Fallout 2 vs New Vegas

[Deleted member 116891]

Since someone asked, and I'm not sure this has been asked recently, which do you prefer, Fallout 2 or New Vegas?

As far as I can see:
Fallout 2 is considered a bigger but far less tight game than the original, with more wacky humour and 4th wall breaks? (am about to start playing it for the first time, this is just what I've seen on here.)

New Vegas:Amazing opportunities for roleplaying, tons of decisions to make and morally grey areas to explore (which the threads still argue about to this day) but hampered by gamebyro (and thus first/third person view and combat), having to take Bethesda's changes (feral ghouls and exploding cars) as canon, and being rushed through development in 18 months with no experience of the engine.

 

[0wing]

Fallout 2: Sandbox RPG that we hate today through and through. Considered by many a better rpg because... combat is turn based and you roll some shit in there. What a strong argument you've got here, @Black Angel
Fallout: New Vegas - player agency and roleplaying autism: the game. In a context of Fallout game, not just a game this one takes the cake.

 

[FDO]

I don't know. It's not easy to compare a game I know since 20 years with one I know since a month.
Vegas is too fresh but I am not sure I would want to rate one over the other anyway. They both have things better than the other.

In case you never played Fallout 1, I would advice to play it as it remain, well you know, the better of all at the end of the day.

 

[Deleted member 116891]

I have played fallout 1, and very much enjoyed it. It's amazing that so few games have been as well designed in 20 years, and it makes some of the more recent attempts (which got me into the series) look amateur at best, though I personally prefer NV

 

[Black Angel]

I've said it once in other thread, but I think Fallout 2 and New Vegas is pretty much on par with one another because their strengths make up for their own weaknesses to the point that I personally don't favor one over the other. However, going purely by gameplay mechanics and moment-to-moment gameplay I always prefer Fallout 2's gameplay (and engine, as evidenced by my personal preference for Fallout 1.5 and Fallout of Nevada) any day over New Vegas.

Fallout 2: Sandbox RPG that we hate today through and through. Considered by many a better rpg because... combat is turn based and you roll some shit in there. What a strong argument you've got here, @Black Angel

Wait, are you implying that I argued Fallout 2 is the better RPG simply, because the combat is turn based and we roll some shit in there?

I think I don't have to bother elaborating on why I think Fallout 2 is the better RPG than New Vegas by a thousand miles, but
Dice Rolls >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shitty minigames and hiking simulator.

 

[0wing]

Wait, are you implying that I argued Fallout 2 is the better RPG simply, because the combat is turn based and we roll some shit in there?

I think I don't have to bother elaborating on why I think Fallout 2 is the better RPG than New Vegas by a thousand miles, but
Dice Rolls >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shitty minigames and hiking simulator.

Yes I am and yes you are.

The reasonings you've been posting at least for me are seem too petty, to the point of being personal preference in gamedesign but I find, while better than in F1 but still limited companions (fixed in 1.5 Res), SPECIAL underutilisation (fixed in Nevada) and poor south end of the game, this I find too crippling for a game that names itself Fallout.

And don't lie to yourself, you know 1,5 Res and Nevada are better not because it's the same engine but because these games are better than 2 and stand better against New Vegas than 2. In the mean time, they're not 2, they're it's own work.

 

[Black Angel]

Yes I am and yes you are.

The reasonings you've been posting at least for me are seem too petty, to the point of being personal preference in gamedesign but I find, while better than in F1 but still limited companions (fixed in 1.5 Res), SPECIAL underutilisation (fixed in Nevada) and poor south end of the game, this I find too crippling for a game that names itself Fallout.

Let's be honest, even with all the improvements New Vegas's shooting mechanics were far too shitty even for a shooter, so don't make me laugh saying it's any better than Fallout 1&2's turn-based combat mechanics for a role-playing game.

And once again, dice roll for lockpicking/hacking/stealing/sneaking/random encounters >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shitty minigames and hiking simulator for me.

Fallout 1 and 2 are both unfortunate products of being the first game in the series and a sequel rushed under unfortunate working condition with bad management and lack of communication respectively. Limited companions and SPECIAL underutilization are the results of that, but that doesn't mean we have to dismiss the engine completely, hence why 1.5 and Nevada are the testament to how amazing the engine is to make a cRPG.

Or would you prefer a Fallout game being made with shitty Gamebryo engine that needs at least 10 mods to work properly?

