Like most of you I played Fallout 3 on release and was shocked by how bad the writing and quest design was, but also like most of you I kept playing it anyway like a sad fuck. I played the DLC too, and I remembered thinking The Pitt and Point Lookout were decent and better than the main game. This week I decided to revisit them for the first time, so I made a new character and did some basic early stuff before rushing to The Pitt and then Point Lookout. Are they actually a significant improvement?
The Pitt - Not the improvement I remembered, or at least not a real significant one. I think I hated FO3's writing so much that I was happy to have something mildly more interesting, but I'd barely call it that now. The main "villain" Asher is probably the only decent thing in it, design and story wise, but he's not exactly a fountain of dialog. The new weapons are shit and the new "monsters" are also shit. The Pittsburgh atmosphere when you first arrive and go over the bridge is probably the best thing in it, but there's not a lot of that afterward.
Point Lookout - This one I'd actually say is a decent step up. I'm not gonna pretend the dialog is good, but it feels like a mild step away from the abyss. The Desmond character has some half-decent writing at times, and the tribals, locals and antagonist at least have some basic flavor to them. The area is large (almost expansion pack size I'd say) and has some decent atmosphere, with the green filter of the game making more sense. Areas like the church feel less random and more well designed than most of the random shit in the main game. The ending decision is still simplistic, but at least it has a Fallout 2 quirky vibe to it I can appreciate similar to Old World Blues.
There's lots of "at leasts" and "buts" and "decents" up there. I'm not saying these DLCs are some great thing. However are they better than the main game? Probably. At least Point Lookout is, I'd say. Still wellllll below New Vegas in quality, but a slight step up from main FO3. Do you agree?
The Pitt - Not the improvement I remembered, or at least not a real significant one. I think I hated FO3's writing so much that I was happy to have something mildly more interesting, but I'd barely call it that now. The main "villain" Asher is probably the only decent thing in it, design and story wise, but he's not exactly a fountain of dialog. The new weapons are shit and the new "monsters" are also shit. The Pittsburgh atmosphere when you first arrive and go over the bridge is probably the best thing in it, but there's not a lot of that afterward.
Point Lookout - This one I'd actually say is a decent step up. I'm not gonna pretend the dialog is good, but it feels like a mild step away from the abyss. The Desmond character has some half-decent writing at times, and the tribals, locals and antagonist at least have some basic flavor to them. The area is large (almost expansion pack size I'd say) and has some decent atmosphere, with the green filter of the game making more sense. Areas like the church feel less random and more well designed than most of the random shit in the main game. The ending decision is still simplistic, but at least it has a Fallout 2 quirky vibe to it I can appreciate similar to Old World Blues.
There's lots of "at leasts" and "buts" and "decents" up there. I'm not saying these DLCs are some great thing. However are they better than the main game? Probably. At least Point Lookout is, I'd say. Still wellllll below New Vegas in quality, but a slight step up from main FO3. Do you agree?