Fallout New Vegas

[Valkyrie-Lemons]

I'd like to add that in Fallout 3, you got to see your childhood. Yes, it's only brief, and basically a tutorial, but it does give an important part of the next acts in what your motivation is really driven by. Is it that you're out to find your father, but you don't really want to leave the vault. Or is it that you want to leave the vault at all costs and your father leaving is an excuse?

In NV, you basically start being shot in the head, your motivation for revenge is really thin. It's only motivated because the game tells you to get revenge on Benny, rather than thinking, "Hey! I really pride myself on being a courier and I'm getting that chip back no matter what!" or "I'm not going to get paid if I lose that chip, I need to get it back." Etc. If you just had a short period before the start of NV that let you decide why you're a courier then it'd really colour the motivation for the next part of the game.

Since when I played it I was wondering why I cared so much about this chip or getting back at Benny. I guess 'cos he shot me in the head, which isn't cool, but I didn't feel why I should go trekking across the desert to find him, short of moving the plot forward. On the other hand, in Fallout 3 my character deeply loved their father and wanted nothing more to simply make sure he was okay. After they found their father they then were involved in the wider plot.


EDIT: I've basically just repeated what Jack said, when I was trying to expand on the point. But whatever, he brings up a good point so it bares repeating.

[Geoff_B]

Fallout 3 has Tranquillity Lane. Also Liberty Prime.

Fallout NV has something that looks like Tranquillity Lane but only as part of a DLC, which was an awesome DLC come to think of it. And no Liberty Prime.

Draw your own conclusions.

[Kayden]

Fallout 3 has Tranquillity Lane. Also Liberty Prime.

Fallout NV has something that looks like Tranquillity Lane but only as part of a DLC, which was an awesome DLC come to think of it. And no Liberty Prime.

Draw your own conclusions.

Fallout NV did have Dr. Mobius in Old World Blues though and we also had ED-E

[Geoff_B]

Very well, you win this round...

[Kapol]

I'd like to add that in Fallout 3, you got to see your childhood. Yes, it's only brief, and basically a tutorial, but it does give an important part of the next acts in what your motivation is really driven by. Is it that you're out to find your father, but you don't really want to leave the vault. Or is it that you want to leave the vault at all costs and your father leaving is an excuse?

In NV, you basically start being shot in the head, your motivation for revenge is really thin. It's only motivated because the game tells you to get revenge on Benny, rather than thinking, "Hey! I really pride myself on being a courier and I'm getting that chip back no matter what!" or "I'm not going to get paid if I lose that chip, I need to get it back." Etc. If you just had a short period before the start of NV that let you decide why you're a courier then it'd really colour the motivation for the next part of the game.

You do realize that you're describing basically the same thing for both games, right? The only difference is that you're saying NV forces you to get revenge on Benny rather than giving you no reason to do anything. And even that, if I remember correctly, isn't neccessarily true. Most of the NPCs (including Benny himself) assume you're going for revenge. But I believe the game itself only tells you to find the man who killed you or something along those lines, as well as find the platnium chip. It doesn't tell you why you should, just like 3 doesn't tell you why you should find your father.

Again, that's assuming that I'm remembering correctly. But either way, they're both very similar in the way you described them to be.

[ZigFB]

Fallout New Vegas gives you plenty of opportunities to explore your Courier's background and establish your personal motivations through character interactions over the course of the game. You can tell people you want the chip for the paycheck, want to shoot Benny in the face for revenge, or just wanna nail him cause, hey, that's a nice suit.

EVERYONE'S Lone Wanderer started out the same. Same father, same Vault, same motivations. My Courier, on the other hand, had a kid somewhere, both his parents were killed when he was young and he had to survive (explaining his larcenous nature), but through it all still had his eyes on the bigger prize. He wasn't even from California or Nevada, just happened to be there and started doing some easy courier work when things went awry.

I felt more connection to the Courier than the Lone Wanderer. Granted, chasing after Liam Nieson to listen to him talk more was a pretty sound motivation, but he didn't care about the rest of the wasteland. He had no vested interests in anyone's plight. He just wanted to grab his dad and go back home. After a while I was just waiting to get Power Armor and then bid the plot good bye and futz around.

Meanwhile, whenever the Courier stumbled on someone's problems, he could help because he understood what it was like to need help, or could screw them over cause life is hard and survival of the fittest.

