I think you make a pretty good point that basically kills the argument on both sides. Especially when we remember that the entire map is scaled down for playability, it makes it easier to suspend disbelief. I mean, sure, the map could have been made procedural like Daggerfall and be way too big and have one million farms everywhere with corn and brahmin and very detailed supply lines to appease someone with an embarrassing amount if gameovers. But we have Starfield to show why that's a bad idea even a decade later even with better tech.
I think there is a point to be made that FNV at least does the bare minimum at making it believable while 3, and especially 4, don't at all and that it doesn't matter because it's just a videogame and you should either enjoy it for what it is or don't play it (or have 30+ spergouts)
Low IQ take. Nobody is complaining that we don't see every single supply caravan in New Vegas because we are told the logistics as to how it's done. We can let our imagination do the rest when we know what's going on behind the scenes. Basic storywriting telling us how the world works is at play.
The crux of the issue is that nobody in Fallout 3 tells us where food comes from, we don't see where it comes from, there aren't even any hints since there is no farms or factories or the like to speak of, so the indication is that the three molerats behind Megaton or the 200 year old pre war food really is how these people feed themselves. No effort at all was put into any worldbuilding, and that's why the game gets mocked. It would take minimal amount of effort to write a little tidbit here or there, but we don't see anything like that because everyone involved was an amateur. But I guess we can just embrace mediocrity because "it is just a video game", just like you are an unwanted tourist within the fandom. You know why we have the awful TV show? Morons like (You), who "don't care" about even the most basic essential aspects of an RPG(ie good writing or wordbuilding) because "game gud already". You are the target audience for slop like Starfield or Fallout 76.
I must have said these points several times by now, but frankly, I don't think I'm dealing with anyone particularly gifted or worth talking to here if half the page is either people complaining that my replies are too wordy and it hurts their head or that I said what they agreed with, but the way I said it hurt their feelings. No, I think out of all the communities that talk about Fallout, the people in this one would be more comparable to a subreddit, ie a waste of my time and talent. Shame, but I'm not going to go dumb down my posts or use "non-inflammatory language" to not make anyone cry, especially since the fine folks at /fog/ or other places can easily keep up with the conversation, and if they don't at least they have more interesting and innovative insults or comebacks. Still, from my experience, there is always more lurkers than you think reading your posts, so hopefully even tho I am engaging with drooling morons who apparently get triggered at everything I type, at least someone with a good attention span can potentially learn a thing or two from what I wrote by just reading the thread.
I loved Point Lookout, but The Pitt? Nah. It looks great and has an interesting premise, but it's surprisingly bare bones in terms of content. Aside from the choice at the end and collecting steel bars, I can't think of a single memorable character or moment in that DLC. It's extra annoying because I always like games that have you go undercover in dangerous and oppressive settings to undermine them from within. The Pitt starts off with that idea but doesn't do a whole lot with it.
I'm not going to defend the state of these DLCs, but all of them are woefully underdeveloped. Especially Point Lookout, more than half the planned DLC content was cut and what we have is the unfinished beta essentially. The most obvious hint to that is how suddenly the main plotline ends, how none of the choices matter and how you can't really interact with any NPCs afterwords, except for the shopkeepers. Pitt was ambitious, but it was sadly brought down by something more mundane: console limitations. What we have is all that Bethesda could afford to give us, as there was no more memory to add more content(if you have other DLCs on consoles like Point Lookout, to this day the game will oftentimes glitch and simply despawn geometry in some parts of The Mill, meaning you will fall right thru certain bridges up above to your death. Only removing DLCs from your hard drive or reloading and hoping for the best will fix this issue since there just isn't enough memory for the game to keep up with every asset). There should have definitely been an explorable area and more side quests, but the main quest itself has problems too. For example, no way to not get enslaved, even when you're wearing Power Armor or work for slavers, which is stupid. The only reason this DLC redeems itself is thru surprisingly decent writing, setting and loot, but honestly from a gameplay standpoint it is little more than an extra town added to the game so I actually agree with you. However, I do recognize that from a technical standpoint, there wasn't much more they could do. For anyone who thinks I am not serious with how much the DLC pushes consoles, look up how it launched on Xbox 360. It was so bad they had to recall it and release it again, there was no fixing it.
