Fallout 2 & 3 side by side comparison

Commiered said:
The problem is that you SHOULDN'T have to imagine that the game is set in another time period, just like you shouldn't have to imagine a better story line. When I play a game I want to get into a believable world that someone has created. I don't want to have to create my own game in my head!
Click to expand...


The problem is that Bethesda made imagination a necessary part of their games, since you cant really enjoy Oblivion or Fallout 3 without it.

Something feels out of place, imagine a justification.

There is no c&c, imagine that there is but you just cant see it.

Everybody treat you the same no matter what you did or what faction your part of, imagine that everybody is just pretending to be indifferent.

All npcs have lousy voice acting and dialogs, just imagine that they are all retards.

You have only crappy end choices, imagine that thats what you would actually choose if you had more choices.

With the power of imagination Bethesdas games can really shine, and if you need any guidelines just ask any gaming journalist.
 
Ausir said:
There are some things that Fallout 3 does right and Fallout 2 does wrong, like the whole retrofuturism theme.
Click to expand...

Thing is, in Fallout 3 the retrofuturism theme just gets in the way - it is everywhere! There's more 50's reference in F3 than in F1 and F2 combined. I personally don't like 50's much, but the way Fallout 1&2 used them...man, that was something. In fallout 3 it is like...uh...forced.
 
Intro
I'm agreeing here.

Character Creation:
Sadly I disagree totally, FO2, once past the character creation screen the ToT made me feel like I was already a part of the world and on my way to becoming 'the chosen one' where the arduous rigmarole that is the baby/child/teen/escape introduction annoys the absolute nuts off of me. it is ENTIRELY repetitive and is part of the reason I only made 3 characters, I couldn't face up to that whole intro thing again. (and yes ToT is repetitive... but I just don't get the same erk-some annoyance from it.)

Graphics:
FO2 gfx might be dated now, but as you stated, they had differences that I could appreciate, (I recall being taken aback at how clean some area's were like inside Vaults or whatever..) FO3 just has the same dreary look EVERYwhere (except inside Raven Rock..) and for me it was a little bit 'too' 50's-ified. I'd like to see a pleasant mix of retro-futuristic (on this point I'm quite a fan of Fallout tactics approach to things..) but each to their own.

BoS
soo many reasons to hate Lyons BoS, also.. why are the 'purist' BoS wearing apparently rusty armour? surely the *ahem* BoS Outcasts would have Scribes and Tech's too ?

Enclave
They're existence in FO3 is odd, let alone ANY in game/storyline oddity. I fully agree with OP.

Ghouls
OP said it all.

Super Mutants
I'm going to leave this subject alone. On the basis I may begin ranting.

Humans
Agreed

Monsters and Others
FO3 really did miss the mark here, It gets sooo boring exploding the X-hundredth Super Mutant head.

Difficulty
FO3 'difficulty' settings are laughable, purely aimed at couch-jockey console gamers that need their instant fix of "OMG i pWn!"

View
Moot it may be but dammit! I want a game in isometric if just for the fact that EVERYTHING else is in first person.

Story
I'm really quite wondering how OP can compare story, when FO3 has none??!

Dialogue
FO2 "im gonna beat you like a red headed step child" sure its a quote from somewhere else... but well really :D
no contest... move on

Conclusion
you may in-fact be my long lost twin-glittering gem of hatred-brother... Your points are Valid, and perhaps a little understated. On the whole though I think this kind of retrospective comparison should have been a MUCH larger part of what was the quite frankly ludicrous media hype.
 
Ausir said:
You can always pretend that the game takes place in the year 2087 instead of 2277. Anything that happened in the story of the game can happen in a few years.
Click to expand...

You could, if not for the presence of the Brotherhood and the Enclave.
Click to expand...

Which does not make much sense in 2277 either. Ofc we could just f*ck cannon and use bethesdas story, but then you could also just invent some sort of story for 2087
 
Ausir said:
You can always pretend that the game takes place in the year 2087 instead of 2277. Anything that happened in the story of the game can happen in a few years.
Click to expand...

