Portal talk:Fallout 3/Archive 1

British vs. American Spelling
For the sake of consistency, I suggest that there be a standardization between the use of British vs. American English spellings. So, everyone: "armor" or "armour"? Xeuton 20:28, 13 November 2008 (UTC)Xeuton
 * The Fallout games are set in the US, so American spelling is preferred, but having British spellings on some pages is no big deal either. Ausir 20:32, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I think that having one standard spelling across a website edited by countless people from both countries would be impossible to enforce and utterly pointless User:Monkeytroll 21:30, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't think there's a point in enforcing it, US spelling is simply recommended, but using UK spelling is no big deal either. Ausir 21:38, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. The main reason I wanted this raised was so there would be a resource for others to check in case they were unsure which they should use. Xeuton 21:54, 13 November 2008 (UTC)Xeuton
 * WOW,Do you really need to worry about spelling my gosh ,some people need to stop nitpicking about stupid thing's like this. (utc)yourmom
 * This is an online encyclopedia dedicated to giving Fallout 3 players information about the game of the utmost quality. Proper spelling and grammar is highly encouraged in all articles. BrenMan 94 19:19, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah I agree. American spellings are the best.
 * I can handle U. --Killchain 05:12, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Stone Head Fetish?
I was wondering what Bethesda's deal with stone heads is. There are stone heads in so many places throughout the Capital Wasteland. They're not all the same either, so it can't possibly be a reference to the Vault Dweller (I read one page that mentioned there was a living stone head of him in the second game I believe, but it didn't say anything about Fallout 3). Ganon12788 00:21, September 15, 2009 (UTC)

I don't know, maybe it has something to do with the capitol of the U.S. and many important people live(d) there. Why does it matter if a game has stone heads? ...some people never fail to piss me off... Lord Snip. 10:24, September 15, 2009 (UTC)
 * It's part of the retrofuturistic aesthetic. Sheesh, some people. http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/fallout/images/thumb/4/4a/Naglowaa_se.gif/15px-Naglowaa_se.gif Tagaziel (call!) 11:08, September 15, 2009 (UTC)


 * Ah yes, because I was obviously complaining instead of just asking if there was a reason behind them. Naturally if anyone makes a comment on something that no one knows the answer to and is unimportant, it's a complaint. I should have remembered that. Ganon12788 19:23, September 27, 2009 (UTC)

Lincoln Craze
I've noticed that Fallout 3 has a massive hard-on for Abraham Lincoln (what with all the collectibles, the Head of State quest, NPCs loving him to death, the Museum of History having an entire section dedicated to him, etc). Having never played the previous Fallout games, I don't know if this is a continuing trend or a new thing. I'm just curious, does anyone have a clue why he's such a big deal here? - Auridan 11:55, 6 February 2009 (UTC)


 * from what i've heard and seen in the game he is popular because he is a symbol of freedom because of his anti slavery look at the civil war, etc. thats why the slaves and everyone else like him. the slavers ,however, do not take kindly to lincoln because of course he is a source of hope and freedom and they want to get rid of anything about him to crush the spirits of everyone. thats just a pretty basic explanation feel free to correct me if i'm innacurate. Mr snip 12:01, 6 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, of course that much is clear. It's not just the slaves and slavers, though. If you go to the Museum of History, look around in the main room where the door to Underworld is. You'll notice four other arches, each titled with a period in history. I'm doing this kind of off the top of my head, but one of them deals with World War 2, one deals with the last war (which they unsubtly call the Resource War), and one I can't remember, but the earliest one says "The Presidency of Abraham Lincoln". Not "The Civil War", you'll note. Also, the curator of Rivet City's museum would take Lincoln to bed if he were still alive. That much is clear from reading the museum computer's historical notes. I'm just wondering if anyone knows of a specific reason why Bethesda loves Lincoln so much, or if the previous Fallout games fixate on him as well. - Auridan 21:42, 6 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't recall any references at all to Lincoln from the first two games (never played Tactics or BoS), so odds are any references there sufficiently limited to not make an impression. From the Wastelanders' point of view, as Mr. Snip says, it's pretty logical to elevate Lincoln to a nearly Messianic status, which explains most references to him there. From a real world point of view... well, Lincoln's one of the US's most beloved Presidents so that kind of thing's going to play very well with the American demographic anyway. The "Presidency of Lincoln" sign is a little baffling, though. 75.166.60.252 08:26, 22 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, building off of what the game presents... The Museum of History has an entire wing dedicated to Abraham Lincoln. This exhibit's duration just happened to coincide with the nuclear holocaust, so it's one of the biggest exhibits left behind (heck, pretty much the only exhibit). From the point of view of a Wastelander, you've got to see this massive amount of attention and think that this guy's a pretty big deal. Add to it that all of the information is going to be positive - he freed the slaves, he was a great speaker, he was amazingly tall, whatever - and the existence of the Lincoln Memorial at the head of everything in the Mall nearby, and what other conclusion could you come away with? He's the only President given such detail in the entirety of the Capitol Wasteland.


