Fallout I've just finished "Fallout: A Post Nuclear Role Playing Game", and...

[Citizen]

I’m just happy I’m not OP:

1. Has a hard time pressing number keys.
2. Thinks Fallout is essentially about “dribbling”.
3. Was so scared of The Glow that he instead betrayed humanity and ran to daddy (The Master) to be dipped.

Also, I’m not sure why Fallout 3 and 4 are mentioned at all (i.e. trash tier).

Trying too hard for codex goodboy oldfag points

 

[Taka-Haradin puolipeikko]

I’m just happy I’m not OP:

1. Has a hard time pressing number keys.
2. Thinks Fallout is essentially about “dribbling”.
3. Was so scared of The Glow that he instead betrayed humanity and ran to daddy (The Master) to be dipped.

Also, I’m not sure why Fallout 3 and 4 are mentioned at all (i.e. trash tier).

The fact that there isn't Come on and Slam -remix for Fallout proves that 2nd point is wrong.

 

[Kev Inkline]

So, what's for dinner?

 

[Twiglard]

Didn't read, but this is the first time I've seen nested parentheses three levels deep. As an inveterate abuser of parentheses myself, I respect the commitment.

It's only abuse if you leave the parens unbalanced.

 

[BarãodoDesterro]

Has the fate of Jacorn been mentioned anywhere?

"Vault Dweller's memoirs" (I have not read it yet, just have heard about it and have visited the "Fandom") seems to suggest Jacoren is still alive.

The Glow is bloody overrated by Codexers. Fallout 1's top moments are 1. The secret of iguana meats and bits. 2. Hire a water caravan to your vault. 3. Meet a bunch of giant monsters in your face (The Shed) etc... The Glow is a good dungeon, full to bursting with loot that will mostly be left behind by new players. Which is why it reinforce the feelings. But it's not a good "representative" moment of Fallout 1.

Well... did it all... a shame I tried (and later discovered) I could not turn the guy to the authorities.

(Shut [the "fuck" up])

I can't react to posts... consider I'm doing it.

Funny x 3

I’m just happy I’m not OP: 1. Has a hard time pressing number keys. 2. Thinks Fallout is essentially about “dribbling”. 3. Was so scared of The Glow that he instead betrayed humanity and ran to daddy (The Master) to be dipped. Also, I’m not sure why Fallout 3 and 4 are mentioned at all (i.e. trash tier).

1. I'm a console player (will not hide it) starting a journey. My problems are not with hotkeys — I've been using them on strategy games (even I am not that hardcore to play AOE2 on my PS2) since ever —, but with the implication that I must use all skills in every frame of the game.
2. What is it about? I always positioned myself the furthest I could and started shooting guys in the head; then, the guys would start shooting as well: or the avatar would fall and lose a lot of hitpoints, or the avatar would receive damage (even 0 damage), or the avatar would dance.
I'm not even saying the combat is bad (it is nice) — and maybe someone could even use grenades, psycho, strategy, creating something else — I am highlighting my experience and sharing how I felt.
One could say, maybe, that people should play "Fallout" on hardest ironman, but no one said it.
3.

Funny
There is the thing about bad design, even though "The Glow" supposedly killed a lot of "losers", a drug dealer is the key to the secrets of the wasteland.

To highlight two things.
Firstly, even if people do not want it, the games belong to Bethesda now — Fallout 3 and 4 are, for all purposes, Fallout games.
That leads to the second thing, I just played "Fallout 1" because I've played the others; more, I'm not playing games chronologically — I'm playing games that feel more important to me —: it is just normal that I compare them.

Hey OP, have you played Arcanum?

I've played 30 minutes or so. It is on my list, I will play it, but don't exactly know when.

 

[Lurker47]

Fallout is a good game.

 

[Ol' Willy]

Fallout 3 and 4 are, for all purposes, Fallout games.

No. These are "Fallout themed games"

 

[Devastator]

1. I'm a console player (will not hide it) starting a journey. My problems are not with hotkeys — I've been using them on strategy games (even I am not that hardcore to play AOE2 on my PS2) since ever —, but with the implication that I must use all skills in every frame of the game.

What sort of a console player does not get turned off by Fallout's otherwise glorious graphics?

