Game News Fallout 2 vs Diablo 2

Tags: Diablo 2

If you think that the <a href=http://www.gamespy.com/titlefight/brackets.shtml>GameSpy poll</a> was stupid, wait till you see <a href=http://diabloii.net/columnists/a-d2-fallout2.shtml>this article</a>. Some guy actually tries to compare <a href=http://www.interplay.com/fallout2/index.html>Fallout 2</a> to <a href=http://www.blizzard.com/diablo2>Diablo 2</a> apple-to-apple style.
<br>
<br>
<blockquote>Fallout II is set in a future after a nuclear war has devastated the world. You start the game in a "tribal" village, composed mainly of tents and people with spears. You are sent on a quest to recover a GECK (Garden of Eden Creation Kit) which will save your village and create a, well, Garden of Eden to live in. You set off, kill a bunch of stuff, get a lot of levels, plunder a bunch of cool stuff, kill off the bad guys and win the game.
<br>
<br>
Otherwise, the side quests are pretty impressive. Yeah, you get the "help Torr defend the cows" ones, but you get the "Find the missing watch" quests which involve dynamiting an outhouse. Fallout II actually has characters, too. Yeah, I know that Alkor is a wannabe necro, and Charsi has a thing for barbarians, but they don't really compare to, say, Sulik who talks to the bone in his nose, or Fergus, who had deluded himself into believing that he runs a nuclear power plant single handedly.</blockquote>
<br>
Wow!
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>

 

I really don't see how you could compare the two games. D2 is an action rpg, and FO2 is more of a story and text based RPG (best way I can put it, if someone has a better way, please type it in)

 

How is it text-based? It's graphical.

ps. Diablo 2 for the win.

 

D2 is a hack'n'slash. FO2 is an RPG.

There. Better

 

I prefer Diablo 2 over Fallout 2. It's a better game.

 

Uh huh...I might prefer a game of pinball over chess, but I wont claim pinball is a better game.

 

D2 I can get instant gratification. After five seconds, boom, I'm out and about and killing things left and right. In Fallout 2, there was the damned temple of trials that actually made me stop playing several times.

 

Say it ain't so... :shock: :wink:

 

It's true, dude. D2 is the superior game. For example, it doesn't get boring even after the 200th time you've killed Bhaal. I'm still playing it after 2 years. I've not touched Fallout 2 since I finished it the second time. It was average at best, mediocre at worst.

 

Diablo doesn't even belong in the same sentence as Fallout..

Unless your describing how much better Fallout is than Diablo.

I've played Fallout 1 and 2 once a year since they were released. Fallout is a bit short, but I find something new in Fallout 2 every time I play. Why, right now I have KotOR, Call of Duty, Tron 2.0, ToEE, and a bunch of other new flashy games on my HD, but I'm so into my yearly Fallout playthrough I haven't touched any of them in a week. Fallout 2 is hands down the best RPG ever made. You can be a porn star ferchrisssakes, whats better than that???

Besides, why are we even talking about Diablo in this forum? Theres barely anything RPG about it. And how could it not be boring to replay? Click on enemy until its dead, collect treasure, repeat. You probably like Dungeon Seige too, huh?

 

200th time? I couldn't bear to play through once due to to the mind numbing repetition and lack of depth, meaningful story, or RPG anything.

 

I didn't know there was supposed to be a 'strong plot' or 'rpg anything' in an action game. As for depth, the character system has plenty of it.

 

In order for one game to be superiour to another, it should posess more of those attributes than the other. D2 has none of those things, including depth.

 

Tell me again how you got your RPGcodex credentials?

 

Diablo 2 = Great action/Roguelike
Fallout 2 = Average RPG marred by revolting pop culture references; countless bugs, some of which rendering the game unplayable; dubious design decisions; et cetera.

I would -- an awesome pinball game is still better than a crappy chess knock-off.

Only if the two games were in the same genre. Diablo 2 is a terrible RPG, but it does what it does better than Fallout 2 does what it does.

Oh dear, God forbid that a staff member play games other than RPG's. I fail to see how liking a good action game more than a lame RPG would bring his "credentials" into question.

 

Gentlemen, we are now passing by a flammable area. Please wear your flame-retardant suits and accompanying flame shields.

Thank you,
The Management.

 

I'd rather not participate in this discussion :wink:

 

What constitutes an RPG and why is Fallout considered one, but Diablo isn't?

And it cannot be any of the following: Character progression, story, or depth.

 

I will say this: D2 is not even a good action game. There is no skill involved in playing D2, just clicking on things when they appear. NOLF2 is a good example of an action game.

 

Why can't it?

Anyway, Diablo is considered an RPG by many people because it has all the trappings of an RPG. But really, it is missing the main ingredients: choice. It offers one path through the game, superficial character development, and nothing but fighting. There is no role to play that you have any choice in choosing or choice in how you will apoproach the role you are given. Fallout is all about choice.

 

I'd just like to ask what the hell the purpose of questioning my credentials was.

If I were to answer that question, I would just say I'm a good writer with the ability to express my opinions in a most eloquent, and convincing fashion - for part of the time, pertaining to matters involving the RPG scene as well as the gaming scene in general. RPGs aren't the only games that I enjoy playing, you know. I'd find it rather difficult to believe that RPGs are the only games some of YOU play, either. There must certainly exist hobbies and game genres outside the scope of role-playing games.

I would beg to differ with you, Jung. In my not-so-humble opinion, Diablo 2 is an ADDICTIVE action game. It might not be good compared to the likes of Far Cry or Unreal Tournament 2004 in terms of 'twitch-gaming', but it certainly surpasses these games in terms of character development on the echelon of discovering 'phat lewt' and player interaction. in fact, I would say that it is the cooperative nature of the gameplay in Diablo 2 which I find so appealing to me, even more so than a quick game of UT2004 Onslaught. The difference between the two is that one has more 'permanent' effects, especially considering character development, and the discovery of, as previously noted, material luxury.

 

You just did.

But anyway. I like apples, and I like oranges. Why bother pitting these two wonderful foods against eachother?

 

For they are both fruit, and damn those than don't compare fruit!

 

I kicked off with D2, found the atmosphere wasn't half as good the original Diablo, killed BloodRaven, finished for the night. Came back the next day and found BloodRaven alive and well. Haven't looked at it since.

 

The original Diablo was all about story. The second Diablo was all about phat loot. I preferred the original.

Anyway, I wont even try to compare Diablo and F2. No matter how many times I beat Diablo, I still find it lacking in gameplay substance. There are plenty of subtleties, but not enough thinking involved in the basic gameplay. On the other hand, I've played F2 most of the way through, but I never beat it because I got bored with the repetitive environments and the lack of control over henchmen very quickly. Also, the lack of randomisation tends to bother me--it makes it too easy for me to resort to a walkthrough. On a different note, I still think Fallout 2 is probably a deeper game. I just didn't enjoy it much after the first 10 hours or so. Randomisation was a stroke of genius for Diablo, and it gave the game a lot of replayability for me.