Thrafe

Lilgamefreak: That raises an interesting point actually. I've never played Fallout 2, and never really thought the Enclave in Fallout 3 were that evil at all. Sure, they were ruthless in persuing their own goals, and extremely prejudiced, but so is every major faction in the Fallout 3 world. The Brotherhood of Steel, for example. Maybe I listenened too closely to Enclave Radio, but the only thing that seemed wrong about the Fallout 3 Enclave was their belief that anything was justified for the greater good. Colonel Autumn did decide not to poison the purifier for humanitarian reasons, despite the fact he was a ruthless male without a father in taking it over in the first place. I'm guessing they were much more evil in the previous games?

Let me start off by saying I really liked the Fallout 3 ending. The main reason for that was the difficulty of the choice at the end (regarding the FEV virus). Releasing the virus may well be the only chance for civilisation to return to something like it was (as the main problem, the overwhelming hordes of mutants, is no more). On the other hand, the cleansing would involve the deaths of millions of sentient, innocent people as well. When I played through, I found that choice hard enough even though I had no idea that most humans were considered "mutants". I assumed the only non-evil creatures to die were Ghouls. I'm not a bigot, so the thought of killing every single Ghoul was not a pleasant one. Nevertheless, I released the virus, and was unpleasantly shocked when I discovered my otherwise virtuous character was responsible for the deaths of almost everything in the Capital Wasteland. If you (you as you are now, in front of your keyboard, not your character) were faced with that kind of choice, what would you do?