[JackSlack]

Weirdly, I was kind of the opposite. When my Lone Wanderer stumbled onto other people's problems, she helped out because she'd been raised to be a good person, which I saw. I had no idea, by contrast, how my courier should handle things, because I have no backstory on them.

[Valkyrie-Lemons]

You do realize that you're describing basically the same thing for both games, right? The only difference is that you're saying NV forces you to get revenge on Benny rather than giving you no reason to do anything. And even that, if I remember correctly, isn't neccessarily true. Most of the NPCs (including Benny himself) assume you're going for revenge. But I believe the game itself only tells you to find the man who killed you or something along those lines, as well as find the platnium chip. It doesn't tell you why you should, just like 3 doesn't tell you why you should find your father.

Again, that's assuming that I'm remembering correctly. But either way, they're both very similar in the way you described them to be.

Not really. For NV I'm saying that (or at least in my experience) I was told what my motivation was. In Fallout 3, I choose my motivation. In Fallout 3, I knew why I was going on my grand adventure, in NV I was already on the grand adventure. I mean, why was I delivering the chip in the first place? Why am I a courier? etc.*

The only reason I chose to go after Benny was simply to move the plot along, I didn't feel any compulsion to right a wrong caused to my character. Losing the McGuffin at the start of the game doesn't make me feel annoyed or sad. If however I had that McGuffin for a little while then I'd feel compelled to get that McGuffin back. As it was in NV I just felt I was pushed out the door and told to...well not really do anything, so I'm left to check my active quest which happens to go and find Benny. In Fallout 3 on the other hand I wanted to find my dad, regardless of it being a quest or not.

*Now, those could be answered in the DLC, since I don't have any of the NV DLC, but you can say that my motivation is established in some DLC I have to shell out more money for. Based on the Vanilla game, I had no say on why I had gotten into trouble with Benny in the first place.

[Kapol]

I just disagree. I didn't care about the father at all. The three small moments I had with him didn't make me care. The other people in the vault got more characterization and had more personality then the person you're sent to chase after did. To me, the father was just a plot device used to push you out of the vault and get you doing something. And it only got worse from there. The NV character didn't start out on a 'grand adventure' either remember. He was just a person doing what seemed like a very simple job when he was attacked. The game made it pretty clear that the PC never knew of the importance of the McGuffin.

At least with New Vegas, you're not supposed to know why you were killed. It gives you a number of reasons to find Benny. You just got to watch yourself be shot in the face by the guy for one, so revenge is a reason. He stole the item from you that you were tasked with delivering, so completing the job itself is another. You have no idea why said item is important, so you could do it out of curiousity. Or, if you're not invested (or you feel your character wouldn't be), you can just ignore that entirely. You'll likely end up running into Benny or someone who wants you to find Benny at some point. But even then, you aren't forced to.

It was the exact same way with F3. Three gave you a reason to find your father, or not to. Didn't like the character or care about him? Fine, wander about. Angry that he's apparently lied to you your entire life? Find him and get angry with him. Concerned? Do the same as last stated. It doesn't force you to do anything though.

Three might have given you a bit more backstory on your character, but at the same time that limits what you can do with your character. In Fallout 3, you were always the vault dweller from Vault 101 who had a relationship with this character, a rivalry (or at least antagonism) with this character, and were kicked out because of your father. There's never an option to not be those things. You then are tasked with finding your father, who you (as a player) have known for 10 minutes or so and has shown he's not been entirely honest with you. In NV, you watch yourself get murdered after having a package you're meant to deliver due to it being your job stolen from you. You aren't told why you're anything because the game leaves it up to you to decide who you are and what you'll do from there. And this happens within the first five minutes rather than the first 20.

Basically, my point boils down to this: I, as a player, care more about finding the person who starts the game off by killing me than I do finding a character who's related to me. Because, with the limited time and information we're given with him, that's the most I felt for the father character.

[Genghis Ares]

After playing the Elder Scrolls games, the Fallout games fit well into the make your own adventure/back story kind of thing. Everyone is supposed to be a sort of blank slate for the player to project onto.

Fallout 3 did have an actual back story that you developed somewhat, but the journey that you're going to embark on is the more important focus and that's what you get to do.

Even in the original Fallout games you were a blank slate, although you did have a clear goal from the start, Water Chip/G.E.C.K., you made up the actually character of the Vault Dweller/Chosen One.