And don't lie to yourself, you know 1,5 Res and Nevada are better not because it's the same engine but because these games are better than 2 and stand better against New Vegas than 2. In the mean time, they're not 2, they're it's own work.

On the contrary, you're the one who's lying here. How the fuck can you say shit like, "you know 1,5 Res and Nevada are better not because it's the same engine but because these games are better than 2 and stand better against New Vegas than 2"?

This is the description for Fallout of Nevada as seen here

Fallout Nevada is not just a clone of the original, its not a assembly of ideas or mods, it is not an expansion of the original story. It is a full conversion mod that borrows the original game engine. 90% of all content, scripts, dialog, characters and locations are build from the ground up for this project. You will see a completely new story, more than 100 quests, a new world map, 12 big locations, 12 new special encounters and much much more.

So, 90% of all content, scripts, dialogue, characters, and locations were all build from the ground up, while presumably 10% is the borrowed original game engine.
The description for Fallout 1.5: Resurrection as seen from ModDB page:

A new old school Fallout game - that's Fallout 1.5: Resurrection, a mod for Fallout 2. The player’s character wakes up, heavily wounded in a dark cave, not knowing how they got there, or who they are. Starting from scratch the player has to search for their forgotten past, with a mysterious talisman as the only clue.

"for Fallout 2".

These TC mods will not be possible IF not for Fallout 2's engine. Do you think the devs could make them with just about any other engine? Can they achieve all they've done with the Infinity Engine, for instance? Or AoD's engine? Underrail's engine? FUCKING Gamebryo?

The freeform interactivity where players can manually apply items towards objects and NPCs by way of point-n-clicking is, in my words, literally THE best cRPG mechanic to date, and no RPG that I know of even tried to replicate that mechanic. It's the single gameplay mechanic that made 1.5 and Nevada even possible.

And if the engine doesn't matter, why is Nevada's dev even try developing Fallout Sonora in fucking Fallout 2's engine again, huh? Why don't he go make the TC mod using Gamebryo to make a TC mod for New Vegas? Or even make his own engine like Styg does Underrail? Or use AoD's template since modding it is possible now?

 

[0wing]

Fallout 1 and 2 are both unfortunate products of being the first game in the series and a sequel rushed under unfortunate working condition with bad management and lack of communication respectively. Limited companions and SPECIAL underutilization are the results of that, but that doesn't mean we have to dismiss the engine completely, hence why 1.5 and Nevada are the testament to how amazing the engine is to make a cRPG.

Stop. Wait. Fallout is unfortunate of being the first game that sets the rules. The sequel being rushed under working conditions is not our, gamers' concern. It's not our problem that Black Isle had some tensions internally or one of the programmers was too full of himself to help the others (Avellone wrote about it AFAIK).

Or would you prefer a Fallout game being made with shitty Gamebryo engine that needs at least 10 mods to work properly?

If it means a better roleplaying games than I don't care about the engine. I like first person games more though, yes. The existing holywar kinda says it all...

Not sure about you, I'd prefer fans to be active and Bethesda and Obsidian to stop, they're not very good at game development anymore. (fingers crossed for Cain and Boyarksy's project tho). I'd like to have more frequent the likes of Sonora, New California, Mutant Rising, Frontier (although not sure about this one).

Let's be honest, even with all the improvements New Vegas's shooting mechanics were far too shitty even for a shooter, so don't make me laugh saying it's any better than Fallout 1&2's turn-based combat mechanics for a role-playing game.

They're equally not good not for me after F:T and not for you after AoD.

On the contrary, you're the one who's lying here. How the fuck can you say shit like, "you know 1,5 Res and Nevada are better not because it's the same engine but because these games are better than 2 and stand better against New Vegas than 2"?

Because they have used the base engine better than Black Isle, you didn't get the message, right? Hence they're better in comparison with New Vegas, hello?

These TC mods will not be possible IF not for Fallout 2's engine.

Yes, it's true. I don't even say Fallout 2 is bad on it's own, just relatively worse. It's called an evolution, ever heard about it?

And once again, dice roll for lockpicking/hacking/stealing/sneaking/random encounters >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shitty minigames and hiking simulator for me.

Fixable, like a list of FO2's problems. You do know Fallout 2 requers mods to work too, right?

 

[scorptatious]

Maybe it’s because I played New Vegas first, but I honestly prefer it.

I feel the story and set up just has a better flow and I really enjoyed the central conflict. It also has some of my favorite characters in the series.

