Which Fallout was the greatest?

[Magister Lajciak]

I think it's reasonable to not like a game on the basis of research and second hand information rather than actually playing it. People often have a good idea of what things will appeal to them. Indeed, I avoid a lot of games on that basis.

[Aram]

I think it's very significative that this alleged excessive cheesiness is the only fault people can find with Fallout 2.

That and some seriously broken quests.

 

It wasn't even just the cheesiness but the complete destruction of the atmosphere. Every town you entered felt like a Disneyland "theme" ride. In this town: Gangsters! In this town: Kung Foo! In this town: The Old West! They all felt like something exactly unlike a post-apocalyptic wasteland. People keep saying it's superior because it has more content, but more means nothing if it's a lesser quality of content.

[Volourn]

It's also superior ebcause the role-playing, and characters are also better.

[Aram]

It's also superior ebcause the role-playing, and characters are also better.

Except they're not really.

[Dark_Raven]

"Heh, he hasn't even played Oblivion. He's basing his opinion of Bethesda on games they released in the 90's, apparently."

 

And, research.

Sure you do.

 

But I agree that F2 is awesome. The best of the best.

[Volourn]

"Except they're not really."

 

They are. new Reno itself is the height of role-playing. None stop choices witha bsolutely meaningful consequences to them. Totally sweet, and awesome. There's nothing like that in any other game including FO1.

[Humodour]

"Except they're not really."

 

They are. new Reno itself is the height of role-playing. None stop choices witha bsolutely meaningful consequences to them. Totally sweet, and awesome. There's nothing like that in any other game including FO1.

 

In light of countless years of having to put up with these kind of posts from you, Volourn, I now petition the powers that be to hire xkcd to install a version of the YouTube virus but for the forums:

 

[GreasyDogMeat]

 

The average YouTube comment makes me weep for humanity.

 

I was willing to understand Volourn's hesitation at getting Fallout 3, until he mentioned he thought FOBOS was 'an okayish action game' yet unwilling to touch F3.

 

I think some people can get so full of spite over a company that even a decent game is ruined in their eyes. I've reached a point somewhat like that with the MoW premium module and Atari's delay. The malice at Atari will end up spoiling the experience. Its a shame if people feel that way at Bethesda over Fallout 3 because it really is an awesome game.

Edited November 7, 2008 by GreasyDogMeat

[Volourn]

"I was willing to understand Volourn's hesitation at getting Fallout 3, until he mentioned he thought FOBOS was 'an okayish action game' "

 

Because, that's exactly what FOBOS is. It doesn't pretend to be soemthing it isn't.

 

 

"yet unwilling to touch F3."

 

FOBOS' developer hasn't made games I dislike that I wasted money on. I'm not gonna be suckered into buying another horrible Bethesda game at full price.

 

It was Bethesda's job to convince me to waste my money on FO3. They even had a head start consideirng how much I love the FO series. Yet, they still failed. And, the posts, even by the people who like the game, illustrates that this game is just another Bethesda game with the FO name attached to it. If I don't like Bethesda games.. why would FO3 be any different.

 

The old saying goes: "Those who don't learn from past experience are doomed to repeat it."

 

Well.. some may think I'm retarded; but even this retardo is smart enough to not repeat the mistake of paying full price of a Bethesda game.

 

Tons of good games I cna enjoy to spend my money on including SOZ... why should I give Bethesda a chance? I shouldn't.

 

I win.

[Humodour]

I am personally loathe to touch Fallout 3. There are plenty of good games out there for me to try, if that's all Fallout 3 is... but it's not worthy perverting my memories of the Fallout universe to do so. I've got Fallout: Tactics for that.

[random n00b]

If I don't like Bethesda games.. why would FO3 be any different.

I thought you had "researched". Shouldn't you be able to come up with something more solid than that? I mean, a healthy dose of skepticism is ok, but this is ridiculous.

 

 

The old saying goes: "Those who don't learn from past experience are doomed to repeat it."

Yeah. So, if you can learn from past mistakes... why are you so convinced that the people at Bethesda cannot?

 

 

but it's not worthy perverting my memories of the Fallout universe to do so.

F3 is fairly respectful of the setting, putting in less wacky or outright stupid stuff than F2, even. If you don't like the premise that the game is essentially a shooter, that's fine... but it doesn't corrupt the setting or steer it radically from what it was. I also don't quite understand how F3 could change your memories of other games, either.

