Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Fallout 2 was always incline

Ryan muller

Educated
Joined
Oct 10, 2021
Messages
162
No, Fallout 1 isnt better than 2


Fallout 1's better pacing and sense of urgency werent enough to justify it being better than its sequel and you should accept it.


Not only density of content but quality itself is consistently higher on the sequel and i will discuss some of those points here.


Lets start with good/evil playtroughts. In fallout 1 karma was extremely important when it came to the reaction mechanics (which were kinda broken anyways, as everybody would hate an evil PC instead of only good npcs), This resulted in an interesting problem because you couldnt really be evil only based on your choices. Why? Because you get very few negative karma doing tasks such as helping Gizmo while doing trivial required tasks for your main quest would give you lots and lots of good karma


As a result, the evil character needs to go out of his way to kill people around maybe without having a reason to,only so he can get to see what effects negative karma will have on the gameplay. This was a problem very similar to what fallout 4 had as you would need to kill people around to be considered evil as you simply couldnt do it by pure dialogue and CnC.


Fallout 2 however, uses reputation titles to register reactions (with town reputations having a smaller effect and karma barely affecting anything). This means you now can be truly evil without having to blindly go on a berserk rage and kill entire towns.


Want to become a mobster? Do it. A slaver? Of course,etc... Being evil can be done without the need to begin a genocide somewhere as there was way more quests and carriers for evil characters. If you dont believe it, try an evil playtrought in both games and which one is better at that will be obvious.


Fallout 2 also makes CnC way more important than Fallout by introducing in-game consequences for your decisions. Aside from that one example about leaking the location of your vault in fo1, theres barely any CnC outside of endgame slides and that example can only be found in V1.0 (which probably wont be the version you will be playing on anyways)


Fallout 2 is different since a good portion of the game requires you to travel between settlements constantly to solve problems between them, this is justified because the economic interests they had, needing to use caravans to trade with nearby societies and maintain their structure (as an example, vault city has to export medical supplies to nearby communities since they have tons of advanced medical technology, while as New reno export Jet to the wastes which is getting pretty popular and causing problems to everyone), this is both interesting from a worldbuilding standpoint and a gameplay standpoint.


Yes, i know one of the main complaints about the game is how over the top it gets with the different thematics for towns and the overblown of pop culture easter eggs, but this often overshadows the brilliance of fallout 2 when it comes to stablishing a strong political scenario for its wasteland.


But going back to the CnC topic, a good example of how this play out would be the whole Jet situation in which you need to free redding and other towns like the Den and klamath from the jet addiction problem by finding an actual vaccine.
If earlier in the game you havent played your cards right, Lynette would have revoked your citizenship earlier on, which would result on you finding out vault city was the only place with enough supplies to make a working vaccine to jet. Essentially by making Lynette angry you would doom the whole wasteland to jet addiction. This happens often in fallout 2 and its part of why its often regarded as having better CnC than its predecessor.


The system itself is also better balanced even tho still far from perfect. For one, combat skills in 1 had very poor balancement as big guns were objectively worse than energy as a late game option ( Flamers werent a viable choice, Rocket launchers were cool but way too niche and they had very heavy ammo and minigun were underpowered and easily outclassed by gatling laser) and unarmed was pretty crap compared to melee due to the lack of gpod midgame options after spiked knuckles and an endgame option which lacked compared to the melee ones (power fist being weaker than either ripper and super sledge)


Fallout 2 made unarmed runs awesome due to all the powerful moves you ve unlocked by getting better at unarmed fighting and the absolutely badass Mega power fist. The same could be apply to big guns which now have some of the coolest guns in the game such as the avenger minigun and the absolute classic, Bozar.


But thats not only for combat skills. Outdoorsman is useful now, doctor is way better integrated to the quest design, science is useful while it was pretty crap at fallout 1, etc... Even charisma isnt a dump stat anymore, unlike fo1 in which its only use would be when you choosed to tag barter.


