I should be talking about Bethesda's
Fallout 3 and not thinking of other things to do. After all, I have been doing little other than playing
Fallout 3 recently. However, drawn away from the screen (or screens, this is both a an Xbox 360 and PS3 review) I also think about a company that brought
Wayne Gretzky Hockey to my Amiga and
The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion to my Xbox 360 and my PlayStation 3.
I'd seen
FO3 at Leipzig not this year but last year in a demonstration on Microsoft's console only, given by the
estimable Peter Hines. At the time I was mildly intrigued, playing as I have both RPGs (all the way back to paper beasties such as Bushido) and first-cum-third-person shooters... as well as
Fallout.
Plot? Right, it's a 'Post-Apocalyptic Dystopian Future' (PADF). It uses the Vault scenario set up in the earlier parts of the
Fallout series. “Vault scenario? WTF are you on about?” Well, see, back in what might have been the 1950s, the world (or a world) was nuclear benighted. In advance of this event Americans (well North Americans) were sent underground into vaults for safety. Some of these vaults – such as Vault 101, which appears in this game – evolved into micro-civilizations of their very own. Others did other things. Others again appear to be rammed with mental cases – but that's another story... or is it?
Vault 101, you see, has a dictator and that dictator has some issues and some secrets that I'll not spoil at this point. Suffice to say that while the early part of
FO3 annoyed the holy hell out of me - like all tutorial levels, it does encourage replay.
At the core of this game is the very real ability to play it using all sorts of strategies and approaches. Unlike, for example,
GTA IV, which locks you into a character and demands that you follow its side-missions,
FO3 feels more open.
Before we exit Vault 101 and get into the big, wide game world, let me get Liam Neeson out of the way. The lad phoned this in. I mean, it's not that he has a great deal to do. Patrick Stewart realised this when asked to play the king in
The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion. He was there for a few brief scenes but the old stager gave it his all. Neeson nearly destroyed the game for me with his “I do not give a flying attack monkey's phlegm for this, why can't my agent get me a real film?” attitude and ham acting. (For legal reasons obviously Mr Neeson gave his absolute all in his portrayal. Just like he did in
Taken.)
Eh? I'm a video game reviewer. What business is it of mine to have a game nearly ruined by one shonky piece of ham acting? Well, if publishers cease casting 'actoooorrrrs' as main motivating characters, I'll stop noticing them.