[Geoff_B]

Actually both Fallout 3 and NV have one very large advantage over Fallout 2. No Temple of Trials.

[Valkyrie-Lemons]

@Kapol
The only problems I have with your point about the courier is this. Was this attack the norm or something that is unlikely to happen? What happens if I don't finish the job? Did I lose a lot of money from this?

These sorts of question really change the whole dynamic of the motivation. I mean, even a very short intro stating how dangerous/safe the mission is, penalties for non-completion, wage etc. changes A LOT of how I feel about being shot and my package stolen. If getting shot is likely to happen then I'm not going to take out a personal vendetta against the guy and track him down across a desert to kill him. I may do it if I bump into him, but not seek him out y'know?

[Master Gunner]

Actually both Fallout 3 and NV have one very large advantage over Fallout 2. No Temple of Trials.

Meh, I never found it that annoying, and it takes no longer to clear than the intro to Fallout 3.

[Kapol]

@Kapol
The only problems I have with your point about the courier is this. Was this attack the norm or something that is unlikely to happen? What happens if I don't finish the job? Did I lose a lot of money from this?

These sorts of question really change the whole dynamic of the motivation. I mean, even a very short intro stating how dangerous/safe the mission is, penalties for non-completion, wage etc. changes A LOT of how I feel about being shot and my package stolen. If getting shot is likely to happen then I'm not going to take out a personal vendetta against the guy and track him down across a desert to kill him. I may do it if I bump into him, but not seek him out y'know?

I think each of those questions are answered in one way or another. The first should be pretty obvious really. Being shot is very likely because... well, Fallout. Even based only on knowing three, I know that there are raiders, mutant animals, and all sorts of other things to contend with. The intro film seems to set up that danger isn't unique before the beginning since it opens with someone getting shot. The scene itself is set to be fairly unique though, implying that the specific circumstances are unusual (being tied up and talked to, with a shallow grave dug before the murder is different then how the person died earlier, with an uncaring shot to the head). This means if you take it personally or not is largely up to you.

The other two questions aren't made clear, that's true. But we can infer that there's nothing unusual about the job up until that point. The game even says "What seemed like a simple delivery job has taken a turn... for the worse." From that we can tell that the job itself doesn't seem special. So I doubt there's any big payday missed or special penalties for failing the delivery.

I do understand what you're saying however I think. The problem is that something like that would really cut the flow of the story. We can guess that the trip was pretty long based on what we learn later, so starting halfway through a trip and just learning those details would be odd. Having a cutscene with a jump to being shot would feel somewhat needless in reality. And, realistically, it makes sense in-character to not remember most of the details. Being shot in the head is likely to cause a bit of memory loss.

But I do understand all this is based on preference really. Establishing information as you suggest would pull out as many people as it would ease in.

[JackSlack]

I just wish the game gave me more lead in. Let me experience the mission. Gave me some investment in trying to deliver the chip, and only THEN have Benny ambush me. Like I said, the first ten minutes of gameplay matter; they set the tone for all that follows.

Fallout 3? First ten minutes are about exploring the son/daughter-father dynamic.

Fallout New Vegas? First ten minutes are about some town called Goodspring that doesn't matter one bit in the larger story.

[Kapol]

But what could they have really done to make the mission feel anything but dull? I can't picture any real way that altering the beginning to stay roughly the same (in terms of storytelling, such as being shot and left for dead by Benny) that would have made sense or wouldn't break flow.

The only place to have anything happen would be between the barricade on the southwest area of the map, through the town that had been overrun by criminals, towards the infest quarry, and being ambushed. But the problem for that would be the following questions:

-Where to have the S.P.E.C.I.A.L screen? I suppose the best place would be at the barricade, having a NCR person questioning you on your life.
-How to have the ambush play out in a way that doesn't feel cheap (No simple 'and then you black out' would feel right), doesn't kill the player (since most fights end in death), and gives Benny and the raiders a chance to tie him up.
-Gives an explanation on why you can't just go the other way to begin with, since most would feel contrived.
-Explains why you're able to get through bandit infested areas without being killed before the game starts, and nobody seeming to remember you after.
-Gives the feeling why you're mission is important when, in fact, it really isn't anything special to the main character.