On top of that, things are just generally more interesting. Companions have more developed backstories and motivations, party banther is a thing, quest design is more intriguing and even locations are WAY more interesting than fallout 1's


I know some will disagree on my last sentence, but as said previously, Fallout 2 made sure to make them feel as different as they could. Yes, that can be also a con if you look it from a consistency standpoint as you can point out to the game feeling like a theme park instead of an post apocalyptic world, still this makes up for definitively more memorable individual moments in every settlement.


Thats also not only contained in their visual styles but on gameplay itself. As mentioned earlier, the political structure of this societies are very solid and each place have their own laws and ways to deal with strangers. In fallout 1 the law seemed equal for every single settlement. Put your weapon away and you would be fine


Here? The den is an anarchic society so having your gun up in there means nothing, while Vault city has way more burocracy to let outsiders in, so you needed to get a day pass, dont bring any alcohol and drugs and follow the protocol if you became a servant, while to became a full citizen you would need to surpass an extremely hard exam to prove you had a healthy mentality, every single place had its own rules and the way you choosed to approach each settlement would change their perspective on you.


On top of that, Fo2 had way too much QoL imrovements over 1. The ability to scroll your inventory down, to move npcs out of your way, to use more than 999 money per time during barter and even the ability to give your companion more complex commands like avoiding burst firing too much. Hell, you could give your allies armor and they also leveled up, which made a playtrought using companions viable for the late game!!!


All in all its just more fun and it has the right ammount of polishment and options to feel like you have an enormous ammount of choices which would impact the world around you, as such, fallout 2 wins by a mile for everyone which isnt a storyfag or outright blind to the OG's flaws.


Tl;dr Fallout 2 does everything better than 1 except in the narrative and worldbuilding department, as a result being a better game.
 

NecroLord

Dumbfuck!
Dumbfuck
Joined
Sep 6, 2022
Messages
8,624
Location
Southeastern Yurop
:mca:
Of course Fallout 2 is and always will be incline. I really like the inclusion of more weapons(such as the Pulse rifle and my beloved Bozar killing machine),badass companions like Cassidy,Sulik and Marcus,more content,more exploration. I think the problem is that it will always be compared to and overshadowed by the first Fallout,who was a major success in video game history.
 

SharkClub

Prophet
Patron
Joined
May 27, 2010
Messages
1,534
Strap Yourselves In
Tl;dr but I agree with the thread title. Fallout 2 still holds up as a game you can sink many hours into whereas Fallout 1 has maybe like 1/3 of the content available, and that's before you even count Fallout 2's big mods. Fallout 1 honestly feels like a proof of concept well-contained tech demo or something when it comes to the gameplay. How many Big Guns are there in that game that lets you waste points in the Big Guns skill and even tag it? I think you can count them on one hand.

Some people really have a stick up their ass about there being a ghost girl in the Den and they will never let that go, there's no convincing them.
 

smaug

Secular Koranism with Israeli Characteristics
Patron
Dumbfuck
Joined
Feb 20, 2019
Messages
6,512
Location
Texas
Insert Title Here
Fallout 2’s main problem is the uneven writing in the game (not necessarily bad but inconsistent compared to 1) with San Francisco being the most egregious example. Other problems are unfinished areas like Vault 15 Raiders and Broken Hills feel half implemented. talking heads declined :(

Aside from that, Fallout 2 is an improvement in virtually every way.

Fallout 1 is iconic and I understand the difficulty of making a sequel that captures the magic is rough, but I think they did a wonderful job.
 

Thal

Prophet
Joined
Apr 4, 2015
Messages
414
Fallout 2 is looked down upon over Fallout, because it doubled down on the wacky atmosphere and pop culture references which were tastefully done on FO1. Even the main quest is contaminated. If it had stayed within the parameters of its predecessor, I doubt that anyone would argue that is not better.
 

