What did you guys think about Fallout: Tactics?

Shaodeus

Shaodeus

Still Mildly Glowing
What did you think about the gameplay, story, pacing and overal concept of the game.

I myself did like it for what it was, it being a tactical shooter set in the Fallout universe. Though I wish the game had actual dialogue and didn't stretch it story all over the american midwest, they should have just isolated the story to Chicago so it doesn't waltz all over the Fallout world
 
At most I've played half an hour of it.
I kind of need to play more for a review however...

So far, I find it to be very different to the previous games, maybe too much of a stretch.

I don't know the story that well, hopefully I can actually sit down and adjust to how different it feels.

Personally, it looks okay, but I don't if anything could touch the quality of the Fallout trilogy.
 
I can't remember much about when I played it many years ago... What I remember is that it disappointed me. Because they provide the tools to make a unarmed and/or melee character, but it is not feasible and I couldn't finish the game with my unarmed build no matter what I changed :confused:.
Also I need games to not be repetitive or I get bored of them fast. And FO:T is just like that because it is a tactical combat game. I could have used some more instances with dialogue, quests that did not involved fight fight and more fight, etc. But again, it is a tactical combat game so I can't be too hard about it.
I also think the robots seemed a bit out of place in the Fallout universe (maybe they are not "retro" enough or something).

I don't really hate FO:T and had some fun in the start, but then I got bored and just wanted to finish it and put it away, and after that I just couldn't continue with my unarmed build because the game is definitely not balanced for close combat oriented characters (which is a pity and I wouldn't have a problem if unarmed and melee were removed instead of having the tools to build a character and more than half-way across the game my character is totally useless no matter what I do because those skills feel like they were just put there because the base Fallout games had them).
 
I played about an hour of the game and then got bored. The combat is kinda lame, they make stealth missions that are impossible to complete with stealth alone, characters are boring, art style is terrible, has an awful sense of humor, ect., ect.

That being said, I don't necessarily agree with the decision to make it non-canon. The plotline is entirely feasible for a Fallout game, and since the Midwest is otherwise untouched, it could very well work as the canonical state of it. If they made the Robots/Weapons/Power Armor look more clunky and atompunk then I think that it would very well be able to capture the Fallout feel.
 
It wasn't bad, but if it never came out, I wouldn't by unhappy. Multiplayer was kinda fun, but got boring quickly.
 
I actually rather enjoyed it. I had a great time adapting to the scenarios. I got the feeling while playing it that you kinda needed the mind set of a marine to work out some of the wierdness to it. Yes there would be moments where its stealthy, but then a variable changes and its guns blazing.

In my opinion its very adaptive, and fun.
 
I enjoyed it enough to play through it a few times over several years. The actual turn-based squad combat was done well enough. The vehicles worked, although I was never thrilled with them. I didn't like the robots part of the storyline or the ending.
Like FO:3, the protagonist sacrifices himself.
 
I enjoyed playing it, but it was a short affair and I got bored quickly. Honestly, I liked the idea, and I wouldn't mind seeing the idea revisited...
 
So how do you guys think it could have been improved? I think for one thing it should have had good dialogue with your squad mates, that would add a lot more tension in ironman mode for when one of your mates bites it
 
I played and finished FOT quite a number of times simply because I was still in full Fallout fanboy mode when it hit the shelves, but also because it's not a bad game. The graphics are stunning when you compare them to the original games and at the time it came out, I really enjoyed and liked some of the things the game added to the Fallout universe, such as Boom Bugs and some of the modern day weaponry. Roshambo was still around at the time, though, so my enthusiasm was rather short lived, but I would be a liar if I told you I disliked the game from the start.
Two years ago, right after I bought a new laptop, I played through Fallout, Fallout 2 and Fallout Tactics again (for the very last time, I told myself), and it should be no surprise that Tactics was by far the least enjoyable. It's awfully repetitive, it's buggy as fuck and every new mission is another cannon rapefest. Some of the missions are beautifully done (like the Quincy mission where you have to save all the hostages), but most maps are a drag to play through and I've pretty much always cheated towards the end of the game, using the duplication bug to clone the best armour, the best weapon, the best ammo, ... so that my squad can basically run through the maps in RT without dying once.
And still it's not a bad game. Some of the cons in the posts above aren't even true if you ask me. You can finish the game with unarmed/melee characters 'cause I've done it before and so have others. It's just a tad harder to reach the end, just as it is in the original games when you limit yourself to unarmed or melee.
The fact that the game is squad based really helps it from becoming boring and repetitive - just not enough. And when you know how to exploit some of the bugs, such as the one that allows you to throw grenades through roofs and walls, the game becomes ridiculously easy way to soon. And most importantly: it's not a roleplaying game, it's something that looks and plays more like Jagged Alliance 2 or Commandos 2, but it's just nowhere as good as those.
Having said all that, I still prefer it over any of the later Fallout games because I hate Bethesda and they will never get my money. Never! Personally, however, I think the Fallout franchise stopped (and maybe even peaked) with Fallout 2. The rest is just a very nice example of how to fuck up a potentially great series.
 
Last edited:
I'm a mild fan of TicTacs ... I like what it offers, essentially fallout meets Jagged Alliance, and love both of those things, so the two together is awesome for me!

Yes, it got a little samey samey and yes there are elements which don't go well with 'established canon' but for me, I like the variety of weapons, the tactical elements (different stances etc) and I like the midwest BOS armour and I like the backstory of the faction breakaway (not so much the lore rape of the BOS origins)

I like the robots and personally don't see the robot faction as being outside of the early canon (pre-Uber 50's Beth-O-vision) and the other factions in the game I gladly include as canonical.

I'm currently replaying it again and enjoying it as much as previously.

