Fallout 2 & 3 side by side comparison

[nemetoad]

Someone should seriously start a drinking game when it comes to people mentioning the lack of farms. Does everyone ignore the fact that one of the the original reasons you became the chosen one in Fallout 2 was crop failure?

and... no traders? *looks a few posts back* Yes, sure. We'll go with that one. Heck, lets even say there were no Raiders either. I'm sure you missed those.

 

[TorontoReign]

Someone should seriously start a drinking game when it comes to people mentioning the lack of farms. Does everyone ignore the fact that one of the the original reasons you became the chosen one in Fallout 2 was crop failure?

and... no traders? *looks a few posts back* Yes, sure. We'll go with that one. Heck, lets even say there were no Raiders either. I'm sure you missed those.

It really is a small thing to bitch about I admit, but when you add up all the other problems with the game it just fucking tops it off.

The problem was not the lack of traders, but the fact that there are five traders that wander around with one guard throughout the wasteland. If I was traveling the wasteland with vast quantities of equipment I would think about hiring more than one pussy guard to protect me.

It would not have been hard for Bethesda to add a couple more guards and Brahmin to the caravan. If they would have spent less time making cool shit and more time making shit that made sense the game would have been amazing.

I might add that this alone does not make the game a failure. It's the total package that fails. I will be the first one to admit I had fun with the game for about two weeks until I saw how shallow it truly is. I played the game for over 60 hours so I got my money worth, but I can't help but think of all the potential this game fucking had and they FUCKED IT UP! It could have been epic. Now it will fade away and no one will remember it. It will be replaced by Fallout 4,5,6 and so on and so forth.

You have to understand when you come to a community as passionate as this one that inconsistencies that might seem minor to the average fan are looked upon as fucking blasphemy. I defended this shitty fucking game to the bitter end, right up until the the truth hit me in the face like a ton of bricks.

Fallout 3 is average at best and trying to convince the vast majority of fans here is pointless.

 

[nemetoad]

So the passionate thing to do is complain rather than to try fixing things? Has the Compendium mod(Forgive spelling - can't recall the correct spelling for that word off the top of my head) doing anything to fix the "trivial" things or are too many people spending too much time complaining?

And I do agree, the game is shallow. Most things in the game seem like they were puposely shallow and not fully established...such as the trade, Outcasts, etc. Much like they did in Oblivion with the Imperial Palace ( It's a palace that doesn't even have a throne. What?) I agree that Bethesda failed in this area, but bringing up the same trivial issues over and over again doesn't change anything. If the board is really "passionate" then shouldn't it be creating a list of things to work on correcting? Or should it instead just be ignoring the work completely, much like what appears to be the case with Brotherhood of Steel (Which I can agree with - that's just Fallout meets X men legends and the sort after all)

 

[Fade]

So the passionate thing to do is complain rather than to try fixing things? Has the Compendium mod(Forgive spelling - can't recall the correct spelling for that word off the top of my head) doing anything to fix the "trivial" things or are too many people spending too much time complaining?

How can you fix something without knowing it is broken? Also do you think Modders grow on trees? I know a little programming, my ability to draw is flawed & my writing ability comes & goes. So I can do a half-assed job of fixing Fallout 3 or I can point flaws & hopefully improve other people's Mods.

And I do agree, the game is shallow. Most things in the game seem like they were puposely shallow and not fully established...such as the trade, Outcasts, etc. Much like they did in Oblivion with the Imperial Palace ( It's a palace that doesn't even have a throne. What?) I agree that Bethesda failed in this area, but bringing up the same trivial issues over and over again doesn't change anything. If the board is really "passionate" then shouldn't it be creating a list of things to work on correcting? Or should it instead just be ignoring the work completely, much like what appears to be the case with Brotherhood of Steel (Which I can agree with - that's just Fallout meets X men legends and the sort after all)

Some people have harder heads than others and we aren't a majority of Fallout fans anymore... it's mostly Fallout 3 fans now. The new fans keep bringing up how great the game is would going silent educate them? How about getting us something closer to Fallout 1?

