Forum:Emmersiveness stories?

Have you ever had a moment of "Woah"? Share your story here!

Once when I was first starting the game, I was wandering off into the wasteland. I had just gotten a sniper rifle, and was looking through that pretty sight every mountain I found. I climbed one particularly tall one, just to see a tower. One of those radio towers.

I wandered around it, just to find a sewer pipe that i could enter. So i did. I walked inside, and noticed it's emptiness. I Wandered around, and found a switch. Upon hitting it, a wall arose, reveiling two dead bodies, and a ham radio. The thought to hide two spies there was ingenious. It really added a great history to the games.

Emmersiveness is not a word. Immersiveness? The actual word should be immersive. LVTDUDE 23:42, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Fallout is one, big moment of Woah. Bethesda can't even dream to match the feeling of descending into the depths of the ruined Vault 15, exploring the horridly irradiated Glow, infiltrating the Mariposa Military Base or the LA Vault. Facing the Master was one of the greatest confrontations of all time, up there with Darth Traya from KOTOR2 and the Transcendent One from Planescape:Torment. That Furry Bastard 07:38, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * That's your opinion.--71.162.18.160 11:20, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * While it's an objective fact that Fallout 3 is far cry from its predecessors, especially in terms of quality. That Furry Bastard 12:16, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Again the quality of something is an opinion. anyway storming the purifier and destroying raven rock were the best parts in the game in my opinion.
 * It's not. Objectively (comparing the amount of quests and their depth, options available to the player, versatility of the system) Fo3 is far more primitive. That Furry Bastard 18:19, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

ThatFurryBastard, no offense, but could you please cut a little down on the whining? OK, I'll roll with you, Fo3 is not nearly as immersive and well-written as Fallout and Fallout 2. However, this is the Fallout 3 General Discussion Forum. Filled with posts from people who actually thinks Fo3 is so good that they are using time to communicate with others who also think Fo3 is great.

I have come to think of the different Fallout games as cakes: Fallout is a rich chocolate cake layered with awesome. Fallout 2 is the same cake, but with more immersiveness topping. Fo:BOS is a dry wafer, and Fallout 3... well, it's something new, like a FPS/TPS pie with a filling consisting of mixed RPG and action, embedded in a crust of graphics and psychics engines from yesteryear. (Weirdly, I got hungry while writing this)

The Fallout games have now been developed so differently that you can not expect every one of them to have the same qualities, nor that every one of them should be equally good. Just because it is the same franchise, doesn't mean that all the games are kick-ass, two-faced developers or not (Damn you Bethesda, I want the Pitt for PS3! NOW!).

I guess all I am saying is: If you don't have anything good to say about it, don't say it, since some people actually think it is great in it's own way. And you are at their part of the forum.

PS: KOTOR 2 is awesome-o-tastic.

AngryNorwegianDude 19:24, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, KOTOR 2 was good with imerssion. The storyline was a bit messed up though. -Xandus the Legend
 * The storyline made perfect sense, once you ignored the subtitle. And remember that this is PS:T IN SPACE, not a Bioware game. As for the Fo3 part, I'm incredibly bitter, because it's a waste - a great franchise dies. That Furry Bastard 21:09, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

well if you're that disapointed the're still working on the MMORPG i'd personally like them to do fallout 4 or something but if they do it right it could work maybe.

Video:Fallout movie trailer (Fake)|thumb|300px|right|Mmm.....immersive fake trailer...

Hah! I'd go see that movie! That was pretty cool. LVTDUDE 01:31, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

I hate leave a comment that is mostly unrelated to the subject, but Furry Bastard the word you're looking for is Subjective not Objective, because it relates to only your own experiences with the game. If you think FO3 a waste of time you are being a hypocrite by spending more of your time talking about it on a forum dedicated to it and it's fans. As for an immersion story, I remember one time I was going up a hill after a red mark on my compass and I had no idea what it was. As soon as I got to the top the Deathclaw was in my face and sending me flying. It was my first time seeing one in FO3 and I almost wet myself. lol Mr.goodtrips 16:12, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Nope, it's objective. Comparing how quests are structured, how they unfold and how they react to the player, how the dialogue is written, how the system is balanced all are objective methods of comparing. That Furry Bastard 13:02, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok I can't argue with that, those are objective. however you are only measuring against other Fallout games and saying FO3 sucks. That's pretty subjective. That's like measuring the Newest Indiana Jones movie against only the old ones. using that criteria sure it sucks, but when compared to other movies in general it was pretty good. just not quite up to par with it's predecessors. The same is true of FO3.... only substitute "Movies" with "Games" Mr.goodtrips 16:24, 21 April 2009 (UTC)