Interview 1UP Interviews Feargus Urquhart

[Reklar]

"FO2 was terrible in comparison to FO1 and i'm sure you disagreed with every point made, just because you're an idiot like that."

I disagree, because FO2 is not worse than FO1. Only fanboys think otherwise.

I don't understand why you continually belabour this point, you played FO2 before FO, so naturally you would assume that it was better because it was your first point of contact with the franchaise. Those of us who played FO1 first see a lot of faults with FO2 because it's not consistent with the world of FO1 (in some ways); this is why FO2 is often critiqued. BTW, how did FO2 improve over FO1/how was it better?

That's a good point Seven, and what I find interesting is I played Fallout 2 prior to Fallout, but I still think Fallout is the superior game overall. Setting consitency and a better plot made up for whatever game mechanics might have been lacking. Since the game's mechanics did not play significantly different between the games it follows that the setting and plot were the important points to compare.

-Reklar
(a Fallout/RPG fan)

 

[Seven]

I liked the "tell me about feature"; it added to the atmosphere and it made NPC's seem more alive (at the time anyways).

 

[Spazmo]

I agree with Brios: independent of whether or not he called us doodyheads, Feargus is still a dick and a hack. It endlessly shits me that really talented people are so ridiculously devoted to him. I mean, sure, he made sure you all got your paychecks in trying times and is still doing so--but he sucks.

As for Fo2, on a recent playthrough, I kinda find the game lacks direction. The inital game--from Arroyo to about Vault City, passing through Klamath, the Den, Modoc and Gacko--is pretty tight, but after that, you kind of just wander around and stumble into a different town looking for a quest. All the other towns were pretty firmly linked: you go to Klamath to find Vic. Vic is in the Den. Vic points you to Vault City. On the way there, you find Modoc. Vault City is full of links to Gecko and things to do. Beyond there, the game needed more hooks with the mid-game locations (New Reno, Redding and Broken Hills).

 

[Volourn]

"I don't understand why you continually belabour this point, you played FO2 before FO"

What a FUCKING lie.

Where the HELL did you read such BULLSHIT?

I have NEVER played FO2 before FO1.

It was ALWAYS FO1 before FO2.

Do you need to FRICKIN' lie to try to prove a point?

Geez...



And, what ways it was better? Let me see.. Better joinable npcs. Better quests. Superior writing.Two of the best towns ever in a CRPG. Role-playing as good as the first. Longer and more long lasting goodness - not just 10-20 hours of yayness; but much, much more.

The only things that FO1 did better was it was less buggy (not by that much considering the size difference), and the cool way you can end the game in two different palces (depending on the order you finsih them). Not too many games (if any other) does that.

Next.

 

[Seven]

For Christ sakes, you can't expect me to go digging up the thread where I read that. And stop whinning about people lying about you, everyday it's "he lied about this," "he lied about that," Innuendo and rumor this",...

 

[Volourn]

"And stop whinning about people lying about you, everyday it's "he lied about this," "he lied about that," Innuendo and rumor this",..."

:D I tell ya what. I'll stop whining about them lying about me when they stop lying on me. That seems like a logical compromise. :twisted:

 

[Seven]

"And stop whinning about people lying about you, everyday it's "he lied about this," "he lied about that," Innuendo and rumor this",..."

:D I tell ya what. I'll stop whining about them lying about me when they stop lying on me. That seems like a logical compromise. :twisted:

I suppose you see yourself as the down trodden protagonist in your own little world, right? :wink:

 

[Volourn]

"I suppose you see yourself as the down trodden protagonist in your own little world, right?"

Absolutely. Aren't we all the protagonist in our own little worlds?

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

"I suppose you see yourself as the down trodden protagonist in your own little world, right?"

Absolutely. Aren't we all the protagonist in our own little worlds?

My world's actually quite big, although I live in a small house.

 

[Sol Invictus]

Well, I don't feel downtrodden, for starters.

 

[Stark]

"I suppose you see yourself as the down trodden protagonist in your own little world, right?"

Absolutely. Aren't we all the protagonist in our own little worlds?

and I don't see myself as protagonist. Yay, joke is complete.

 

[Volourn]

Good for you all. I like seeing liars at work.

 

[Avin]

fo2 is a funny easter-eggered game. it's not better than the original.

you know, one old trick you use when people just love some story is making fun of itself. you can check it in the x-files series, when they lost the breath they start making fun episodes.

that is what fo2 is. sequences are ligh-hearteds because, folks, the writers just don't know what to do.