You could, if not for the presence of the Brotherhood and the Enclave.
Click to expand...

Well, lets make a 10 year story for the Brotherhood, with starts in 2077 when some military people changed to that bunker. Then we can say that after 2-3 years radiation levels became low enough for surface exploration. After 3 years (in about 2082-83) they became used to California and sen't a exploration team to the east to establish an base on the eastern half of the US. They made the distance by foot and it took about 3 or 4 months. If the year of the game is 2087, 5-4 years after the BoS arrival in DC, then it explains why the pentagon is still under reconstruction (the citadel it is in a pretty bad shape in the game, compared to their bases in Fallout 1 and 2) with that crane.

The enclave is the remains of the US armed forces and government. And it makes much more sense for then to exist a few years after the war then 200 years in the post war future (after that much time the wasteland would probably become so different that the word "america" would mean nothing to the people). In DC the remains of the local US armed forces were stationed in that bunker on the edge of the map. And the president died in the nuclear holocaust and Eden was the computer that was programed to run the country if the nuclear war happens and the government structure collapsed.
 
Well you could just run past the rats. That was so good about it. You could go half way to the next level killing them all, but didn't have to if you couldn't be bothered.
 
I liked how in FO2, the story would lead you through pretty much every location on your search for answers (if you weren't skipping any because you knew EXACTLY where to go before hand) It was hard to miss a town for any reason (maybe Redding or Mariposa) In Fallout 3, the main story was basically Megaton, Rivet City, LL/V83, BoS, Enclave, Endgame. Basically, FO2's story gave you a good tour of the game world, and FO3's main plot felt like a drawn out side quest.
 
MAIN QUESTS
Fallout 2's story is much more open than FO3's... you create the history... and you fell curiosity to investigate how it follows... you have to make your way not only killing enemies... far from there, you can pass the game only killing Horrigan, and without shooting a gun.

You have a lot of ways of doing the "quests"... they are no obligatory quests, you do them speeching, or killing, or somehow... but is not a line... you can go directly to Sanfra and ask for the request for de vertibird plans on lv1 with almost no exp...

Fallout 3 is like a "missions game"... you are told where you must go, even if you dont speak with anybody, you follow the arrow in the low left part of the screen and you reach destiny with no problems... only killing the enemy obstacles... like a "capture the flag"... or... something like that.

And is very linear.... you do quest after quest, following the little arrow and you reach....


Dialogue options
In FO2, all dialogues were very funny indeed they had their original black humor, and despite you only see 2D characters from the sky, and dont see their faces, each character had an unique personality... there are a lot of original dialogue options, and original responses with a lot of personality and their charisma.

In FO3.. the personality of every npc seems very monotone, the dialogue options and responses are allways the same. If you have IN 1 or IN 10 they are almost the same, despite the [Speech XX%] options that... well, better not to mention.

Mayor Storyline
In the old fallouts, you start solving a problem to your people and you see yourself inmerse in a great mayor storyline, that if you are a good or a bad character, its pointless because you are inmerse too, it only modifies the way that you figure things out and get the information of what you want to do.

In fallout 3, that "want to do" is a "must do"... if you are a bad character, or a good character, you've to do good things equal... and you beeing a bad person will join the "GOOD BROTHERHOOD THAT WANT TO SAVE PEOPLE" (WTF!) and there is no mayor problem that involves you from "above"... you go in search of your father and MUST do what your father wanted to give people purified water (?)

BoS
Here, the most terrible thing... the brotherhood in previous game, specialy FO1, was a group of people that wanted to preserve tecnology for the future.... and your role with them was A TOOL... if you join them or not (It would cost you) you can beat the game anyway... the brotherhood only cares about their safety, not anybody else.

Here the brotherhood appears like a faction that want to save stupid people, and the story itself makes you one of them.... here, they are the good guys, and no matter if you are bad, you get in too.
 
A. Song choice:
I prefer "I don't want to set the world on fire". I actually love that song and found myself singning it at work. But here, it's a matter of opinion as the two choices are solid.