If I were rating this game some years back, I'd probably have given it a strong 8/10 ... with hindsight (and more than a few crashes and game-breaking bugs) i'd still roll a nice 7/10 for it.

To me at least, it offers a strong Fallout inspired tactical experience, and one I happily engage with, unlike certain games which feature the number 4 in their title.

(side note: writing this made me realise I need to play JA2 again)
 
Shaodeus said:
What did you think about the gameplay, story, pacing and overal concept of the game.
Click to expand...

It was all around decent from what little I played, but I was always put off that it wasn't really an RPG. The familiar Fallout trappings weren't enough. Perhaps I'll finish it one day.
 
I absolutely love it. Its the only game I've ever played where I didn't want to finish the last mission, I was itching for more. I loved the setting because there were so many different locations(ruined cities, snow covered alien looking military bases, industrial factory zone, trenches, underground storage facilities, tribal villages, BOS military bases etc. I also enjoyed the combat, factions, weapons, cover based combat, use of sneak and crouching, military bases etc

It has a lot of problems like the complete lack of RPG elements, rushed missions, kill everything that moves objectives, world map/encounters, not being supplied gear for missions, mountains of pointless weapons and items, certain skills being useless, only a handful of missions require you to be tactical(Quincy, St. Louis, first few missions, Preiora facility).

I still enjoy playing it every 1-2 years. It brought some many new aspects to the world that F1 + 2 only touched on and because of that I'd put it up there with them.

The game was originally supposed to be much bigger(more missions), more vehicles, more tactical, more everything really. I will try and find the original advert picture which boasts 40+ missions.
 
drawnacrol said:
I absolutely love it. Its the only game I've ever played where I didn't want to finish the last mission, I was itching for more. I loved the setting because there were so many different locations(ruined cities, snow covered alien looking military bases, industrial factory zone, trenches, underground storage facilities, tribal villages, BOS military bases etc. I also enjoyed the combat, factions, weapons, cover based combat, use of sneak and crouching, military bases etc

It has a lot of problems like the complete lack of RPG elements, rushed missions, kill everything that moves objectives, world map/encounters, not being supplied gear for missions, mountains of pointless weapons and items, certain skills being useless, only a handful of missions require you to be tactical(Quincy, St. Louis, first few missions, Preiora facility).

I still enjoy playing it every 1-2 years. It brought some many new aspects to the world that F1 + 2 only touched on and because of that I'd put it up there with them.

The game was originally supposed to be much bigger(more missions), more vehicles, more tactical, more everything really. I will try and find the original advert picture which boasts 40+ missions.
Click to expand...
I had hope for Tactics 2... where lore wouldn't be ignored, the game would have been so much better. perhaps more RPG elements?
 
I often replayed Tactics. I really enjoy most of the missions, even those that make me curse and bitch and cry like a little baby.
That's what a game should do, it shouldn't hold your hand through it.
After trying Wasteland, I noticed someone [who?] commenting that Tactics was way harder, and I kind of agree. In Tactics you can and will have your entire squad wiped out by turning the wrong corner. Reload previous save.
Insta-deaths by fumbling with grenades, insta-deaths by tampering with mines, it's probably one of the most insta-death-ridden games I have enjoyed this much

and it makes my blood boil
So many times I've thought to myself I'm gonna try to limit the use of stimpaks, only to end up spending whole turns after the other just stimming up, cus I'm getting the tar beat out of my platoon

Sneaking for 15 minutes, only to be spotted, and have some raider shoot wildly, and set off 4 landmines at once, and cut my squad in half while crippling the other half. Reload previous save.

But yeah, I love it. I always wanted FO3 to look like it, visually. Junction City was my FO3 wet dream location

Dr Fallout said:
I had hope for Tactics 2... where lore wouldn't be ignored, the game would have been so much better. perhaps more RPG elements?
Click to expand...

NO! I know what you mean, but NO. We should begin to fucking learn by now, sequels are always a kick in the nuts. We hope and dream and yearn, I do too, I am human with dreams and hopes

but no :'I
 
I love Fallout Tactics. As a big fan of X-Com and Jagged Alliance, and as a huge fan of Fallout, FOT was a perfect fit. I think it has a more interesting story and factions than FO 3 or FO 4.

It is also canon to me, especially seeing how it is mentioned in FO 3 and FO 4. We knew from FO 3 that some BoS were sent to Chicago area, and we know from FO 4 that they got there via Airships, so I don't see why this game would be considered non-canon, at least the main aspects of the story are.

Plus it can be super fun playing in real time with a squad of BoS with Gatling lasers and a Gatling Gauss gun mowing down robots. Fun times.
 
EvilBastrd said:
It is also canon to me, especially seeing how it is mentioned in FO 3 and FO 4. We knew from FO 3 that some BoS were sent to Chicago area, and we know from FO 4 that they got there via Airships, so I don't see why this game would be considered non-canon, at least the main aspects of the story are.
Click to expand...

I took that as poking fun at tactics when they mention the midwestern brotherhood and how they hadn't been heard from recently(i.e: the sequel getting cancelled) and the game being widely ignored in relation to canon.

F3 took a lot of influence from tactics especially with Broken Steel.
 
zegh8578 said:
NO! I know what you mean, but NO. We should begin to fucking learn by now, sequels are always a kick in the nuts. We hope and dream and yearn, I do too, I am human with dreams and hopes
Click to expand...
Are you kidding? The Devs actually acknowledge there were problems with Tactics and wanted to fix them. Also admit, fighting in the mutated forests and swamps of Florida is a whole new can of beans.
 
Its alright as a turn based or even real time game....its fucking bonkers when it comes to lore and whatnot but I like tactical turn based games so I just kinda dig it for what it was.

Its not POS or 3 or 4 so thats at least good
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top