Fallout 1+2+3+4 = Perfection?

W

WarAlwaysChanges

First time out of the vault
So I am obviously new to the community. Having stumbled upon a Kotaku article citing the collective hate here for fallout 3, I must admit I was intrigued. So much so that I decided to create an account in an effort to reach out to these individuals and gain some perspective.
I was introduced to the franchise through fallout 3 myself. Having loved every second ( and having been a huge fan of isometric RPG's like Baldrus gate and Icewind Dale wayy back when ) but being only 7 when the first fallout came out, I finally attempted to play the original. I'm still playing through, but needless to say I love it.
This threads topic is evident from the title. What would an amalgam of all 4 games look like? If fallout 5 was to come out (in 10 years or so the way Bethesda makes games) and attempt to incorporate the old with the new What would the perfect fallout game look like?
I am fully aware that some of you share a disdain for the latter two games. If so elaborate on what the perfect fallout 5 would be. Would you have an iso view? FPS? Would you change the setting? I have always been exceedingly curious as to what is going on in the rest of the world amid this post apocalyptic universe. Fallout Chicago isn't as much of a departure from the series as say fallout in Egypt, Rome, even say London. (I feel German and Russian super mutants would be unstoppable)
Whatever your perfect vision of fallout is I'd like to hear it.
 
Yeah but as great as fallout is its movement has not aged well, nor has the combat. In this day and age of fast paced online multiplayer matches, having to use ap to walk forward 1 square and then use more to stab a scorpion one time just to end my turn is tedious. No thank you, if I wanted to play D&D I'd quit my job live with my mom and be a loser in her basement.

I can't tell you how many people I've tried to get to play the first fallout and most will not even try once they see how the game works. Those that do try, give up before they leave the cave with the first vault. Damn rats, I tell em to shoot em in the groin and Ya can't go wrong but most can't even figure out how. (Granted most of them have been around 14-20 years old and none have patience for older games, yet all were fans of F3)

As I said I love original fallout, but not its combat system. I appreciate it for the dialog, art style, and amazing rpg elements ( I just talked to this dude about irrigation and got XP!) Those are the moments I love.
 
PossibleCabbage said:
Atomkilla said:
Play through Fallout. Play through Fallout 2. Then play through Fallout 3.

You won't be seeing any sort of perfection anymore.
Click to expand...

New Vegas will probably make you feel better about a lot of stuff though.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Fallout 3 was my first game, sadly, and I thought it amazing until I decided to get New Vegas, and after playing through it for the first time and going back to FO3, I realized what a pile of fucking shit it is. Later on I got FO1/2 from GOG for free and decided to give them a go, played through FO1, had a blast and it still remains on par with FO2 for me. By far the darkest game in the franchise imo and I think that's the main reason I enjoyed it. Just great story telling, great characters, the overall aesthetic, and it was short and sweet. FO2 was next and boy, this game is fucking huge. I'm not sure how bigger it is than FO1 but it took me quite awhile to finish. Loved everything about it, and I probably consider it overall my favorite Fallout. Although there is some silly stuff in there, it was never anything that took away from my experience.

Then I played New Vegas again. Man, the second time around was so much better than when I had played the game without the knowledge of the first two. So many references and subtle hints or nods to the earlier games are thrown in there that I completely missed. Not even that, but just the complete experience felt so much better after playing through them in a straight order instead of just 3-NV. The game feels like it's in the same universe as 1/2, while 3 does anything but. It's just a complete piece of shit in comparison and I can't believe that there are people who still consider 3 the "definitive" Fallout game.

That was kind of off-topic, but I just wanted to share that. In my opinion, the perfect vision of Fallout is the first two. I'm pretty sure we're never going to get anything close to those two games ever again, but I feel like New Vegas was realistically the closest thing that we could have gotten. There will never be a perfect Fallout for just one person, as the franchise has changed so much and there's so many new fans who are already accustomed to the shitty Bethesda versions. Just the fact that people complained about the dialogue being too long or boring in NV, or that there wasn't anywhere to explore is a testament to that.
 
WarAlwaysChanges said:
Yeah but as great as fallout is its movement has not aged well, nor has the combat. In this day and age of fast paced online multiplayer matches, having to use ap to walk forward 1 square and then use more to stab a scorpion one time just to end my turn is tedious. No thank you, if I wanted to play D&D I'd quit my job live with my mom and be a loser in her basement.
Click to expand...
This reeks of dickishness. Not everyone who likes P&P games is a neckbeard basement dweller. Inb4yousayI'monetoo.
 
