Fallout 3 - Crafting an Narrative Experience

Damien Lawardorn of Only Sp posted a new four part article this month where he talks about how you can craft your own Narrative experience in Fallout 3.

Even as I stood blinking dumbly, waiting for my eyes to adjust to a light brighter than any I had ever seen, I heard the Vault door slam shut behind me. That place had been my home for nineteen long years, and now my best friend had cast me into exile. I could have broken down and cried for the future I’d lost when I shot a hole through the back of The Overseer’s head, but I wasn’t thinking of that at the time. Nor was I thinking of how I’d left my sweetheart behind that cold steel door, most like to never see her again. I wasn’t thinking of what I’d lost and left behind. All I was thinking of was that I had to find my father. He’d left the Vault, and left me to suffer the consequences, and I wanted answers, no matter how far I had to search to find them.

Click to expand...

The other three parts of the article can be read here , here, and here.


More information.

Man, I really wish they'd make Fallout 4.

Fallout 3 is one of those rare games that grabbed me and never let go. I played it obsessively for about 70 hours straight. Then once all the DLC was out I played another 40 hours straight to finish absolutely everything.

I just think it is interesting how some games can grab the player while other games, even great games, don't have that "can't stop playing" effect. It is an interesting question to ponder, and I still don't have an answer.

F3 has one of the worst main game story i ever played, nuff said

Fallout three was a great game, imo. Certainly not a true RPG, but it captured the DC area like no other game ever has, and having lived there for fifteen years, I really enjoyed playing in the open environment. I still fire it up on occasion.

The main storyline wasn't anything to write home about, but the game world was incredible. Exploring the Capital Wasteland was one of the most immersive experiences I had in any game I've played over the last decade.

Yes, the writing and dialogue were mostly awful, but I'll take great exploration over dialogue every time.

JDR13 said:

The main storyline wasn't anything to write home about, but the game world was incredible. Exploring the Capital Wasteland was one of the most immersive experiences I had in any game I've played over the last decade.

Yes, the writing and dialogue were mostly awful, but I'll take great exploration over dialogue every time.

Click to expand...

So true. It has occurred to me that exploration beats story in the real world too. I think of my last vacation. I went to the tropics, but the story of my trip was pretty basic. However, the exploration of the trip was fantastic. So although I didn't learn much or engage in any deep philosophy, the vacation was fantastic.

And the obvious if somewhat deep truth is good exploration is its own story. Hence Fallout 3's story wasn't about the "main" story. Or to put it another way, when 90% of your time is spent exploring, that mathematically is the true "main" story.

Fallout 3 truly was Oblivion with guns in that it grew incredibly dull, repetitive, and tedious the longer you played. It had a great atmosphere, but with none of the provocative story that brought me back to New Vegas again and again.

Roleplaying is all well and good, but the developers need to provide some semblance of structure rather than, say, plopping down a couple Ma & Pa cannibal families next to a raider-inhabited town… or contriving to insert vampires into the game…. or placing Cthulian ruins in the middle of nowhere. The game has no structure at all to it - it is simply dozens and dozens of disparate locations with little to do with one another.

If I had any interest in making the story up as I went along (which I do not), I would definitely opt for a game that didn't take every opportunity to hit you over the head with WTF moments such as these.

Just not my cup of tea. Unlike some others here I need an interesting story to keep me invested. Exploration does almost nothing for me so FO 3, like most Bethesda games just fails to capture my attention. Maybe one of these days I'll be able to summon the willpower to finishing forcing myself through the game, but it sure won't be anytime soon.

