Fallout The original Fallout is the Mortal Kombat of CRPGs

I grew up like many of you with the original Fallout games being some of my first PC gaming experiences. Obviously i enjoyed them back then. But having tried to replay them many years later, i realised something: They are not that great. I mean, given the time period, they were very good for those standards, but a close examination can reveal not only many flaws, but it can also reveal that Fallout design was nothing special (no pun intended) and the main reasons for their success and fandom lies elsewhere. I realised that Fallout is the Mortal Kombat of RPGs.

What does that mean? Mortal Kombat was generally a bad fighting game. Street Fighter II and other games like the Neo Geo fighters were much, much superior to Mortal Kombat in terms of gameplay quality. The only thing going for it was the "real life graphics" based on real actors, and the violence and blood. And yet, those very things made it top the sales charts. People prefered Mortal Kombat because it featured real actor ninjas, hot chicks in swimsuits, and tons of blood and fatalities and gore. The TV outrage about "protect our children" helped a lot with popularity too. Mortal Kombat was cheesy, but in a good way. Though other fighters were simply put better video games, the masses floked to Mortal Kombat because the gory combat was more fun. Kids and teenagers especially loved it more, because it was more "mature" in setting than the "kiddie" street fighter ii.... Thus Mortal Kombat was solidified as the most famous fighting game series, even though it wasn't that good.

I think the same effect happened with the original Fallouts. What really drew me in was the violence in Fallout, the gore, the ability to target specific parts (which was basically the only strategy involved, aside from who target to shoot first and with what gun/mode). The mature post apocalyptic setting that was different from all those kiddie fantasy games. It also helped that Fallout in general was pretty easy and straightforward. A very simple character system, with a very simple combat system. Just point and shoot. There is no depth and nothing to learn. You just create any character, ensure it has decent small guns stat, and that's about it. All else is a decent armor and the game goes from there. Very simple and straightforward to play. You just enjoyed the carnage and mayhem in a post apocalyptic setting. That was the novelty.

I think that is what most people don't want to admit. The original Fallouts are being held up to a pedestal they don't deserve, simply because of nostalgia. They weren't tactical games, they weren't hard games, they didn't have much choice, they were short, they were buggy, their character systems were extremely flawed (most skills were barely useful), and the production values weren't that great. People loved them though for the setting, the maturity, and gore. People were drawn to a post apocalyptic america. It was cheesy fun. That is what made us love those games.

Bethesda Fallouts brought these elements to our age, by using a modern engine with more freedom involved. Fallout 4 is a much better game than the original Fallouts. I know you don't want to accept this truth, but it is still the truth. Everything good about Fallouts 1 and 2 is in Fallout 4, but the engine is modern and the gameplay much more advanced. It is time to leave the past to the past and stop trying to hold RPGs back in the mid 90s just because you are too old to appreciate and immerse yourself to the modern games.

 

1) Yes
2) No
3) Maybe
4) retadred

 

Don't give him retarded ratings, he wants it! Let's ruin his masterplan to become the ultimate retard

 

Show Spoiler Hide Spoiler

I agree about the character system. It's very flawed. Making anything other than the very few meta builds feels like fighting against the system.

 

I am not farming retarded ratings. I mean, obviously i will get them, but that is a side-effect of truth-telling in an era(and website) of lies and deceit. The cake is a lie, the emperor has no clothes, Fallout is flawed, archaic, obsolete, and mediocre by modern standards.

 

Damn, boy. You beat even my retard ratings. I'm impressed.
And here i thought GD is the easiest way for farming em.

Edit: /me gives TemplarGR a balloon.

 

You two will like each other.

 

Oh God...I thought you left.

 

Welcome back TemplarGR, I see you are already fiercely competing to bring back the title as the Greatest Retard after your landslide victory couple years back

 

You are wrong.

I find Fallout and Fallout 2 to be, as a whole, better than vanilla New Vegas. They are much more tactical games than Fallout 4 could ever hope to be. They are much harder games than Fallout 4 could ever hope to be. They have much more choice than Fallout 4 could ever hope to have. And they are certainly far less buggy. The gameplay of Fallout 4 isn't "much more advanced". It is entirely different. That people sing more praises about its crafting and homebuilding features over its RPG features says a lot about it as a Fallout game.

