We only talk about Fallout

[Fenghuang]

Man, Kroney has three official posts and he's already giving Kiro a run for his money for the title of forum perv. What the hell?

[Kroney]

Man, Kroney has three official posts and he's already giving Kiro a run for his money for the title of forum perv.  What the hell?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I used to have my own emoticon. Two, in fact.

[astr0creep]

The only thing I didn't like about Fallout was not being able to get out of combat mode just because there was still at least one enemy, somewhere, alive that I could not see.

I never cared about waiting for the turns to end, it allowed me a small break to stuff my face with Doritos and Pepsi.

 

And the graphics(mostly colours though) were hellacrappy.

[Powerslave]

FALLOUT's combat (and FALLOUT in general, anyway) was meant to be an as accurate as possible representation of the way PnP Combat is handled. Just as in PnP Combat the DM has to do rolls for every "enemy" after the players take their turn, the same happens in FALLOUT. Slow process or not, it too contributed to the game's great atmosphere.

 

And, every time you criticize FALLOUT's graphics, God kills a decent RPG Designer. Please, think of the RPGs.

Edited September 21, 2006 by Powerslave

[6 Foot Invisible Rabbit]

The graphics in its day was damn good. What do you expect, Astrocreep? The graphics getting better as time goes on in a game made in the late 90's?

[Tigranes]

Arcanum solved most of Fallout's combat problems except for the lack of real Cover. Then it broke balance in just about every way possible.

 

So...

[astr0creep]

The graphics in its day was damn good.  What do you expect, Astrocreep?  The graphics getting better as time goes on in a game made in the late 90's?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

For my own defense, I did say "mostly colors". Shades of brown, grey and green is bland. And it is a personal preference. I am also aware that after a nuclear war, bright colors are, well, rare. It would contradict with the desired atmosphere.

Maybe I'm not a fan of post-apocalypticness.

 

:">

[Blank]

Has anyone noticed what a cluster**** team combat is in Oblivion? You hit your companions as much as you hit your enemies.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

For example, my accomplices in the game went in to slash the enemy. I stayed back at a safe distance, firing arrows. After the battle, I examined my buddies and they had more of my arrows sticking out of them than the dead corpse did.

Then I tried going in to slash the enemy with my sword. I would hold the trigger and wait for it to power-up, but by that time, my buddy jumped in front of me, and I dealt him a massive blow to the back.

[astr0creep]

Has anyone noticed what a cluster**** team combat is in Oblivion? You hit your companions as much as you hit your enemies.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

For example, my accomplices in the game went in to slash the enemy. I stayed back at a safe distance, firing arrows. After the battle, I examined my buddies and they had more of my arrows sticking out of them than the dead corpse did.

Then I tried going in to slash the enemy with my sword. I would hold the trigger and wait for it to power-up, but by that time, my buddy jumped in front of me, and I dealt him a massive blow to the back.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Seems to me it's your aim that sucks.

[Kroney]

FALLOUT's combat (and FALLOUT in general, anyway) was meant to be an as accurate as possible representation of the way PnP Combat is handled. Just as in PnP Combat the DM has to do rolls for every "enemy" after the players take their turn, the same happens in FALLOUT. Slow process or not, it too contributed to the game's great atmosphere.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

In PnP a GM can roll multiple dice at once. On a computer, even a 486 is capable of performing the same outstanding feat.

 

And no, it didn't. The game's great atmosphere was created by good sound effects, good music and good vision in creating the blasted look of the buildings. It was not helped by interminable waiting.

 

The game's got flaws, all games have them, including the mighty Fallout franchise. In fact, Fallout had more than most. This combat lag was, in my opinion, one of them.

[Volourn]

"using a stable and working ToEE engine."

 

Does. not. exist.

 

 

"FALLOUT's combat (and FALLOUT in general, anyway) was meant to be an as accurate as possible representation of the way PnP Combat is handled. Just as in PnP Combat the DM has to do rolls for every "enemy" after the players take their turn, the same happens in FALLOUT. Slow process or not, it too contributed to the game's great atmosphere."

 

You obviously didn't read the thread. FO's combat is nowhere near remotely representative of how pnp combat is handled. The only thing in common is they are both turn based. I have NEVER seen any DM including the most anal ones who force the players to wait for an entire town to make a move. Never.