I'm pretty sure we're never going to get anything close to those two games ever again.
Click to expand...

There are quite a few options still, Planescape Torment trumped Fallout in some ways. Shadowrun Dragonfall and NEO Scavenger are quite in the same spirit too. As for RPG elements themselves there is Vampire Bloodlines, Deus Ex and The Witcher.
 
Eumesmopo said:
I'm pretty sure we're never going to get anything close to those two games ever again.
Click to expand...

There are quite a few options still, Planescape Torment trumped Fallout in some ways. Shadowrun Dragonfall and NEO Scavenger are quite in the same spirit too. As for RPG elements themselves there is Vampire Bloodlines, Deus Ex and The Witcher.
Click to expand...
My bad, I meant that in relation to Fallout, not RPG's overall, I should have clarified.
 
Eumesmopo said:
I'm pretty sure we're never going to get anything close to those two games ever again.
Click to expand...

There are quite a few options still, Planescape Torment trumped Fallout in some ways. Shadowrun Dragonfall and NEO Scavenger are quite in the same spirit too. As for RPG elements themselves there is Vampire Bloodlines, Deus Ex and The Witcher.
Click to expand...


I like The Witcher, but let's be real, that game is a weak RPG when it comes to mechanics. The Witcher 2 even more so. I can't tell about TW3, since I haven't played it. When it comes to choices and consequences, it's spot-on.
Planescape: Torment is probably the best story ever delivered in a video game. It is for me.
When it comes to other elements of the game (like combat), it is pretty weak.
NEO-Scavenger does nail the post-apocalyptic survival feel like few other games, but it's far from your typical PA setting or RPG mechanics.




...




The original Fallout is an unique game since it, basically, filled almost every criteria that RPG population demands (or at least, demanded).
1) Good story and characters, choices and consequences, overall excellent writing
2) Solid mechanics which offered many different approaches to solving a problem
3) Big, open logical world
4) Fun (and unique) combat
5) Original setting



Add on top that it was aesthetically very pleasing (from graphics to music and everything in between), took an unique approach to PA setting and (re)introduced it to the wider gaming market, had a completely original rulesystem (based on GURPS, but still original) and tons of other stuff.
It wasn't perfect, it had its flaws - like some skills being absolutely useless, not much interaction with companions, some quests being unfinished etc. Also, one could argue that at the time of its release it was quite hardware-demanding or so I've gathered.

However, it was basically a game that did everything right and then some more. Few games ever achieved that, in any genre. Perfection is, by itself, unattainable, but Fallout is one of the games that got very close to being perfect.




However, the original game was the zenith of the series. Mind you, there are other Fallout games which are very good too, but they all pale in comparison to the original when you analyze them a bit. There were improvements here and there, but in general, the series just went downhill after that, with an occasional climb-up, but still not enough to reach the top.








On the other hand, all of this is very subjective.
 
Atomkilla said:
Eumesmopo said:
I'm pretty sure we're never going to get anything close to those two games ever again.
Click to expand...

There are quite a few options still, Planescape Torment trumped Fallout in some ways. Shadowrun Dragonfall and NEO Scavenger are quite in the same spirit too. As for RPG elements themselves there is Vampire Bloodlines, Deus Ex and The Witcher.
Click to expand...


I like The Witcher, but let's be real, that game is a weak RPG when it comes to mechanics. The Witcher 2 even more so. I can't tell about TW3, since I haven't played it. When it comes to choices and consequences, it's spot-on.
Planescape: Torment is probably the best story ever delivered in a video game. It is for me.
When it comes to other elements of the game (like combat), it is pretty weak.
NEO-Scavenger does nail the post-apocalyptic survival feel like few other games, but it's far from your typical PA setting or RPG mechanics.




...




The original Fallout is an unique game since it, basically, filled almost every criteria that RPG population demands (or at least, demanded).
1) Good story and characters, choices and consequences, overall excellent writing
2) Solid mechanics which offered many different approaches to solving a problem
3) Big, open logical world
4) Fun (and unique) combat
5) Original setting



Add on top that it was aesthetically very pleasing (from graphics to music and everything in between), took an unique approach to PA setting and (re)introduced it to the wider gaming market, had a completely original rulesystem (based on GURPS, but still original) and tons of other stuff.
It wasn't perfect, it had its flaws - like some skills being absolutely useless, not much interaction with companions, some quests being unfinished etc. Also, one could argue that at the time of its release it was quite hardware-demanding or so I've gathered.