 

[TorontoReign]

So the passionate thing to do is complain rather than to try fixing things? Has the Compendium mod(Forgive spelling - can't recall the correct spelling for that word off the top of my head) doing anything to fix the "trivial" things or are too many people spending too much time complaining?

And I do agree, the game is shallow. Most things in the game seem like they were puposely shallow and not fully established...such as the trade, Outcasts, etc. Much like they did in Oblivion with the Imperial Palace ( It's a palace that doesn't even have a throne. What?) I agree that Bethesda failed in this area, but bringing up the same trivial issues over and over again doesn't change anything. If the board is really "passionate" then shouldn't it be creating a list of things to work on correcting? Or should it instead just be ignoring the work completely, much like what appears to be the case with Brotherhood of Steel (Which I can agree with - that's just Fallout meets X men legends and the sort after all)

Well not everyone wants to fix Bethesdas fuckups man. I'm going to college for Game Design so maybe one day I can make games that people can bitch and complain about, but until then i will bitch and complain as much as I fucking want. It's my god given right.

 

[nemetoad]

It's a god given choice. Yes, I understand that not everyone is a modder ( I tried - never found the full ambition to do so because games are secondary in my life now) but I'm just curious on if any group has tried to take some of these trivial complaints - lack of farms, too few escorts for traders, etc - and has tried to put them into place.

 

[big brother]

The game isn't shallow. It may not put it's emphasis where you want it, but I wouldn't call it shallow. There are a lot of little stories, back stories and explanations pretty much everywhere.

There are Mirelurks Hunters in the game. There's one lady who says her sons are hunting them and I found one. Or at least his body in the Anchorage Monument. I also found a Mercenary with a memo on him to kill those guys and start selling the Mirelurks. This is just one example of stuff that is designed in the game but you don't get to see them often. I played the game 5 times and found that merc only once, by total accident I might add.

Oh and I saw a couple of farms. Okay, so they weren't farming and the raiders were just there waiting for me but I saw them.

Would it have been a cool little addition to see one or two qorking farms out there? Sure. Why not. Would it have been more realistic to have two or three gards on a caravan, and maybe an additional brahim. Yeah whatever.

My main gripe with the game is the small settlements. I would have prefered the small places like Andale, Arefu and Canterburry Commons to be around 10-15 people and add another 15 to Megaton and Rivet City.

But the fact that I didn'T see a potato foeld doesn't make me mad at all. I couldn't care less. I thought seeing most cities having Brahims was actually a nice touch.

Oh well, I guess I am just one of the few here is prefers to find the positives in games.

P.S. I just want to re-iterate one thing. I played Fallout 2 and I LOVED it. But I also know what it takes to make a videogame, what the process is and how you can have a million good ideas but can't implement them all. I understand the nature of the beast it was and the beast it became, thanks to the cost associated with making games and the risks associated with it. (I have a friend who works at Ubisoft Montreal and the whole place was nervous at the release of Assassin's Creed because failre there maight have meant the office closing it's doors... and we're talking about the developpers that have Splinter Cell and Price of Persia to fall back on so it should give you a good idea of how risky this business is).

Do I think the game is perfect? No it's not. Do I think it's better than Fallout 2, probably not. Do I enjoy playing it as much. yeah. It's a different experience to be able to physically walk between cities and see that huge wasteland. For me, coming out of the vault and having that white light go out and see Washington DC in the game was awesome, something Fallout 2 couldn't give me because of it's limitations.

And yes, I do think that Fallout 4 will be better. They will have tons of feedback, they will have one game and multiple DLC under their belt and now they won't have to fear about the critical reception of a franchise that was pretty much dead for 8 years. They took a risk and needed to make sure it wouldn't be too "far out" for the common gamer and now they can try some stuff in the next one that will be even better.

 

[Fade]

The game isn't shallow. It may not put it's emphasis where you want it, but I wouldn't call it shallow. There are a lot of little stories, back stories and explanations pretty much everywhere.

There are Mirelurks Hunters in the game. There's one lady who says her sons are hunting them and I found one. Or at least his body in the Anchorage Monument. I also found a Mercenary with a memo on him to kill those guys and start selling the Mirelurks. This is just one example of stuff that is designed in the game but you don't get to see them often. I played the game 5 times and found that merc only once, by total accident I might add.