The opening they chose explained some of those details and left the rest up to the imagination. Your PC starts out with no levels because of being dead. Same with figuring out your SPECIAL and perks.

Here's the thing, I agree that Goodspring wasn't a great start. It felt anti-climatic and didn't really give the player anything to feel in itself. But it did a good job of what it was intended to do. It introduced players to the factions in a straightforward way. Brand new players were given the experience of a reasonablly easy, full area to explore while learning how to play the game, instead of being confined in one room at a time like Fallout 3. Some motivation was given to the player without it being shoved down their throat, allowing some choice in what to do.

If there's one big failing, it's that Goodspring didn't mean anything in the long run. But, then again, neither did Vault 101 besides establishing the character. I just don't see a way that they could do something similar to the vault in New Vegas that would make sense, flow together with the rest of the game naturally, and still give people their own interpretation of their character.

[ZigFB]

Even in Goodsprings, though, it felt like it matter. I left the town thinking I made a difference in those people's lives today... And not just in all the stuff I stole and sold to the guy running the store. Ultimately, it didn't matter, but it did set up what kind of person you were going to be.

It's very much like the "what sort of man am I" speech from the first Tenth Doctor episode. It spoke louder to me than "here son, shoot these roaches."

[JackSlack]

But, then again, neither did Vault 101 besides establishing the character.

Even in Goodsprings, though, it felt like it matter. I left the town thinking I made a difference in those people's lives today... And not just in all the stuff I stole and sold to the guy running the store.

But that's just it: Vault 101 was the point of Fallout 3. Its central mystery and relationship was all tied up into that tutorial: Who is James? Who was your father, and how do you feel about that?

(In my game? The answer was: I loved him even more, and was determined to finish his cause for him when he died. Of course, I did take the Daddy's Girl perk, so that's hardly surprising.)

When it's all said and done, there's really only two (maybe three) locations that matter in Fallout 3: Vault 101, the Jefferson Memorial, and (maybe) Megaton, which isn't important to the plot but assumes an iconic status pretty early on. And the game knows this! It knows that Rivet City is ultimately incidental, along with all the other side locations. The beating heart of that game has two chambers, and it knows to start you in one of them.

By contrast, what's Goodspring to you? It's where you got shot, but even here they do, to my mind, a lousy job of playing that up. Yes, there's an open grave in the graveyard, where you got dug up, presumably. But imagine if there'd been a big splotch of dried, sticky blood up there, and a single cartridge nearby. That might have done a better job conveying to you what happened to you, making it feel real.

The difference between the two is that one of them is central to the game. The other is incidental. New Vegas only has two locations that matter, only two locations that truly speak to the story: Vegas itself, and Hoover Dam. The story should have started in one of them. My pick is Vegas; start you out there getting the job, ideally during the day when Vegas doesn't look as fun and flashy as it does at night.

But what could they have really done to make the mission feel anything but dull? I can't picture any real way that altering the beginning to stay roughly the same (in terms of storytelling, such as being shot and left for dead by Benny) that would have made sense or wouldn't break flow.

My thought is this: The action opens, not with the classic iconic night-time Vegas shot, but instead with a dusty, daytime shot of the classic Vegas sign. We scroll out past the drunks in the street and the NCR soldiers harassing them to move on, past the Lucky 38. Get all those good shots in, they were there for a reason. We wind up in the Mohave Express offices, and the monologue ends right as the despatcher yells, "Courier 6! You're up!" THAT's when you make your character, and see them then walk up to get their job.

Put in fun tutorial challenges. (Sneak, bluff, bribe or create a distraction to get past an NCR checkpoint! Hide, fight, run or blow up a wandering Caeser's Legion patrol! Etc. etc.) Then, then when you're thinking you're free and clear, spring Benny's ambush. You wake up in a small shack, with Victor and a med robot having brought you back to health. And from there, the plot can begin.

[Genghis Ares]

You have to make sure that your Courier 6 tutorial is linear leading up to the Benny ambush. The player has to hit it before being given the freedom to do whatever, and I can't see how you would design that in a logical way. Vault 101 was very linear, and I don't think you can replicate that with a courier mission.

[Valkyrie-Lemons]

You can make the Benny ambush in more than one place, but have him drag you to Goodsprings. That way even if the courier tries to run away, they'd still end up in the start place.

