Fallout/Shock series sequel trends

Supreme Shah Ismail

Supreme Shah Ismail

Where'd That 6th Toe Come From?
So something I noticed while thinking about the Bioshock/System Shock series and Fallout and trends in sequels.

System shock 1-2/Fallout 1-2: OG games, a dizzying amount of depth in game play, writing and atmosphere. Incredibly influential games and RPG's. Generally speaking which ever is "best" is down to personal preference. I like System shock 2 A LOT more than 1 (its still good but aged really bad, heres hoping for a good re make) and I honestly cannot decide whether I like fallout 1 or 2 better.

Fallout 3/Bioshock: Basically a more watered down/consolized version of its predecessors. Generally considered good games (tho that's divisive among older fans..) but a step back from their predecessor and a bit of kick in the balls for anyone used to more in depth PC RPG's.. Borrows its narrative heavily from its predecessors too. Its still visibly a (Fallout/Shock) game, its in its DNA but its not nearly as good as it could have been.

Bioshock 2/New Vegas: An improvement over its predecessor in nearly every way. Some pretty dam good DLC and often over looked/disregarded by more hardcore fans of the predecessor (Bioshock/FO3)

FO4/Infinite: Incredibly divisive among fans because of story/watered down mechanics. Its been so diluted, watered down and consolized its hardly recognizable as (Fallout/Shock) game save for some mechanics/narrative elements that link it to its predecessors. Arguably fun on their own merit but a MASSIVE step back compared to the other games.

I know this isn't exactly a shocking discovery but I thought it was novel. At most we can discuss trends in both series (games in general too) and whether or not it will change for the better or worse.
 
i noticed similiar pattern in soulsborne series too, but it haas more something to do with rehashing vs introducing new mechanic. It does sound same in regard to appease certain audience
 
Not close to what i felt.

Fallout 1 had praise for his sf and serious tones.
Fallout 2 already divided the fan base for being more light hearted, having too many jokes and breaking the fourth wall. Also, it has a weaker main storyline and few connections between settlements. Yet, it has more choices, more locations, more epic characters.
Fallout Tactics divided the audience even more. It wasn't an rpg and had a few inconsistencies. There were already people crying for decline. It has the better combat system of the series.
Fobos and Fallout 3 were so awfull for the original fanbase that it retroactively enhanced the opinion on Fallout Tactics, made it one of the three cult classics. Yet, it gained a new casual fanbase.
Fallout New Vegas appears to have reconciled the fan base and acquired some new fan base, but there are still Beth worshippers complaining that you are no longer an almighty god and that some deathclaws could kill you.
Fallout 4 kept the trend of dividing fan base, with some Beth fan joining the crowd complaining of the things they lost, like the dialog system or other stuff. Yet, it still has some fans.

So, imo, only FoNV reconciled some fans at release, although it didn't seduce all the Beth crowd. I bet even Fallout 1 disapointed some Wasteland 1 fans. Imo, it would be more interesting to consider why people were disapointed by each different titles, in order to get a picture of what was lost and gained.
 
eissa said:
i noticed similiar pattern in soulsborne series too, but it haas more something to do with rehashing vs introducing new mechanic. It does sound same in regard to appease certain audience
Click to expand...

Yeah I can see that now, though there was far less "dumbing" down in that series.
 
naossano said:
Not close to what i felt.

Fallout 1 had praise for his sf and serious tones.
Fallout 2 already divided the fan base for being more light hearted, having too many jokes and breaking the fourth wall. Also, it has a weaker main storyline and few connections between settlements. Yet, it has more choices, more locations, more epic characters.
Fallout Tactics divided the audience even more. It wasn't an rpg and had a few inconsistencies. There were already people crying for decline. It has the better combat system of the series.
Fobos and Fallout 3 were so awfull for the original fanbase that it retroactively enhanced the opinion on Fallout Tactics, made it one of the three cult classics. Yet, it gained a new casual fanbase.
Fallout New Vegas appears to have reconciled the fan base and acquired some new fan base, but there are still Beth worshippers complaining that you are no longer an almighty god and that some deathclaws could kill you.
Fallout 4 kept the trend of dividing fan base, with some Beth fan joining the crowd complaining of the things they lost, like the dialog system or other stuff. Yet, it still has some fans.

So, imo, only FoNV reconciled some fans at release, although it didn't seduce all the Beth crowd. I bet even Fallout 1 disapointed some Wasteland 1 fans. Imo, it would be more interesting to consider why people were disapointed by each different titles, in order to get a picture of what was lost and gained.
Click to expand...

I disagree to an extent on Fallout 2. While it certainly had it's more light hearted moments, it also went darker than the original game with sex slaves, drug addiction and human experimentation also taking a focus.

I do agree however, that F1 is the better of the two and is only matched in quality by New Vegas.

Buy F2 is still an amazing sequel and pretty beautiful to play afterwards.
 
I am not necessary saying that fallout1 is the best, but that fallout 2 already had a ton of haters in fallout 1 fanbase, even if the reasons aren't quite the same forc each titles.
 
naossano said:
I am not necessary saying that fallout1 is the best, but that fallout 2 already had a ton of haters in fallout 1 fanbase, even if the reasons aren't quite the same forc each titles.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I remember people protesting when Fallout 2 came out. Some of them were quite vocal too.
It is why there are many people who consider "real" Fallout to only be the first game even today.
 
eissa said:
i noticed similiar pattern in soulsborne series too, but it haas more something to do with rehashing vs introducing new mechanic. It does sound same in regard to appease certain audience
Click to expand...
Bloodborne's great though.
 
It follows the same basic curve as PC adoption among kiddies and casuals. IE, Steam's popularity skyrocketed, PC components got cheap enough to be more competitive than consoles, devs started targeting mass appeal instead of making good games.
 
I wonder where the remake and System Shock 3 will fit into all this.

I also think Alien Isolation is a far better spiritual successor to the original Shock series than any of the Bioshock games.
 
joevonzombie said:
I wonder where the remake and System Shock 3 will fit into all this.

I also think Alien Isolation is a far better spiritual successor to the original Shock series than any of the Bioshock games.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Depends with shock 3, its being made by the a lot of the OG crew but they have hinted at large story/gameplay changes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top