Steam has a 66% off sale on the Fallout Collection. You can buy the Fallout 1/Fallout 2/Fallout Tactics bundle for 6.79 EUR/USD, or individual titles for 3.39 EUR/USD.
Gamefeel has an editorial up about Fallout's use of co-authorship.<blockquote>In the above graph, I’ve noted the differences between Fallout’s construction and the comparatively ‘narrative-based’ style Bioware used in Baldur’s Gate 2 and has been building off from since. While Baldur’s Gate 2 is concerned with telling a story, which necessitates a degree of linearity, Fallout exists as a formless soup—a model where the player can not only move forward but in all directions. In Fallout the player creates a story on the fly using the innate game mechanics handed to him or her by the designers. The personality of the protagonist is left wholly up to how the player utilizes their avatar to interact with designer-placed elements such as other characters or objects. To summarize, the designers of Fallout claim authorship on the rules and scenario of their game, but allow the player to dictate complete authorship within those boundaries. In this way Fallout’s “formless soup design” (as I’ve obnoxiously decided to name it) acts as a perfect model for interactive storytelling.
One would assume that the trade-offs of this style of design would mean a lower caliber of emotional connection that comes with a carefully crafted narrative, but that surprisingly is not the case. Having control of the scenario and setting alone affords the designers just enough control to indirectly reinforce the context to all of the player’s actions. Non-playable characters become deeper as even the least essential of the lot must have a reaction prepared towards being punched, shot at, stolen from, threatened, or… spoken to politely. Perhaps even helped or made friends with!</blockquote>And in unrelated post-apocalyptic news, Le Wastelander linked to a nice-looking WIP animation project called Ruin.
Gamefeel has an editorial up about Fallout's use of co-authorship.<blockquote>In the above graph, I’ve noted the differences between Fallout’s construction and the comparatively ‘narrative-based’ style Bioware used in Baldur’s Gate 2 and has been building off from since. While Baldur’s Gate 2 is concerned with telling a story, which necessitates a degree of linearity, Fallout exists as a formless soup—a model where the player can not only move forward but in all directions. In Fallout the player creates a story on the fly using the innate game mechanics handed to him or her by the designers. The personality of the protagonist is left wholly up to how the player utilizes their avatar to interact with designer-placed elements such as other characters or objects. To summarize, the designers of Fallout claim authorship on the rules and scenario of their game, but allow the player to dictate complete authorship within those boundaries. In this way Fallout’s “formless soup design” (as I’ve obnoxiously decided to name it) acts as a perfect model for interactive storytelling.
One would assume that the trade-offs of this style of design would mean a lower caliber of emotional connection that comes with a carefully crafted narrative, but that surprisingly is not the case. Having control of the scenario and setting alone affords the designers just enough control to indirectly reinforce the context to all of the player’s actions. Non-playable characters become deeper as even the least essential of the lot must have a reaction prepared towards being punched, shot at, stolen from, threatened, or… spoken to politely. Perhaps even helped or made friends with!</blockquote>And in unrelated post-apocalyptic news, Le Wastelander linked to a nice-looking WIP animation project called Ruin.
