Fallout So, Fallout 1....I'm raging so hard now.

AoD? Non combat solutions? Without metagaming? Get the fuck out

 

Hey, no one said nuthin'bout no metagame.

 

It's a good thing Bethesda recognized all the flaws that JC mentioned and improved it with a real time engine on the third game.

 

Fallout was released before torment was... if You played them in proper order and don't Jew your shekels you would enjoy it.

 

It takes some effort to make FO combat interesting. Random encounters are bad no matter which way you slice it(I alleviate this situation by hitting "A" ASAP). But the fights against the Khans in FO1 or Den Slavers in FO2 are pretty awesome. With a good plan i.e. a good loadout and proper behaviour set for companions, you'll always end up victorious and feel that satisfaction of victory.

 

Of course, duh. And "averange" is being quite easy on it in recognition of its other strengths combined. Normally, combat is shit ergo it's shit crpg.

Shit FPS with nice dialogies, an adventure game with nice dialogues, an ambitious but largery dysfunctional RPG like Fallout, did not play.

 

Too much combat? Only mandatory combat in F2 is boss fight.

 

The interesting thing is that Bloodlines has less shitty FPS combat than the others have shitty RPG combat. Says a lot actually

Still, like Infinitron says, games like Bloodlines and PS:T have way more going for them in most of the departments where they do shit right compared to Fallout.

 

- jeeeeesus fucking christ....

JC the dumbfuck, awor spoiled braT sukratz, GRUNKER THE DENSE and Infinitron are now going to judge Fallout..?

Because teh combat isnt actiony enough?

The Turn Based combat?
It lacks actionz eh? You just like...stand there and shoot, right?

How fucking stupid can you people get?
.. well... i shouldn't even ask really since Einstein already answered that conundrum.
Your stupidity is infinite.
It has no end or limit.

NEWSFLASH - for you popamole action graphikz sucking dumbasses. Turn Based combat is not about action gameplay or actiony like moves and thrills - at all.

 

Captain dumbfuck has reported in.

And he cannot into reading. Shocker.

Thank you Captain obvious. Or should we call you Obvious Dumbfuck?

 

Why doesn't Infinitron get a tagline..?

I know. That's why I enjoy cerebral combat in games like KotC much more than in Fallout, where cheap thrills like exploding heads is all there is

 

Maybe fighting with kobolds with your maxed out 6 lvl mage in a generic Forgotten Realms setting immurse you more. Maybe you are more into quirky paragraph rpgs or maybe you prefer point and click adventure games? Who knows.

Bloodlines combat mechanics are absolutely abysmal. I won't believe there is one person here that didn't want to cry when being forced to make his way through the endless tunnels full of monsters. Not only it's shit(especially ranged, Toika cannot into FPS), it's not fun at all. I really can't see why you compere it as superior combat system( in it's own sub genre) to Fallout .FO combat was fun, it was rather quick for a turn based game, it was simple and you didn't have to bother with it if you didn't want to. The game offers you enough solutions to finish your journey with non-combat approach. How exactly is worse then Bloodlines?

 

So you are saying Baldur's Gate has better design then Fallout?

 

He's saying that for Baldur's Gate's faults, it still has areas where it excels. Fallout doesn't, except maybe in its setting.

 

I'm not a big fan of Baldur's Gate 1. Maybe that's why I can't see where it excels. Care to elaborate?

 

For me, atmosphere was the most endearing quality of the original Fallout games, followed closely by a sense of mystery/unfamiliarity/venturing into the unknown (qualities I rarely see cited specifically with regard to cRPGs, and which few games can match), followed by writing and dialog.

I found the combat satisfying due in large part to the visceral death animations and audio, which is perhaps a popamole reason to enjoy combat, but whatever.

There are hotkeys for each skill.

 

^ I think that post is actually the best proof yet that me and Infinitron are right, Blaine. It's fine that you love it, but, "atmosphere" and sense of mystery is something that can be said about a lot of games depending on who you ask.

 

I'm not arguing for or against you, just weighing in.

I'm too close to the Fallout games to view them objectively. I've played FO1 nine times, FO2 thirteen times, and was an obsessed superfan for a very long time until I finally got tired of playing them. I've since backed off a bit. I know they're not objectively the best cRPGs ever developed, but they're perhaps the most sacred to me personally.

 

In my opinion, it's an intentional design decision meant to emulate the fact that a player must choose which skill to use on a given interactive object entirely of their own accord. A context menu typically presents all viable options, while hiding non-viable ones. For example, the player might not realize that a given object can be repaired or science-d until he tries it. A context menu would remove all guesswork, informing the player of what is and isn't possible.

Oh come on, Infinitron. A small animation makes you impatient, and it should be instant because FUN? Memorizing a handful of hotkeys is too hard? Smells like decline in here.