Fallout 3 ending...

[grumbler]

It's been said before, but is there really a reason for them to seal the airlock in the final scene? I mean, if you or Setinel Lyons goes into the purifier control room without the door closing, it should only take like a second to type in a three-digit number, giving them plenty of remaining time to run out of the room before receiving critical radiation levels (Should've thought of doing that Bethesda) :rolleyes:

Yes, there really is a reason to seal the PC in: because the ending was going to require the PC's death. Lyons and the other companions were added later.

 

I think people are way over-analyzing the reasons for the PC to die at the end. BethSoft did this because that was "how the Fallout universe did things" (based on a misunderstanding of the way the Fallout universe actually worked).

 

Lots of things in the first two Fallout games were "not logical." That's okay. Pure logic isn't necessary for the universe to hang together. What is irritating about this ending isn't that the PC dies (I can accept that the PC dies at the end of the main quest, even if it based on a misconception of "how Fallout games end"), but that the decision to add all of the other companions didn't force a simple game change (they all wait outside to "hold the rest of the Enclave off" or something) that was clearly necessary once they made that design decision. Good designers always look at the impact of changes made in complex systems. BethSoft failed a basic test of good designing.

 

Okay, quick question, who is going to stay around and look after the purifier? Certainly not any of your companions, and I'd doubt Lyons would either. Who has experience in maintaining it by at least starting it up in "Waters of Life"? Certainly not Lyons or any of your companions (except maybe RL-3, but he wouldn't stick around and Dr. Li is just a plain old scientist who couldn't defend herself) :P

Obviously, Dr Li and her team, having helped build the thing, are in a much better position than the PC to keep it going.

 

Finally, I think the final battlescene with Liberty Prime would've been better if it fought an Enclave-controlled mega-robot, while you took out ground squads of Enclave soldiers, smaller robots, and officers.

I actually disagree. Combat isn't all that interesting by that point in the game. Having to take out more than the dozen or so Enclave types I had to take out in this version was boring enough. More wouldn't have added anything.

[jaosals42]

What is irritating about this ending isn't that the PC dies (I can accept that the PC dies at the end of the main quest, even if it based on a misconception of "how Fallout games end"), but that the decision to add all of the other companions didn't force a simple game change (they all wait outside to "hold the rest of the Enclave off" or something) that was clearly necessary once they made that design decision. Good designers always look at the impact of changes made in complex systems. BethSoft failed a basic test of good designing.

 

So then, there's another mistake. They left all those guys hanging around outside when they could've joined up with you and Lyons into the purifier. What were they doing out there? Striking up a conversation?

 

Obviously, Dr Li and her team, having helped build the thing, are in a much better position than the PC to keep it going.

 

So, what happens if all of Dr. Li's team dies during "The Waters of Life?" Is she going to run the purifier by herself? Besides, she's much older than the player. If she were to live another thirty years and still be healthy enough to maintain it, I'd be surprised.

 

Finally, what's your opinion about having to buy a DLC on Windows Live to "change" the ending that actually should've been an optional ending in the first place? I don't mind paying to expand on the main quest, but I do mind not having such an ending in the vanilla game (Thank god for the game expanding mods).

 

You know what REALLY pissed me off? Before I went in I put on rad-x and an advanced rad suit, I was getting like 5 rads a second and died before I even had advanced radiation poisoning (200). I was like- "I could have walked out, noticed I had the code wrong, gone back to fix it, run around a few times, watch it start up, wave hi to fawks, then click enter and leave before I hit 800."

 

Yes, there really is a reason to seal the PC in: because the ending was going to require the PC's death. Lyons and the other companions were added later.

 

Shoot, when I took my character into the purifier, he was taking like only twenty rads a second, and that was without any protection whatsoever. He could've had enough time to type in that code and have Lyons recycle the airlock again without dying, but they didn't make that in an option in the "Final" version of the game :pinch: .

[grumbler]

So then, there's another mistake. They left all those guys hanging around outside when they could've joined up with you and Lyons into the purifier. What were they doing out there? Striking up a conversation?

