Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Jarvis]

I was just saying that I thought it'd be really odd if they removed a feature that has been present since the first game. I wouldn't really have any gripes with a male only protagonist besides it removing a lot of roleplaying, which the Fallout series has been built upon. Again though, it's just a rumor and we'll probably have to wait till E3 for more.

[TempAcc]

Its something that hasn't been true for any fallout games, made by bethesda or not (as far as I remember). Dont see any reason they'd do it now, plus that info is purely based on comments from people that saw the zero gameplay teaser trailer.

[Jarvis]

The Hype Train is rarely anything other than pure speculation.

[TripJack]

And I liked FO3's plot and DLCs way more than FNV's.

why? fallout 3's plot was full of massive holes and characters doing nonsensical things plus the game never gives the player any reason to care about what's happening or go along with it other than lack of alternative

[Yoink]

Everyone loves to hate on FO3's plot, but I really fail to see why.
I enjoyed it. I definitely enjoyed it a lot more than the story of Oblivion, and was actually surprised at the time by how good it was.
NV's plot was alright, too, but not nearly as good. It felt like it never really focused on the factions/plotlines I found most interesting.
Maybe my standards had just increased a bit in the time between FO3 and NV, who knows.

[Neonivek]

And I liked FO3's plot and DLCs way more than FNV's.

why? fallout 3's plot was full of massive holes and characters doing nonsensical things plus the game never gives the player any reason to care about what's happening or go along with it other than lack of alternative

How about the fact that Fo3's plot has actual stakes

While New Vegas' plot has absolutely no consequences

In fact out of all the Fallout games created... New Vegas probably has the most "So what?" plot of them all. As 1, 2, and 3 actually would have completely changed the landscape of the entire fallout universe.

It is only because New Vegas outright IGNORES Fallout 3 that its' effect has diminished.

I honestly was expecting there to be a bigger plot somewhere the entire time I was playing New Vegas... like maybe someone was going to use the robots to take over the US... But no... New Vegas is completely superfluous to the plot (but that is because the game was originally intended as a expansion to Fallout 3)

[Damiac]

The Hype Train is rarely anything other than pure speculation.

You forgot to wildly speculate in this post...

I assume that there will be male and female options, and the main character will mainly just be a trigger for story events, rather than a real part of the story, like with most wRPGs, and fallout games in particular.  My 'point' (such as it was) was simply that if they did decide to make the main character actually part of the story, like the witcher games for example, it makes sense to have a more set character. 

I found FO3's plot to be semi-ok, the self sacrifice at the end made NO sense, but then final fantasy gets away with having characters die all the time when there's a cheap, infinitely available method to resurrect people... 

I mean, it won't win literary prizes, but it wasn't utter nonsense. 

[Fniff]

Well, I didn't enjoy Fallout 3, but maybe a second go at the series is what Bethesda needs.
I'll wait for more concrete information, also known as reviews.

[Neonivek]

I just hope the plot unlike Fallout New Vegas actually has... well... Stakes. Something actually important.

I understand, as I said, that New Vegas was an expansion pack originally and thus its plot couldn't be too important.

But given that this is Bethesda and "Skyrim was popular" expect another faction plot.

[scrdest]

New Vegas, plotwise, was a sequel... to Fallout 2. It recycles a ton of ideas from Van Buren, the unreleased sequel.

[Flying Dice]

Apart from the idiotic end to FO3's main plot, the thing that people mean when they talk about it not making sense is "bluh bluh muh BoS lore".

[Neonivek]

I actually found a lot of the story of Fallout 3 to be quite a bit more interesting then New Vegas

For example the VR section.

[SealyStar]

New Vegas' story was mostly superior to Fallout 3 in that it was consistent and freer of plot holes. The other big difference is that NV is heavily based on semi-realistic political conflict while 3 is based on larger-than-life good-versus-evil ("higher stakes"), and while I prefer the former I think this is much more a matter of choice so I won't complain.

The FO3 story moment that everyone loves to hate is the ending where you have to sacrifice yourself in the radiation room even if you have super mutant/ghoul companions who could do it safely, because hero's destiny blah.

[Neonivek]

Yes but Fallout 3's story was more then that one ending that was patched and fixed (Yet people seem to STILL believe it is still in the game)

It actually had a consistant and ongoing story. You had to uncover relics of lost ages, follow your father across the world, as each and every location has its own story.

New Vegas? Well... once you find vegas the story is pretty much over. Chose your side... DA END! Want to explore these locations? Sorry nothing interesting here turn back!

So New Vegas didn't have much of a story to really have holes.

It is just weird to me that Fallout 3 is held as "bad" even though I consider it better than New Vegas by a long shot. There are preferences and then there is just this weirdness.

[TripJack]

What stakes in fallout 3? If the player doesn't act presumably autumn and the enclave get the water purification thing and build a new united states. Why this would be so terrible is never really explained in the game other beyond superficial 'lel enclave is evil'. Autumn's plan sounds p good to me, where do I sign? Oh right bethesda is lazy and that isn't an option