 

[Reklar]

"I don't understand why you continually belabour this point, you played FO2 before FO"

And, what ways it was better? Let me see.. Better joinable npcs. Better quests. Superior writing.Two of the best towns ever in a CRPG. Role-playing as good as the first. Longer and more long lasting goodness - not just 10-20 hours of yayness; but much, much more.

The only things that FO1 did better was it was less buggy (not by that much considering the size difference), and the cool way you can end the game in two different palces (depending on the order you finsih them). Not too many games (if any other) does that.

Next.

The better NPCs I can understand because the developers had time to receive input from the fans and implement changes to make them more managable. Better quests and writing I think is highly dependent on personal opinion though, since Fallout had a much tighter storyline and more consistent progression, which made more quests relevent to the outcome of the game. As for game length, I don't know how anyone could get through Fallout in 10-20 hours on their first playthrough, or why anyone would even want to finish that quickly, but apparently you have so I'll have to take your word on that. Incidentally though, people have claimed to finish Fallout 2 in less than two hours by simply running to Navarro and getting the APA, then going straight to San Francisco and taking the tanker to the Enclave.

-Reklar
(a Fallout/RPG fan)

 

[Volourn]

"Incidentally though, people have claimed to finish Fallout 2 in less than two hours by simply running to Navarro and getting the APA, then going straight to San Francisco and taking the tanker to the Enclave."

I haven't done that; but it is believeable it is possible. of course, i highly doubt anyone has doen that first time through. You'd have to have played the game at least once to accomplish that i think or use walkthroughs.

Good post though.

 

[Sol Invictus]

The better NPCs I can understand because the developers had time to receive input from the fans and implement changes to make them more managable.

Fallout's joinable party NPCs were incredibly lame. Not only did they shoot you in the back of the head (this is a feature!), they also had no personality. This is a polar opposite from the NPCs which you interacted with, like Lockley and Killian.

Better quests and writing I think is highly dependent on personal opinion though, since Fallout had a much tighter storyline and more consistent progression, which made more quests relevent to the outcome of the game.

Fallout definitely had one of the best open-ended storylines ever made for an RPG and the quests were excellent especially since you were given a multitude of choices and methods in which to accomplish them. Fallout 2 on the other hand was an incoherent compilation of individual stories. While the individual stories themselves provided a myriad of enjoyment the game as a whole did not, especially the Frank Horrigan story arc that was nothing more than a poorly written sequence of plot devices.

As for game length, I don't know how anyone could get through Fallout in 10-20 hours on their first playthrough

I clocked 13 hours on my first playthrough of Fallout. Fallout 2 took a lot less time, even though I felt a general lack of interest in comparison to the original. The easter eggs and locations which did not fit into the 'feel' of the game as a whole killed it for me.

, or why anyone would even want to finish that quickly

Because it's... short? I can't imagine playing in slow motion.

Incidentally though, people have claimed to finish Fallout 2 in less than two hours by simply running to Navarro and getting the APA, then going straight to San Francisco and taking the tanker to the Enclave.

Been there, done that. My first few playthroughs of Fallout 2 were no longer than 6-8 hours only because it was really easy to inadvertantly finish the game without ever having to touch most of the locations. The experience rewards for most of them were pointless and the endgame didn't need you to be that powerful, either. I think I was around level 8-15 (can't remember) when I completed it every time.

Arroyo > Klamath > The Den > Vault City > Gecko > New Reno > NCR > San Francisco > Navarro > The Oil Rig

Areas skipped:
Modoc, some parts of New Reno, Skynet, most parts of NCR (just do the vault 15 quests), Redding, that other town with the mutants, and whatever I forgot to mention.

This was my first run through. I went to the rig thinking it would just be another area - but it turned out to be the endgame. Lame.

Getting the Power Armor MK2 from Navarro is unbelievably easy once you have a car. It's pretty pointless to even go to the abandoned WestTec base for the Power Armor and Combat Armor MK3 there, or even get the 'reward' of Power Armor from that Brotherhood guy, either. I don't know what the point of those things were.

 

[RGE]

, or why anyone would even want to finish that quickly

Because it's... short? I can't imagine playing in slow motion.

I like to take my time when I play one of the few games that I think are good. That way I gain much more playtime, and get to soak in the world. Your way of playing seems completely focused on the main plot, while I try to avoid the main plot for as long as possible. I think I would prefer a game with many main plots, where I'd have to choose one and go with it. Then I would be able to play the game again without knowing where I'll eventually end up.