 

And FWIW, Tactics isn't even considered canon by devs.

[Oerwinde]

"I was willing to understand Volourn's hesitation at getting Fallout 3, until he mentioned he thought FOBOS was 'an okayish action game' "

 

Because, that's exactly what FOBOS is. It doesn't pretend to be soemthing it isn't.

 

 

"yet unwilling to touch F3."

 

FOBOS' developer hasn't made games I dislike that I wasted money on. I'm not gonna be suckered into buying another horrible Bethesda game at full price.

 

It was Bethesda's job to convince me to waste my money on FO3. They even had a head start consideirng how much I love the FO series. Yet, they still failed. And, the posts, even by the people who like the game, illustrates that this game is just another Bethesda game with the FO name attached to it. If I don't like Bethesda games.. why would FO3 be any different.

 

The old saying goes: "Those who don't learn from past experience are doomed to repeat it."

 

Well.. some may think I'm retarded; but even this retardo is smart enough to not repeat the mistake of paying full price of a Bethesda game.

 

Tons of good games I cna enjoy to spend my money on including SOZ... why should I give Bethesda a chance? I shouldn't.

 

I win.

 

I've hated every game Bethesda has released. I love Fallout 3. Just think of it as a first person spinoff instead of a sequel if it helps. If you don't want to pay full price, your call and understandable, but take it from a fellow Bethesda hater that its not worth missing out on the game just because its Bethesda, they actually managed to pull off a decent game here.

[Volourn]

"I thought you had "researched". Shouldn't you be able to come up with something more solid than that? I mean, a healthy dose of skepticism is ok, but this is ridiculous."

 

Huh? I've read enough about FO3 to know that it's basically a Bethesda game that just happens to be called FO3. i could list a billion of things that I've read, or whatch in videos that make me feel that the game wouldn't be worth $80. From the fact that VATS sounds like a dumb combat system, the fact you can kill people will teddy bears, the fact that the writing looks to be 'not so good' (that's being polite), and more all reasons to avoid this game.

 

 

"Yeah. So, if you can learn from past mistakes... why are you so convinced that the people at Bethesda cannot?"

 

L0L This is easy to counter, and I cna't believe you wasted time posting this softball question. It's simply. Bethesda doens't think they made a mistake with their earlier games. And, why should they? Whether I liked them or not is irrelevant. They're both critical, and financial success so why in the bejeebers would Beth change that formula just to please an internet geek like me? So, the fact is, in order to learn from past mistakes you have to actually believe you made a mistake to learn from. Obviously, Beth doesn't.

 

And, the fact that FO3 has been selling super fast (it might end up selling more than Oblivion did, and already has outsold all previous FO games combined if the news is true); they don't need my money so Beth can throw me in the trash can.

 

 

"I've hated every game Bethesda has released. I love Fallout 3. Just think of it as a first person spinoff instead of a sequel if it helps. If you don't want to pay full price, your call and understandable, but take it from a fellow Bethesda hater that its not worth missing out on the game just because its Bethesda, they actually managed to pull off a decent game here."

 

It's a sequel. There's no pretending otehrwise. But,k i should point out, I'm not one of those who hate FO3 because it's not gonna be exxactly like FO1, and FO2. I could live with that. It's why I would have bought a FO3 from BIO, Obsidian, or any other company even if they made it RT. I'm not big on FO3 because of what i've heard of it, and because I simply do not like Bethesda games.

 

Blame Bethesda not me.

[random n00b]

From the fact that VATS sounds like a dumb combat system, the fact you can kill people will teddy bears, the fact that the writing looks to be 'not so good' (that's being polite), and more all reasons to avoid this game.

The teddy bear thing is plain weak, as it's just random junk that's used for the weapon. As for VATS... you could NOT use it, if it was really so terrible, you know? Is that your "research"? Sounds more like prejudice to me.

 

 

so why in the bejeebers would Beth change that formula just to please an internet geek like me?

So why did they change stuff like dialog and leveling if, according to you, they don't think anything needed changing?

 

Anyway, it's your loss.

[Volourn]

Nope. I'm having a blast with NHL 09, and getting pumped for SOZ. I'm not losing anything. I play games to have fun, and I'm currently playing games and having fun. I WIN.

 

Anyways, back on topic: FO2 is the best FO game.

Edited November 7, 2008 by Volourn

[Humodour]

F3 is fairly respectful of the setting, putting in less wacky or outright stupid stuff than F2, even.

