RandianHero Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 With the way everything looks, how fresh the destruction appears, the fact that the majority of nuclear contamination dissipates after 35 years (i.e. Chernobyl), and just the overall tone of the setting, I think Fallout 3's timeline should be scaled back by about 150 years. Make it no more than 50 years after the bombs. Alter the storyline for the Enclave, making them the original faction instead of a splinter of the Poseidon Oil Rig Enclave from Fallout 2. I'd much rather have the game as an awesome prequel than a sequel with massive plot holes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattinator Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 With the way everything looks, how fresh the destruction appears, the fact that the majority of nuclear contamination dissipates after 35 years (i.e. Chernobyl), and just the overall tone of the setting, I think Fallout 3's timeline should be scaled back by about 150 years. Make it no more than 50 years after the bombs. Alter the storyline for the Enclave, making them the original faction instead of a splinter of the Poseidon Oil Rig Enclave from Fallout 2. I'd much rather have the game as an awesome prequel than a sequel with massive plot holes. okay...i may be new to these forums but i'm pretty sure this isn't the place to post this...and you kinda forgot that throughout the game you get the oppurtunity to detonate a giant nuke in the middle of a city, shoot down a giant mutated freak with a mini-nuke launcher, and find mini-nukes like that in various locations. Just because it's 200 years later doesn't mean the nuking stopped :unsure: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandianHero Posted January 16, 2009 Author Share Posted January 16, 2009 You're right -- you are new to these forums. This is a modification request. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feltorn Von Dentai Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 Actually, a better idea would be; keep the story the same but reduce a bit of radiation here and there and add lots of overgrowth and stuff, like in the "greenerworld" mod exept vines crawling their way through old, delapidated ruins and so on... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattinator Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 You're right -- you are new to these forums. This is a modification request. sooo...you're requesting some ingame text editing, and some dialogue removal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandianHero Posted January 17, 2009 Author Share Posted January 17, 2009 Pretty much. I'd do it myself, but I'm busy with my Wasteland Gigolo mod. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ossa000 Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 I just think that some places should be cleaner. People dont like to live in dirty places, so, after 200 years, places like Rivet City should be cleaner, not some dirty full of rubish boat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyro Paul Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 With the way everything looks, how fresh the destruction appears, the fact that the majority of nuclear contamination dissipates after 35 years (i.e. Chernobyl), and just the overall tone of the setting, I think Fallout 3's timeline should be scaled back by about 150 years. Make it no more than 50 years after the bombs. Alter the storyline for the Enclave, making them the original faction instead of a splinter of the Poseidon Oil Rig Enclave from Fallout 2. I'd much rather have the game as an awesome prequel than a sequel with massive plot holes. The fact of the matter is, Radioactive contimination created from multipule nuclear sources do not dissipate for over thousands of years, that is untill the radioactive agent reaches its half life. Yes, atmosphearic radiation dissipates after only 20-50 years, however radioactive hot spots will still exist for thousands of years after a contimnation event if proper cleansing does not take place. even in Chernobyl, there are large swaths of radioactive areas which can kill a man in seconds if he is exposed to it unprotected and everything in chernobyl is still contaminated and irradiated. flora, water, debris, and wildlife in a once contaimnated area will remain contaminated for several hundred years. Water will retain its radioactivity almost indefinatly (or untill the radioactive elements become inert) unless if properly purified. and really, the way the place looks could acctually be quiet accurate, if you base it on current thermonuclear MAD theories. having several nuclear strikes on/near the capital would effectively burn a temporary hole in the ozone layer which will bake the ground bathing it it with solar radiation. most all plant life would be cooked off turning areas which where once green lush land into barren desert wasteland for over 300 years. ultimatly, we don't know what would happen when we hit a place with multipule nukes, nor what it would look like several hundred years down the line... no such event has happened to give us an idea. Chyernobl and 3 mile island only went critical and bathed the surrounding area with radiation... it didn't go nuclear and create a thermonuclear detonation. the only thing that doesn't make sense scientific wise is the Ghouls and mutant creatures. Radiation makes you dead... not bestow weird mutations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyro Paul Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 I just think that some places should be cleaner. People dont like to live in dirty places, so, after 200 years, places like Rivet City should be cleaner, not some dirty full of rubish boat. well, that is arguableif you are living day to day trying to stay alive, then your sense to be 'clean' fades considerably. Look at third world countries... they are not exactly 'clean' or 'tidy'. granted, places like Megaton, afreu, and other wastelander settlements should look better as individuals whom decide to make camp would create more perminent structures and improve upon the old. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Try2bcool Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 I just think that some places should be cleaner. People dont like to live in dirty places, so, after 200 years, places like Rivet City should be cleaner, not some dirty full of rubish boat. well, that is arguableif you are living day to day trying to stay alive, then your sense to be 'clean' fades considerably. Look at third world countries... they are not exactly 'clean' or 'tidy'. granted, places like Megaton, afreu, and other wastelander settlements should look better as individuals whom decide to make camp would create more perminent structures and improve upon the old. I'm sorry, but anywhere there is a civilized woman living...there is going to be a clean toilet! Anyway, to shove this back on topic, I was thinking the same thing, it shouldn't be too hard to create a mod that would swap the texture of some of the nasty toilets and bath tubs in certain locations with the clean ones like you find at Tenpenny Tower...most of the work is done already. I've seriously got to sit down and try to learn GECK...I could handle small requests like this (ones that don't require any art skills) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.