 * As for why Bethesda themselves went for this angle, well, that's a mystery. 98.226.85.9 06:50, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

It might be the recurring theme of self sacrifice and idols. Lincoln was assasinated and serves as not only a repersentation of the slaves freedom in fallout but alsoin reality. This is of course on par with the sacrifice of the lone wanderers father etc. etc. just a thought.--217.33.11.13 12:42, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Also keep in mind that Lincoln's statue survived the War and that after 200 plus years, the populace might start referring to him as some sort of deity. Just a thought, considering in real life there is a giant statue of Lincoln in his Memorial. --Killchain 05:15, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

We need some regulation
I think we need some rules posted on the article editing page. There are way too many people posting personal stories ("when I did this...") or over-specific walkthroughs aimed for only one type of character. Since we don't have enough people to correct the mistakes of others, this would be a way to at least prevent some of these things from happening. --Clean Up 20:31, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Word. The UESP wiki is very good at removing the "When I did.." posts. The crap looks very poorly written, and it is obvious that many posters don't realize that they shouldn't be editing in first person. Everytime I look at a page like this, I just skip over it, because it is very hard to read. 160.150.65.52 18:49, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

When's the last time the featured picture changed?
It's been Shrapnel from Flak 'N Shrapnel's since forever, is there someone responsible for this kind of thing? Techercizer (say hi)(pwnage) 18:31, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, it's *the* featured picture :-P
 * More seriously, don't think there's anyone specifically reponsible for updating the portals. The recent news aren't up-to-date either. However, if you want I can change it to a 31-day/picture-rotation like the featured article and you can fill it up with pictures :-) -- Porter21 (talk) 18:51, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I'd be honored to go on a picture hunt to improve the wiki, but I can't do it until later tonight (school and all that junk)... Techercizer (say hi)(pwnage) 18:55, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
 * No need to hurry :-) I've changed the portal and created the pages - you can find them at Category:Fallout 3 portal, the pages called "Template:Portal:Fallout 3/Picture #". I've filled them all with the Shrapnel picture for now, feel free to replace them at your leisure. -- Porter21 (talk) 19:26, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I've already begun. Fair warning though, I do have a witty sense of humor... Techercizer (say hi)(pwnage) 23:09, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I can tell from your signature. 98.226.85.9 06:51, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

PS3 Save File Woes
I did a backup and restore from one PS3 to another. User 1 can save and load Fallout 3 save files normally, but User 2 has a problem. The file works, it loads up fine and I carry on where I left off BUT it wont let me save. The save option is greyed out on the menu and autosaves dont happen.

Any clues how to fix this?

72.189.89.40 14:47, 3 May 2009 (UTC)Chance

Washington DC?
Do you think the creators of fallout 3 ever looked at a map of the city? I understand that atomic bombs would change what the city and surrounding area would look like, but the game looks nothing like the real world location! Yes i know its a game but if there going to base he game in a real world city then it should at least look like it has some of the same features.

I think that any differences between the FO3 world and the real world can probably be forgiven. Fallout takes place in an alternate reality, so it stands to reason that the cities would have developed differently than they did in the real world. I mean, obviously there wasn't a nuka-cola bottling plant in Washington DC. It's somewhat doubtful that places like Dot's Diner or Radiation King existed either. 64.12.116.68 04:24, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Well we dont know if its an alternate reality, its just the future. That being said there would probably be buildings there that are not there today. Companies would be made things would progress like they do now and days.--Spartanac911 11:34, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
 * We do know that it's an alternat timeline. See: Divergence. It's even stated in the FO3 manual! Ausir(talk) 11:24, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Questions about reasoning for 200 years later
Insert non-formatted text here OK it's a hypothetical but here me out, it may just be me but I have to think that by 200 years in the future society would have been far more reestablished then it is in Fallout 3, especially in the capital of the nation where you would expect more military presence and perhaps some leaders who survived the blast who could reorganize the people, I just thought I get some thoughts from everyone else about why it seems especially compared to the first two fallouts that society has been so slow to recover out in D.C.

