Today’s value is choosing own goals, a real classic, and emblematic of the entire category of “self-direction” really. I’m already getting the writer’s equivalent of “the stitch” from writing all these posts on Schwartz values and Fallout 3, but I plan to persevere, though perhaps with a break now and then.
Put simply, you can, of course, choose your own goals in Fallout 3, but the availability of genuine free, unshaped goals is heavily limited. In particular, given that all you can really do in the game is shoot stuff, pick stuff up, and walk, your goals are going to be a bit simple. You can decide to walk four miles East… or West! You can shoot that guy in the head… or the knee! Complex activities, of the kind we normally associate with setting goals for ourselves, aren’t really available for construction.
In other words, you really need to interact with the designed system of the game in order to undertake meaningful goals. The game, in these instances, is almost merciless in making sure you know that those goals are not your goals. Pretty much every single thing you do is for someone else. “Save the world!” “Find my parents!” “Find my son!” “Defuse this bomb!” “Get me a glass of water!” Life in the Wasteland is a litany of people with requests ranging from the epic to the insanely trivial.
The one goal that we might think of as truly owned by the player, or at least the avatar, is to “find dad”. As I’ve commented earlier, however, dad was such an underwhelming presence in the early game life, that by the time I actually got out into the world, I’d forgotten I was looking for him at all. Guess that one wasn’t my goal to choose either.
Today’s Schwartzean value of interest is independence, again from the “self-direction” category. Reference.com hits us up with this definition: “freedom from the control, influence, support, aid, or the like, of others”. As in, an absence of other people and all the stuff that they imply. The dictionary definition is phrased very positively, and there’s a tendency in Western cultures to view independence that way – but of course in other cultures, being independent of other people would be considered sad and depressing.
As I mentioned yesterday, a big moment in the game is when you step out of the Vault and into the uninterrupted landscape of the game’s world. This is not only a moment of sensing “freedom”, but a definitive enforcement of your independence. The contrast with the complete dependence on the system and hierarchy of your former life is very start. The game, then, heavily emphasises a value of independence, whether you want it or not.
This is ultimately carried through in most aspects of the game. Although you do interact with others, it’s never at an especially emotional level. There’s a definite sense of being dependent on others in terms of the game structure – you need them in order to progress the narrative(s) of the game. Without other people, life would have no meaning beyond what you could construct by walking around.
The one major exception to your “kind-of” independence is that you occasionally pair up with another character. This amounts to the other character fighting anything hostile to you. The “other character” might be your dad, a renegade Super Mutant, a Brotherhood of Steel Paladin, or a dog. The only reason I might question these relationships is that you don’t really depend on them, they’re just an additional gun in the fight – not specifically necessary. (My only caveat would be the potential more powerful emotional relationship you might develop with the dog – I haven’t had the experience yet, though I’m working on it.)
Fallout 3 is a game in which you are essentially forced to be independent of others because there aren’t really relationships to be had. Sometimes people depend on you to do things for you, but it tends not to be reciprocal in a strong sense beyond your pressing need to finish a quest, which is more of a “ludic” dependence. You’re on your own, even your dad barely has the time of day for you.
The next value in the “self-direction” category of Schwartz’s big list is creativity, which is really a bit of a holy grail in a lot of video games. That became especially true with the advent of the “sandbox” game, I guess, popularly identified with the Grand Theft Auto series, particularly the miraculous experience of playing GTA III.
Fallout 3 allows for some “obvious” takes on creativity, particularly in the sense that you can “create” your own weapons at little workstations throughout the game. But that’s clearly a pretty blank perspective to take on the whole thing, it doesn’t lead anywhere and it’s not actually creative, it’s the representation of someone else’s (the avatar’s) creative process, kind of.
When we talk about creativity in games, we normally mean that there are novel and interesting ways of achieving your ends, either those assigned by the game or by the player themselves. In Fallout 3 there’s definitely a degree of this – there are a number of ways you can accomplish your goals, often dividing along the lines of “being stealthy about it” or “not bothering to be stealthy about it”, and various tactics along that spectrum. Back-of-head-shooting versus face-shooting, you could call it. Again, maybe not really that creative.
We want creativity in a game to ultimately be the potential for self-expression, perhaps. Fallout 3 doesn’t offer much of that, most games don’t in the basic game level (they often do socially). As a canvas and set of tools, the game doesn’t give you a lot. You could argue that the most creative acts come, literally, in designing the way your avatar looks (despite never actually looking at him/her throughout the game), or perhaps in managing your inventory or choosing which weapon to use in a particular fight. These are creativity-moments, but weak ones in my opinion.
Near as I can tell, Fallout 3 just isn’t a creative game. You don’t make things so much as admire what’s there. The ruined world, the scenic (if apocalyptic) beauty. The game’s the artwork and the creating’s been done, we just live in it.