Fallout is a great game. The only truth you have spoken is that it is a short game. And yet, despite it being the perfect blueprint for a bigger and better game, Bethesda had no better idea than to strip everything that made it great when making Fallout 3, and carry over their mistakes from their own Elder Scrolls franchise.

I don't have anything else to add to this.

 

There is nothing tactical about Fallout. You want proof? simple. Analyze a typical battle and give me the "interesting decisions" you make in Fallout. Actually, never mind, i will do it for you:

1) Preparation: Put armor and a weapon in your slots

2) Push the combat button

3) Hover your mouse to see which target has the higher chance to hit, unless someone is threatening you with nasty damage and you can take him out first

4) Shoot it or use aimed shot to target the eyes or groin, or use burst in point blank range to cheese ez killz

5) Do that until combat is over.

That's the "tactics" of Fallout. There is no cover. You can't control the NPCs. You basically can only fight with guns, melee, or grenades, so the combat is vastly inferior to something like DnD (there is no magic).

Seriously, where are the "tactics"? There is nothing tactical about Fallout, you just play the combat turned based like a retard instead of real time in Fallout 4. That's about it.

 

Leave again and stay leaved.

 

Despite your retarded, clickbaity title, I actually read your post. And you surprised me: The original Fallouts do have some flawed mechanics, and they do deserve criticism. But I'm not aware of many people who hold the Fallouts as classics for their mechanics. Instead, everyone praises their world, their characters, their quests, their choices, their writing in general. In sort, everything Bethesda's Fallouts lack. I was ready to begrudgingly grant you a point. Until I read the final sentences, that is. Now I'm convinced you're trolling. No human being can possibly believe that for real.

 

Bethesda's writting is not much different. It is less "mature" than the originals, but it is still pretty much Fallout. People love the Bethesda Fallouts a lot, they do not love the originals this much, or else Interplay wouldn't go bankrupt.... There is a reason people even today don't play the Fallouts outside for a niche cult of nostalgia fags. Fallouts are available, they are cheap, they can even run on a phone these days, but people don't care about them, because they are trashy games and the setting is better explored in Fallout 4, the best in the series. That is why FO4 sold around 35 million copies and counting (or something like that, haven't kept in touch lately).

 

Ontopoly, look. This is what you sound like when you talk about your personal crusade against the Larian shills.

 

Difficulty: hard/hard
Dump luck and don't invest in outdoorsman to get the most interesting encounters
No Navarro meta-runs

Now tell me about "easy" combat

 

If there's no cover in Fallout, there's certainly far less cover in Fallout 4 where you can simply shoot at people in the open and survive.

1. Preparation: doing reconnaissance of the area. A good player will first look at his surroundings to think of a battle plan. This is particularly obvious in the quest to rescue Tandi: if you are moronic and run head on, you will get massacred. On the other hand, if you look at the positoining of the enemies, you will be picking your fights. This is near impossible in newer Fallout games unless you use stealth, as as soon as you alert an enemy the whole damn building gets on you.
2. Cover and positioning: in Fallout, cover matters as enemies can't swarm at you in real time like they can in Fallout 4. Being in a good position increases your odds of success, as you can't simply run away from bullets as you can in Fallout 4. Why bother hiding if you can simply dodge bullets left and right by moving? Not to mention you die much faster in Fallout than Fallout 4, so there's a good reason to prevent enemies from having a shot at you.
3. Ammo variants. That thing which Fallout 4 removed from the game after Obsidian reimplemented it in Fallout: New Vegas. But this is par for the course when it comes to Bethesda: instead of fixing mechanics that don't work very well (one could argue that the ammo variety in New Vegas was sort of pointless given the game as a whole was rather easy) they remove them altogether. And you know what, Fallout had ammo variants.

 

Jesus, please, stop embarrassing yourself like this. Brocken Jr. I stand by the "37 months" theory.

 

Oh great. Inb4 he gets assblasted again and leaves cuz u ppl are so contrarian not smart and mature and old liek me who comes to a forum just to post contrarian stuff and why are u so mean to meeeee waaaaaah