Nordicus wrote...
Yeah it was a bit of a different scenario. It's not that Fallout 3's ending was badly written in comparison to the rest of the story (I'm one of those people who just can't let FO3's massive pile of plotholes and inaccuracies slide), the ending had problems from a game design perspective.Arcadian Legend wrote...
I think Fallout 3 was one other game, though I haven't played it so I can't give more detail.
EDIT Though I'm told that was a bit of a different case.
1) You couldn't continue playing after the ending, which is not how previous Fallout games nor Bethesda games have done it
2) You had to sacrifice yourself for the good of Capital Wasteland even though there were several NPC companions in FO3 who could do the task unharmed.
3) Unlike previous Fallout games, the narrator didn't tell you what happened to the many side-quest locations and people after the end of the game.
Fallout: 2 was the only game you could play afterwards, but even then, it wasn't anything extra. Pretty much the only difference was some jokes and people telling you stuff (and you can get a secret book). It was more of a joke than anything serious. I'm glad that Obsidian didn't allow for post-game play in New Vegas.
Yeah, they did put in the DLC Broken Steel, but it isn't like they ended some huge series that span three games where you could import characters. It was only the crazy kiddies asking for post-game play because they wanted to launch mini-nukes everywhere. Bethesda's ending was overlook because everyone knew their stories are jokes full of inconsistencies and plot-holes. Fans, for the most part, didn't seem outraged like these ME boards, from what I've read, got.




Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut






