Forum:What's wrong with the story?

I've seen a lot of complaints about the Fallout 3 story, but not necessarily a lot of detail about what was so bad. On the surface, the quest design is pretty good. There is variety, and most of it holds together pretty sensibly if you accept the premise of the gameworld (with the exception of the ending, which was thankfully retconned out of existence by Brotherhood of Steel).

I went out on the Web to look at other games lauded for story, and I think I have identified a couple of key points.

1) Lack of Surprise:  The Enclave is telegraphed as the badguy from the minute you step out of the vault and meet your first Enclave Eyebot.  On top of this, the reveal of the true nature of President Eden is not really very relevant.  There is nothing really in the plot that the reveal explains that was previously inexplicable.  Even Colonel Autumn isn't really that bad of a guy -- he is no more amoral than the Brotherhood Outcasts, and even some members of the BoS itself.  The first two Fallout games had more surprise in the ultimate reveal of who was behind it all.

2) Weak Characters:  There are a very small number of characters -- your father, Ian West, Elder Lyons -- who have a moderate amount of backstory and complicated motives.  There are a far larger number of characters with hints at motivation that are never fleshed out.  More importantly, there are ample sources for conflict that are never addressed.  Who doesn't think the game would be improved by a series of quests where you work for either Simms or Moriarty, with each option providing a different moral spin but never quite turning violent?  Who wants to be able to do something about the schism with the Outcasts and the BoS?  Some characters are little more than caricatures -- the cola addict and her horny next-door neighbor.

Here is an example of how the story could have been better: Autumn and the BoS are really working toward the same purpose, but Casdin of the Outcasts is working to set them against each other as revenge against Lyons for betraying the ideals of the Brotherhood. The player managers to reveal the role Casdin is playing, but learns that Casdin wasn't behind all of it. Oddly, robots that Casdin claims to know nothing about have been sometimes helping the BoS, and sometimes helping the Outcasts, and sometimes helping the Enclave. The player eventually learns that "President Eden" is actually an AI that has been working at cross-purposes to Autumn. The player stops the AI, destroying Raven Rock, but cannot stop the Brotherhood and the Enclave from starting a fight over the Jefferson Memorial. In the climax, the player confronts Autumn, and can possibly convince him to sacrifice himself to save the water purifier.

At a minimum, this would have allowed for a greater role for the Outcasts, and more characterization for Autumn and Casdin. DreadPirateMurphy 20:42, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

For me, the main purpose in F3 isn't the story but the game world itself, as the story is more or less the same in my eyes and the only time it really changes towards the ending and raven rock on what decisions you make from there. don't get me wrong, the story is great but after repeatded play the story is the least important thing in the game, but if you explore the wasteland it is never the same due to the random events. Also i've had F3 for about 7-8 months and i still haven't found every location and bobblehead. However i agree with the opinon that some of the characters are woefully under developed like the BoS Outcasts (i haven't played F1, 2 or tactics) and people new to the series make become confused early on. Sasquatch99 21:15, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

The same thing that is wrong with Oblivion's story........ITS NOT ABOUT YOU!!! You always are the guy who does everything! Dad and Martin Septim are Idiots!!! At the end of Oblivion, the guy is like........well we need a new emperor.....anyway, heres some stupid armor thx.....WTF? -FalloutFreek

Biggest problem about the story: Nothing memorable.

Take for example Oblivion. Who can forget about the Assassin guild, the vampires brotherhood, the thieves guild? All of those were organizations that were fully fleshed out, characters explained. They each had their own unique backgrounds thus differentiating them from each other and making them memorable. And those are just a small sample of all the factions/grouops in the whole game. In Fallout 3, you have what? The Raiders? You mean those low level fodder who became utterly irrelevant past level 10? The biggest redeeming factor, Evergreen Mill, was a lackluster effort. Without the Behemoth, it's just another generic dungeon. Then you got the Outcasts, who seem to have an interesting conflict, but this conflict was never resolved, relegating them to a minor side-role. Their headquarters? Boring concrete dungeon just like Evergreen Mills. Slavers? Seems like a contrived way to build in a companion for evil character. They also have no bearing on the story, and are not really developed farther other than that one mission. What if instead of having a shallow quest, you acutally have a series of quest in the same line as the assassin guild? Super Mutants were fine. The game built up a conflict, and resolves it in a quest in that you find out their backstory, and you actually get involved (or had the option) with one of their characters. The Enclave, with Eden, the supposedly M Night Schamalan of the story, was weak. As a previous poster stated, it was of no consequence that he was a computer. Oter than the oh ok factor, it served no other purpose.