 

It's real simple, and should be common sense. Someone not involved in said combat should not get a turn.

 

Period.

Edited September 21, 2006 by Volourn

[alanschu]

I love love LOVE the tb combat of games like Jagged Alliance 2, Silent Storm and the Front Mission series. The tb combat of Fallout, however, poo.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Certainly all combat systems are different. I thought Dungeon Siege was pretty boring myself. To eahc their own, I suppose.

 

I don't understand this concept of "waiting as a flaw" or whatever some of you seem to be saying. In a game of turns, you wait your turn. Its not a flaw; its the rule. Or a rule anyway. If you don't like the rules of the game, it doesn't mean the game is flawed.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

The wait when fighting the regulators was nearly unbearable. What should have been an exciting part of the game had me not playing the game for 3-4 minute intervals at a time.

[LoneWolf16]

Completely agree with Mr. Feng/CoF/SoE.

 

At first I thought I was just biased because of my liking for real time, but I can usually stand and even enjoy turn-based games. Fallout though.....if it weren't for the coolness of the setting and crotch shots, I'd have to burn it...

[Shadowstrider]

The suspense of waiting in Fallout was, quite literally, killing me.

[Slowtrain]

Wow. I'm surprised at the huge negative take on Fallout combat. I personally think it was one of the best combat crpgs I've ever played. I never found it boring. Ever. Weird.

[Pop]

Wow.  I'm surprised at the huge negative take on Fallout combat.  I personally think it was one of the best combat crpgs I've ever played.  I never found it boring.  Ever.  Weird.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Same here. And I was much less patient when I was 10.

[alanschu]

When I first played Fallout, I loved the combat for the over the top death scenes.

 

I also remember being down to one health, fighting a death claw, and figuring I needed a critical hit. So I aimed for the head, and boom!

 

 

At the time it was probably one of the best combat crpgs. But what did it have to go up against? It certainly hasn't stood the test of time (combat wise) IMO. If I'm looking for a Fallout like combat experience, I'll play Silent Storm.

[Slowtrain]

If I'm looking for a Fallout like combat experience, I'll play Silent Storm.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Ah ha! Silent Storm isn't a crpg! Of course one would expect the combat of a game whose focus is tactical combat to be superior. But for a crpg, I thought Fallout did combat better than most other crpgs.

[alanschu]

But, do I play a CRPG for its combat?

 

I love Fallout for its setting, and atmosphere. It has great wit and great humour.

 

I think my statement is still fair...if I'm looking for a Fallout combat experience, I'll play Silent Storm (or probably Jagged Alliance, as I have found that game again!!!)

 

I play Fallout for many reasons, but (particularly now) combat isn't really one of them.

 

 

The things I love about Fallout are also easily transferable things, which is why I'm optimistic about Fallout 3.

Edited September 21, 2006 by alanschu

[Slowtrain]

But, do I play a CRPG for its combat?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

True. Not for combat alone. But combat can always be a part of it. That's more how I feel about Arcanum, which I don't think haad good combat, but had a ton of other neat stuff going on, so I could sort of tolerate the combat for the sake of the game.

 

 

 

(or probably Jagged Alliance, as I have found that game again!!!)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Jagged Alliance 1 or 2? Jagged Alliance 1 isn't anywhere near the game Jag 2 is. I'm assuming you mean Jag 2. Which is awesome

[alanschu]

The only JA game I have played is the 2nd one!

 

I get the internet tomorrow so I should be able to try that neat fan patch, sans the air strikes again.

[Slowtrain]

The only JA game I have played is the 2nd one!

 

I get the internet tomorrow so I should be able to try that neat fan patch, sans the air strikes again.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

http://ja2v113.schtuff.com/

 

[alanschu]

What version of the game do I need to patch it to (if any)? I suppose I could just check out the link.

[Slowtrain]

What version of the game do I need to patch it to (if any)?  I suppose I could just check out the link.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Recommended is Jag 2 gold patched to the offical 1.12 patch first.

 

However, people have used regular Jag 2 and things appear to work OK.

 

I use Jag 2 gold.

 

On topic: Jag 2 is Fallout with a lemon twist.

[alanschu]

I have the ollllllllllllllllllld version of Jagged Alliance 2. I think my install version is literaly 1.00 or maybe 1.01

 

A common patch I think was to 1.06!

 

Been a while since I played though, so I'm not too sure.