2 was great as well, but for me, the first few hours are a bit of a slog and the main story kinda gets sidelined until you finally get to Vault 13. Stuff like New Reno and Vault City was cool though.

 

[TheHouseAlwaysWins]

New Vegas:Amazing opportunities for roleplaying, tons of decisions to make and morally grey areas to explore (which the threads still argue about to this day) but hampered by gamebyro (and thus first/third person view and combat), having to take Bethesda's changes (feral ghouls .

I thought fallout 1 and 2 both have ghouls that are actually feral of it or something?

 

[Pwener]

I prefer New Vegas to be honest. Fallout 2 is a hell of a game but even then I do rank Fallout 1 above it. But there is just something about New Vegas. It has so much appeal and personality. The characters are all great, even minor ones with little to no dialog like Dr. Strauss in Novac. Yeah, I remember the name of a doctor in a small town that isn't involved in a quest. That's how memorable the game is.

Then there's the quests and stories which are so rich in interpretation and meaning. The game has so many layers upon it. Fallout 2 just doesn't go that far in my experience. It certainly tries but I find that it worries more about how every character and settlement connects than anything else. New Vegas does that and more, and in much subtler ways as well.

I'll probably post more later but for now this is enough.

 

[Cobra Commander]

NV is the best Fallout.

political plot between new factions modeled after a post-apocalyptic world >> some random guy saving the world from baddies.

 

[Atomkilla]

FO2 better in gameplay, FNV better in almost everything else.

 

[Hulk'O'Saurus]

I'd sooner recommend Underrail than Fallout 2.

If one hasn't played Fallout 2 but wants some historical background for the series, then yeah, go ahead. The game simply stretches everything to the limit and tears appear, though, that is not to say that there isn't good in it. It even lets you play after you beat it, which, as far as I can tell is something of a requirement to enjoy a Fallout game by some people...

Also, Restoration Project.

 

[Unorthodox Outlander]

New Vegas has a more interesting story in my opinion, and the gameplay seems much more enjoyable.

Suffice it to say, I'm not particularly fond of turn-based combat outside of strategy games.

 

[tgawt]

fallout 2 is a lot of fun but its a game with no grey area. most of it is fucking great and then theres parts of it which are complete dog shit. its not consistent at all. fallout new vegas is pretty great all around but it never reaches fallout 2's peaks

 

[SiriusShenanigans]

I prefer New Vegas to be honest. Fallout 2 is a hell of a game but even then I do rank Fallout 1 above it. But there is just something about New Vegas. It has so much appeal and personality. The characters are all great, even minor ones with little to no dialog like Dr. Strauss in Novac. Yeah, I remember the name of a doctor in a small town that isn't involved in a quest. That's how memorable the game is.

Then there's the quests and stories which are so rich in interpretation and meaning. The game has so many layers upon it. Fallout 2 just doesn't go that far in my experience. It certainly tries but I find that it worries more about how every character and settlement connects than anything else. New Vegas does that and more, and in much subtler ways as well.

I have the exact opposite problem. I find new vegas to be incredibly boring and uninteresting, from its characters to its choice of factions and political conflict. I never cared much about Hoover Dam, I get that its a valuable piece of energy generation but I always felt like there are no good options where power is left to corrupt. NCR and Legion have a lot of the same problems so why pick either? House is a maniac. I guess I'm choosing the independent ending, but Vegas isn't even that great of a place, and its probably gonna fall to infighting rather soon, or get some new version of mr.house along the way.

I find that Fallout 2 has amazing dialogue that makes me remember many characters in a way that New Vegas never did. I love the way that each town is interconnected and helps tell the story of the entire wasteland. There is an ever present theme of the brutality of the wasteland being favorable to the insanity of the past. I enjoy the lack of faction outcomes in the end, because its not so corporate. You don't need a faction to take down the bad guys, because there is a theme of "Power corrupts". Ultimately all of the bigger factions have messed up ideologies, and some of the more lovable towns are the ones most vulnerable. Fallout 2 manages to also use comedy while still maintaining a brutal setting in ways that New Vegas can only approach in its "Old World Blues" dlc.

People say they aren't big fans of turned based combat, but I just get so turned off by the time consuming nature of wandering around and looting junk in facilities I hardly know anything about. Not to mention the loading screens that pollute every single town from door to door. It makes exploring towns so frustrating. Then there is the lack of voice acting talent and the reused actors making every interaction feel uninspired and repeated. Having the first person view might be immersive,but its such a clunky engine that the immersion makes the world seem bland. Fallout 2 takes a step back and lets you have free range of imagination, only giving you small sprites and short descriptions to help guide you in figuring out what things look like. It feels like the joys of reading a book.