Another problem with the game: You're too overpowered. In Oblivion, when you just started the game, your character felt hopeless. He can't just start doing shit in Imperial City, cuz the guard will make mince meat of him. In Fallout 3, I could defeat Simms when I was level 2, and after level 5, pretty much no character posed me a threat. And you can solve all mission with just brute force. In Oblivion, you had theif missions, where you have to steal stuff without getting busted. You also had assassin missions which can't just be solved with brute force.

All in all, the problem with Fallout 3: generic. Nothing's memorable about the story line. Many conflicts unresolved, and many stones left unturned. --Big Wang 12:18, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

At level 5 no character posed a threat? Try going to downtown DC and fighting super mutant masters with only a hunting rifle, or maybe a low level R91... and change the difficulty to hard... then see how easy it is... 15:39, 7 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I didn't make myself clear. Obviously, there are enemies in games that will give you a run for your money at level 5. For example, behemoths. However, after level 5, I could pretty muich go on a killing spree in all of the towns. In Oblivion, the guards will totally own you if you tried to start shit at low levels. Which brings me to another point. In Oblivion, if you commit a petty crime, you go to jail and gets locked up. In FO3, you steal some food, the whole town opens fire on you. What the hell is that? --Big Wang 20:47, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, the story itself left a lot to be desired, but then again (as a previous poster stated) FO3 isn't really about the story, it's just a way to facilitate moving through an immense and engrossing game. The backbone of FO3, the thing that makes it truly great, is the exploration. Everywhere you turn, you see a new scene, whether what you're looking at occurred 2 days or 200 years ago, almost everything you come across in the wastes has its own story, whether obvious or inferred. For an example of obvious, take Little Lamplight, after careful searching you can uncover how the "town" really began, it may not DO anything for you, it's the simple accomplishment of having your curiosity satisfied. And then there are the random scenes, like the skeleton leaning over the toilet bowl. You stand back and ask yourself, "What the hell happened here?!". You take a closer look, you see there are 2 wires leading down into the bowl, and if you check around back you'll find the battery they're connected to. "Ahhh, I see now, I wonder why they would booby-trap the toilet?", and so begins the mental merry-go-round until you can come up with a reasonable explanation based on the information available. When it comes down to it, it's the exploration and scavenging that makes FO3 amazing, not the fighting or the story or even the characters (although I certainly wouldn't classify any of these things as "bad" in FO3). If you're a naturally curious person, FO3 was MADE for you.--DashMan54 16:02, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

People see the storyline as a mix of FO1 and FO2 together.Example,the people at Project Purity wanted to make the water clean.Vault Dweller was sent to find a water chip to save his Vault.Fallout 2- you find a G.E.C.K. to save Arroyo;Among the way you save the world, and your village from the Enclave.Who want to use a modified FEV virus to kill all mutated people. In FO3 you find a G.E.C.K. to help Project Purity. In many people's Opinion FO3 is a mix of the first two Fallout Games. People also weren't pleased with fallout being a FPS with RPG elements;and much hate goes on Bethesda for being unoriginal,in many peoples eyes.--ChicagoWanderer 03:57, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

I've never played Fallout 1 and 2, version 3 is my first game of the series. After beating him to death, I see some problems that I after discover that other people see it too. I mean no offense, but the game is...shalow.