Ryan muller

Educated
Joined
Oct 10, 2021
Messages
162
Other problems are unfinished areas like Vault 15 Raiders and Broken Hills feel half implemented. talking heads declined :(
I feel like both games have clear unfinished content tackle at them

For example, fallout 1 had both ending slides for The hub and Followers cut from the game so you could only get 1 ending with both regardless of your actions

And you had shit like not being able to do khans raids nor having content for the thieves circle aside from one single quest, making the whole thing pointless

While as in fo2 you had a bigger game, which means that the lack of content in fo1 makes it feel even shorter

In fact i would go against the decision to remove the mutant invasions as well, that shit needed to be properly implemented, if you havent play fixt with this mod on, do it, it is the ultimate fallout 1 experience
 

Ryan muller

Educated
Joined
Oct 10, 2021
Messages
162
Fallout 2 is looked down upon over Fallout, because it doubled down on the wacky atmosphere and pop culture references which were tastefully done on FO1. Even the main quest is contaminated. If it had stayed within the parameters of its predecessor, I doubt that anyone would argue that is not better.
While consistency is something 1 has over 2 i simply cant see how this is enough to make the original better, the main narrative is tight and better paced but everything else is made better in 2

And even if story is not as good, narrative in 2 has its moments such as Marcus's quote, the whole political scenario, etc..
 

smaug

Secular Koranism with Israeli Characteristics
Patron
Dumbfuck
Joined
Feb 20, 2019
Messages
6,512
Location
Texas
Insert Title Here
Fallout 2 is looked down upon over Fallout, because it doubled down on the wacky atmosphere and pop culture references which were tastefully done on FO1. Even the main quest is contaminated. If it had stayed within the parameters of its predecessor, I doubt that anyone would argue that is not better.
While consistency is something 1 has over 2 i simply cant see how this is enough to make the original better, the main narrative is tight and better paced but everything else is made better in 2

And even if story is not as good, narrative in 2 has its moments such as Marcus's quote, the whole political scenario, etc..
The beef people have with F2’s writing are the settingfags, so if it’s not that important then it’s almost not accountable. Not sure how much it changed to Fallout 3 though.
 

CHEMS

Scholar
Joined
Nov 17, 2020
Messages
1,504
Fallout plot and aesthetics were wonky from the start, futuristic mish mash with fifties was weird as fuck already, why complain about "muh pop references in Fallout 2"? They were fun, i actually liked how the game would break the 4th wall (like when the player tries to justify to Mr Bishop that was other player character shagging his wife) and throw movie quotes out of nowhere.

Fallout 2 added settlements depth, Redding's drug problems fueled by the criminal world in New Reno that had shady ties with Vault City. Fallout 1 settlements were nowhere as deep regarding the writing. Each game to me has it's own objetive. As already said in the thread, Fallout 1 was about urgency, a iminent danger about your vault running out of water and then the mutie invasion. Fallout 2 had that GECK retrieving thing going on, but you're never actually forced to rush it.

My only problem with Fallout 2 is how the ending section felt rushed. San Francisco was a bore fest and irrelevant to the game's lore, their only importance was the tanker which needed a annoying backtracking quest to make it funtional to travel to the rig. It would make more sense to give the player a opportunity to stowaway in a vertibird after infiltrating Navarro.
 

garren

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Nov 1, 2007
Messages
2,036
Location
Grue-Infested Darkness
I edge on Fallout 1 being better just for the tighter focus and more consistent pacing, Fallout 2 was more wacky and less focused than the first one. Still a great game of course.
 

Fargus

Arcane
Joined
Apr 2, 2012
Messages
2,504
Location
Moscow
Fallout 1 blew me away when i was just a kid that only started getting into rpg genre. It seemed like such an amazing game with interesting world and endless depth. When i played it years later it felt like a 16 hour long mediocre game with a handful of simple quests and very few good ones. You can quickly do everything you can in it and i would never bother to replay again, just not worth it. Getting through the Glow felt like heroic achievement at first, which is the only memorable moment for me in that game aside from convincing Master to commit suicide. Fallout 1 just doesn't hold up.

Don't have that problem with Fallout 2. It's still fun and got lots of stuff to do. I love the worldbuiding and hilarity.

That being said, i prefer Arcanum over both of them. Story and main quest especially are simply better. Can't say i ever cared about main quest in either of Fallout games like i did in Arcanum.
 