Oh and I saw a couple of farms. Okay, so they weren't farming and the raiders were just there waiting for me but I saw them.

Show, don't tell especially in a First Person game. Depth. You made my point for me. Little stories each one of them tied to nothing else. To be deep they should be bigger, tied together or evoke strong emotions. I just don't see that in the quest & back stories... wish I did. Fallout 1/2 gave me a sense of changing the wasteland & a sense of the history that had already passed. Fallout 3 doesn't.

 

[Crni Vuk]

Someone should seriously start a drinking game when it comes to people mentioning the lack of farms. Does everyone ignore the fact that one of the the original reasons you became the chosen one in Fallout 2 was crop failure?

and... no traders? *looks a few posts back* Yes, sure. We'll go with that one. Heck, lets even say there were no Raiders either. I'm sure you missed those.

Many small things make for one big thing.

The farms are just a indicator. You could talk about defenceless 5 men communities next to raider camps/super Mutants/monsters for example.

Or lack of economy which suports slaves.

Runing computers and machines in the waste without any visual suport of power and totally exposed to the elements (how comes that in so many buildings of the game you still have runing gas leaks that explode when shoot around it?)

Same to light in almost every building you enter

Robots that scavange the wasteland for no reason ... 200 years? yes ...

The Robco fascility 2 min. away from Tenn Penny towers just waiting for the player. Totally untouched ... for how long? Only Tenn penny knows it.

Lidle lamplight 5 min away from the main base of the Supermutants vault 87. And they survived for the last 200 years?

you see ... we are somewhat reaching a pretty strange point. A point where you have to leave your brain outside of the door before entering this Fallout party. And it should not have been that way.

People are not demanding realism. Just verisimilitude. I dont see whats wrong with that in a RPG. Even most usual shooters (the better ones, See Deus Ex, System Schock 2) can provide verisimilitude within some limits.

 

[BurningInFlames]

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.

Preference of one song over another does not necessarily add meaning to a setting. I prefer hearing Metallica over Little Wayne, but would it make sense to have Metallica playing at a hip-hop club?

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.

I disagree with you there, I watched both intros extensively and I think that the Fallout 3 intro reveals ALOT more about the war, the past and the future. As opposed to FO2 where you play the game to obtain this information.

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.

Again I disagree, when I played I felt like every town had the same lighting, people, and problems.

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.

Why was there EVEN a need to call it UNDERWORLD? I thought it was corny and they could have called it anything else. Plus the whole idea of ghouls disliking humans and vice versa seemed so forced in FO3. They seemed identical other than artwork and there seemed to be no reason that either should hate the other. And I definately don't understand how 1 roaming guard for a set of 2 wooden double doors would protect anything from anybody...

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.

This was not in "my mind" I played both games at the same time so as too not make the mistake of remember fallout 2 for what it was not. There are no evil characters in FO3 or Good characters. They are all indifferent. Its as if walking around in "Oblivion" the only "evil" or "good" characters are so far fetched and blatant it is unbelievable.

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.

This I admit is nit picking and the choice of monsters and things to kill is not very important, but it just started to get very boring when I kept killing SM's and it was a joke to kill them.

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.

The content of the writing was FAR superior in FO2 than FO3...There should be no argument here...This is a fact. Also FO2 can be beaten strictly with diplomacy. There were dialogs that amounted to nothing in FO2, but don't forget that FO2 is a much older game with a much smaller budget and a much smaller audience. Not that this is an excuse but the game is MUCH larger than FO3.

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.

Once again this is where we disagree COMPLETELY. I started playing FO3 about 3 weeks after it came out, without reading NMA specifically not to have my mind pre-made to hate the game. I read some of the reviews and all of them were very positive. I went in thinking that this game would be amazing and honestly as I played the first 2 hours I was blown away. Unfortunately, once I got past the first slow-motion head shot and the new graphics, I felt the game had none of the soul of Fallout 3.

 

[BurningInFlames]

Couldn't Agree with you more on Crni Vuk!

 

[BurningInFlames]

As for the humour, I will say that they have a different kind of humour. Bethsada made an incredible amount of little jokes but most of the are in the landscape instead of in dialog. Fallout 2 was more "in your face" type of humour while Bethsada was more subtle, which doesn't fit the company...

