Lack of Depth in Fallout 3???

[Woe Is You]

Quantity is not depth, though. Mass Effect is far more linear and its side quests are painfully obviously just randomly generated areas, while Fallout 3 at least has some effort put into areas that aren't story related. In Oblivion, most areas outside of the towns are usually painfully obviously randomly generated too.

Like theres probably more people in Oblivion and there was never any random Bruma citizens or Chorrol Citizens, unlike Fallout 3 where you have Rivet City Residents, Tenpenny Tower residents, Megaton Residents and Underworld Residents. Looks like they were simply trying to make up numbers.

Haha, sure, they're just for numbers there. But guess what? All of those Oblivion citizens are also very much for numbers. Just because they have a random generated name doesn't mean they're any less for numbers. In fact, the AI system in Oblivion makes it painfully obvious since the characters' voices for non-important NPCs can switch from youthful chirping and screechy old grandma speak within seconds.

I dont think Fallout 3 will have the same replayability that Oblivion had or Mass Effect.
You're always the same character.

Wait, what? Oblivion lets you complete everything with one character and max his/her skills during that.

There's less content in Fallout 3 than in Oblivion, sure, but I'd argue it's far more focused and thought out content.

 

[Mr.Pandah]

Others have already said it, but I'd like to re-iterate the point.

I think the "depth" is right on, as far as you think depth goes. Other then items being a bit...limited, I felt that just about everything was in the right scope. I never felt overwhelmed, but I also never felt like there wasn't enough. Thats a fine line to ride on and they managed to pull it off in FO3. In Oblivion, there was just too much and I didn't care nearly enough. I raided about 3 crypts and stole from a bunch of houses. However, after that...I was done. Nothing else really interested me. FO3 managed to keep my attention for about 2 weeks, but I just lost interest after a while anyways.

I guess this really didn't have a point then =P

 

[Rensenhito]

Isn't what the OP is complaining about a lack of content as opposed to a lack of depth?

There's more content in Fallout 3 than most games and more than many RPGs.

As to actual depth then yeah Fallout 3 has almost no depth, especially when compared to it's predecessors.

That is what i was on about, there is a fair amount of content, but it always seems a bit shallow.
I dont think Fallout 3 will have the same replayability that Oblivion had or Mass Effect.
You're always the same character.

Well, you're always the same character in Oblivion, too... At least Fallout 3 gives you the option of getting a haircut every now and again to kinda change things up. Oblivion didn't have that, and the lighting during character creation in Oblivion was so screwed up I had no idea what my character was going to look like in normal conditions. My first few characters (even the female ones) looked like George Lucas until I got the hang of it.
Fallout 3 has a lot of depth, actually. If you look at it, you've got followers to recruit, factions to massacre, a city to nuke, a lot of stuff to collect (bobbleheads, nuka colas, etc.), a ton of places to explore, and several kinds of enemies to kill with different weapons. You'll never play the same way twice. I never have.

 

[laikenf]

Damn I see some people here saying they finished Fallout 3 and Oblivion in 1-3 days... Jesus I do not see the point on that, you people even enjoyed it? What's the rush? I don't know about you guys, but having paid 60$ U.S. for a game that gives you as much as F.O.3 and Oblivion just to blaze through it in a few hours makes no sense to me.

Having said that, I kind of enjoyed Fallout 3 more than Oblivion, I just liked the premise better; and while Oblivion may have more content, I found that F.O.3's content is tied together in a more coherent way. And I also found that the Side quests and mini quests are VERY rewarding, giving you lots of motivation to seek them out and complete them.

 

[Baby Tea]

Fallout 3 has a lot of depth, actually. If you look at it, you've got followers to recruit, factions to massacre, a city to nuke, a lot of stuff to collect (bobbleheads, nuka colas, etc.), a ton of places to explore, and several kinds of enemies to kill with different weapons. You'll never play the same way twice. I never have.

Yeah, I'm going to go ahead and disagree.

Oblivion I played the crap out of. I beat it over and over and over again. I played as a Mage, as a thief, as a warrior, as a mage/thief, as a warrior/mage, as a monk (Using only hand to hand), as an archer (only using bows...seriously) and any combination of those. Tons of replayability for what type of character to play.

Fallout 3? I played through once using guns as per the norm and havin' a fun time. Second time through? I tried hand-to-hand weapons, and it was brutal. It was terrible. Not only hard, since practically every other enemy is shooting you in the face and you have to run through their hail of bullets before you can peg them with your pool cue, but because it just wasn't fun. Trying to run at a group of raiders who are whipping grenades at you and shooting you in the face with assault rifles while you wield a bat or something isn't cool or fun. It's retarded. And I ended up just grabbing a gun anyways and shooting them. Even with a terrible score in my gun skills, it was still easier then using melee weapons.

So there are two characters in Fallout 3: Guns or no guns. One is fun the first time through, and the other is never fun. Take your pick.

Side note: Hmm...methinks a review is in order...

 

[Guido656]

**SPOILER**
I agree to a lack of depth, but not so much with the side quests and what there is available, but with the main quest itself.

I didn't play the old Fallout's, but on arrival of this one, I found out a lot about the back story of the Fallout universe, and I just think this games' main quest lacked depth.

I mean, you turn on the purifier.....done. I was looking for a more indepth take on the corrupt government, people going against each other, a deeper look at all the main characters and their history, Elder Lyons, Colonel Autumn, the President!! But it just ended....and that was that.

Oh well, im going to play Skate 2. wweeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!

You obviously didn't beat it yet.
Or you'd know the backstory of Eden and Lyons.

I have completed the main quest, but are you saying that you find out more from beating the entire game....side quests and such? If so, then you are correct, as I am currently working my way through loads of those which I have left! I hope to feel more involved.

