I just finished Fallout3 today for the very first time. I actually finished Fallout1 and 2 before. I guess I can give a straight forward opinion about the fact why Fallout3 isn’t as good as the others, though. 7 or more endings could be seen at the end of FO1 and/or FO2, that told the player about the outcome of his actions during his play through. Instead, Fallout 3 offered you a good and a bad ending, just telling you how you’ve sacrificed yourself to give the capital wasteland and new future or not. But the small things I did, the small things that could have a big impact on the world got not mentioned. It just felt like that some things I’ve done didn’t changed anything at all in the end. But I’m glad that some things never change. For example war. War never changes. Almost ;)
If the player in Fallout 1, for example took the Water Chip of Necropolis without to repair an old water pump, then the Gouls died. The game commented this by telling the player at the end that Necropolis now truly is a dead city. The same happened to all the other settlements on the worldmap. The player felt that his actions really changed something. This concept is totally scrapped from Fallout 3. Equal if you destroy the Enclave threat or not, the game doesn’t tell you about the destruction of the Enclave base or what happened to the remains of the smashed Enclave. I also destroyed the Slaver outpost and gave the escaped Slaves a new home at the Lincoln Memoriam. The game didn’t told me at the end what happened to this new home of the Slaves. I too destroyed a group of selfish headhunters that killed for fun without remorse. Once again, the game didn’t told me about the outcome and how this action changed the capital wasteland. Thats the only thing I disliked. Everything else was just okay and perfect.
My next turn will be to play Fallout Tactics, the FO3 Add-On Broken Steel (the only add-on that continues the main story, while the other’s got just made to steal more money from customers) and New Vegas.
A3D's Let's Plays 