The reasonings you've been posting at least for me are seem too petty, to the point of being personal preference in gamedesign but I find, while better than in F1 but still limited companions (fixed in 1.5 Res), SPECIAL underutilisation (fixed in Nevada) and poor south end of the game, this I find too crippling for a game that names itself Fallout.

Also, what exactly do you mean? Like limited companions makes sense. It gives a reason for Charisma to be a decent stat. And what exactly is special underutilization? New Vegas may have a little bit of special checks, but special overall in New Vegas decides nothing about your character. Fallout 2's special can make or break a character quite easily. Special actually did something in Fallout 2. And what's wrong with the south end of the game? Do you mean the end of the game or just the southern areas of the map?

 

[Lone Cat]

One thing Obsidian did right about New Vegas is that they excluded FEV completely and chose the oldschool supermutants (created by FEV but in FVN no such viruses ever mentined, not even Tabitha spoke its name) and how did they do 120 years AFTER the fall of Master. (and 4 decades after the destruction of Enclave Oil Rig... this related to 2nd Generation Super Mutants which Tabitha (Herself a nightkin) rules over)
while Ironicallly Betty doesn't seem to get over this virus through Obsidian prove that it's no longer neccessary in Fallout narratives by this point. in Fallout 3 there's both original FEV that created a breed of Capitol Wasteland Supermutants and Centaurs (but no floaters because these are Unity exclusives), and FEV Curling from Fallout 2 owned by the Enclave. and in F4 the Institute still experimenting on this virus (while Big Empty in New Vegas--despite various crazy experiments (which they set loose some onto the wastelands)-- never works on FEV AT ALL!)
given six months or more, Floaters might be shown up in New Vegas in Tabitha's holdings.

 

[Norzan]

I never cared much about Hoover Dam, I get that its a valuable piece of energy generation but I always felt like there are no good options where power is left to corrupt. NCR and Legion have a lot of the same problems so why pick either?

Because both have good and bad? And no, the NCR and Legion don't have the same problems, the exact opposite. The NCR wants the democracy where every man is free, while the Caesar's Legion wants every person to live and die for the Legion, meaning that's their main point in life. He believes that eventually people will accept the Legion way and that will lead to a better future where corruption and lazyness doesn't exist. Problem with the NCR is that their method leads to corruption, lazyness and complacency, the rich taking advantage of the poor. While Caesar's Legion is a brutal regime where everyone is basically a tool to be used by the Legion.

House is a maniac

No, he's not? He makes a lot of good points. I get a feeling that you didn't even paid attention to what they even said and weighed their pros and cons or else you wouldn't throwing statements like these.

Really? Not a single interesting character? Basically all the companions, Caesar, Mr. House, Benny, the Kings, Christina Royce, Dog/God, Dean Domino, the Think Tank, Joshua Graham, even Ulysses? You are hard to please then if you find all of these characters boring. And i'm not mentioning several more.

Honestly, i found the Enclave to be rather dull. They are just a faction that basically wants to hit the reset button for the entire humanity. Just flat out kill thousands of innocent people, just restart everything anew. At least the Master had a point and you could say why he wanted to do what he wanted to do.

 

[SiriusShenanigans]

Really? Not a single interesting character? Basically all the companions, Caesar, Mr. House, Benny, the Kings, Christina Royce, Dog/God, Dean Domino, the Think Tank, Joshua Graham, even Ulysses? You are hard to please then if you find all of these characters boring. And i'm not mentioning several more.

I feel that New Vegas DLC is a different story from New Vegas vanilla. I love Ulyssess, I find think tank amusing. I didn't finish Honest Hearts, but Joshua Graham seemed alright. I will say that I like Benny, he's probably the best thing in the New Vegas Strip. One of my big complaints is that the game doesn't do a great job of presenting Benny's crisis of not being able to trust others and how flimsy his plan is. I like the kings, they aren't great, but they are fun and they make freeside more habitable. That said, many of the characters have the same voice actors and don't really have that great dialogue. Not in the way that Fallout 2 did with less resources and less voice acting. I find a lot of the companions kind of dry. Sharon Cassidy has attitude, but she isn't her father. Veronica is fun and has some good lines but I don't like her in the way I like the fallout 2 crew. Its not like Vic going on about calling you boss even if you tell him not to, or how he gets uncomfortable around Sulik. Goris is my favorite companion along side Marcus. I never got connected with Raul or Lily, or Boone. I think it helps that I was able to run around with a small army of friends in Fallout 2. I remember so many worthless characters in fallout 2. From the girl who tells you about how she lost her cat, to the hilariously named "Doc Painless". The number of characters per town I remember is much higher for Fallout 2 than Fallout New Vegas.