2. What is it about? I always positioned myself the furthest I could and started shooting guys in the head; then, the guys would start shooting as well: or the avatar would fall and lose a lot of hitpoints, or the avatar would receive damage (even 0 damage), or the avatar would dance.
I'm not even saying the combat is bad (it is nice) — and maybe someone could even use grenades, psycho, strategy, creating something else — I am highlighting my experience and sharing how I felt. One could say, maybe, that people should play "Fallout" on hardest ironman, but no one said it.

You do know that combat is basically optional in Fallout (i.e. you can do a pacifist run if you ignore the fact that you may have to set off a nuke at the end)? The beauty of Fallout is that it can be anything you want it to be. Why settle for dribbling?

3.

Funny
There is the thing about bad design, even though "The Glow" supposedly killed a lot of "losers", a drug dealer is the key to the secrets of the wasteland.

See my previous point. Going to The Glow is worth it because you can finally relax and play a game of chess with an AI. Plenty of background radiation, no one alive nearby, all robots powered off, backpack full of drugs. If that is not relaxing, what is?

 

[MRY]

Fallout 1 and 2 were great for their 'slow', mellow, melancholy, nuclear apocalypse wasteland setting and feel IMO.

That description of the setting is largely true for FO1 (though even FO1 has a number of setting-breaking moments that are largely forgotten) but it's not really true of FO2. When I played FO2, the thing that offended me most about the setting was not the talking animals, talking Death Claws, or pop culture references everywhere. It was that the apocalypse seemed basically to be over and done with. There were multiple thriving areas, and various technologies (IIRC) had now surpassed the pre-war levels (particularly in San Francisco).

 

[Gnidrologist]

You can't (totally) avoid the combat diplomacy {with rats}.

 

[Sigourn]

You've discovered Fallout is the most overrated RPG of all time. Not because of what it was in 1997, but because of what people claim it is in 2021. It happens to the best of us, sooner or later. Welcome to the pack.

Fallout: New Vegas is what happens when an ambitious dev team decides to take a cool setting to "best of all time" levels of greatness. The gameplay is similarly shit, but at least it's more honest about it.

 

[MRY]

But that's the whole point of Fallout 2! The point of 2 is that the old basic apocalypse fight for survival and city-states only concerned with their internal affairs is over. Its has been eighty years, its a new age now - a age of rebuilding, of progress, of powerful city-states and vast nation states. Its telling that in 1, you're trading bottlecaps in the midst of ruins and junk, while in 2, you're buying and selling using gold coins, a gold-backed currency coined by an advanced, hegemonic nation state.

Remember: Fallout happens 84 years after the war. Fallout 2 is situated 168 years after the war. Even after a nuclear war, that's a lot of time. Things happen, things change, the world revolves and turns. The world of 1853 was very different from our own, why would the world of 2242 be just like the world of 2161?

That is an inapt comparison. Of course a densely populated, fertile world that has just developed rapid transit and has just opened up huge areas of untapped natural resources would boom economically in 168 years. The world FO1 posits is utterly different from that. There's no comparison we can draw from our world, but you might consider Mexico after the Conquest -- so it dropped from ~25M people and a prosperous, thriving civilization in early 1500s to ~6M in 1545 to ~2.5M in 1570 to 1.2M in 1620. In 1800 it was ~5M. What grew back in Mexico was not a high-tech version of the Aztec Empire, either. The collapsed civilization never really came back.

The problem with FO2 is that it doesn't look like a second-growth civilization coming up among the ruins of the old civilization (like a Charlemagne Holy Roman Empire or whatever). The Shi are just a thriving continuation of the preexisting civilization -- Aztecs with spaceships. None of it makes the least sense because all of the technology that is miraculously being built upon in FO2 presupposed supply chains that don't exist.

But to be clear, I don't want FO2 to be realistic -- I want it to be thematic. And there was a rich, existing literature of second-growth post-apocalyptic civilization (the low-hanging fruit would be A Canticle for Leibowitz, explicitly referenced in FO). That literature does not have hyper-high-tech radiation-eating plants being engineered 168 years after the apocalypse. In Leibowitz, it takes 1000+ years to get there. If anything, FO2 feels more like right after a less destructive apocalypse, when the old order hasn't yet completely collapsed. You don't go from Junktown to New Reno (thematically or realistically); you go from New Reno to Junktown as the pre-apocalypse infrastructure that New Reno depicts breaks down. That shit doesn't last 168 years after the supply chains are broken; it might not even make it 30 years.

