Editor, DLC Coming To Fallout 3

Bethesda has announced that an editor for the Windows version of Fallout 3 will be coming in December. They also said the first additional downloadable content for the Windows and XBox 360 versions will follow in January. MTV's Multiplayer blog got a few more details from Bethesda's Pete Hines, who said additions to Fallout 3 will resemble the Oblivion expansion pack Knights of the Nine in size and scope. MTV then brought up the question of how early publishers should provide DLC, pointing to Fallout 3 and Fable II as examples of games for which the expansions were planned to go live only a few months after launch.

Comments

It's shocking

[Dr. Hellno]

that the fallout 3 expansion will be similar in size and scope to the oblivion expansion! It seems obvious to me that in between Oblivion and Fallout 3 they jettisoned their old design paradigm and followed a radical new direction! This is so totally unexpected!

Srsly though, I bought fallout 3 a while back and rolled a (sort of) melee character. So I basically got "oblivion with guns" without the guns.

There are some quality artists at Bethesda. Beyond that, I have absolutely nothing good to say about them. Writing? fucked. Combat? fucked. Quests? oh boy. Character progression? there isn't any, thanks to that ridiculously stupid difficulty scaling. In fact, I propose a trade. How about you, Bethesda, get to keep your DLC, and in exchange you stay the fuck away from decent, god-fearing franchises like Fallout. Thanks guys.

Re:It's shocking

[BenevolentP]

There is no very limited Level scaling in FO3; All creatures have a certain level range that scales with the player. But if you progress a few levels, you will one-shot every raider or mole-rat that gave you serious headaches before. And previous mole-rat teritory will not suddenly be infested with deathclaws or something.

FO3 isnt really great as a melee character, i give you that.

The combat is the best ive ever experienced in any not-strictly-turnbased game. Ever. The VATS isnt optional, youll die a lot if you dont use it.

I loved Fallout 1 & 2 and i absolutely love FO 3. The sheer amount of places, quests - i finished it after 85 hours and have visited about 70% of the places (judging by the map).

The writing isnt as good / funny as in FO1/2, but thats the only, minor fault i can find with it.

Re:It's shocking

[Jellybob]

FO3 isnt really great as a melee character, i give you that.

And why would anyone expect it to be? It's set in a world where the majority of people are packing guns, lasers, and rocket launchers. I can't imagine Iraq is much fun if you decide the only way you're going to go into combat is by hitting people in the face either.

Re:It's shocking

[sammyF70]

Not too sure which Fallout3 it was you bought "a while back". The game by Bethesda has been out for slightly less than a month, so either you fell through a time warp, you are aging superfast, or you have a very low attention span.

So far (with something like 30 hours of gameplay on a single character and only halfway through the main quest), I didn't think the writing was fucked at all. Most quests I found offer many different possible paths, some of which aren't obvious at first, and the dialogues have been consistently very good and well performed considering the aforementioned freedom and the fact that there is an incredible amount of spoken text in there.

Fucked combat? It wasn't through time you fell through, it was from an alternative universe . Combat in FO3 is stellar ... for what it is trying to be, namely a Roleplaying Game. It is not a FPS, never was intended to be (nor were the previous Fallout instances). You are supposed to use VATS in most circumstances. The only ones I can think of where you don't use VATS are

• very easy foes (radroaches after you reached a certain level, for example)
• whenever you don't have any action points left but don't want/can't wait. In that case, and here I might be mistaken, your luck (the game stat) plays a bigger role in whether you'll hit or not than during VATS events where your skills are more important.

If you play like it's an FPS (or in your case as melee, as if it was Dark Messiah), then of course, you won't have much fun. Not Bethesda's fault that you can't read game descriptions though.

Character Progression? *PLENTY* of that, thanks to the very complex and involving quests (or show me any other relatively recent RPG who let you make as many moral choices during quests), and as someone else stated earlier, the difficulty scaling only defines what you'll meet in certain zones based on the level you have the first time you actually enter the zone. Oh wait .. I suddenly see the light! I know what you've been rambling about! You see, the game we're talking about here is Fallout 3, it is NOT W.O.W.! The character progression isn't defined by how much you grind, but by the choice you make concerning your character's personae and how it affects the character's future decision. This should of course be reflected in the way you set your skillpoints and the way you choose your perks. And that's something Fallout3 does very well, considering it's only a computer game and not a human GM.
But of course, if you thought we were talking about W.O.W. (or maybe FFXI, or basically any MMORPG, along with most other single player ~RPGs~ (Diablo???) which came out lately), then all your comments make sense :
"Shitty combat?" "check!" "Fucked writing?" "There was writing??? oh! ... check!" "Character Progression?" "lots of that! I used a template I found on Tw1nK-R-Us, and was able to get to lvl 125 in a mere 5 hours ... Basically I play a Mutant Dwarf Mage with Ranger and Animal Companion. Doesn't make sense in the story, but who cares. That's the winning build. Everybody is playing those"

lots of talk just to tell you : you are wrong

Re:Yes to one, no to the other.

[yoyhed]

You can also get speech options for all the other SPECIAL attributes, if they're high enough.. although you're right, I never saw anything for having an attribute too low.. my 3rd character, a highly specialized killing machine, has 1 charisma and 1 perception and makes it by just fine.

If you're just a total bastard throughout the game the ending is pretty funny, and it does mention some specific things, but you're right that it doesn't really mention side quests. I do think the main quest got a little silly and felt rushed at a certain point, which sucks because before that it was sweet.

As far as Oblivion: at least Bethesda improved on that by hand-placing stuff in the world this time around. Oblivion just wasn't worth playing once you realized it was all leveled and you could just tool around the same starting areas as you leveled up to get the best items, and even worse, that you COULDN'T get those items at an earlier level. Fallout 3 vastly improves on the fun and replay factor of Oblivion with VATS and hand-placed items and locations.

And Morrowind: sure the NPCs were lifeless, the combat sucked, et cetera.. but at the time, had you ever played such a vast and hand-detailed game, with so much freedom? At least Morrowind's main quest was actually interesting (it had a ton of back story at every turn if you were willing to read) and took you through all sorts of places and trials, unlike most of Oblivion's and half of Fallout 3's. Although, you're right: in Morrowind even, Bethesda managed to make the ending feel half-assed, among other things.

Regardless, Morrowind still ranks as my favorite game of all time, just for the initial 250 hours or so of amazement as I explored every little nook and cranny of that world. And Fallout 3 is still a game I keep installed now, because it's so much more FUN (if you don't do the main quest after a certain point) to just explore and kill things. And Oblivion, well, I loved it at one point, but Fallout 3 has totally eclipsed it, since it is essentially a better version of Oblivion.