Fallout Fallout 1 is the best RPG of all time that stood the test of time

[Lhynn]

?? Who is this?

Maybe the janitor or the accountant.

 

[RNGsus]

?? Who is this?

Maybe the janitor or the accountant.

Scruffy works for us.

I think its the Interpol.

 

[Matticus]

?? Who is this?

Just an unknown programmer in the game industry. I don't want a developer tag as that would draw attention to myself - attention I don't deserve. I've come here to learn.

 

[Irata]

And if you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss also gazes into you.

 

[Ninjerk]

?? Who is this?

Just an unknown programmer in the game industry. I don't want a developer tag as that would draw attention to myself - attention I don't deserve. I've come here to learn.

Have you equipped the ring?

 

[zaper]

don't trust him guys he's from ob-

 

[Matticus]

?? Who is this?

Just an unknown programmer in the game industry. I don't want a developer tag as that would draw attention to myself - attention I don't deserve. I've come here to learn.

Have you equipped the ring?

I'm going to guess at the meaning of this and respond with 'no'

 

[PorkBarrellGuy]

?? Who is this?

Just an unknown programmer in the game industry. I don't want a developer tag as that would draw attention to myself - attention I don't deserve. I've come here to learn.

Enjoy your stay, however short it may be.

 

[Cael]

So yes, despite the ruined atmosphere and somewhat lower world quality, I think Fallout 2 is a better game than its prequel. It's the best RPG and among the top 5 best games I ever played. Next stop: Fallout Tactics (is it worth my time? Can someone please describe what it actually is?)

Turn based or RT (you choose) tactical game based on FO. It is NOT a RPG. Think of it like XCom.

 

[Goral]

Fortunately, they also managed to notably improve the AI. This resulted in much better pathfinding and more interesting combat. I must admit, I was rather amazed when I noticed enemies picking up and using stimpaks and weapons of the fallen combatants.

I'm pretty sure they were picking up weapons in F1 too, don't see how it makes for better combat though. AI seemed the same to me too the only difference in combat was that in F2 there were much bigger battles and more enemies on average (which isn't necessarily a good thing, I would argue that more often than not it's a bad thing). Also, due to insanely long time limit stimpacks are redundant, you can just rest to heal. By the end of F2 I've had like 500 stimpacks, 200 superstimpacks and quite a few these other stimpacks. And with the ability to use as many of them in single turn as you like you're basically immortal (although some critical shot could always end you).

Character progression offers more choice due to additional perks although I felt there were way too many skill books in the game.

In F2 many new Perks were just dumb, e.g. "mysterious stranger". Instead of removing the most stupid ones from Fallout 1 they've added even more stupid/redundant ones. As for skill books, in F1 there were also enough books to reach the maximum level (91% or something like that) so nothing changed in that regard.

The plot is just serviceable again, but it's longer and more detailed.

It is longer I'll give you that but it's way worse than the one in F1 IMO. The premise is the same (GECK instead of water-chip) but you have some telepathic mumbo jumbo added and it doesn't make sense at all. In F1 you could learn that you weren't the only Chosen One sent on that mission (which was logical), in F2 the whole village had stayed to die instead of moving somewhere else and the only thing they've tried was sending 1 man (literally one) to fix the problem for them by finding some magical item (GECK itself is a dumb idea, something like a portable power plant would be way more logical but this is just ridiculous). What's the most stupid though is the fact you have over a decade (13 years) to accomplish this task (now compare it to 150 days in F1 which is more than plenty of time). WTF?

And finally choices & consequences... damn.

I must admit, it is better in that department. If you're so impressed with this though try playing Age of Decadence (or FNV, although it's way worse than AoD in that department).

Anyway, I've finished Fallout 2 two times and Fallout 1 more than 15 times. Fallout just doesn't bore me, I can play it every year from start to finish and find something new. Fallout 2 on the other hand turns to shit in San Francisco and it's very hard for me to finish it (the second time I've played with Killap's mod). In general, locations here are way worse than the ones in F1 despite being more of them (and being bigger in general). The only locations I've found very good were Vault City and New Reno (but New Reno also doesn't fit the Fallout post-apocalyptic setting that much, it's just a fun amusement park) the rest is either bad or forgettable. There is nothing even comparable to The Glow here, nothing as interesting as The Hub and nothing as strange as The Cathedral. Shady Sands is also much more atmospheric than NCR (which IMO is also one of the worst locations, such wasted potential) - this is how I imagine a post-apocalyptic location would look like. Characters in F2 are also forgettable, on the other hand I'll never forget Ian, Harry, Decker, Gizmo, Harold, Aradesh, Loxley (one of my favourite characters ever), etc.

Fallout 1 is just perfect in terms of amounts of fun per hour spent in the game and it ends before it even starts to bore. Every quest is a gem here and they feel more natural (you're just doing some side quests in places you visit which could help your main quest) and the flow is more fluid. Fallout 2 on the other hand dumps dozens of quests on you and most of them are of questionable quality. In F1 if you get a quest it will be memorable (like hostage negotiation in Junktown or Loxley heist) in Fallout 2 the quests I remember best are the retarded ones like the quest with a ghost or playing chess with a plant or becoming a porn actor in a post-apocalytpic world .