But that would obviously raise the question of why Benny would drag you all the way to Goodsprings? Unless Goodsprings is the only place with a cemetery, and Benny feels it's bad to bury someone anywhere but a cemetery.

[Kapol]

But that's just it: Vault 101 was the point of Fallout 3. Its central mystery and relationship was all tied up into that tutorial: Who is James? Who was your father, and how do you feel about that?

The first two questions are the same thing. And those aren't tied to Vault 101, those are tied with your father. Realistically, Vault 101 could be almost any vault, or even most of the towns, and it wouldn't have made any real difference. The driving force of the plot is your father, not where you came from. If I remember correctly, you can learn within the first 20 minutes that your father was an outsider who came into the vault with his wife, who died during your birth, and raised you in the vault. So the mystery that ties him to the vault is solved before you even begin the real game.

Vault 101 ends up being entirely unimportant to the story as well. The vaults as a whole end up being important, but only because you need them to get the G.E.C.K. Once you leave it and finish the tutorial, Vault 101 is basically forgotten besides some characters alluding to the fact you're from a vault. The only attention it gets later is in a side-mission that doesn't have anything to do with the main storyline. The only reason it's important is because it's where you spend the opening of the game.

And, had the developers chose to go a different route, that could have been changed to most other locations. You could have been a child of Rivet City, growing amongst the safety of the rusty hull. A child of the bomb who grew up behind the relative safety that the walls of Megaton provided. These choices would have changed the story somewhat I grant you. But not in any real meaningful way. Just like Goodspring could have been replaced with most other areas in the game without much trouble.

Now, I do agree that they really underplayed the fact that you died in NV. I doubt the things you mentioned would have been better (though some blood in the grave might have worked better) since the desert would have likely eaten the blood or the empty clip with no trouble. Or perhaps the reason those things aren't there is one that the player is to infer, namely that Benny didn't want to leave any evidence of his crime. Hence why he chose a graveyard located a ways away from a town to kill and bury you instead of in the desert.

But let's assume that wasn't meant to be true. I'm going to play devil's advocate here and explain why the underplaying of your death might just be a brilliant idea in NV. That reason is fairly simple. It shows you just how dangerous, deadly, and uncaring the Nevada area (and by extension all of the Fallout world) is. You're killed as soon as you start playing. Shot by a man who doesn't know you over what seems to be an ordinary trinket. Judging by what you learn throughout the rest of the game, nobody would have really cared either. Nobody seems incredibly happy to see you. Some are surprised but not happy by your presence. Given the dangers you fast throughout the game, it's unlikely that anyone would have been surprised 'back home' if you never came back. It's a dangerous world after all, and someone with your job obviously has risks. It gives the entire world a feeling that you are unimportant to it... until you make yourself important. It's solely through your actions and choices as a player, and not through your history with family or where you grew up, that you decide how to change the world. You choose who to back, or you can just take charge yourself. These are all your decisions and actions that have a major impact on the future of the Mohave (though the fact we don't see that at all is one of the major problems of the game).

But, as I said before, I still agree with you. Underplaying your death was a mistake in the end. No matter the reason behind the choice.

My thought is this: The action opens, not with the classic iconic night-time Vegas shot, but instead with a dusty, daytime shot of the classic Vegas sign. We scroll out past the drunks in the street and the NCR soldiers harassing them to move on, past the Lucky 38. Get all those good shots in, they were there for a reason. We wind up in the Mohave Express offices, and the monologue ends right as the despatcher yells, "Courier 6! You're up!" THAT's when you make your character, and see them then walk up to get their job.

Put in fun tutorial challenges. (Sneak, bluff, bribe or create a distraction to get past an NCR checkpoint! Hide, fight, run or blow up a wandering Caeser's Legion patrol! Etc. etc.) Then, then when you're thinking you're free and clear, spring Benny's ambush. You wake up in a small shack, with Victor and a med robot having brought you back to health. And from there, the plot can begin.

I don't think that the Mohave Express is set up in the New Vegas area, at least where you start out. If it were coming from anywhere close to New Vegas, I doubt that Mr. House would have bothered with a courier if the chip was anywhere near New Vegas to start.

