>>3820755
>It makes no sense lore-wise,
Yes it does. I mean what's the lore-related problem?
The BoS would naturally want to take the military tech in the Pentagon, and if they had to walk all the way coast to coast, their leader opting to lead them in a more benevolent direction is very realistic.
It makes sense that Vault-tec would be given some FEV to experiment with
And it makes sense that the Enclave would have more than one base, and try to rebuild in the original capitol of the USA.
Like all previous Fallout games up to that point, 3 has its own distinct tone and take on the worldbuilding of Fallout.
Fallout 2 played into the comedy, the satire, and the outlandish elements of the Fallout universe.
Tactics played into the militaristic grit, and BoS played into the dudebro 'awesomeness' of the post-apocalyptic wasteland.
Fallout 3 made a world more outlandish and whimsical. Where you could have vampire-esque mutants, or a town of just children, or characters who mostly played into the 50s theming in their dialogue.
Fallout 2 had fucking ghosts, this is not a great deviation.
>almost all moral choices are butcher puppy or don't butcher puppy,
Most choices in Fallout 1 or 2 were black and white as well. And having a greater emphasis on good vs evil morality is a perfectly fine direction to take an RPG. You may not like it as much, but Fallout 1 and 2 did already introduce a good vs evil karma system.
>the characters are almost all trash because of the terrible writing
Have you played the game? There are plenty of great characters, and most of the writing is serviceable to good. Albeit there is also a significant amount of bad dialogue, too. I'll grant you so much.