Harthwain

Magister
Joined
Dec 13, 2019
Messages
4,773
Fallout plot and aesthetics were wonky from the start, futuristic mish mash with fifties was weird as fuck already, why complain about "muh pop references in Fallout 2"? They were fun, i actually liked how the game would break the 4th wall (like when the player tries to justify to Mr Bishop that was other player character shagging his wife) and throw movie quotes out of nowhere.
Very well said. I did miss probably 95% of the jokes on the account of being completely detached from popular culture at the time (hell, even now I am not really tracking this kind of stuff, although now there is the internet and search engines, meaning it is possible for me to find out in case I really get interested in something) so I never had a problem with pop cultural jokes/references ruining the mood for me. Another reason - besides what I already stated - could be because I accepted everything Fallout 2 did by the virtue of its "futuristic fifties", which was already a pretty unrealistic scenario/universe to begin with. The effect of suspension of disbelief, I guess.
 

AW8

Arcane
Joined
Mar 1, 2013
Messages
1,852
Location
North of Poland
Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire
Small gameplay improvements aren't enough to make up for the massive retardation of the setting and plot. People love to bash Bethesda for ruining the Fallout world, but Black Isle did that themselves with the talking deathclaw furries, the meme vaults, and a town literally covered in shit. That garbage drags down the good stuff (New Reno, Vault City etc.).

Fallout 2 was decline.
 

Ryan muller

Educated
Joined
Oct 10, 2021
Messages
162
Small gameplay improvements aren't enough to make up for the massive retardation of the setting and plot. People love to bash Bethesda for ruining the Fallout world, but Black Isle did that themselves with the talking deathclaw furries, the meme vaults, and a town literally covered in shit. That garbage drags down the good stuff (New Reno, Vault City etc.).

Fallout 2 was decline.
Hardly would call Usable companions with more developed personalities, heavy polishment and balancement in the skill system, better quest design, Double down the ammount of weapons in the game, heavy CnC with visible outcomes in gameplay and a bunch of other stuff the game does better than 1 "small"

And both talking deathclaws and vault experiments arent alien to a setting containing humans with psychic habilities and super intelligent a.is who can spend time playing chess with you.

Real examples of out of place stuff would be san francisco, the ghost in den and shit like the mobster families in reno

Those are not enough to overshadow its brilliance
 

smaug

Secular Koranism with Israeli Characteristics
Patron
Dumbfuck
Joined
Feb 20, 2019
Messages
6,512
Location
Texas
Insert Title Here
Small gameplay improvements aren't enough to make up for the massive retardation of the setting and plot. People love to bash Bethesda for ruining the Fallout world, but Black Isle did that themselves with the talking deathclaw furries, the meme vaults, and a town literally covered in shit. That garbage drags down the good stuff (New Reno, Vault City etc.).

Fallout 2 was decline.
What’s wrong with Vault City?
 

NecroLord

Dumbfuck!
Dumbfuck
Joined
Sep 6, 2022
Messages
8,624
Location
Southeastern Yurop
Small gameplay improvements aren't enough to make up for the massive retardation of the setting and plot.
Can you elaborate?
The talking deathclaw furries were supposed to be bioweapons used by the Enclave. Intelligent enough to follow orders,but being intelligent they obviously chose to escape and make it out on their own. I will admit that the pop culture references can get really out of hand and drag away from the original Fallout setting,but one cannot deny that Fallout 2 is a great game. It will be always be overshadowed by its older brother,but that game was a smash hit and monumental success. Fallout 2 was only the sequel and nowhere near as influential.
 

Butter

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Oct 1, 2018
Messages
7,652
Fallout 2 is exactly what you'd expect it to be, given the circumstances of its creation. They were able to refine some of the gameplay systems, most notably by better integrating the companion system and by giving Charisma a proper function, but they had to shit out 3x as much content as the first game had with only 1/3 the production time. They did this by bringing in new people who hadn't worked on Fallout 1 and by not having any semblance of quality control.
 

mondblut

Arcane
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
22,225
Location
Ingrija
Fallout 2 is clearly worse better than 1 since it doesn't really have a time limit. That alone is enough to show the first second game's supremacy.

FTFY. Fuck time limits with a power of thousand suns.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom