Incline Of the Big Three, which is your favorite? (Fallout, PS:T, Arcanum)

[FriendlyMerchant]

I mean if you can't figure out how to pay for Arcanum on GOG, then apply Drog's patch, then install a simple DX wrapper to get the high-res patch to work right, then... yeah, don't bother. This game isn't meant for your kind.

Arcanum is simply a broken game and any potential that might be gleaned from it by those who have the patience and know-how to get the game working is not enough to carry it to the top of this list

It's literally just installing the game and then installing a patch. Just running an .exe. If it's not working, there's something else that's going on in your computer that's screwing everything up and can affect other older games too. For example: Windows 11.

I did what you guys said and the game still didn't fucking work right. The game was still playable though, it was mostly visual bugs, but I found the gameplay to be mind numbingly bad. Joke all you want, it's a broken game and the combat is terrible. Way worse than PS:T's combat, which is actually not nearly as bad as people claim it is. It's serviceable enough to not be annoying so that you can enjoy everything else the game does great.

And I put it down, if all these FO stans had played Underrail before FO, the game wouldn't be nearly as highly rated. Underrail is the superior gaming experience in every way.

Arcanum's combat is essentially just Fallouts combat but with magic and fewer targeted shots allocated to hotkeys instead of an in-game menu. You just have the option of a real time mode in case you want to spam harm instead of playing the turn-based mode. Underrail's combat is pretty much just Fallout's but with some extra options like a lot of traps and mindmagic but with no targeted shots and the option to craft outside of combat. If you like Underrail's combat, you should like Fallout's combat. Even their leveling systems are the same being the allocate points to skills and pick a feat ever few levels. Same thing with Arcanum in Turn-based mode. Arcanum only has a different leveling system as it's just allociate a point ever level and two ever 5 levels to build your character.

As for the visuals, it's probably a combination your computer, your operating system, and your gpu driver. I'd bet you have all sorts of effects enabled through your gpu driver software and you possibly haven't disabled all the crap that comes with your operating system.

 

[ItsChon]

Arcanum's combat is essentially just Fallouts combat but with magic and fewer targeted shots allocated to hotkeys instead of an in-game menu. You just have the option of a real time mode in case you want to spam harm instead of playing the turn-based mode.

FO's combat is not good, so this is not a mark in Arcanum's favor. Also, the functionality and feel of the combat is just as important as the systems underneath. The RTwP combat plays like shit with harm being broken and the TB combat didn't feel much better. Of course, I will add the caveat that the version of Arcanum I played was not working correctly, which one again circles back to my point that it's broken and bugged.

Underrail's combat is pretty much just Fallout's but with some extra options like a lot of traps and mindmagic but with no targeted shots and the option to craft outside of combat. If you like Underrail's combat, you should like Fallout's combat. Even their leveling systems are the same being the allocate points to skills and pick a feat ever few levels.

These three sentences were retarded. I won't be mean and call you an outright retard, but you definitely sounded like one in these three sentences. I'm not going to let you get away with grossly simplifying Underrail's combat system in so many ways so that you can claim it is functionally the same as FO's combat system. Anyone who has played these two games can see the much higher levels of depth and complexity that are present in Underrail versus FO, with many of the most ardent FO defenders on this forum admitting as much. At least they cite FO's other features and things it does well to support their claim of its total superiority, you id none of that.

 

[HeatEXTEND]

Arcanum, it's the most c RPG I ever played, it's sense of freedom within the system is unequalled imo.

 

[jackofshadows]

The RTwP combat plays like shit with harm being broken and the TB combat didn't feel much better. Of course, I will add the caveat that the version of Arcanum I played was not working correctly, which one again circles back to my point that it's broken and bugged.

Harm isn't even broken. It's more of a mem, a bait, don't fall for it and repeat what others say all the time. Clearly you didn't play the game enough for yourself to judge. It's like saying neural overload is broken un UR because you can go through the entire game with it (you can't even do that with harm because it doesn't work vs all enemies and you won't be able to kite everyone in rt either). As the Merchant said, tech problems are on your end. Some people play and enjoy it even w/o patches (mods).

 

[*-*/\--/\~]

Arcanum shouldn't even be in the top 3.

 

[FriendlyMerchant]

Arcanum's combat is essentially just Fallouts combat but with magic and fewer targeted shots allocated to hotkeys instead of an in-game menu. You just have the option of a real time mode in case you want to spam harm instead of playing the turn-based mode.

FO's combat is not good, so this is not a mark in Arcanum's favor. Also, the functionality and feel of the combat is just as important as the systems underneath. The RTwP combat plays like shit with harm being broken and the TB combat didn't feel much better. Of course, I will add the caveat that the version of Arcanum I played was not working correctly, which one again circles back to my point that it's broken and bugged.

Underrail's combat is pretty much just Fallout's but with some extra options like a lot of traps and mindmagic but with no targeted shots and the option to craft outside of combat. If you like Underrail's combat, you should like Fallout's combat. Even their leveling systems are the same being the allocate points to skills and pick a feat ever few levels.

These three sentences were retarded. I won't be mean and call you an outright retard, but you definitely sounded like one in these three sentences. I'm not going to let you get away with grossly simplifying Underrail's combat system in so many ways so that you can claim it is functionally the same as FO's combat system. Anyone who has played these two games can see the much higher levels of depth and complexity that are present in Underrail versus FO, with many of the most ardent FO defenders on this forum admitting as much. At least they cite FO's other features and things it does well to support their claim of its total superiority, you id none of that.

All this from a guy who can't even get a game to work. What a retard. Especially retarded to ignore the fact that Styg based his game on Fallout and just added some more bells and whistles (even though he removed targeted shots).

 

[BruceVC]

Unfortunately I have only played Planescape so I voted for that but I fully intend to play Fallout 1. I have heard mostly very positive things about it and I loved FO3, FO4 and F:NV and I havent played FO2

 

[Jasede]

I used to pick PST as my top dog over Arcanum but these days I really don't care about stories as much as I used to, not even good ones. All I care about is atmosphere, music and the ability to play with very different builds without it being boring. Restartitis, yes. It's very strong in Arcanum. PST? If you do a max Wis/Int/Cha mage you've seen 95% of the game. Now true, in Arcanum you may not see much new story stuff, but all the builds, however broken, feel very different and fun to play.

Fallout is always doomed to #3 for me because while it does have excellent atmosphere I just don't care for its themes as much.

 

[ItsChon]

The RTwP combat plays like shit with harm being broken and the TB combat didn't feel much better. Of course, I will add the caveat that the version of Arcanum I played was not working correctly, which one again circles back to my point that it's broken and bugged.

Harm isn't even broken. It's more of a mem, a bait, don't fall for it and repeat what others say all the time. Clearly you didn't play the game enough for yourself to judge. It's like saying neural overload is broken un UR because you can go through the entire game with it (you can't even do that with harm because it doesn't work vs all enemies and you won't be able to kite everyone in rt either). As the Merchant said, tech problems are on your end. Some people play and enjoy it even w/o patches (mods).

I just threw the harm meme out there, but running around Shrouded Hills and doing some of the quests around there was enough RTwP combat for me to realize that this shit wasn't it.

All this from a guy who can't even get a game to work. What a retard.

I could get the game to work if I cared enough. If the combat hadn't been so dreadfully atrocious in my first few hours of playing I probably would have looked for a solution, but nothing grabbed my attention.

Especially retarded to ignore the fact that Styg based his game on Fallout and just added some more bells and whistles (even though he removed targeted shots).

Just because Styg based his game on FO doesn't mean it's not many times more complex than Fallout. In Fallout you usually cap out at 5-6 perks before finishing the game. You will have three-four times as many feats (perk equivalent) in Underrail by the time you finish the game, with the potential to earn more through in game actions and events. That's not even mentioning the fact that the perks in Underrail are far more detailed and game changing. Underrail also has five more skills than FO, with many different skill requirements for feats, weapons, skill checks, and more all throughout the game. Underrail is a lot more than just "FO with bells and whistles", and you just confirmed the fact that you were born with an extra chromosome.

 

[FriendlyMerchant]

The RTwP combat plays like shit with harm being broken and the TB combat didn't feel much better. Of course, I will add the caveat that the version of Arcanum I played was not working correctly, which one again circles back to my point that it's broken and bugged.

Harm isn't even broken. It's more of a mem, a bait, don't fall for it and repeat what others say all the time. Clearly you didn't play the game enough for yourself to judge. It's like saying neural overload is broken un UR because you can go through the entire game with it (you can't even do that with harm because it doesn't work vs all enemies and you won't be able to kite everyone in rt either). As the Merchant said, tech problems are on your end. Some people play and enjoy it even w/o patches (mods).

I just threw the harm meme out there, but running around Shrouded Hills and doing some of the quests around there was enough RTwP combat for me to realize that this shit wasn't it.

All this from a guy who can't even get a game to work. What a retard.

I could get the game to work if I cared enough. If the combat hadn't been so dreadfully atrocious in my first few hours of playing I probably would have looked for a solution, but nothing grabbed my attention.

Arcanum is not RTwP. It is either Real time or Turnbased. Spacebar can be used to switch between the TB and RT modes. The TB mode is pretty much just Fallout's combat system with a different action point system, magic, and

Especially retarded to ignore the fact that Styg based his game on Fallout and just added some more bells and whistles (even though he removed targeted shots).

Just because Styg based his game on FO doesn't mean it's not many times more complex than Fallout.

And yet it's still just Fallout with more stuff.

In Fallout you usually cap out at 5-6 perks before finishing the game.

And? Then again, I can take a certain trait and only have about 4 perks before finishing. But the number of perks is just how far the game extends the leveling system and it's length. Kinda like what Fallout 2 did. Longer game with more levels = more perks. Also the apt comparison is pathfinder 1e to D&D 3.0. Pf1e is just D&D3.5. Except the classes have a few more bells and whistles on top of the classes taken directly from D&D3.5 and you get a feat ever second level instead of every third regardless of class. So with a non-fighter, you cap out at about 7-8 feats given a generic class while you have more like 10-11 in Pf1e.

You will have three-four times as many feats (perk equivalent) in Underrail by the time you finish the game, with the potential to earn more through in game actions and events.

Rather than having the ability to target specific parts of the body in the beginning like Fallout, Underrail instead allows certain things like Beheading with the Sword or Dirty only when you take the feat. The rest is mostly cooldown reduction, ap reduction, damage increase, number increases, etc. kinda like FO. But then again, this really just adds some extra considerations on top of the Fallout character building system. It doesn't make it a different system at all. Both however treat skills and attributes the same way with Attributes affecting skills and points distributed between skills each level with a fix amount of hp based on Con (End in FO) just like Fallout. However, it's missing tag skills like Fallout and it just treats all skills the same for that purpose as you needed two points for each increase in a non-tag skill whereas Undertale is just one point for each point in the skill. Underrail also is missing traits which given both a bonus and a penalty on character creation. Of course, there are differences. However, it still is just the Fallout character building with more bells and whistles.

with the potential to earn more through in game actions and events.

Fallout also did this with certain thinks like implants or the "childkiller" trait.

Underrail also has five more skills than FO,

Yes. Underrail has the crafting and psionics skills. However, Underrail lumps skills together like unarmed and melee into just melee, the gun perks into one perk called guns (no heavy guns in game though).

with many different skill requirements for feats, weapons, skill checks, and more all throughout the game.

Like Fallout which has skill and attribute requirements for feats, weapons, and skill checks (dialogue checks are not advertised in dialogue). Besides, where did you think Styg got the idea from? Not Neverwinter Nights. He got it from Fallout because he wanted to make a game like Fallout with more stuff in it. The game plays like Fallout. But with more bells and whistles. It would be retarded to deny this.

Underrail is a lot more than just "FO with bells and whistles",

Underrail is Fallout with more bells and whistles.

and you just confirmed the fact that you were born with an extra chromosome.

Lol. Retard.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Arcanum's combat is essentially just Fallouts combat but with magic and fewer targeted shots allocated to hotkeys instead of an in-game menu. You just have the option of a real time mode in case you want to spam harm instead of playing the turn-based mode.

FO's combat is not good, so this is not a mark in Arcanum's favor. Also, the functionality and feel of the combat is just as important as the systems underneath. The RTwP combat plays like shit with harm being broken and the TB combat didn't feel much better. Of course, I will add the caveat that the version of Arcanum I played was not working correctly, which one again circles back to my point that it's broken and bugged.

Underrail's combat is pretty much just Fallout's but with some extra options like a lot of traps and mindmagic but with no targeted shots and the option to craft outside of combat. If you like Underrail's combat, you should like Fallout's combat. Even their leveling systems are the same being the allocate points to skills and pick a feat ever few levels.

These three sentences were retarded. I won't be mean and call you an outright retard, but you definitely sounded like one in these three sentences. I'm not going to let you get away with grossly simplifying Underrail's combat system in so many ways so that you can claim it is functionally the same as FO's combat system. Anyone who has played these two games can see the much higher levels of depth and complexity that are present in Underrail versus FO, with many of the most ardent FO defenders on this forum admitting as much. At least they cite FO's other features and things it does well to support their claim of its total superiority, you id none of that.

Underrail's combat is MMO-tier cooldown management, people who jerk off to it are weird

 

[Bigg Boss]

My favorite is Arcanum since I still need to play it all the way through and the others I have played too much so they bore me. I would pick Fallout but I literally despise it now because the fanbase is so autistic and retarded. Planescape is more of a one play and done kinda game as well.

 

[Cael]

Arcanum hands down. I completed the game without Drog's patch.

The premise is unique, and its mechanics implementation is good. The storyline is unique in western RPG, especially the twist at the end. It had a LOT of potential for sequels. Too bad it fell into the hands of literal demons in human form.

 

[Daedalos]

Without a shadow of a doubt, Fallout.

I will always be biased towards great post-apoc/sci-fi whatever type of crpgs, and Fallout ticks every fucking box there is.

It's simply one if not THE best cRPG ever made. Colony Ship will try to pry that title away, obviously. 2023 hype

 

[ItsChon]

Arcanum is not RTwP. It is either Real time or Turnbased. Spacebar can be used to switch between the TB and RT modes. The TB mode is pretty much just Fallout's combat system with a different action point system, magic, and

Still shit.

And yet it's still just Fallout with more stuff.

By that logic, a pizza is just bread with more stuff on it. The whole is greater than the sum of its parts, and your crude reductionist bullshit isn't going to fly here just because you want to disingenuously pretend that FO's combat is in the same ballpark as Underrail. You're such a dipshit it's hilarious.

And? Then again, I can take a certain trait and only have about 4 perks before finishing. But the number of perks is just how far the game extends the leveling system and it's length. Kinda like what Fallout 2 did. Longer game with more levels = more perks. Also the apt comparison is pathfinder 1e to D&D 3.0. Pf1e is just D&D3.5. Except the classes have a few more bells and whistles on top of the classes taken directly from D&D3.5 and you get a feat ever second level instead of every third regardless of class. So with a non-fighter, you cap out at about 7-8 feats given a generic class while you have more like 10-11 in Pf1e.

The point is that Underrail has many different "builds" that are possible as a result of the sheer number of feats in the game that have a significant impact. Do you want to play a glass cannon psyker? Go right ahead, and while you do so, feel free to choose between the countless different psychic archetypes that range from using melting people's brains with your mind to launching balls of fire and ice with your thermic control. Do you want to play a stealthy sniper rifle, where you set up traps on the battlefield to stack the deck more favorably for yourself, while also manuevering to the perfect position so you can pick your enemies off one by one, retreating tactically until they are all dead without even laying a finger on you? You can do that. Heavily armored, sledgehammer wielding tank that throws grenades at his feet? Check. Agile hoplite that can throw his spear over long distances for extra range and massive damage, while also being relatively tanky? Check. Chemical weapon specialist, with the ability to fill a battlefield full of noxious gas? Check. Spec ops commando, mowing enemies down room by room with none the wiser? Check. The list really goes on.

Contrast this with fallout? Where the builds can literally be summed up as melee, sniper, or heavy gunner. Combat is also braindead easy, so it's not like any of these choices are actually meaningful. Underrail dwarfs FO in terms of the sheer amount of builds you can play that are actually good at doing the thing you set out to do with them, versus just being some niche meme build. It also offers countless different encounters and enemy types that are made possible due to the sheer amount of these feats, which could never happen in FO.

Rather than having the ability to target specific parts of the body in the beginning like Fallout, Underrail instead allows certain things like Beheading with the Sword or Dirty only when you take the feat.

Have you even played the fucking game? Beheading doesn't work anything like FO's targeting system. You really don't have any idea what the fuck you're talking about?

The rest is mostly cooldown reduction, ap reduction, damage increase, number increases, etc. kinda like FO

This is such a gross mischaracterization and simplification of Underrail's feats. The difference between FO's feats and Underrail's feats is that while FO's feats are like you described, simple improvements to numbers and stats, Underrail's feats take this to a whole new level by making feats very specific and requiring a certain set of conditions to be met so that the great benefits can be felt. Take a feat such as survival instincts, which increases crit chance when below thirty percent health. While yes, this involves "number increases", it implements them in such a way that instantly changes how your character is going to be played. It adds a whole new dimension to a build, and forces you to either spec into extreme damage resistance and tankiness to compensate for the low health, or forms of crowd control/damage avoidance. What about ambush, which increases accuracy and crit chance when attacking a target that is illuminated while you are in the shadows. Once again, a "number increase", but done in a way that dramatically changes how you play your character and how you approach different fights. Or, we can talk about Thermodynamicity, which gives an ap reduction when alternating between hot and cold metathermic psionic abilities. If you really can't see the difference between FO's implementations of perks and Underrail's feats, you're a lost cause.

Fallout also did this with certain thinks like implants or the "childkiller" trait.

Childkiller is a reputation that you get, not a trait, and it literally just effects reaction and spawns in bounty hunters. This has nothing to do with in game feats that effect how a build is played and/or the types of damage you deal. Implants are literally just +1 stat bonuses, which again has nothing to do with feats/perks. You're retarded.

Like Fallout which has skill and attribute requirements for feats, weapons, and skill checks (dialogue checks are not advertised in dialogue). Besides, where did you think Styg got the idea from? Not Neverwinter Nights. He got it from Fallout because he wanted to make a game like Fallout with more stuff in it. The game plays like Fallout. But with more bells and whistles. It would be retarded to deny this.

I never said Styg didn't get many ideas from FO. Underrail's system was inspired by FO and I never denied this. What I said was.

I'm not going to let you get away with grossly simplifying Underrail's combat system in so many ways so that you can claim it is functionally the same as FO's combat system. Anyone who has played these two games can see the much higher levels of depth and complexity that are present in Underrail versus FO

Something can be inspired by something else, but then proceed to improve upon it and add so many different things to it that it reaches a new level of depth and complexity that the original did not have. Underrail does everything FO does, but better. And it does them significantly better in meaningful ways. You're a faggot ass fanboy however, so you pretend that it's just a few "bells and whistles", when in reality the two games play very differently.

These newfags get worse and worse every year. This dumbass has NMA reject written all over him.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

And yet it's still just Fallout with more stuff.

It's not. Underrail is only superficially like Fallout, it's a much different game.
ATOM RPG is the game that's "like Fallout". I enjoyed it so much that it reignited what I originally liked about RPGs and made me do a replay of FO1.