 

*shrug* I've heard plenty of conflicting information on that point. I'm inclined to side with the hardcore Fallout fanboys not because I particularly like their fundamentalism, but because I share a similar 'reverence' for the original Fallout universe.

 

If you don't like the premise that the game is essentially a shooter, that's fine...

 

It's not that. Some of my favourite RPGs are shooters. I disagree with the move to 3D in Fallout's particular case (because you lose the turn-based aspect), but it's a minor gripe.

 

Unless you're saying that the game is a shooter more than an RPG. That would be cause for me to worry.

 

I also don't quite understand how F3 could change your memories of other games, either.

 

Bad sequels pervert the atmosphere and feel of the original that you've got stored away in your head. It's similar to how after you watch a movie of a book (good or bad), whenever you read those books from then on, you think of the characters the way the movie portrayed them instead of your original abstractions (Harry Potter comes to mind).

 

And FWIW, Tactics isn't even considered canon by devs.

 

Which devs? MCA and co? Micro Fort

[Pidesco]

Fallout 1 is the tighter, better designed game, but fallout 2 takes the cake for me, because of the melee combat.

 

Crotch and eye punching my way to victory, FTW.

[Humodour]

Fallout 1 is the tighter, better designed game, but fallout 2 takes the cake for me, because of the melee combat.

 

Crotch and eye punching my way to victory, FTW.

 

I played Fallout 2 first, so it holds a special place.

 

But in terms of atmosphere, storyline, and uniqueness, Fallout 1 is the definite winner.

 

Trivia: Melee in Fallout 2 (and 1?) is amazingly easy, because eye hots have a high probability of instant kills, and groin shots have a high probability of knocking them flat.

 

So all you gotta do is get close enough without being pumped full of holes.

[Pidesco]

As you go up in levels that's true, but in the first half of F2 melee isn't that easy. It's a cakewalk after you get slayer, of course.

[Volourn]

"But in terms of atmosphere, storyline, and uniqueness, Fallout 1 is the definite winner."

 

Consideirng that both FO games have the same absic unoriginal story, and since they're loosely based on Wasteland, they're far from 'unique'. FO's strengths was solid combat and awesome role-playing. Atmosphere is great too. But, the storie(s) are average at best.

[Humodour]

As you go up in levels that's true, but in the first half of F2 melee isn't that easy. It's a cakewalk after you get slayer, of course.

 

By level 9 you have:

Critical chance: 33% (8 luck, Haymaker, Finesse)

Better Criticals perk

3 AP targeted shots (Bonus HTH Attacks perk)

High accuracy eye shots (because there's no range penalty unlike with guns)

 

So you're doing 3 eye attacks per round to stationary targets. Each eye attack you do has a high probability of: blinding them, knocking them out, making them lose a turn, instant death, double/triple/quadruple damage. Not to mention that eye attacks have an even higher critical chance, so it's actually more than a 33% chance of critical (probably about 50% or 60%).

 

I know that when I went to Reno at about level 9 and fought in the boxing ring, half the guys died instantly, and the other half fell over defenceless and blinded. It was a treasured moment, especially since my endurance was 4 and my strength was 5.

 

Add in some Bonus Move perks (and Action Boy for laughs) and you're good to go.

 

Slayer, on the other hand, is like level 24 or something.

[random n00b]

Bad sequels pervert the atmosphere and feel of the original that you've got stored away in your head. It's similar to how after you watch a movie of a book (good or bad), whenever you read those books from then on, you think of the characters the way the movie portrayed them instead of your original abstractions (Harry Potter comes to mind).

Well, I suppose I understand what you mean, but I've never had that happen to me. I guess my head just compartmentalises stuff rather strictly...

 

 

Which devs? MCA and co? Micro Fort

[LostStraw]

@Krezack

In Fallout 2 the bonus HtH attacks was actually a level 15 perk (changed from Fallout 1).

[Humodour]

Yeah I thought that sounded wrong since I only remember getting off two targeted shots per round in Reno.

 

Combat sucked.

 

[Magister Lajciak]

"I was willing to understand Volourn's hesitation at getting Fallout 3, until he mentioned he thought FOBOS was 'an okayish action game' "

 

Because, that's exactly what FOBOS is. It doesn't pretend to be soemthing it isn't.

 

Well, if the name is the real reason you don't like Fallout 3 that's a different matter. Don't get too hung up on it. Just think of Fallout 3 as Fallout Action, or something and you can enjoy it too.