This isn't a mistake, because they don't do this. As my post stated, BethSoft could easily have had the companions stay outside to battle any Enclave reinforcements. It would make perfect sense.

 

So, what happens if all of Dr. Li's team dies during "The Waters of Life?" Is she going to run the purifier by herself? Besides, she's much older than the player. If she were to live another thirty years and still be healthy enough to maintain it, I'd be surprised.

All of Dr. Li's team can't die in the "Waters of Life" quest - she is essential. Snce the PC hasn't had anything to do with the creation of Project Purity and has no idea how it works, PC survival is immaterial to the maintenance of the project. Dr. Li would just have to train her successor, as presumably her predecessor trained her.

 

Finally, what's your opinion about having to buy a DLC on Windows Live to "change" the ending that actually should've been an optional ending in the first place? I don't mind paying to expand on the main quest, but I do mind not having such an ending in the vanilla game (Thank god for the game expanding mods).

I don't like the idea of "changing the ending" at all. I think DLC should take place before the end of the main quest. If BethSoft does change what I already know happened, I will be very disappointed. Given that stance, I don't have a problem with DLC that allows you to use one of the non-dying options presented in the first place (because PC death is "an optional ending in the first place"), but a big problem if the PC starts PP and does not die.

 

Of course, FO2 had a "canon" ending to FO that applied no matter what the PC actually did in FO, so I could see BethSoft misinterpreting this to 'allow" a "canon ending" to the existing FO3 ending as "the way Fallout does things."

 

Shoot, when I took my character into the purifier, he was taking like only twenty rads a second, and that was without any protection whatsoever. He could've had enough time to type in that code and have Lyons recycle the airlock again without dying, but they didn't make that in an option in the "Final" version of the game :pinch:

Lots and lots of assumptions here. You can believe that if you want, but the game doesn't support PC survival if the PC decides to activate the project, so all you are doing is arguing that your assumptions trump game "facts," and that is a tough row to hoe.

[enkephalin07]

Playing post-game doesn't really have to make sense, in Fallout2 it was really all for non-canonical absurdity with absolutely no consequence. The actual story was assumed to have ended. In fact they basically handed you massive cheats and said, "Have a blast with it! You, the purchaser of this game, may choose to have fun as long as you like and end the game when you want it to end! So go get your end game grats, character encores, and kill anyone you wished you could've before!"

 

The ending was incredibly weak mostly because the story line was far too short, and the final chapter just didn't have a climactic feel. So when the game ended it caught players off-guard with its abruptness, and because the epilogue narration was so short and unsatisfying that you couldn't help feeling ripped-off.

 

More and more since Morrowind's strong modding community Bethesda has gotten sloppier, cranked out games with less and less content, and relied on the amateurs to create the value in it's games that it used to author itself. Rip off.

[grumbler]

More and more since Morrowind's strong modding community Bethesda has gotten sloppier, cranked out games with less and less content, and relied on the amateurs to create the value in it's games that it used to author itself. Rip off.

Really? More and more meaning all of what games, exactly. Insofar as I know, Oblivion and Fallout 3 are the only post-Morrowind games released, and Fallout can hardly be said to be sloppier than Oblivion (other than in texture placement, which is at least somewhat understandable as there are about 100x as many textures places in Fallout 3).

 

I think that the explanation for the less-"deep" world of Oblivion and FO3 versus Morrowind has to do with the added expense of improving the visuals and sound, and with the decision to make the games appeal to a broader set of customers. There are only so many man-hours a developer can spend on a project, and if each task is more costly in man-hours to complete, fewer tasks can be undertaken. It is true that there are more people working on the games now, but not necessarily in line with the increased workload. I think people who attribute to malice (e.g. "Rip off") what can be explained by other factors just make themselves look petulant, especially when their argument is invalid for the vast majority of Fallout sales (which were on consoles).

