that changes when you complete the game is a a couple of slides, and maybe four different narrations. Off course within the game you witness the immediate effects of your actions, but not in the long run. You end up knowing nothing of what you have done to the world other than poisoning it/bringing it fresh water.

Also, please elaborate on what you think is particularly nitpicked about my post?



That was actually on purpose. It was pretty clear it would not be that unbiased seeing as The Good, the Bad and the Ugly denote two pejorative adjectives and one good one, so its not much balance wise. The 'Unbiased' is more to be read metaphorically in that I also appreciate the good aspects of the game, but also see it for its flaws. Most of the time, both here and on NMA its either ''Love'' or Hate'' and nothing inbetween. That is what I meant with 'Unbiased'.



Regardless whether its the dialogue structure of the dialogue itself, the point still stands that the dialogue is still crap compared to the previous games. Thats pretty much a fact.

I will try and find the article and where Emil says this, but to me it still seems like they ignored the dialogue in one way or another, even if the quote was referencing something different. Will look it up.

Once more, if you feel there are inconsistencies in my post, feel free to discuss them. Simply stating there is something wrong and not telling me what doesn't help.

If this starts with comparing it with previous games, it will be moved to the Fallout Series section of the forum. Just so you know. And anything taken out of context and thrown out there as having some other meaning that what it was meant to be is just unfair and one must expect to be called on it by those who know better.

Don't get me wrong i'm not bashing anyone for their opinions, but if you are going to sit down and play a video game you need to suspend your disbelief. I mean you can't sit here and judge the game on where is the food coming from or the water, or rad-away, or why isn't there a mechanic who can fix a car. You just have a take it at face value, because you can't be too logical or realistic about everything. The game isn't even set in a real USA, it is a fictional one where they had nuclear powered cars, laser guns, and robots so if you are going to be all logical and judge it on things such as where is the food coming from, or the rads would kill someone after 100 days then judge it on 'my god there's robots, laser gunds, and nuclear powered cars where did they come from'. If you can't sit down and play it for what it is and what Bethesda intended it to be and not judge it on petty discrepencies maybe you shouldn't play it or try to be more open minded and imaginative. If you were this nit picky about every game no game would ever be a truly great game. That is just my opinion about it and it bothers me people have to sit and anolyze every little thing. It's fantasy, make believe, a what-if scenario.

OK, I have removed it. It was more for my personal reasons anyway to see how people would react to it. As it stands, you picked up on it.

The ''Fallout Series'' forum is described as being for discussions regarding Fallout 1, Fallout 2, Fallout Tactics and Brotherhood of Steel. This is a discusssion primarily about Fallout 3, but being the third game of the series its not unfair to compare it with its predecessors in some way or another. Im not aiming to make this a Fallout 1 and 2 discussion, and if I do feel free to move it there.

Also, thanks for the compliments.



OK, this is where verisimilitude comes in. I have no problem imagining things or suspending disbelief. Obviously I would not play PC games if I had that much of a problem with realism as 'OMG I can't kill somebody with a single bullet as it is in real life' doesn't really apply to games.

HOWEVER, that is not the point. I am not judging Fallout 3 based on realism, it clearly isn't realistic, but then again neither is any other game. Verisimilitude works by setting a number of principles to your world, and then having your game abiding by it, kind of like physics for that particular world. Tell me that magic potions heal wounds because that is how magic works in this world, then ok, I believe you. No problem. Tell me this laser rifle turns you into dust, cool! Oh, and heads explode when shot at, excellent!

The problem is Fallout 3 is inconsistent in that it goes against the world it created, and against the world created in the two previous intalments. Food is still the main way of sustaining people. Water is clearly vital. Yet, the game makes no attempt to explain where people get their water from. There is not one single well in the entire game. Not a homemade purifier. Zippo. At the same time, the game says people survive on scavenged food, but at the same time, says its 200 years after the war. These two things don't go together, food would have rotted, and been consumed by the first couple of generations. Im not saying this is related to reality or not, im saying it doesn't make sense in the world its set in (verisimilitude)

Another important point is that this is a third game in the series. A lot of people fail to see that when you have two games before hand, with clearly set examples of how the world works and good examples of verisimilitude and interaction between towns, trade and politics, when the third game ignores all this its seen as 'nit picking'. If this game was the first one then maybe it would have been nit picking, but its really hard to ignore the disregard to previous lore.

''If you have seen farther it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants''

EDIT: Refer to Aqualamb's post below if you still don't understand.

We put all comparisons of the three games in "Fallout series" just as we move comparisons of TES games into "TES General".

*sigh*

http://img3.imageshack.us/img3/6526/abstractrealityzs8.jpg

I'm not sure why you felt the need to put your review in quotes. Not only is it unnecessary, but it makes it very difficult for someone to respond to any of your specifics without a lot of copying and pasting. Might I suggest you consider removing the quote tags?

Aside from any specifics, in what world does being 20 years old make someone a middle-aged gamer?

OK, I'm not trying to make this a comparison thread, but some referring is necessary sometimes. I'll try to keep it as Fallout 3'ish as possible.



Thanks, thats actually an easier explanation to the one I proposed.



Middle-aged in that I am inbetween the pre-pubascent and adolescent nerdy crowd and the older more reserved and generally more elitist gang. Im stereotyping here, but thats how it usually works.