There's a few caracthers worth of memory and some quests don't even make sense (Westland Survival Guide to point one, but to be honest, Moira is very fun to deal it, so you don't mind the nonsense). Dunwich Bulding is other unmarked quest that suffers from poor imagination. The atmosphere of the building is superb, you really believe in bad mojo! :D The design of the map is challenging, making you become interested in what happend. Then when you finally solve the whole mystery the solution is...kill the guy! You shiting me, right? People are right when they say you can solve the whole game with killing spree, there are no consequences for this apart the mentioned Regulators/Talon on your back. For example, blowing Megaton. I like to see more serious consequences for this action, like you are forbid to enter Arefu and Underworld. I don't think a person who do this will be well accepted in any place.

The "Big Trouble in Big Town" is great example of action and consequence, Bethesda did a great work on it. Going to Germantown is dangerous and challenging, reading the diary about the first days of the war is very accurate (..."It's not so much that people die; it's how they look when they go. They all think they'll just lose a bit of hair, maybe get a rash. It gets so much worse than that". Or do you feel that the explosion and fallout will be your only problem in a nuclear war? Radiation sickness, my child). And depending on your XP level the task is hard. After you rescue Red and Shorty, if you leave the town everyone will be dead, so you loose your free doctor and your number one fan, Bittercup, who gives will many things freely.

In my first time I made this quest in the beginning of the game, when you're strong but low on cash to expend in doctors or stimpaks, and I regreted my decision to leave the town to his destiny. Why don't follow this line for the rest of the game, the black and white karma system "you are good or you are bad" is a joke. Also, if you don't want children to be harmed why put them in a game where the world blows up? The decision to make them immortal is an insult to my inteligence.

Also, I agree with the majoraty, your caracther becomes too powerfull in the beginning and the game levels the enemys, so if you go to Museum of Technology in level 3 or 4 the Super Mutants will be no problem (ammo for your rifle and assault rifle will). Other thing is the world is rather large, but also too much crowded. You have Super Mutants, living by side with Raiders, with Talon/Regulators walking side by side with them, with the local fauna fighting for their space. I dunno, there things that aren't just right after 200 years of nuclear devastation, like an abandoned robot factory with working computers. If the story tells me that 30 or 40 years had passed it will be more believable.

It is like the DLC "The Pitt". The atmosphere is great and the history is very good, but the decison to return your weapons in the middle of the game simply thrown it to the gutter. Why don't let you get your gear only after your task was completed, there are plenty of weapons and ammo in the map?

I like the game, don't think I don't, I just wish there are more on it. Brfritos 10:29, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

I think the major problem is that it's not Interplay making it. But I'm not a rabid fanboy of the original games; I liked them because they were good. And so's fallout 3, but differently so. Mostly, the plot is a Standard Videogame Plotline. It's not particularly brilliant or memorable or shocking, but it's not especially BAD, either. It's basically the soap opera plot of videogames; you know what you're getting, but it's not unwelcome and the predictability is nice.

The thing about brute forcing through the whole game is that Plan C should not be the path of least resistance. I'm all for giving the player options of being a psycho killer who just downs everything in his path, but 1) there should be consequences and 2) It should not be the simplest solution. --Big Wang 19:04, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

But what could there be aside from the characters you killed being dead? I guess you could have someone hire both the regulators AND Talon Company come after you as well as the BoS, but other than that, what else is there?

"I dunno, there things that aren't just right after 200 years of nuclear devastation, like an abandoned robot factory with working computers. If the story tells me that 30 or 40 years had passed it will be more believable. " true, but remember that the fallout universe was supposed to have super advanced technology, created around a time when everyone was afraid of nuclear war. Most of it made to last through atom blast and survive for centuries to help rebuild, evident in the vaults. --Pandaman_with_BR december 9th 2009

Sasquatch99 - I agree with the facts of your analysis but do you still not consider that FO3 is a remarkable achievement and an incredible game despite these faults? It may seem like a ticket to accept second best but it is just a game. Bethesda could have worked all these strands through and fleshed them out but at some point they have to release the game. You could therefore argue that the DLCs let it down in that they could have been vehicles for patching these flaws. Gunner Bill 16:32, December 11, 2009 (UTC)