I mentioned a things I feel could make it work in my last post. But Genghis mentiond one of the major reasons I don't think it would work. It'd have to be at least fairly linear. You could be given some choices as you mentioned, like how to deal with various situations. But some of those situations seem like a lot to put on new players right out of the gate. Trying to put a player through a linear situation in a non-linear world just doesn't seem like it'd fit well. With Fallout 3 you had the vault to start with, which gave a good narrow range to follow (even if it felt contrived at times to me). You could put something like that in NV I suppose. But it's make it feel even more like 'Fallout 3 2' instead of it's own game with it's own identity.

You can make the Benny ambush in more than one place, but have him drag you to Goodsprings. That way even if the courier tries to run away, they'd still end up in the start place.

But that would obviously raise the question of why Benny would drag you all the way to Goodsprings? Unless Goodsprings is the only place with a cemetery, and Benny feels it's bad to bury someone anywhere but a cemetery.

You could, but as you mention, it'd feel really odd. It seems like the main reason you were at Goodsprings when he got you in the main game was because that's the fastest path to Vegas. Having him ambush you and drag you there from anywhere else seems odd. Not to mention that it'd mean the developer would be forced to create multiple ambush sites that would play out in an exciting way without making the player feel stupid for walking into it.

Edit: Also, I think I'm starting to show that those long posts from when I play Mafia aren't just because of playing Mafia. I ramble on quite a bit.

[ZigFB]

You could have started off in Prim at the Mojave Express outpost, getting a brief glimpse of Ulysses turning down what eventually was your mission. But this just brings up the Uncle Ben theory. Do we really need to spend time with Uncle Ben to know he was important to Peter? So did we really need to have the chip in our personal possession in order to want to know why it's so special?

[JackSlack]

We need some time spent in a state of normalcy to make the following story seem extraordinary, though. I mean, that's what an act 1 is.

[Kapol]

I would argue that, thinking of it in the classic story-telling terms, Goodsprings is act 1. It serves as a location for you to relearn everything that you may have forgotten (in-character from the bullet ordeal, out-of-character because you hadn't played Fallout 3). It gets you accustumed to life in the wasteland and the general attitude of 'the people with the most military might just take what they want' through the Powder Gangers (an attitude shown later in the story as well through any of the factions). The factions system is introduced. Various ways of dealing with problems are presented even if not for the powder ganger problem. And overall it helps ease players into the game. If they try to wander too far, the game gives them a warning telling them this is meant to be where they learn everything.

But, unlike movies and some games like Fallout 3, you aren't forced to go through all this. If you already know how to play or just get bored, you can wander away without any difficulty. This hurts you from a story-telling standpoint since you don't learn about the mechanics and get a feel for life in the game. But it's an option that's there, neither forced on you or prevented from happening.

And I like that better, personally. I don't want to have to go through a 20-30 minute intro every time I start up a new character when I already know everything that's happening anyways. It feels like it's just wasting my time in a game.

[JackSlack]

That's not an act 1, though: It's a tutorial.

In your classic Heroes Journey, Act 1 is everything before the Call to Adventure. It establishes the normal baseline of the character's life, creating the contrast for what will come afterwards. This is very typically the boring life before the exciting one (See Luke Skywalker, as an example) but hardly has to be; you can have a character whose life is a whirlwind of adventure but then takes on a very specific direction or change with the Call to Adventure. (See Dragon Age for an excellent example of this. Whoever your Grey Warden is, they were a competent, skilled warrior/mage before this who lead a life that did not lack for excitement. But it still has a very powerful and well defined Call to Adventure. Granted, there it's more a prologue -> Act 1 transition, but still.) It's that latter arc which I think Fallout: New Vegas should have tried for, but instead it simply did not have one.

Now, fine. In medias res and all that. But beginning a story in medias res doesn't excuse you not having an act 1. It simply means you have to deliver act 1 interspersed throughout act 2... and I don't believe this happens in New Vegas. Rather, the game is simply utterly disinterested in who the Courier was. His or her motivations are irrelevant to the story, as far as it's concerned, especially compared to characters it furnishes loving detail on like House or Caesar.

By contrast, Fallout 3 is primarily a story of the Lone Wanderer and James. It's curious about both. And it's why, in spite of the frankly sloppy storytelling on display, I still like 3 more in spite of New Vegas doing just about everything else better. At least to my mind. Story structure counts for a lot, and Fallout 3 handled it better. To counter your last point, Kapol, you don't get the option to skip the introduction. The game forces you to, and dumps you in Goodsprings right after it.