I found Robots on toilets and when I moved them there was (s)crap metal in the toilet. I found a guy chained to a wall by a foot, his body fuly extended. And when I checked towards where is arm was pointing, I found a lockpick book. The wastelander strapped with explosives, the wastelanders with the Survival guide book, dead or alive depending if you lied or did the missions...I found a lot of those "small stories" that weren't really explained by Bethsada but made the game very funny to me. Now the dialog itself... hurg...

In my opinion having guys at a random bar playing "Ragic The Mathering" or a hooded man guarding a bridge that will spawn killer brahmin when attacked is much more humorous than a robot on a toilet seat with scrap metal when searched. Also I think it is alot more subtle. I would have to say I disagree with you here. But then again some people find South Park funnier than Family Guy and Some people think that South Park is brainless and family guy is intelligent...unfortunately there are more family guy fans so I must be wrong.

 

[BurningInFlames]

Sorry for the numerous posts in one session...don't really have access to the internet where I am at right now.

Finally I wanted to say that I started this post as a comparison not really an attack on Fallout 3. I would just like to compare certain aspects and point out legitimate shortcomings of either game. I am a big fan of analytical thinking and think that all claims should be backed up with proof. Thank you all for not turning this into a FO3 sucks or FO3 is better than FO2 thread.

 

[Crni Vuk]

...
It really is a small thing to bitch about I admit, but when you add up all the other problems with the game it just fucking tops it off.
...

I think you are right when you (and others) eventualy see farms and the lack of them in Fallout 3 as a serious issue. Its one single thing, but its somewhat indicative for the whole concept of Bethesdas Fallout that has a pretty shallow and inconsistend world.

 

[Per]

Sorry for the numerous posts in one session...

In the future, don't apologize, use the edit button.

 

[danielje]

you are 100% on the mark.

Fallout 3 is not a true Fallout game.

Buying a franchise to change a game is like Blizzard making Diablo 3 into a MMORPG like World of Warcraft. You need to expand upon the good idea and games that Fallout 1 and 2 were, not "take the game" in a new direction because youre some stuck up snob who thinks because of your "hit" games, everyone wants to play the game thing painted a different colour.

GG Bethesda, you fail at Fallout.

 

[rcorporon]

And yes, I do think that Fallout 4 will be better. They will have tons of feedback, they will have one game and multiple DLC under their belt and now they won't have to fear about the critical reception of a franchise that was pretty much dead for 8 years. They took a risk and needed to make sure it wouldn't be too "far out" for the common gamer and now they can try some stuff in the next one that will be even better.

If the evolution of their other games, the TES series is any indication, FO4 will not be better.

 

[Danilh]

*fo3 plot resumed*
[spoiler:28e7096b6b]0 year; appearance
You have 1 year; assign attributes
10 years old; punch butch, gain pipboy
16; tag skills
18; OMFG ESCAPE TEH VAULT, "real plot" begins

Go to megaton, talk to moriarty or steal info
go to rivet city, talk to chinese woman
go to tranqulity lane, rescue father
go to jeferson memo, fix the fuse box(hurr durr hurr), see pops get killed
escape, go to Good Guys Inc, receive awesome- i mean power armor
go to kid-city , into vault 87, get geck, OMFG FLASHBANG(through you power visor, weird)
say the f-word to the nazi guy, kill bad guys , speak to machine and convince it to suicide(???), see the fireworks alongside with a mutant using a gatling laser F--- YEAH
teleport back to charity & honor & happy puppies corp, follow the megazord, enter the memorial
speak to col. nazi, OMFG THE PURIFIER WILL EXPLODE IF IT IS TURNED OFF, SO YOU HAVE TO TURN IT ON(??????)
mutant says it is your destiny(cliche caused seizure), go inside the chamber, become green shit, go to hell, watch slideshow[/spoiler:28e7096b6b]

Now some subquests!