[enkephalin07]

I meant Oblivion and Fallout3 by 'more and more'. Oblivion had much less story, content, interactivity, and Fallout3 has even less. Most of your visual improvement has come from rendering engine tweaks, and not from better quality models or textures. Most of your audio improvement has come from generating (or acquiring) a new sound set, and hiring celebrity voice actors who have far fewer lines. Why did they bother to hype getting Ron Perlman when he hardly had a role here?

 

Where they really saved their money is on the actual world development and character permutations, and it shows starkly in comparison to Morrowind, which was at least as expansive as the early Fallouts. And game mechanics, a lot of the dumbed down and FPS choices seem to be simply omissions. This is where they skimped on the man-hours, when that could have been achieved during voice production and engineering an in-house engine they already own.

 

Eye candy and ear candy isn't enough to make up for the shallowness of this, yet they still charge you the same for a box of air.

[grumbler]

I would argue that Fallout 3 has a lot more real interactivity and depth than Oblivion, and certainly no more "celebrity voice actors" or fewer lines of dialogue. To argue that Oblivion doesn't have better quality models and textures than Morrowind is laughable!

 

I would note that the Fallout series had Richard Dean Anderson and Michael Dorn, so it isn't like "celebrities" are something new to the series.

 

I think that the less-extensive world of Oblivion and Fallout 3, compared to Morrowind or Fallout and fallout 2, is due to exactly what I said: such world development is more expensive in a 3D game engine with lipsynched characters and high-quality sound. I would note that similar games (like, say, The Witcher) suffer from exactly the same problem.

 

Again, to attribute the less-extensive world to malice when other factors easily explain it sounds merely petulant to me. If you don't like it, then don't play it. Just don't pretend that the reason you don't like it is because BethSoft set out to "rip you off." I was rather disappointed by some of the shortcuts myself (and somewhat appalled at the ending) but I can understand that these were due to the fact that there was a set budget and some things had to give. Overall, though, I find it a fun game with some really-well-thought-out quests, dialogue, and features, and I look forward to what this will be like with some mods. If this is what you call a "box of air" then I look forward to more boxes of air from BethSoft. :)

[Gallongo]

I hated that Ending ...

I mean the game was great even the storyline kept me going on with it but when i ended the game it was like ... lol stupid game...

I expexted something great like a sequel to the story i didn't even think that this would be the end...

[DigitalEternal]

The ending was crap, end of story. Anyone that buys the 'we added folowers in later and couldnt go back and change the ending' bs needs to get off the glue, it would have been nothing to go back and change the ending, would have taken them all of an hour or two to do.

 

I absolutly hate playing games where your character dies at the end, makes the whole gameplay an utter waste of time, just like s.t.a.l.k.e.r, all that work to get to the end and be crushed by a building, what a load of crap.

[WrathOfDeadguy]

Why did they bother to hype getting Ron Perlman when he hardly had a role here?

 

There's an easy answer to that- he voiced the narrator in both original games. An awful lot of Fallout fans would've been up in arms if he hadn't been hired to do the cutscenes, because that's how rabid fandom works.

 

I don't mind player-death endings, as long as the player's death (or ambiguous fate, which I prefer) is well handled. If it feels contrived, it doesn't work. I didn't have a problem with Fo3's ending the first time through because Fawkes had literally died on the Memorial's front steps so I didn't run into that particular plot hole. Because of that, it didn't register and I happily became a human glowstick despite the dozens of radaways and rad-x's I'd squirreled away by then; I got carried away by the mood and forgot I was even carrying them. I noticed it the next time around, though, because by then I'd made the connection between "Colonel- is it Colonel?" and "Colonel Autumn" and Fawkes hadn't died.

 

The radiation should not have triggered the normal Geiger counter. It should have either not displayed one at all or triggered a "special" one that just flashed *DANGER DANGER DANGER* or jumped quickly to 1000 and given the player a temporary invulnerability (perhaps with a crippled leg/crippled head effect thrown in for dramatic effect). Being able to look at your counter and see that you're not taking a lethal dose kinda kills the mood.