Sigh, Rook...............................................................................................................................................................

:batman:

The canon ending is the only thing that is important. Most of those slides will be thrown out. All but one of those endings will be throw out. Question is when will this happen??????? No one knows........

Fo3 is not a fps. I m so sick of seeing the older fan base call it that.

This pointless.......The older fan bases wants a turn based map nodes rpg with some better graphics. The rest of the fan base has seen an open world game with tons of stuff to do and an ending that I know what happened.

All the yesman/House/NCR endings are flawed and they left logical options out. I was really liking the game until I saw what they did at the ending. Then the game got weird an started feeling cheap. I ve played rpgs when I was younger and they do not have to have 47 endings that leave you with no idea what happened.

There can still be choices and cause and effect without all that.

Rook give an example of the logical choices left out.

Also give an example of an ending slide where it wasn't clear what happened.

Not completely true. The over all idea becomes canon, IE NCR won. The other slides, on minor factions can change. New Vegas we learn that the Bishop family still runs New Reno but the good thing to do was to get the Wright Family to run the place. Its even hinted that the man that runs it is the son of the Chosen One.

Having multiple endings gives us an idea of what can happen in the future. There is alot of room for debate. Without them all we have is Nothing. People debating over nothing because they have nothing. Its pointless.

The proof is I say good and bad things about nv, old fo fan bases only says good, and they only say bad about fo 3. Everyone of them says the same things. That is proof of deep bias.

Its not possible for nv to be better than fo3 in every way I dont think fo3 is better than nv in every way, because I don t really have an agenda to flush anything fun from the game and turn it into sims.

I am not bias, I call it like I see it........... OFB only says Bethesda messed everysingle thing up.

This

RPG games have multiple endings, it always have it, but sooner or later, only one becomes canon

Go and play Mass Effect, Dragon Age, KOTOR, BG, TES games, they have it, but only one is canon, the others become optional only for fun sake

1 example....... They make it like possible for u to join bos. House wants you to kill them. U can t even give him a heads up that u r bos and r not going to kill they.

He may try to kill u, he may change his approach, but we don t know because the is no option to man up and tell him you r not going to do it. Thats just 1 example of a logical choice/option they left out.

They put one in with NCR, but not with House. I m not even saying House should change his mind,but you should at leasg be able to tell him you r not going to do it.

The ending slides are not clear, because most will be thrown out (one day) A story can only have 1 ending. All those endings are fools gold...... Not calling people that like them fools, but you catch my drift.

Mr.House would not take No for an answer. He would just go "fine I will send my robot army after them and attack you for breaking contract."

Still there are alot of options in the game when it comes to factions, which is an awesome thing. I don't like only having two options "Good or Bad" and in the end really there is only the Good option. Like Fallout 3. They force you to join the good guys and yet you can't help the bad guys. Well you can help the Enclave but they still attack you :rolleyes:

Fallout 3 also has little to no options. Sorry I am not trying to make this a NV vs Fallout 3. Its just that Fallout 3 makes a good example.

There is a quest that bugged me in Fallout 3. There is that scientist guy that had chips to control ghouls and super mutants. He's always hostile. Looking at his notes he talks about how he wants to control a Behemoth, if only he could find one. I can't help but think "I know where one is and its in a cage!" Still I can't help the man even if I am evil. I can't even continue his work to control the Behemoth or even a ghoul.

Styles wouldn t you rather debate the effects of what really happned at the end though. Fo3 though hated by all old fo base, we can debate what is happening there now and in future games with much more truth to it. Nv all we can debate is geeee I wonder what will be the canon ending.
Wouldn t you rather know if your fo tactics ending happened for sure?? Then u can think about what they ll do next.

I agree on not going on about NV vs Fallout 3. I will get on topic.

You mentioned Fallout Tactics and the ending I want. See that is what I am talking about. If it were not for multiple endings based on my actions, I would not even know about it. I would not know what would happen if you let Barnaky join with the Calculator or what would happen if I did nothing and let the Calaculator die. I know what happend because I am told what happens. Without the endings I would not have a clue. It would all be pointless speculation and debate. People debating over nothing.

The endings give a foundation, they make people excited about the future. Having something to debate about as in "which ending is better." To me that is a better debate than "what do you think happened?" because it poinless specualtion. Sure it can be fun but Fallout 4 could be years from now and having that same poinless debate over and over is just madness. And really how much could happen when you are only give one option "good?"