*andale*
[spoiler:28e7096b6b]speak to weirdos, enter shack/basement, get confronted, any answer leads to case closed(by speech check or combat)[/spoiler:28e7096b6b]
*arefu*
[spoiler:28e7096b6b]speak to blonde, go to village, search vampires. Now , two paths: kill'em'all or convince them to do some shit. Case closed[/spoiler:28e7096b6b]
*oasis*
[spoiler:28e7096b6b]become drugged, talk to tree, battle crab people, shoot/use substances on a heart[/spoiler:28e7096b6b]

Now, FO1 adytum quest

[spoiler:28e7096b6b]arrive in town, get hired(or not) to kill "bad guys", get there, don't kill them(or not) to learn they are the goodies, seek help for weapons, get trucidated by deathclaws, reload game, get to heavily armed people, accept to kill deathclaws(or not), get in there, kill the uglies, go to basement, kill their mother, burn the eggs , get weapons for friends(or for you), get to goodies again, participate in battle(or not), Win! Or, you could have gone alone, guns blazing, against baddies or goodies from start, or at the end[/spoiler:28e7096b6b]

 

[Skadoosh]

I can't believe I registered for these forums just to reply to this post but here goes:

1: To the people talking about the over the top violence.

I distinctly remember, in Fallout 2, my characters punching holes through people with his bare hands, slicing people in half with an ordinary knife, and blowing someone's left side off with a 9mm round.

2: Toilet humor.

As if there isn't a quest in fallout 2 where you blow up a toilet and cover the town in feces...

3: Realistic economy.

Based on bottle caps? The skill is called barter for a reason. Pretty much the most primitive form of economy you can have. The main character in fallout 3 goes against the grain by investing in what few traders dare ply their trade, with all the raiders running about, and having them specialize in their fields like a capitalist would. Honestly, I'm surprised there are five people who would risk their lives for some soda tops.

4: Farms.

It's a wasteland? The kid's in lamplight scraped some edible fungus off the cave walls and used that for trade. If that's what you're looking for.

And Ghouls have never been important. With the exception of Harold. But Harold is special.

Don't get me wrong I love Fallout 2 but Fallout 3 is a great game as well. And I'm with whoever said they aren't as different as they're made out to be in this thread.

 

[TheMutantMe]

1: To the people talking about the over the top violence.

I distinctly remember, in Fallout 2, my characters punching holes through people with his bare hands, slicing people in half with an ordinary knife, and blowing someone's left side off with a 9mm round.

Well the difference is, in the first 2 Fallouts, the violence is more to add to the gritty atmosphere. While in Fallout 3 it's used as a gimmick, the whole "violence is fucking funny" thing.

2: Toilet humor.

As if there isn't a quest in fallout 2 where you blow up a toilet and cover the town in feces...

Yeah, and I thought it was one of the weakest jokes in a game that already had a hit and miss sense of humour, yet it is easily on par with even the wittiest jokes in FO3.

3: Realistic economy.

Based on bottle caps? The skill is called barter for a reason. Pretty much the most primitive form of economy you can have. The main character in fallout 3 goes against the grain by investing in what few traders dare ply their trade, with all the raiders running about, and having them specialize in their fields like a capitalist would. Honestly, I'm surprised there are five people who would risk their lives for some soda tops.

A barter economy is still an economy and is exactly what is missing from FO3, no one produces anything to barter, and no one has any system to get the needed goods to survive. This is dubious even 20 years after the war, let alone 200. We not talking about people risking their lives to make money, just to get the what they need to keep their community going.

4: Farms.

It's a wasteland? The kid's in lamplight scraped some edible fungus off the cave walls and used that for trade. If that's what you're looking for.

If it's so blasted that nothing edible can grow, then humanity wouldn't still be around after 200 years. And the fungus is an example of farming of soughts, but it's the only example of any kind of industry in the game.

And Ghouls have never been important. With the exception of Harold. But Harold is special.

They were part of the main plot of fallout 1, and part of a fairly major side quest in 2.

Don't get me wrong I love Fallout 2 but Fallout 3 is a great game as well. And I'm with whoever said they aren't as different as they're made out to be in this thread.

Well, great game is a matter of taste, but I just can't see how the can be thought of as similar. They are so different in game play, setting at style, what remains to make them alike, bar the name? I personally get far more of a fallout feel playing STALKER, and that certainly doesn't have much in common with the first 2.