However, it was basically a game that did everything right and then some more. Few games ever achieved that, in any genre. Perfection is, by itself, unattainable, but Fallout is one of the games that got very close to being perfect.




However, the original game was the zenith of the series. Mind you, there are other Fallout games which are very good too, but they all pale in comparison to the original when you analyze them a bit. There were improvements here and there, but in general, the series just went downhill after that, with an occasional climb-up, but still not enough to reach the top.








On the other hand, all of this is very subjective.
Click to expand...

Mostly agree, but I'll argue that Neo Scavenger mostly has the 5 elements you mentioned. It has a big open world that is mostly consistent and logical (the only gap I remember is the lack of an explanation for where does Detroit get it's power and industrial goods from, but hardly a issue since only a small fraction of the city is shown ingame). Encounters, combat and survival have multiple valid approaches. The combat itself is pretty fun and unique. The setting is rather original for a post apocalyptic since it mixes in elements of mysticism and folklore. There is a strong and logical chain of choices and consequences. Characters and factions can become your enemies if upset them with your actions. What you do, gather and learn from the world is all instrumental on the final encounter. The only thing in which it comes lacking is writing and character development, although it is still better than many 'AAA' games on that front.
 
Umm you realise there cannot be super mutants in Germany and Russia? Yeah that statement just reminds me of the whole Bethesda think they know what Fallout means... aka Super Mutants and Vaults. Fallout 3 will be dragging everything back.

Now Fallout 1+2+New Vegas= Perfection (only if made by Obsidian or some other GOOD developers)
 
Dr Fallout said:
Umm you realise there cannot be super mutants in Germany and Russia? Yeah that statement just reminds me of the whole Bethesda think they know what Fallout means... aka Super Mutants and Vaults. Fallout 3 will be dragging everything back.
Click to expand...

I really hope that Bethesda realizes that if you set a Fallout game outside of North America that this is essentially license for them to make up whatever kind of new mutants and sinister pre-war conspiracies with echoes centuries later that they want to. The problem with relying on Vaults and Super Mutants to define Fallout is mostly that it just limits creative space, since it's a big wasteland and you can just fill it with whatever new things you think would be interesting. It's not like Fallouts 1+2 gave us Cazadors, Nightstalkers, the Sierra Madre and the Cloud, Tunnellers, the Think Tank, etc. but all of those things fit very neatly into the Fallout canon because the folks at Obsidian bothered to consider how to make it fit with the existing canon and jive with the existing tone. That's all you really have to do.
 
PossibleCabbage said:
Dr Fallout said:
Umm you realise there cannot be super mutants in Germany and Russia? Yeah that statement just reminds me of the whole Bethesda think they know what Fallout means... aka Super Mutants and Vaults. Fallout 3 will be dragging everything back.
Click to expand...

I really hope that Bethesda realizes that if you set a Fallout game outside of North America that this is essentially license for them to make up whatever kind of new mutants and sinister pre-war conspiracies with echoes centuries later that they want to. The problem with relying on Vaults and Super Mutants to define Fallout is mostly that it just limits creative space, since it's a big wasteland and you can just fill it with whatever new things you think would be interesting. It's not like Fallouts 1+2 gave us Cazadors, Nightstalkers, the Sierra Madre and the Cloud, Tunnellers, the Think Tank, etc. but all of those things fit very neatly into the Fallout canon because the folks at Obsidian bothered to consider how to make it fit with the existing canon and jive with the existing tone. That's all you really have to do.
Click to expand...

Yeah but those are ORIGINAL. Soup Mutants and Vaults are not.
 
My ideal Fallout is a STALKER game with a stronger showing of its RPG elements. I actually prefer the FPS gameplay of 3/NV to the oldschool isometric gameplay, personally. It's just that Fallout 3 is a terrible first person shooter that was outdone in nearly every aspect by Shadow Of Chernobyl, and wouldn't have many of its mechanics improved until New Vegas, which I find is still far from perfect unless I mod the crap out of it.
 
The last truly creative thing Beth did was Morrowind.

And that was mostly because their creative guys left afterwards.

Would explain why they would forget that Cyrodiil was supposed to be a tropical/Mediterranean mash-up.

And why they would go, it's different because of magic!

Or my favorite.

That the in-game book that describes the nations was just wrong.

*sigh*
 
Morrowind... sure the gameplay was shit and the graphics bad but the world... so fucking detailed it made me cry...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top