Pretty much, my thoughts

Its simple. You stop working with him. You walk out the door, or you kill him, simple. He makes it quite clear that he is not going to compromise with the Brotherhood. He wants them destroyed, full stop. Mr House is all about "My way or the highway". You can tell Caesar that you won't destroy the BOS, and aside from him throwing a little tantrum, it doesn't change anything at all.




Ah, ok I understand now. I thought you meant it didn't actually say what happened in each ending slide.

Styles, you r totally right about fo3 not having enough choices through out the game. Talon Comp should have also had options and quests with them. (notice I am saying something bad abouy fo3, because I am not bias)

The main story was written so only a mad man would want to help Enclave. Give me one good reason any sain person would want to help them after what they did and what they were planning to do

You say its bad writing, but I think it was good. It made you hate them. Even bad guys and girls like mommy and daddy. Only some psycho would want to help Enclave in that game.

Its not bad because its not what you wanted. You don t see me saying nv writting svcked because I don t like the endings. I think the writing at the ending svcked because it makes it look like you have choices, but then it leaves a bunch out.

House could not send robots into hidden valley. He says he dosent have full control of them. There is a sand storm his robots would never find the bunker.

If his robots did find the bunker they would be bottle necked in the entrances and would be destroyed.

House needs you more than you need him. Even if he did try to kill me. Or just tells me to get my crap and go its better than having to kill him without him being aware of what the story is.

House needed a chance to weigh his options. I couldn t give him a choice, because the game would not let me. This is only 1 example 1

Exactly, that's why it's down right stupid that they gave you options to help them, introducing a ton of Enclave-related splot points at the same time. You have absolutely no incentive to help them but he games got to have MORAL CHOICES and some ending variation so just put it in anyway.

As soon as you are forced to be done talking to House about bos, The NCR then won t accept your help anymore, then you r forced to go to yes man. Don t even get me going on no options with a robot named yes man.

You put him in and he tells you. You can t tell YES MAN A SINGLE THING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The totally [censored] addition of yes man not only pisses me off to no end, but also leads to flaws in the game.

They don t need to have moral choices at the end. The rest of the game having moral choices is fine (more than fo3 had). A game program can not keep up with a human brain where it comes to a bunch of morality choices all at one time. The human brain will quickly find choices that were left out, and in NV the endings become totally cheap, because you can fool the game program. When video games get fooled dumb things happen like ncr stands around and waits for a dead pres. Then the game feels even more cheap. Then it takes you out of the game........ Then you get pissed.......

Not the case. If Mr.House was stupid and did a full out assualt on the bunker you would be right but Mr.House is a patient man. All he would have to do is lay siege to the bunker. A cave is grave. Once the enemie finds your hidey-hole, you're screwed. The BoS would be bottle necked trying to get out. House's Robots don't eat and they don't need sleep. Without supplies getting into the bunker the BoS will die off.


As for your other post. The Enclave's plan in Fallout 2 was also something "Evil" it just that the Enclave were given different personalities so you could find some good in them, as to not make the game totally "Good vs Evil." Fallout 3 the Enclave are pretty much clones, personalite wise.

Good can come from Evil. I don't like to think there is such a thing as "good" just lesser Evil. Better the Devil you know then the devil you don't. Enclave in Fallout 2 thought they were doing humanity a good thing. How many in the Enclave knew the plan about killing everything is up for debate. Maybe only Richardson and the top people knew. Fallout 3 Enclave was just lame, like I said before they were all monotone, one voice, one responce. Clearly everyone knew what their goal was by then. Like you said they were made to be hated, which goes back to the "Good vs Evil."

Made to be hated, something only and insain person would want to join and yet there is an option to nuke a town full of innocent people just so an old man can have a better view. Great writing Bethesda :rolleyes:

I have to agree with this. I cant stand people who Bethesda bash. There games aren't bad no matter what way you look at it. It starts to piss me off when people constantly say " ohhh Bethesda ruined the series" NO THEY DIDN'T. They made it alive again. They got the defibrillators and revived this franchise to what it is now...

It is when you look at it as a Fallout Game IMO. Not bashing Bethesda. Fallout 3 is a great game for what it is. I do see it as a Canon Fallout Game. I just don't see it as the best Fallout game. Its at the bottom of my list and don't worry my list does not include "the Burned game."

Bethesda was not the only one going for the rights to Fallout. They just happened to have the most money to bid on it.

Really well who else was going for the game then...?

Troika Games - consisting of the devs who invented Fallout. For example.

There were others as well. Bethesda did not just come along and save Fallout from the garbage bin. Interplay had an auction for it.