Consider one of the most basic features in Fallout: The ability to inspect everything. Every single item, person, object, and scenery placement can be inspected.
There are actually three basic types of inspections in Fallout:

• The first time you hover over something.
• A regular hover inspection after the first time.
• An examination using the examination verb.

To people who only care about the combat, all of this is meaningless to them. I personally love it. It feels like a world that was designed to be explored and interacted with, not a world that exists to present a narrative.

And as a bit of a tangent but still related to the above,
I've often wondered how much of Fallout's brilliance was somewhat unintentional and due to implementing nearly everything in-game using scripts instead of other various abstractions. Consider a typical game that had things you could inspect. A typical gamedev would usually just tag these things with a description string and call it a day. But in Fallout, when something is inspected it actually calls a function on the object itself, and most things have multiple possible responses just to examining them.

Consider this example(from the BIS FO2 script sources) for using the examine verb on a door:

/**********************************************************************************
   Should the player examine the door closely, then he should be allowed a lockpick
   roll, a traps roll and a perception roll. Depending on which rolls are made will
   determine how much information about the door will be given.
**********************************************************************************/

procedure description_p_proc begin
   script_overrides;
   if ((local_var(LVAR_Locked) == STATE_ACTIVE) and (local_var(LVAR_Trapped) == STATE_ACTIVE)) then begin
       call Look_Traps_And_Locks;
   end

   else if (local_var(LVAR_Trapped) == STATE_ACTIVE) then begin
       call Look_Traps;
   end

   else if (local_var(LVAR_Locked) == STATE_ACTIVE) then begin
       call Look_Locks;
   end

   else if (DOOR_STATUS == STATE_WOOD) then begin
       display_msg(mstr(100));
   end

   else begin
       display_msg(mstr(101));
   end
end

Like all interactions in Fallout, when you do something it calls the appropriate function on the script attached to it, including something as mundane as examining it. It's why the game feels so reactive... because it is.
I know this could easily be done without scripting, but If all this was implemented on the tools side you'd have designers/writers constantly begging the tools developers to add more and more features for something they could have done themselves in about 5 minutes. Perhaps there's a discussion here about the long turnaround time of games now compared to being able to make the massive beast that is FO2 in a single year(regardless of your feelings on it.)


--

Fallout is as much of an adventure game as it is an RPG. And that's why it's so damn good, because RPGs should be adventures. Your "action cursor" is your verb list, with subverbs(skills, items, ...)
I guess it's probably not a good game if you just want to play cooldown popamole or something though

 

[ItsChon]

Arcanum's combat is essentially just Fallouts combat but with magic and fewer targeted shots allocated to hotkeys instead of an in-game menu. You just have the option of a real time mode in case you want to spam harm instead of playing the turn-based mode.

FO's combat is not good, so this is not a mark in Arcanum's favor. Also, the functionality and feel of the combat is just as important as the systems underneath. The RTwP combat plays like shit with harm being broken and the TB combat didn't feel much better. Of course, I will add the caveat that the version of Arcanum I played was not working correctly, which one again circles back to my point that it's broken and bugged.

Underrail's combat is pretty much just Fallout's but with some extra options like a lot of traps and mindmagic but with no targeted shots and the option to craft outside of combat. If you like Underrail's combat, you should like Fallout's combat. Even their leveling systems are the same being the allocate points to skills and pick a feat ever few levels.

These three sentences were retarded. I won't be mean and call you an outright retard, but you definitely sounded like one in these three sentences. I'm not going to let you get away with grossly simplifying Underrail's combat system in so many ways so that you can claim it is functionally the same as FO's combat system. Anyone who has played these two games can see the much higher levels of depth and complexity that are present in Underrail versus FO, with many of the most ardent FO defenders on this forum admitting as much. At least they cite FO's other features and things it does well to support their claim of its total superiority, you id none of that.