 

[Volourn]

"(i.e. you can do a pacifist run if you ignore the fact that you may have to set off a nuke at the end)?"

"(ie. You can be a virgin in life if you ignore the fact that you may have to have an orgy that one time.)


rOOL THE FUKK EYES.




P.S. OP is retart

 

[Funposter]

Fallout 1 and 2 were great for their 'slow', mellow, melancholy, nuclear apocalypse wasteland setting and feel IMO.

That description of the setting is largely true for FO1 (though even FO1 has a number of setting-breaking moments that are largely forgotten) but it's not really true of FO2. When I played FO2, the thing that offended me most about the setting was not the talking animals, talking Death Claws, or pop culture references everywhere. It was that the apocalypse seemed basically to be over and done with. There were multiple thriving areas, and various technologies (IIRC) had now surpassed the pre-war levels (particularly in San Francisco).

San Fransisco having advanced technology goes into the same category as talking animals and the rest of the general fucktardery present in FO2. The best bits are all tied to FO1 in some way and the wholly original material tends to be mediocre or bad.

 

[urmom]

Fallout 1 was my first Fallout. I can't imagine playing it *after* 2 or 3 or 4.

 

[Funposter]

Also the talking animals were explained in FO2. Well, except that plant. That was really strange and bizarre.

Just because something was explained doesn't make it reasonable or enjoyable.

 

[Daedalos]

Shitting on fallout...

That's a paddlin'

 

[The Jester]

To this day I still think there is deep meaning and hidden message behind that Scorpion chess player quest.

 

[Zboj Lamignat]

There has never been a Fallout game with combat that isn't total crap.

Lol. It's very easy to criticize Fallout's combat, because there's a lot there that could be improved or expanded upon and it's definitely rather simplistic, but calling it "total crap" is completely ridiculous. In fact, it's pretty much one of the smoothest (provided you move combat speed slider to the maximum right:p) and most enjoyable combat experiences in classic crpgs. It has guns, animations and critical hit flavor texts that don't get old on your 20th playthrough. And then there's the context: the dialogue, the scenarios and the characters that make many encounters really satisfying.

The best bits are all tied to FO1 in some way and the wholly original material tends to be mediocre or bad.

Yeah, right. The best "bits" of F2 is the mid-game, the power struggle between the different bigger and smaller players in the region, how they all tie together and, most importantly, how it's something you don't just hear about but actively participate in through expansive chains of interwoven quests. Which not only isn't tied to FO1 at all, but also something F1 didn't have, because its "amazingly designed, realistic and down to earth" settlements were literally 2-3 quest dispensers, a shop and some retarded random shit like a guy making canned people or robin hood with his thief guild, because we always have to remember that only F2 had stupid random shit, F1 never did.

 

[Taka-Haradin puolipeikko]

Fallout 1 was my first Fallout. I can't imagine playing it *after* 2 or 3 or 4.

I played Fallout 2 and Arcanum before I got my hands on FO1.
My impression about it back then was "Tightly designed, but kinda simplistic and latter games have some very much needed QoL improvements; Shady Sands was obvious demo content and had some ideas that weren't used elsewhere".

 

[Commissar Draco]

There has never been a Fallout game with combat that isn't total crap.

Lol. It's very easy to criticize Fallout's combat, because there's a lot there that could be improved or expanded upon and it's definitely rather simplistic, but calling it "total crap" is completely ridiculous. In fact, it's pretty much one of the smoothest (provided you move combat speed slider to the maximum right:p) and most enjoyable combat experiences in classic crpgs. It has guns, animations and critical hit flavor texts that don't get old on your 20th playthrough. And then there's the context: the dialogue, the scenarios and the characters that make many encounters really satisfying.

The best bits are all tied to FO1 in some way and the wholly original material tends to be mediocre or bad.

Yeah, right. The best "bits" of F2 is the mid-game, the power struggle between the different bigger and smaller players in the region, how they all tie together and, most importantly, how it's something you don't just hear about but actively participate in through expansive chains of interwoven quests. Which not only isn't tied to FO1 at all, but also something F1 didn't have, because its "amazingly designed, realistic and down to earth" settlements were literally 2-3 quest dispensers, a shop and some retarded random shit like a guy making canned people or robin hood with his thief guild, because we always have to remember that only F2 had stupid random shit, F1 never did.