B. "War" Speech
FO2 didn't spell everything out? Check it out again. It told you everything that happened since the Beattles started smoking pot... Fallout 2 may be better, but not by that much.

Character Creation:
Definitely interesting way to do it, from being a baby. Gets old on the 5th playthrough but still interesting.

Graphics:
I felt FO3 did a good job of making the world unique from Tennepenny Tower to Megaton, From Cantenburry Commons to Rivet City. From The Republic of Dave to Underworld. From Oasis to Girdershade... okay scratch that last one. It's not a town, it's neighborghs. These are different towns with different feels. Fallout two was better, but not by as much as you make it.

BoS
In Fallout 2 they want to you get Vertibird plans. In Fallout 3 they want you to get a geck. I agree with the power armor being too easily handed out, they could have made it that you need to do a mission for them but, again, they aren't as far from each other as you say.

Enclave
Okay, Encalve sucked. I agree. They had cooler weapons and deathclaws and Sentry Bots with them but that was it. The main reason they were a threat was that they were helped by robots and killer walking... crocodile things...

Ghouls
Ghouls weren't part of every towns in FO2 and they are more important than you make them look like in Fallout 3. Underworld, which is where you find Reiley, the Tennepenny tower quest which had a different view about how ghouls and humans would treat each other but doesn't make it less present.

Super Mutants
I am still looking for the reason why mutants are in DC. My bet is that we'll find out only in a DLC. And honestly, if every SM was a SM Master from the beginning, it would have been better. Fallout 2 was better in that.

Humans
You are right... in FO3 every human is the same. No evil or good characters here. Are you kdding me? Maybe there was more memorable characters in your mind in FO2 but open your eyes. There are good and evil characters in both games. Hell, your NPCs will be determined by your Karma since they are either good or evil.


Monsters and Others
Ennemies from FO2 NOT in FO3: Rats, Geckos, Radiscorpions, Wamingos, Plants, Exploding Brahmin, and plenty plenty plenty more. Different creatures depending on areas and some that can be found everywhere.

FO3 - Feral Ghouls, Mire Lurks, Giant Radiscorpions, Yao Gai, Flies, Roaches, New types of Robots and Behemots.

Yakuza are raiders with swords. Slags aren't ennemies if you do the quest peacefully just like Tennepenny Tower Residents are hostile if you don't enter the ghouls or attack them. It wouldn't change squat if they called some raiders "bandits" or "mobsters" they ARE the same ennemy. At that rate I would have prefered something from FO Tactics: Beastlords. People who trained various animals to help/fight for them.


Difficulty
No argument there. FO3 is way too easy for my tastes.

Story
This is the biggest mistake people make when comparing the game. FO2 is open ended? How? Let,s get back to the MAIN quest. Get out of your nest, try to find Vic, free Vic, get info about Vault 13, get a geck, get on a boat and kick the Enclave ass. There is no way to do it otherwise. Everything else are side missions. What made Fallout 2 better was that side missions were included in the ending.

Basically, you need to see Arroyo, Klamath, The Den, Vault 13, NCR, Vault 15, Vault 13, San Fran and Oil Rig. The most interesting places aren'T on the list...

Fallout 3 goes from Vault 101, Megaton, DC, Rivet City, Vault 112, Jefferson, Citadel, Little Lamplight, Vault 87, Raven Rock and back to Rivet/Jefferson for the finale. Again, some of the most interesting places aren't on the list.

Dialogue
Again, you think with your heart and memory. Fallout 2 had many many dialog trees that would amount to nothing. It also had a lot of totally useless information. There was better dialog writting but in both games you have dialog trees that are good and some that amount to nothing.

I also LOVE how people bash Bethsada for not following the Fallout logic while Fallout 2 was full of references that happened after our worlds "seperated". I liked them, but they don't make much sense.

Conclusion
Fallout 2 and 3 are different beasts. But at the heart they feels very similar. A wasteland to explore with a somewhat short main mission but the meat is in discovering the rest. All the side missions, the other cities and so on.

I hope someday Fallout 2 players will take a real hard look at both games and realize they aren't as far off as they claim it is.
 