 

[Cael]

If Fallout 2 was superserious about things, you won't have the completely warped sense of humour that permeates just about everything.

Monty Python's King Arthur? Check.
Redneck shotgun wedding? Check.
Star Trek red shirts? Check.
Monty Python's (again) bridgekeeper? Check.
Area full of discarded protag toons? Check.
Mel Gibson in his Mad Max get up? Check.
Star Trek time warp nonsense? Check.
An area full of Fallout forum goers? Check.
Black racist bitch? Check. Whoever that wrote that one was prescient, given how long ago Fallout 2 was made.

That was what made Fallout 2 so much fun: It doesn't take itself seriously.

 

[Cael]

don't trust him guys he's from ob-

We found faqqa, guys:

 

[Swampy_Merkin]

Monty Python's King Arthur? Check.

Monty Python's (again) bridgekeeper? Check.

You have to know these things are like 20 yrs older, right?

Monty Python was from the 70's dude.

I know....I know...it's a difference of taste.

I love Fallout 2, but the general atmosphere of Fallout 1 is better. It just is....it conveys the spirit of a people trying to come back from the brink.

Fallout 2 is cartoonish by comparison (even though I love it as a game).

I actually prefer the atmosphere of Fallout 3 to 2, or even 1, as it draws you into a world that has been devastated by nuclear war much more so than ANY other game. I mean ANY other game.

You can make the argument that Fallout 3 doesn't keep to the spirit of Fallout 1 or 2 ( it doesn't, obviously), but it does do one thing better than any other Fallout, or Bethesda game: It creates a world that is believable.

Hear me out....of course the story is garbage...and all Bethesda main narratives are garbage as far as I can tell...

Yes, yes, yes.....the main story of Fallout 3 is complete and absolute garbage. In most rpgs that would be a deal-breaker.

But the vastness of FO3 lets you find all kinds of creepy little human stories in every weird nook and cranny.....that's what I love about it.

Fuck the main story...FO3 shits in your face for following it....get lost..literally get lost in its wastes....it's a glorious slow-burn creep through a great creepy world full of....all sorts of creeps.
You find some of the most effecting human dramas ever told through gaming just by creeping through some dead family's home.

Emerging from the vault into the Wasteland is really amazing...don't say it wasn't beautiful to you...you're lying.

Seeing your first fully rendered Super-Mutant had to have been a great experience...or you're just a old-school curmudgeon because that gets you cool points on here.

Falloout: NV restored proper Fallout story-telling, but that's it. The environments, and the environmental story-telling were sub-par compared to FO:3.

FO:3 - garbage main story/fuck the main story

 

[Cael]

Monty Python's King Arthur? Check.

Monty Python's (again) bridgekeeper? Check.

You have to know these things are like 20 yrs older, right?

Monty Python was from the 70s dude.

They are examples of how the game doesn't take itself seriously. It is not supposed to be as serious/logical as you like it to be, which was your complaint, no?

 

[Swampy_Merkin]

They are examples of how the game doesn't take itself seriously. It is not supposed to be as serious/logical as you like it to be, which was your complaint, no?

I don't know, and I'm not sure now.....my previous post was a half-lucid attempt at trying to defend Fallout 3.

Hey! Monty Python is just soooo great.

But I should shut up and go back to reliving Fallout 1 greatness (which I am) as per the thread topic.

 

[Swampy_Merkin]

Falloout 3 has great cinematic moments that I'll remember forever....as well as little creepy moments that stuck with me longer than any horror story. It's a wonderful experience if you go into it not expecting a proper Fallout game, but love the idea of uncovering bleak, depressing post-nuclear waste....

Why would one like to do such a thing?....because FO3 does it in a way that is simply unforgettable....and because people should have an understanding of just what we might be headed for.

Fallout 3 is the least unlikely of all the Fallout scenarios.

 

[Swampy_Merkin]

In other words:

FO:3 is the best post-nuclear sim.....not the best post-nuclear game.

 

[Swampy_Merkin]

Ok...so I am currently playing Fallout 1 for the 1st time since it came out (roughly). I'm playing the most current GOG version, so running whatever mods are on that included, but nothing else.

I genuinely love it...it's superb in almost every way.

I remember playing Fallout 2 in 1998-9, or thereabouts, and also loving that game, but thinking some of the world-building stuff was a bit corny.

Fallout 3 which I played when it first came out struck me as something entirely new in the Fallout universe. Yes the opening within vault was stupid...as was all of the main story.

Yes that's a serious drawback for any good rpg.

But if you really weren't sucked in by your first taste of the outside world after the dumb drama of the Vault, and couldn't wait to get out there and just explore...then I feel sorry for you....you apparently missed the splendor of the big world that was so obviously laid out before you in a haze of majesty.

And didn't love the sadness of all those depressing vignettes told by the placement and positioning of all those skeletons.....