A) it's a fucking game B) It's not up to snuff with the other Fallout games, but that's OK because it you really want to start nitpicking shit, the entire Fallout series is built on stupidity. C) SIGN YOUR FUCKING POSTS! 4 GODDAMN "~" IS NOT FUCKING ROCKET SCIENCE!!!! 24.1.34.230 08:48, 19 July 2009 (UTC)    FYI. You're an asshole. That is all. 160.150.65.52 19:00, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

OK yes society would most likely have been rebuilt by this time. But its a game. Person number 2 you need to settle down. We want people to keep coming back to the site posting things and keeping everything up to date.--Spartanac911 11:35, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Correction: it's a badly designed game. Fo2, set 165 years after the war was already in the middle of some major rebuilding effort. http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/fallout/images/thumb/5/5c/Scribe.jpg/15px-Scribe.jpg Tagaziel (call!) 11:58, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, it was my first post, I tend to take games more seriously then I should but it just felt odd to me with the dramatic contrast between the original two and the third in terms of the societies I mean in Fallout Two there was already a fairly well developed government in the NCR, the best Fallout 3 can do is Rivet City, It just seems like there is something missing I just wanted to see if anyone else had a theory about it, or if there was perhaps a good reason for it. --NewWorldEmperor 07:40, 21 July 2009 (UTC)NewWorldEmperor
 * There is no provided explanation, Bethesda simply failed to create a believable world. http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/fallout/images/thumb/5/5c/Scribe.jpg/15px-Scribe.jpg Tagaziel (call!) 09:39, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Tagaziel We all know you don't like fallout 3. I'm not to crazy about the world either, BUT i would prefer fallout 3 over the original style of game play.--Spartanac911 15:49, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

There could be a number of reasons as to why there is no built-up civilization in Fallout 3. For starters, it was hit the hardest by the nukes being the capital of the country, so it makes sense that there are few survivors since I doubt more than a handful of people survived the war outside of the vaults. This is evidenced by the family settlements such as Republic of Dave and that one cannibal place, they were basically one family that survived and have only kept going by inbreeding. There is also the super mutants who probably ran the whole Capital Wasteland before the Brotherhood of Steel showed up so a lot of survivors were killed/turned. The Enclave had also been around doing stuff behind the scenes (they had 2 bases around the Capital Wasteland so they had their own little advanced civilization going on) but nobody knew they were really there until halfway through Fallout 3. Another thing you can't forget is that there is an advanced civilization to the north at the Commonwealth. Many people in the game talk about that place and even go there/have been there, so it's possible that all the smart survivors headed up there and they might actually have some real stuff going on. Now that the Lone Wanderer has made things better though (just like the heroes did in the first 2 games) the area will surely advance and grow into a real civilization. Also, if you want to look at it in a not so canon way, when playing and beating the game you kill about 1000 raiders and other bad guys (more if you are evil and kill good guys also), significantly reducing the remaining human population in the U.S. and on the Earth.--Jam287 11:58, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
 * All your reasons are pretty much invalid. The Supermutants didn't run anything, vide Megaton, Tenpenny, Paradise Falls, the Enclave arrived c.a. 2245 and the Lone Wanderer didn't change anything. It's just bad game design. http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/fallout/images/thumb/5/5c/Scribe.jpg/15px-Scribe.jpg Tagaziel (call!) 12:05, 23 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Super Mutants were an issue before the Brotherhood set up base. D.C. being a major nuke target also helps to explain the poor conditions. Heavy radiation and fallout would've persisted for far longer than on the Core Region, which saw few direct hits (and those few were uninhabitable without heavy protection and plenty of chems). And there are, as mentioned above, references to settlements that have advanced far beyond what the Capitol Wasteland has. Mostly, though, there just seems a lack of any real ability for people to gather together in large groups and actually rebuild anything. Settlements are small, and built around or inside of whatever's at hand that offers immediate protection. The largest civilized populations are in the thirties or forties tops, and are too small to go much beyond that.


 * But beyond that, consider how much of the population has turned out uncivilized. Ghouls, feral and otherwise, are everywhere - again, the massive amounts of radiation and fallout are a major contributing factor here. As for unmutated humanity, massive numbers have turned to raiding. Why rebuild when you can just kill and steal what you want from the people that are actually trying? For the people capable of making the Capitol Wasteland more than what it is, it's a desperate existence. It's not really surprising that they haven't gotten far - they're in the same sort of slump the failing villages in previous games were in, under constant threat from irradiated nature and broken humanity alike.