Because both have good and bad? And no, the NCR and Legion don't have the same problems, the exact opposite. The NCR wants the democracy where every man is free, while the Caesar's Legion wants every person to live and die for the Legion, meaning that's their main point in life. He believes that eventually people will accept the Legion way and that will lead to a better future where corruption and lazyness doesn't exist. Problem with the NCR is that their method leads to corruption, lazyness and complacency, the rich taking advantage of the poor. While Caesar's Legion is a brutal regime where everyone is basically a tool to be used by the Legion.

I care most about freedom and both sides have the same issue in that respect. They both are institutions of bondage. The NCR restricts everything you do and how you live with many rules, and the legion is the same way. And both are extractive sorts of goverment, where they put heavy taxation of resources, in different ways, but both sides are suffocating the wasteland. The legion is pushing pointlessly for its empire that will crumble when it has no one to conquer, for no one but themselves, and the ncr is pushing in the same way to fill space simply because they can. The Legions talk about being free from corruption is utter crap anyway. They are raiders and they will spawn nepotism and despotism without fail. Especially if they lose Caesar, which is inevitable. They are as temporary as the empire they imitate. I feel like I would enjoy New Vegas's main plot if only they made it so that their gray decisions had better arguments on all sides and made it feel worthwhile no matter who you choose. I feel like the game does a better job saying why you shouldn't choose each faction than it does saying why anyone would side with them.

No, he's not? He makes a lot of good points. I get a feeling that you didn't even paid attention to what they even said and weighed their pros and cons or else you wouldn't throwing statements like these.

I call House a maniac because I'm profiling his ass. He's arrogant and he's smart but he has this way of considering himself an exception to the norms of society. He thinks he is the greatest good for humanity, their last best hope. Every villain thinks they are doing the right thing. His plot line has you slaughter the white glove and the brotherhood of steel for not a whole lot of good reason. He is the sort who will take the power of the securitrons as something almost like a divine mandate, that his might crafted by his intellect validates his actions, whatever they may be. He is the sort that would pillage and steal from anyone, if he thought what they have was important to his mission. I believe that given power, House would take over with cruelty and robotic efficiency. Even his ending depicts his rule as "Despotic and cold". Even after the NCR leaves, he is vindictive and punishes anyone who sided with NCR. He's not a good end. Also, he destroys the kings, who are just more likable than house, soooo... yeah. If House ever decided he didn't need the courier anymore, he might very well decide they should disappear in the night.

Honestly, i found the Enclave to be rather dull. They are just a faction that basically wants to hit the reset button for the entire humanity. Just flat out kill thousands of innocent people, just restart everything anew. At least the Master had a point and you could say why he wanted to do what he wanted to do.

I like the enclave, but they are a different sort of villain from the master or house or any of those. The Enclave are terribly idiotic and terribly human. They are stubborn and hate to change their mind. They are directly in contrast of the master from the previous game. The master cares if humanity lives on. He cares that his plan works. The enclave is different. Their arrogance is reflective of the old world. All the insanity that caused the great war in the first place is found in the enclave. The enclave doesn't want to reset humanity, they want to claim the US for themselves, because they believe they are the true americans. Always have. Their plan will get everyone on the planet killed, probably even themselves, but they can't see that even if you explain it to their face. They are insane. They are really good satire because they are america... and even then aren't. They aren't the citizens of america, they are the politicians, the military, and the corporate elite who all decide they are the true americans and don't care about anybody but themselves. Its a parody showing how much of joke american democracy is. I always found the irony of characters like Frank Horrigan tragic and horrifying, as he is so prejudice and spiteful of mutants, carrying out the missions of the enclave without question, even when he is one of those mutants he has been brainwashed to hate. All the soldiers at navarro are going to be sacrificed too, as they are all wastelanders. It shows how the Enclave truly views themselves as above everyone. They are scary to me because they are powerful, almost undefeatable, and yet they are insane, stupid, and realistic... and they shouldn't be. I think one of the greatest follies in philosophy is believing that mankind is a logical creature.