With the announcement of Fallout 4, the hype train has come once more and grabbed a few more passengers. The success of the Bethesda-produced Fallout game, and the solid New Vegas by Obsidian Entertainment, probably helped with the pre-orders the game is receiving despite the very distant release date for Fallout 4.
To commemorate Fallout 4's announcement, I will be looking at Fallout 3 (PC/X-Box 360. PS3). Once again, this is my own opinion (subjective) and feel free to disagree. In my own opinion, Fallout 3 was a decent game, not great but pretty good for anyone wishing to try out RPGs and not wanting to delve into a strong RPG series with too much back-story to catch up with.
 |
| https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/83/Fallout_3_cover_art.PNG |
The open world to explore is the first thing to come to mind. After the tutorial sequence, you are thrust into a wide open world that demands to be explored with a trusty gun at your side. Bethesda's greatest strength is the creation of an open world that is filled with events, items and people to find and experience whereby a first-time player would probably enjoy (though repeated playthroughs will make the world feel stale over time). The Capital Wasteland is filled with events and quests that can be interacted with upon finding them. As a result, new players, seeking to find new and interesting things, will probably enjoy this game for the thrill of exploration and veteran players might have fond memories when playing again (the latter players may be using mods though)
Gameplay in Fallout 3 is vastly different from previous Fallout games which had turn-based combat and RTS-like view for the entirety of said games. That said, Fallout 3's gameplay (having been simplified to the typical 1st/3rd person view and combat in real time with the option to use an aiming system that kinda acts like a turn-based system) is easier to get into for both new PC and console players as the mechanics that made previous games complicated have been trimmed out. As a result, it allows new players to experience the game without having to spend hours understanding what it means to raise a skill level to 200% or figuring out how to read the map.
The side-quests being interesting is a staple to Fallout games and Fallout 3 does have a good amount of variation to the narrative of each side-quest ranging from superheroes to a dying village filled with adolescents with very little experience living outside their original homes. While the journey to resolving these quests are similar to each other (due to gameplay that involves either shooting, sneaking or talking), the results can vary and as a result, you feel a sense of accomplishment for having solved the problems of the common folk.
The impact of the player in the game's world is something most players wish to see, especially with RPGs (role playing games). The debacle surrounding Mass Effect 3's original ending shows us what happens if you neglect having an epilogue to show the impact a player has in the game's world. Fallout 3 uses the slideshow display to do so and does so in an acceptable manner (though if comparing to New Vegas' own slideshow, it is the equivalent of a shallow pond compared to New Vegas' ocean). Outside the endings, the fact that I could return to these quest locations and see the results of my actions really gave a sense of accomplishment that most RPGs should have to show impact.
Graphics and sound design are acceptable though the former is dated (it is an old game by today's standards though can be fixed with mods) while the latter is able to convey a desolate track that makes it worth it to explore a desolate Wasteland where life is scarce but present. Credit is due to Liam Neeson playing the protagonist's father, James, but probably would not win you over since he disappears for a majority of the game as part of the main quest (an odd trend of Bethesda can be seen here whereby they find big-name voice actors to play a role in the main quest only for them to disappear). The music on the radio tracks are appropriate for the retro theme that the Fallout series uses.
What breaks it:
Token attempts to incorporate Fallout elements in Fallout 3 can be seen from the lack of relevant factions (NCR, Khans etc.) mentioned, the lack of attempt to make characters with great depth and a setting that is too far to be affected by the established lore. Fallout 3 makes very little effort to be part of the Fallout universe as a whole as the NCR (New California Republic) along with the Followers of the Apocalypse and many elements from previous games do not even pop up. While the lack of factions can be justified due to canonical distance in game, the factions within the game are merely one-dimensional in alignment with one faction being good (with vague hints of being more lawful neutral) and another being evil (with vague hints of having a slight amount of decency). As a result, the factions are within the game are capable of being replaced by any faction one could conceive of in a post apocalyptic setting and after sorting them out as per their alignment, slip them in without changing too much (save for aesthetic elements).