Underrail's combat is MMO-tier cooldown management, people who jerk off to it are weird

I've seen what you think is good your opinion means nothing to me.

 

[HeatEXTEND]

cooldown popamole or something though

Did you just call UR "cooldown popamole"?

 

[rusty_shackleford]

cooldown popamole or something though

Did you just call UR "cooldown popamole"?

Where did I specify underrail? You seem to have quickly made a connection where I did not. Is there a reason for that?

 

[HeatEXTEND]

Underrail's combat is MMO-tier cooldown management, people who jerk off to it are weird

 

[motherfucker]

Fallout for its visceral combat and specifically the first one for its sense of classic, masculine American adventure that no other game has.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Underrail's combat is MMO-tier cooldown management, people who jerk off to it are weird

That was in a separate post. There are plenty of games with trash MMO-tier combat.
Not my fault you immediately assumed I was discussing Underrail.

 

[Lord of Riva]

I have recently played through Fallout again, as a "let's play" for my wife.

The thing is while I brought her to enjoy videogames somewhat, she particularly enjoys strategy games, she does not have the competence for anything that is more hardcore in how it handles.
Meaning stuff like Ego-Shooters are basically off-limits, harder Plattformers as well, some Strategy games in the RTS-format are too fast paced for her.

Therefore I started replaying some of the titles I enjoy so she can watch, one of them was Fallout.

The thing with Fallout is, that when you look at it as a person never having played it, it just does not make much sense when you see someone who knows how to play the game. Meaning the biggest part of Fallout, I think, is the inherent roguelike nature the game has for someone who goes into it without proper knowledge.

Getting stomped in the Rad-scorpion cave because your build is shit, making yourself explode by trying to seal it. Making a build that is too retarded to talk, trying to manage full melee without knowledge of perks, wandering into the hands of the super Mutant by accident.

Not knowing where the actual cities are, or where the main story aspects are located. Playing around with different solutions, understanding that you might should have skilled science instead of three weapon groups because you are a retarded child.

These are the things that made Fallout great, all this nuance is lost if you play it with proper knowledge and while I made play the introduction with her own character (and she failed because the build was shit) I ended up playing it for her. When you look at the game this way it's relatively short, pretty linear and the story is very loosely told. It just does not make much sense in itself and I ended up explaining her outside of the game why some of the stuff is interesting or how you would have encountered in the first experience.

To make a long story short, Fallout is something that needs to be explored on your own and it remains great because this experience will never be lost to yourself and that in itself makes it an odd Masterwork.
I really do enjoy it because of this insight, but in the end people who will understand the game like this and enjoy it because of how it is will always be a extremely small group of people (with excellent taste).

So in the end I must say PST is the better one for me, but just with a small margin. The games are quite opposite of each other in what they achieve and it is hard to judge them against each other.

Arcanum, as engrossing as it is, has a lot of gameplay related flaws (even compared to PSTs combat) that I do not consider it on the same level.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

The idea that Fallout is the opposite of PST has an obvious implication. PST is a great ...something... but the one thing I can say it's not is a great computer RPG. It's a great experience, for sure.
And it's not about combat, as I know someone will bring it up. How you interact with the world... how you represent yourself in the world, is fundamentally opposite in PST and Fallout.

To put it more succinctly: You are the Vault Dweller. You are not The Nameless One. In Fallout, you are exploring and interacting with the world. Heck, the game even begins with a mcguffin, because it's all about the journey not the destination. Although Fallout having an excellent destination is simply icing on top of that cake.
In PST, you are on TNO's journey and everything else simply serves as a vehicle for this narrative. As a simple example: How many side quests can you remember from PST if you haven't replayed it recently? I remember enjoying them, but if I was forced to name some at gunpoint, I'd be fucked.

 

[HeatEXTEND]

Underrail's combat is MMO-tier cooldown management, people who jerk off to it are weird

That was in a separate post. There are plenty of games with trash MMO-tier combat.
Not my fault you immediately assumed I was discussing Underrail.

Right, that's good then.