Super Mutants
I am still looking for the reason why mutants are in DC. My bet is that we'll find out only in a DLC. And honestly, if every SM was a SM Master from the beginning, it would have been better. Fallout 2 was better in that.
Click to expand...

We know that already - they come from Vault 87, which for some reason was used for FEV testing. Yes, it's lame, but there's nothing deeper to it.

Story
This is the biggest mistake people make when comparing the game. FO2 is open ended? How? Let,s get back to the MAIN quest. Get out of your nest, try to find Vic, free Vic, get info about Vault 13, get a geck, get on a boat and kick the Enclave ass. There is no way to do it otherwise. Everything else are side missions. What made Fallout 2 better was that side missions were included in the ending.
Click to expand...

You don't have to find Vic nor free Vic, nor find Vault 13, not find a GECK before you get on a boat and kick the Enclave ass.

Basically, you need to see Arroyo, Klamath, The Den, Vault 13, NCR, Vault 15, Vault 13, San Fran and Oil Rig. The most interesting places aren'T on the list...
Click to expand...

Actually, Vault City, Gecko and New Reno are also part of the natural progression of the main quest (even if skippable, like most of the rest of your list).
 
And in the same vein one of my friends found vault 112 by mistake after leaving Vault 101 and scavenging just for fun thus making a huge part of the storyline skippable. I personally had a cool experience accepting 3dog quest, finding my father and THEN doing his quest. He acknoledged it and gave me a key to a hidden weapon bunker to thank me. But that's beside the point.

Gecko and New Reno weren't part of the Main Storyline. they were cool places to visit but they were only sidequests.

My point was not about how you could forget about the Main storyline, it was about how the Main Storyline isn't longer in Fallout 2. It's pretty similar, it's the sidequest that really add the most fun of both games.

And I think Super Mutants are in the Mall for another reason than because they were from Vault 87. If it was only that, they would have went to Tennepenny tower. Or Megaton. Or any other place in between.

And I found multiple informations in game that said that Super Mutants seemed to be looking for something in DC. There was a couple of discussion between people in the Citadel and files from computers. Hell, maybe I just missed the point and they're only looking for Vault Tech headquarters to get revenge but I think there is more to it.
 
And in the same vein one of my friends found vault 112 by mistake after leaving Vault 101 and scavenging just for fun thus making a huge part of the storyline skippable.
Click to expand...

For me it seems like that everybody who said to themself "no, I don't follow the main plot, I explore by myself for now" has found the Vault 112 by accident. I think this is because if you take a look at the map, you have to go to the right corner of the map - directly into the town. So most people who just wanted to explore are going to the left side of the map by instinct and enter everything that looks like there could be something cool. If they found something cool then or not doesn't matter (I never found something interesting besides ammo and maybe some stims..) but still, because of this they found the Vault and then skip a part of the story without knowing it.
 
Going to Gecko and fixing their power plant is a way to get access to the vault city computer and thus to get the location of the southern vaults. I would consider that part of the main quest since you're looking for a geck and by extension a vault that has one. If you progress "naturally", not doing things your charachter wouldn't know about.
 
Gecko and New Reno weren't part of the Main Storyline. they were cool places to visit but they were only sidequests.
Click to expand...

You needed to fix the Gecko power plant problem in order to gain access to Vault City vault to get info on Vault 15. You needed to get the voice recognition module from New Reno for the diplomatic solution to getting GECK from Vault 13.

Also the map design is better - most of the places that are optional to the main quest are also places that you will simply have to go through or near while doing the main quest. In FO3, you won't knot about most of the interesting locations if you focus on the main quest only.

And in the same vein one of my friends found vault 112 by mistake after leaving Vault 101 and scavenging just for fun thus making a huge part of the storyline skippable. I personally had a cool experience accepting 3dog quest, finding my father and THEN doing his quest. He acknoledged it and gave me a key to a hidden weapon bunker to thank me. But that's beside the point.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, the main plot becomes entirely linear the moment you find Dad.
 
As far as I remember you can also enter the Vault City vault if you pass the becoming-a-citizen-test? With this you don't need to visit Gecko.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top