Search results

There is obviously a point in the middle of the road to be reached. I can't say a fully-voiced game troubles me as a player, and I can't say a non-voiced game would trouble me either, but Fallout 1&2 did perfectly well with key characters being voiced - and guys, what voice! I had Marcus in mind...

Nothing special for a game that had far more money spent in it than Fallout 1 and 2 together, and ten more years. However I don't share your opinion about evil playthroughs, maybe it is better than is Fallout 1 and 2, but you really can't do many evil things in a different way than just chosing...

Fallout 1 is definitely the better opus when it comes to plot and history. That's probably why you immediately liked it, it is a downward spiral that takes you right in the middle of a perverted dream. On the other hand, Fallout 2 has better gameplay, that means it has more locations, more...

I was reacting to numerous comments on the first page of this topic.

I hope it wasn't directed to me, because I fancy being a man that always finds something to criticize ; however I don't see how "lack of originality" of a post-apo game can be said to be bad as we don't know yet how it will turn out. People saying "Oh no, another post-nuke world!" make as much...

My opinion is, a post-apocalyptic universe can perfectly look the same in a ton of game, it doesn't matter. What matters is gameplay, not plot or graphisms - not when it comes to post-apo. Fallout 1, 2, 3, Tactics, BoS, New Vegas? They all use the same universe, yet they all are very...

Yup, they'd rather do some post-apo RPG... before the apocalypse actually happened ! :rolleyes:

I don't see how Diablo III's case is relevant. Diablo III is quite an UFO: no gameplay, no DA, obvious and terrible clone of Diablo II, yet a giant buzz and tons of players. From that, you can't build a theory like "Yes, a clone of Fallout 2 would work!"

Hard to say. Tactics has turn-based combat and isometric view, and it isn't a Fallout game to me (and everyone else), it's a spin-off.

How is that related to the point? If your point is, I should call Izual stupid because he thinks New Vegas sucks, you're going to be alone here. I explained my point about franchises a few posts ago, now if that comes to "Hah because New Vegas sucks!", I'd better be going.

In that quote "it" doesn't mean "Fallout New Vegas plot". Maybe a wise defense of your (apparently) beloved New Vegas should start with reading other posts? By the way, I never said New Vegas was a bad game. My point was, New Vegas and Fallout 1/2 should be two separate franchises.

I didn't say that. Maybe you should re-read my posts. If you've read them at all.

GTA 1 and GTA 4 are totally different. However one is a poor version of the other. Fallout should give me the same experience as the 1997-8 Fallout games did. If it can't, then don't call it Fallout.

Yes. Too bad it looks like a poor version of Fallout 1's plot, though.

About ambiance and atmosphere...

It's not all about graphics. Gameplay ? New Vegas isn't even turn-based. Content ? It introduces totally new super-factions (Legion), it's not in the same geographical area, ... Atmosphere ? Fallout 1/2 don't have same ambiance and atmosphere at all. It wasn't a better one, but it was a...

Sorry, but if you think the following pictures are all the same, marketing did its job on you, no offence. As I said, Fallout New Vegas might be a great game, but its simply not the Fallout we enjoyed back in 1998. The same way Daggerfall isn't Skyrim.

Every "Fallout" games after Fallout 2 were not Fallout games. They might be great, enjoyable, cool and stuff (e.g. I liked Fallout Tactics), but they have nothing in common with Fallout 1 & 2, except names in a story. If you think Fallout Tactics/POS/3/NV are "Fallout", it's just that the...

Yeah I thought exactly the same. Back in 2000.

You can actually loot armors from the dead in Fallout 1. Check the Order's Fallout Iron Man topic, a few of us had to burn Junktown to the ground and turned into armor merchants :D