Anybody who says Fallout 3 is a bad game or not a true RPG either never played a pen& paper RPG, or else played them all as D&D dungeon crawling or Shadowrun hit & run kind of missions…
I will not simplify things by using the old (and much hated) expression "roll playing not role playing", because this is a cRPG, not an RPG forum, so, the same rules do not apply. Let's just say that both styles are RPG and, just because old school computer RPGs went for the tactical turn-based combat, complex mechanics, that almost show you the dice rolling, party management and similar stuff, instead on going for the immersion and exploration, that does not mean that one style is better than the other.
And about the main story. Well, I bet most people here love Fallout, the first. The main story is about scarcity of pottable water in the Fallout world, Fallout 3 is about the same thing. Dialogues are not worse than the first one, weird characters and weird situations abound in both games, but one is loved, the other is hated. Why? In my opinion, the paragraph above explains it all. Bethesda changed an old school game, obsessed with game mechanics and tactical combat, into an exploration/ immersion game, that substitutes that with a type of combat that resembles an FPS, but just resembles (the VATS system cleverly turns it into something that certainly is not an FPS). And people hated them for doing just that, and not keeping with was supposed to be 3rd Fallout. I am quite sure that everybody will disagree with this, but that does not mean I'm wrong.
This said, I also think New Vegas has a better main story and is a better game in general. Although in particular there are many things much more interesting in Fallout 3 (the exploration bit is much more varied, for example). But they are both great games for every role player that doesn't give a damn about rolling dice, consulting charts, managing health potions, planning sieges and memorizing creatures stats…

I don't disagree with you MigRib as I still play both Fallout 3 and NV every year. I also have to say I enjoy playing Skyrim despite all the negative comments that get posted.

Couchpotato said:

I don't disagree with you MigRib as I still play both Fallout 3 and NV every year. I also have to say I enjoy playing Skyrim despite all the negative comments that get posted.

Click to expand...

Well, that's good to know. I also like Skyrim, but as I'm not really a fantasy fan, I just played it once (a lot, but just once). And speaking of the "devil", I never found it to be a buggy game. Neither Fallouts 3 nor NV, on the contrary of the popular opinion that they crash to desktop every five minutes and have so many bugs that you will grow hair on your palms (hmm, I might be mistaken about what suposedly causes that last thing...)

Well I used to have crash to desktop problems but I found a fix for them. Anyway I can't really blame Bethesda as it has more to do with the Gamebryo engine.

Though I never had a problem with the updated Creation engine in Skyrim except for the ram limitation they fixed in a patch. A mod helped me overcome that problem.

Still I wonder if Fallout 4 or the next Elder Scroll game will use the creation engine?

Couchpotato said:

Still I wonder if Fallout 4 or the next Elder Scroll game will use the creation engine?

Click to expand...

My understanding of what's "under the hood" is pretty much null, but I think that would be a good thing. Had no problems with Skyrim at all (didn't use much mods, though) and, even if it the game does not have the best looking graphics when looking close, the landscape is still beautiful.

Tbh, I think Obsidian made the WAY better Fallout with "New Vegas". The New Vegas story and world was coherent - in the twisted Fallout-way - and it all made sense. F3 by Bethesda was kinda weird. But maybe it was the first try. I really wish Obsidian got the chance to make a Fallout 4. Bethesda is busy with Elder Scrolls Argonia as we know, so give the damn game to Obsidian already!

Exactly.
Bethesda is currently obsessed with their MMO, and it's okay, every company has CEO who gets some mental disorder and then tries to compete with Blizzard ignoring singleplayer games market.

I'm sure FO:NV earned them millions. So why not outsource again, why not paying Obsidian to develop another if own staff is occupied with some MMO?
Sadly FO4 is not the only thing Bethesda refuses to announce. They deny existence of Dishonored 2 too.

I was so sick of running through the subway to get everywhere in FO3 it became a grind, and then the end of the story was pretty lame... New Vegas, on the other hand, snatched me hook, line & sinker.

I agree the Metro system of travel in FO3 was annoying at times. On the other hand, Ghoul hunting there was fun. Loved to sneak 'n snipe 'em.
What I didn't like in FO:NV was the damage system/calculation. While VATS on FO3 was a bit over-powered, combat damage in FO:NV was under-powered, IMO. I just didn't like it. Also preferred the world in FO3, too.

I loved every minute of Fallout 3. It's a game I will replay in the future and it will always stick with me.

I did kind of get annoyed at the subway system at times. It had a nice atmosphere, but figuring out where to go was insane! If it was a little easier to navigate it would have been fine.

Overall, it's an all-time classic game, in my opinion.

I liked Fallout 3. It went beyond my expectations. But I never felt the personal narrative that accompanies a good open world game. And that ending made no sense. And it always bothered me that a city was built around an unexploded Nuke. So I played the game and had fun.

However, Fallout Vegas blew me away and made me a guaranteed return customer for the next game in the franchise. Interestingly. Fallout New Vegas is still in the top 40 of games played on Steam.