Low re-play value is often the bane of an open world sandbox game. After completing an entire playthrough, it becomes difficult to return for a second playthrough. In Fallout 3's case, the multitude of things to find (as I said before) will become stale when playing it a second time unless you play it differently than your previous playthrough. As a result, the exploration becomes more predictable and you lose interest in the game (unless you mod the game as per most Bethesda games). This can take place in Fallout and for me at least, I wound up playing with a check-list mentality rather than curiosity (plus playing the bad guy in Fallout 3 was too comically and excessively evil to even consider trying out).
Moral ambiguity is very lacking in this game whereby the karma meter and the long term effects always seem to be positive for all actions (save for one that I will not mention to avoid spoilers). As previously mentioned, many of the factions (save for a small number) are either good or evil, black or white and rarely have a shade of grey to add complexity. While playing, I could immediately tell which people were good or evil simply by the karma meter that ended up guiding how I played the game and removed my need to ponder my actions. New Vegas, with solid writing (within the DLCs) and morally ambiguous situations, made it a challenge to pick sides as you'd have to think of the long-term consequences of a decision whereby blindly obeying a faction like the NCR or the actual Brotherhood of Steel would actually be a more harmful decision to the general populace as a whole. Even the obviously evil Caesar's Legion have positive traits that does not paint them as completely evil (at least until you read deeper into their lore and backgrounds). The DLCs also added onto to this with Honest Hearts (in New Vegas) having a more positive ending if you picked a different route than the seemingly good ending whereas Fallout 3 did not really have this for all but one DLC (and that one doesn't even confirm the result of it). This would make it seem that the writing is basic textbook level in terms of depth which is a shame for a series known for strong writing and the ability to portray moral ambiguity.
The main quest has always been a weak point for most Bethesda games as the writing often seems basic in terms of narrative (motivation, conflict, sudden escalation, grand situation that affects world, climax, conclusion that is open-ended). While the game starts out with a personal quest that gives some form of motivation, it becomes less interesting as time goes on and eventually it becomes a typical save-the-world (or region) story where the level of investment can vary (at least for me). This is a staple of most Fallout games (at least that's what I have noticed) and level of investment can vary. The problem here is the danger of losing interest with a story that does not provide investment and in my opinion at least, New Vegas was able to avoid this problem with sidequests and characters linked to the factions that expresses the values of each faction and helps you decide how important each faction is to the region(the DLCs especially play this role well). Fallout 3 does not have this due to a lack of depth to it's story, at least from what I recall, and most of my investment involved imagining character motivations with a check-list in mind.
As per any open-world game, bugs will exist. No matter how skilled or large a game company is, one or twenty bugs will slip by on release and depending on the company, may not be patched quickly. While some bugs can be hilarious to see, some can be game-breaking or problematic. For me, I ran into a graphical bug that prevented me from looking at certain areas due to the textures going berserk. Official and unofficial patches do exist for Fallout 3 that could fix this but if you lack an Internet connection, you may be frustrated by a game-breaking bug that you may not be able to resolve.
There are more things that could make or break this game but right now, I can't recall them and since I'm writing based on what I can recall from a playthrough from six months ago, this list is incomplete. I had fun with Fallout 3 despite my complaints and thanks to it, I was introduced to the rest of the series which I had a great time playing through (Fallout 2 and New Vegas being my personal favourites due to refinement of previous game elements and overall entertainment). My hopes for Fallout 4 is a collaboration by Bethesda and Obsidian to provide a vast but interesting world to explore and strong writing that creates intrigue while adding depth to the main story.
What makes it - open world, decent gameplay, variety of sidequests, impact of player's action, acceptable graphics and sound design
What breaks it - token attempts to incorporate Fallout elements, low re-play value, lack of moral ambiguity, main quest, bugs
EDIT: Now that I think about it, Fallout 3 was a poor Fallout game. Not a bad game but not a worthy installment to the Fallout franchise. I recommend New Vegas instead.
No comments:
Post a Comment