Ok so maybe this isn’t the best of ideas, but on the other hand I don’t think the article I’m about to tear into was the best of ideas either. On a blog known as Hellforge a writer known as Sol Invictus wrote an article claiming that Fallout 3’s story sucks because it’s not original, and that it’s not original because it relies too heavily on the previous games in the series. Which to me sounds extremely…what’s the word? Ah yes. Dumb. Now maybe this is just the work of one of the NMA (No Mutants Allowed: a Fallout community who has had no end of whining about Fallout 3) crowd being very disenfranchised. Or maybe he thought he had a good point. However there is just one thing that stands out above everything else: A huge lack of research and an even bigger lack of evidence backing up Invictus’ claims. And frankly, that’s what really bothers me. Yes, I understand how easy it is on the Internet to just throw something out there and get a bunch of people to smile and nod and go “yes, I suppose so”. And in fact that’s just what he’s done, with many comments espousing how many plot holes there are in Fallout 3 (as if the other Fallout games didn’t have any). So I offer this rebuttal with actual research done to stand as an alternative to madness that will probably go unnoticed. And yes, there are major spoilers ahead. (click to read more)