 * Just calling it bad game design is lazy. You clearly managed to suspend your disbelief for the previous games (which had plenty of their own WTF? moments), why give it up so easily now? 98.226.85.9 07:05, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

You have to understand the amount of information was lost. Lets say America IRL gets hit. A great deal of information is stored on the internet, all of that will likely be lost. A great deal of information will be stored on databanks in important US Government facilities. These are likely very secure, and primarily for weaponry, construction, and aerospace projects, and thus useless to rebuilding civilization. A great deal of important books will be destroyed, and hard drives obliterated. Any books will likely be found in rural areas, or in smaller communities. Then you have to realize that all the real available information is on books. Ask yourself this, "Are you really going to spend time reading when all you have ever known is now gone and dismantled." A tragedy like a nuclear holocaust is going to set us back as we are now at least 1000 years. I think Fallout 3 is quite a jump for only 200 years... And of course, since the government will have the most information on hand post-nuke, we just have to pray it isnt something as horrible as the Enclave. Axier 02:34, September 14, 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I'm going to spend it reading. My survival depends on it, so it's obvious that I will expand my skills by reading everything I get in my hands. To assume that we will be knocked back into 1009 is stupid. I mean, really stupid. We are advanced enough to preserve a lot of technology, repair it and rebuild. A more accurate timeframe would be getting knocked to the 19th century and even then it'd be just a temporary setback. http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/fallout/images/thumb/5/5c/Scribe.jpg/15px-Scribe.jpg Tagaziel (call!) 08:49, September 14, 2009 (UTC)
 * What kind of Society do you think we live in? Very many people are selfish and greedy even in this day of prosperity, and are not above taking what they want from others. It doesn't matter how advanced you are, you're never going to rebuild in as difficult as conditions as DC has. Even with the BOS fighting off the super mutants non stop, they can still be found all over the Capital Wasteland, plus the fact that there are probably more raiders than wastelanders. Add to the fact that there are several individual gangs, such as the Family and Mercenaries, not to mention the Slavers. And, since the Capital Wasteland was hit the hardest by bombs, there are almost no functional computers with which to accomplish the very first step in rebuilding the capital wasteland into a survivable area, which is purifying the water. Depending on the player's actions, the Lone Wanderer can eliminate almost all of these problems. Now, I don't know how this would go down in real life, but this isn't real life, it's a game, and it's close enough to what would happen in real life for me. Also, the entire world getting destroyed isn't a temporary setback, it's the end of the world as we know it, and the start of a new world. Rebuilding is pretty much hundreds of years into the future, based on these limitations. Of course, the California area rebuilt pretty nice, but it wasn't doing so hot at the beginning of Fallout 1. Anyway, sorry if I phrased anything in a way to insult you, and I hope this answered any questions you may have about my opinion. --24.72.49.251 00:32, November 4, 2009 (UTC)

mods
is there anyone out there who could make mods of fallouts 1 and 2 for fallout 3 they were awesome games but i cant find them for sale?--5:33pm 20:45, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * http://www.amazon.com/Fallout-Triology-3-Pack-Compilation-Pc/dp/B001V9PTVE/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1249071119&sr=8-1, $19.99 for three games. TheFourthHouse 20:13, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
 * http://www.amazon.com/Fallout-Triology-3-Pack-Compilation-Pc/dp/B001V9PTVE/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1249071119&sr=8-1, $19.99 for three games. TheFourthHouse 20:13, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Good vs Evil Quest Paths
I have been using the site for about a week now and noticed there is no clear indication on what is the good way or evil way to do the quest. Is there something we can do, such as make the good way all in blue and the evil all red maybe? People wanting to use the site for quest information for a specific path may be mislead. However, there are some quests (some as in few) that tell you if its the good or evil path, but towards the end of the quest. TheFourthHouse 20:08, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I think that every reader should simply assess what is "good" or "evil" himself, without the need of color codes for it. Ausir(talk) 20:20, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
 * The exact definition of "good" and "evil" varies person-to-person. It wholly depends on one's standards of morality. BrenMan 94 19:30, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

==That is all well and good that you have stated the obvious fact of how ones' moral turpitude is directed by their own beliefs but he isn't asking in the abstract, but how the quest is accomplished and whether it is construed as "good" or "evil" by the karma scale on the game. It is rather simple to understand if the actions are good though, usually the evil path lets you profit from other peoples losses, the good way helps them. Kebab In A Can 12:26, 20 October 2009

Three dog and GNR
Have anyone else encountered similar "problem" with me including GNR and Three Dog's news reportings, although I have accomplished my quests and followed the game's storyline. He wont deliver the news as if I haven't done anything? Is this even a problem. I was just wondering during my gaming that he speaks so little about my "accomplishments".