 

[GuerrillaClock]

I've put more time into Fallout 3 than I do most games - you can call it out for many things, but a lack of depth is not one of them. Even better, Broken Steel looks like it's going to fix some of the more jarring faults in the game.
Gawd bless DLC!

 

[Flour]

Damn I see some people here saying they finished Fallout 3 and Oblivion in 1-3 days... Jesus I do not see the point on that, you people even enjoyed it? What's the rush? I don't know about you guys, but having paid 60$ U.S. for a game that gives you as much as F.O.3 and Oblivion just to blaze through it in a few hours makes no sense to me.

Both games have a main quest that is finished in less than 10 hours.
Finishing it and starting a new character(or loading an old save) will give some people complete freedom. A friend finished the game and now has a save with 100~ hours playtime where he never bothered with the main quest.

What I mean is that some people enjoy finishing a game in just a few hours time, to quote a mario 64 TAS: At first there were 70 stars because Bowser demanded it. Then there were 16 stars because MIPS the rabbit demanded it. Then there was 1 star because Bowser's Sub demanded it. Now there are none because the viewers are impatient and demanded the game be quicker. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFlH90SrOKM]

 

[Anton P. Nym]

You obviously didn't beat it yet.
Or you'd know the backstory of Eden and Lyons.

I have completed the main quest, but are you saying that you find out more from beating the entire game....side quests and such? If so, then you are correct, as I am currently working my way through loads of those which I have left! I hope to feel more involved.

Frankly, I don't know how you could finish the game without learning the backstory of Pres. Eden and Elder Lyons; you have to have face-to-face encounters with both to complete the main storyline, and they're both quite chatty fellows. Perhaps if you skip ahead through the dialog and never ask them about themselves, I guess... but I really don't see how that would the the fault of the developers.

-- Steve

 

[Nivag the Owl]

I completely agree with you. Ever since Fo3s release I've been trying to defend Oblivion's blatent superiority over this game. I mean, don't get me wrong it's an incredible game but it has nothing that Oblivion doesn't (other than the entire concept of course).

None the less:
- Minimal side-quest lines.
- More repetative map.
- Lack of creature variety.
- a fucking ending.
- Tiny level cap.
- Minimal unique items.
- Little reward for doing anything.

On the other hand:
- Cooler lock-picking

Was going to do an even list but um... I don't think I can.

 

[FluxC]

Yeah the puddles throughout the Wasteland were pretty shallow. The one in Megaton went about knee deep i think. But that's about it. It's understandable though. A post apocalyptic wasteland would most likley evaporate quite a lot of water.

 

[Elurindel]

I rather liked Fallout 3. I didn't think there was quite as much depth as the others, but the game was certainly immersive, even though I wanted to smack thevoice actors upside the head every time they placed the wrong emphasis on words...which was all the time.
That's why I never found the android. EVERYBODY seemed robotic.

 

[Guido656]

You obviously didn't beat it yet.
Or you'd know the backstory of Eden and Lyons.

I have completed the main quest, but are you saying that you find out more from beating the entire game....side quests and such? If so, then you are correct, as I am currently working my way through loads of those which I have left! I hope to feel more involved.

Frankly, I don't know how you could finish the game without learning the backstory of Pres. Eden and Elder Lyons; you have to have face-to-face encounters with both to complete the main storyline, and they're both quite chatty fellows. Perhaps if you skip ahead through the dialog and never ask them about themselves, I guess... but I really don't see how that would the the fault of the developers.

-- Steve

Ah I understand that you can find out much by asking them, and talking to them. Which I did. What I mean is, apart from their account of where they came from, and what they did, that's all you get. I was looking for more of a thrilling end to the game, interactively speaking, more choices, do right or wrong, go with this guy, or that guy. All you got was to choose whether to infect the water or not. You know?

 

[Saevus]

While I could easily lambast FO3 in horrible and verbally sensuous ways, it would be unfair to do so.

The vast majority of games are, nowadays, short - even RPGs. Of course, that isn't to say you can't spend much time on it (unless you went and plowed through the storyline before sidequests HAHAH GOTCHA THERE DIDN'T WE), but it's really short in content. It's been said before by more authoritative individuals, but a sandbox game is essentially skimping on the juicy stuff and demanding that the player puts effort into making their own fun.

FO3 didn't break this trend, and even then, it's an Atlantic to Oblivion's Pacific.

 

[nova18]

I dunno, Oblivion was a little overwhelming.
You would start off thinking "Where the hell do I even start", then you would start one side quest and be given 20 more to do before you can finish the first one.
Fallout was a good pace for me, admittedly I did finish and get the platinum trophy in a day and a half, I still enjoyed it a lot. I've revisited it to find all the little secrets and stuff I missed the first time and there is a lot of depth, you just have to dig around a little.

 

[GonzoGamer]

I can see where Fallout three took quality over quantity while Oblivion did the opposite. Sure Oblivion is a longer playing game, however Oblivion usually had a pretty set way of finishing a quest while Fallout 3 leaves it more to the players interpretation if not a bit contrived. Fallout 3 also had many different types of random encounters while Oblivion almost always just had you fight someone/thing.

 

[Onyx Oblivion]

Well, my name isn't Onyx Fallout...so I'm going to say that I'm biased. But each of those games have one key difference that makes Oblivion superior to Fallout in my opinion: The setting. I just don't enjoy the wasteland nearly as much as I enjoyed the pretty, if unchanging, forests of Oblivion's world of magic and whimsy. After playing Fallout for a decent 48 hours, I gave it up and decided that I'm not going to force myself to play something that I don't enjoy just because it's a critic's darling. And the general gamer's darling. In fact, I enjoyed Fable 2 a great deal more than Fallout 3 even. Then again, what Fallout sets out to do, it does very well.