Then you just didn't get it.....you just glossed over what made FO3 an absolute jewel of "show not tell" story-telling.

 

[Makabb]

I played through Fallout (Original - GOG) last week with the water chip timer in tact. Embarrassingly, I had only played Fallout 2 up to this point.

I've seen many complaints about the water chip timer but I liked it a lot. I noticed that it was possible to extend the timer in The Hub but I easily found a water chip in time. If I were in charge I'd actually push the time-based elements of the game further rather than remove any. It was awesome/surprising seeing events transpire in certain locations as the months went by, caravan quests that occurred on specific dates, and even surgical procedures that consumed large amounts of in-game time. Too many RPGs feel like the world is constantly waiting for me rather than moving on its own accord.

I've been obsessing over it since. The atmosphere of Necropolis - incredible. Perfect aesthetic both visually and in the ambient soundtrack. Nothing in the game felt pushed over the top; Every piece fit. The top-down perspective (cavalier) obviously still the best way to experience this type of game.

I feel privileged to have worked with a few of the original developers over the years; Talented, modest, great people.

Infinitron dev tag?

?? Who is this?

Makabbs threads bringing the best people to Codex

 

[KK1001]

Fallout has the best core package of gameplay, role playing, exploration, and choice and consequence of any cRPG. Most importantly, it is succinct, with little added fat and nothing that feels like it is missing.

Though the Codex routinely places PS:T above it, I think Fallout barely squeaks by for the following reasons: 1) PS:T has pretty poor combat encounter designer, with a serious lack of set piece battles and too much trash; 2) there's little reason to play anything but a Mage (someone's probably done the math on this, but the amount of content you get locked out of as a Mage can't really compare at all to fighter or thief); and 3) the third act feels a bit rushed. Though it works fine as it stands now, I feel the lack of a longer plane or an additional visit to somewhere else.

BG2 has a similar balance to Fallout, but I think it may be a bit bloated.

 

[Makabb]

Fallout has the best core package of gameplay, role playing, exploration, and choice and consequence of any cRPG. Most importantly, it is succinct, with little added fat and nothing that feels like it is missing.

Though the Codex routinely places PS:T above it, I think Fallout barely squeaks by for the following reasons: 1) PS:T has pretty poor combat encounter designer, with a serious lack of set piece battles and too much trash; 2) there's little reason to play anything but a Mage (someone's probably done the math on this, but the amount of content you get locked out of as a Mage can't really compare at all to fighter or thief); and 3) the third act feels a bit rushed. Though it works fine as it stands now, I feel the lack of a longer plane or an additional visit to somewhere else.

BG2 has a similar balance to Fallout, but I think it may be a bit bloated.

Its apples and oranges, PS:T is more of a text adventure than a game due to pretty bad combat, while Fallout is the opposite

 

[KK1001]

Yeah, while that's true, AD&D is fundamentally about combat. Some effort was paid to the combat, it just didn't receive the necessary QA passes and design work to make it work. Was it worth it if it meant we got great characters and the best story in CRPG history? Yes. But would the game be much better with more varied encounter design and a bit more work done to make Thief and Fighter interesting to play? Absolutely.

This is just nitpicking, of course. I don't think PS:T deserves to be shit on for its combat, because it's not bad - it's just disappointing in light of the rest of the game. I don't think Fallout has this same problem; everything is balanced and coheres rather nicely.

 

[Makabb]

This is just nitpicking, of course. I don't think PS:T deserves to be shit on for its combat, because it's not bad - it's just disappointing in light of the rest of the game. I don't think Fallout has this same problem; everything is balanced and coheres rather nicely.

I think it's done on purpose on PS:T or rather, the combat is not the main point of the game, so they took less resources to make it 'good'

 

[KK1001]

The combat is not the main point of the game, but it's there and it's not as good as it could have been.

 

[Swampy_Merkin]

Eh...I give up. Fallout 1 (and 2 to a lesser extent) gives a player all manner of C&C.....there is just a ton to discover in that regard.

But if you want to zone out and really experience a different world, and with even more complex emotions embedded within the game-world itself, then FA:3 delivers over and over and over again....as long as one forgets about the main quest (which is shit).

C&C....Fallout 3 had virtually none...that's a huge step down from F1.

I won't argue with that....I would argue that one aspect that could make an rpg great is not necessarily the only aspect that must be dealt with at all.

You play a role....maybe it's yours maybe it's the writer(S).

Whatever...you either like that role or you don't.; FA:3 gave me the intentionally open-ended role of a "wanderer." I enjoyed the fuck out of wandering.


At the end of the day, what is your gripe with games that let a player wander and explore??


That very idea seems like incline to me...

OK...so the dialogue takes a hit, because writing/programming seems like it would take up a lot of resources to cover all the bases players might go to.

That's a legit concern....but think of all you're asking there....that's a fuckload right there.


I want NPCs that react to every change I make in the world, but it seems like you need a Rockstar-like budget to even think about reactivity like that.

Unless you just scale down everything else about the game....

Fuck it, might as well find a good DM and play tabletop....