Am I crazy or am I sorta of right? : Fallout: New Vegas

» Sun Mar 06, 2011 5:22 pm

Fallout 1 and 2 had lots of living plants and sand all around. :mellow:
If anything Fallout 3 strayed from the formula.

Oh and post-apocalypse.
It doesn't have to have destroyed buildings and streets every 100 meters.
It's all about the setting and story and how they take place.
Caesars Legion for example, could only have been created if the world was lawless and tribal.

My thoughts exactly.

» Sun Mar 06, 2011 8:46 am

NV isn't really supposed to give you the post apocalyptic feel, it was never hit by bombs

» Sun Mar 06, 2011 1:10 pm

...show the post apocalyptic world in the sense that in order to have any society in you have to have the basic needs met. Second it has the gangs that are trying to control it's inhabitants. Lastly it is showing the ugly side of that very world. On top of that you have the mutants from ???.

Well, it's closer to the FO1/2 worlds, but to me, it seems more like a third world situation rather than a PA one. You have a number of strong competing organizations out to control resources, and you have a general lawlessness overlying a gritty existence of most folks just trying to get by,

I prefer the FO3 world, where people are living in ruins and being overrun by things that want to kill them. I like the desperation of the FO3 world, where people are just trying to find food and water. I think the F:NV world is too socialized, too organized, and too politicized. The politics is almost too big, too powerful, for an individual to have much impact.

» Sun Mar 06, 2011 1:22 pm

The Road inspired Fallout 3 aspect of OH GOD, EVERYTHING'S TRYING TO MURDER AND EAT ME OH GOD OH GOD, isn't really what we need to think of as the post-apocalypse. Maybe if you're doing a horror genre work, but I don't recall Fallout leaning that way too much.

I'm replaying Fallout 3 and seeing all these gore bags, cut up bodies in raider camps, and the like just make me feel like it's trying too hard to be horrifying. The post apocalypse doesn't have to be that way.

» Sun Mar 06, 2011 5:10 pm

The Road inspired Fallout 3 aspect of OH GOD, EVERYTHING'S TRYING TO MURDER AND EAT ME OH GOD OH GOD, isn't really what we need to think of as the post-apocalypse. Maybe if you're doing a horror genre work, but I don't recall Fallout leaning that way too much.

I'm replaying Fallout 3 and seeing all these gore bags, cut up bodies in raider camps, and the like just make me feel like it's trying too hard to be horrifying. The post apocalypse doesn't have to be that way.

I never got why EVERY raider camp had cut up people in it. I mean, sure a few would be into stuff like that, but realistic raiders would be setup more like the kahns.

» Sun Mar 06, 2011 7:24 am

I always thought it was such a pity they did so little with radiation. Dying from radation has never happened to me nor was it a threat. With the exception of a certain vault I entered while I only had a few radaways.

I know the fallout would have decayed ALOT, but it still just like

. I guess I should play stalker if I wanted real radiation danger.

1. This area wasn't directly hit

2. Ever been to Camp Searchlight?

» Sun Mar 06, 2011 8:32 am

I think it's a pretty good representation of what things might be like 200+ years after the war considering that Vegas wasn't directly hit. It doesn't give off that stereotypical post-apoc vibe, but I'm 100% cool with that. The setting is the setting...I wouldn't like to see post-apoc stereotypes/cliches shoehorned into it just to make it feel more like a Mad Max film.

:shrug:

» Sun Mar 06, 2011 8:03 pm

I somewhat agree that it strays a little from the apocolyptic feel, but I like the hint that the real apocolyptic damage is in the distant cities and towns, places like the mojave have hardy creature and plant life in reality.

» Sun Mar 06, 2011 4:26 pm

Well, it's closer to the FO1/2 worlds, but to me, it seems more like a third world situation rather than a PA one. You have a number of strong competing organizations out to control resources, and you have a general lawlessness overlying a gritty existence of most folks just trying to get by,

I prefer the FO3 world, where people are living in ruins and being overrun by things that want to kill them. I like the desperation of the FO3 world, where people are just trying to find food and water. I think the F:NV world is too socialized, too organized, and too politicized. The politics is almost too big, too powerful, for an individual to have much impact.

I can agree with that.

» Sun Mar 06, 2011 1:50 pm

FO1 and 2 took place in California, which is pretty much a desert. Southern and Central California only receive about 15 inches of rainfall per year, that's only 5 more than the Mojave.

As for radiation, there wasn't much of that in FO1 and 2 either. You had the Glow in FO1 and the Toxic Cave in FO2. Radiation isn't magic. There has to radioactive material around to emit the radiation and they tend to get buried by natural phenomenons. Only places with a massive concentration of radioactive elements would be a problem.