Show me Fallout game when you can decide how entire nation states live and die and no killing some ten raiders not counts Comrade, I remember how you could totally f... V city by accidentally poisoning their water supply, strong arming them for NCR/Bishops or do the opposite, make gold mines full of town join them and become Vault City Guard Captain... when you entered there as stinking tribal in old vault suit. What a pitty that we never seen Arroyo and in all its glory aside from extro pic:

In which it looks rather glorius with those three giant basilica buildings.... Churches or Governmental buildings?

Also we can visit the New Reno around time of Fallout 1 in Fallout Nevada it had Major, City Council and Police Department thirty to forty years after the Great war with wave of looting and anarchy when Old Mayor died and people were able to live ''free of his tyranny'' . So it makes sense to look like Ghetto or slums instead of burn down ruins like Clamath or Den.

 

[Ol' Willy]

In fact, it's pretty much one of the smoothest (provided you move combat speed slider to the maximum right:p) and most enjoyable combat experiences in classic crpgs. It has guns, animations and critical hit flavor texts that don't get old on your 20th playthrough.

My man, that's so true. Fallout combat lacks tacticoolness, but it's so enjoyable overall - yes, smooth indeed. Controls are very good, audiovisual stimuli are working perfectly: when you bust a cap - and weapon sounds are great, Gauss rifle thump alone worths a lot - score a crit and guy explodes like a watermelon or melts down. And considering the finest quality of spritework of NPCs and locations, which adds even more. A lot of games have more tacticoolness, but not many of them are so smooth.

 

[Darth Slaughter]

Didn't read, but this is the first time I've seen nested parentheses three levels deep. As an inveterate abuser of parentheses myself, I respect the commitment.

Indeed.

It also shows the author is Brazilian. He doesn't merely put parenthesis inside his parenthesis, he puts curly brackets inside brackets inside parenthesis, like this: ([{}]). Do you know where the only place AFAIK where this is taught as the proper method in writing and math? In Brazil. Because I was taught to do it too. Not that his name doesn't say "brazilian", but it shows he is genuinely one and not a troll pretending to be.

Althrough it still looks like a troll.

Well, being a Brazilian myself, iirc the right order actually is {[()]}. At least in math...

 

[Devastator]

"(i.e. you can do a pacifist run if you ignore the fact that you may have to set off a nuke at the end)?"

"(ie. You can be a virgin in life if you ignore the fact that you may have to have an orgy that one time.)

Why is sex your default analogy?

I find interesting the difference in terms of pressing a button that will later set off an explosion (or convincing The Master to do it) vs. personally killing someone.

However, there was a considerable difference between shooting a man at 400 yards, at which distance the damage caused by the bullet to his body was largely unseen, and cutting a man’s throat or bayoneting him in the guts ... Distance made killing less troubling as bomber crews found when flying raids over Germany in the depth of night

 

[JarlFrank]

Fallout 1 and 2 were great for their 'slow', mellow, melancholy, nuclear apocalypse wasteland setting and feel IMO. No game can really recreate that today because most game studios only think about the most shallow parts of Fallout 1 like "LOL PEOPLE EXPLODED WHEN YOU SHOT THEM, AND YOU COULD SHOOT THEM IN THE BALLS!! LOL!" or "it was the idealistic 50's with robots but then they blew up the whole world lol so IRONIC!" and they think that is what everyone must love about Fallout so they just go overboard on that shit. Not to mention many modern players might just find a slower paced, more empty wasteland to be "boring or lacking content" and totally not get the point at all...

Fallout 1 had that atmosphere.

Fallout 2 already stepped too far into the "haha funny jokes in a wasteland" territory.

Which makes sense considering Fallout 1 is the only one in the series made by the troika of Cain, Boyarsky, Anderson - who would leave Interplay and go on to make Arcanum, a game that captures the same atmosphere of melancholy, just in a different setting (high magic fantasy world entering an era of industrialization, with many places giving you an atmosphere of melancholy as the old world fades and makes room for the new, with many people being left behind).

Fallout 1 never received a sequel.