T
TorontoReign
Guest
Surf Solar said:
You're entitled to your opinion, but you're wrong.
Fallout-related tidbits
- Thread starter WorstUsernameEver
- Start date
You're entitled to your opinion, but you're wrong.
Surf Solar
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
Akratus
Bleep bloop.
Obviously there is a large discrepency between Fallout 2 and 3, but how can anyone prefer the second over the first when they state that there are not enough arguments in Fallout 3's favor, yet only have a few for Fallout 2? I mean, I hear so often that Fallout 2 has way more content. But does THAT make a masterpiece?
The RPG Codex agrees, and placed Fallout 1 first, fallout 2 3rd or 4th? In their rpg top list.
The RPG Codex agrees, and placed Fallout 1 first, fallout 2 3rd or 4th? In their rpg top list.
Not just mean more mass but more situation to use various skill to solve various way. it's not bad way to increase size of game.
I feel like Fo1 is too small to show it's possibility well.
I even feel like Fo1 is smaller than Wasteland.
it's not because actual size of game is smaller than wasteland but
the given situation of Fallout 1 is too narrow.
and not just increasing size but fixed lots of flaws.
especially for companion. companion of Fo1 is just POS.
they are just... I just don't want them to block my way since there's no way to move them.
I feel like Fo1 is too small to show it's possibility well.
I even feel like Fo1 is smaller than Wasteland.
it's not because actual size of game is smaller than wasteland but
the given situation of Fallout 1 is too narrow.
and not just increasing size but fixed lots of flaws.
especially for companion. companion of Fo1 is just POS.
they are just... I just don't want them to block my way since there's no way to move them.
Surf Solar
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
Fallout 1 has the perfect size and length to play through. I get bored by FO2 halfway through the game. Quantity doesn't mean quality.
Mr Fish
Slippy sloppy, The
For me Fallout 1 is better than Fallout 2 because it's more structured, it's something that they carefully crafted to progress along nicely, it didn't have more than it needed and it didn't have too little. Fallout 2 on the other hand has tons of content, way more than Fallout 1 but it doesn't make it better. Fallout 2 can be a mess to play through with its main story because it feels like it's put in the background of all the side-quests. Simply put, it's easier to get lost in Fallout 2 and not in the good way.
Fallout 2 allows you a lot of opportunity to roleplay different things but it loses sight of what is important, which is the main quest. In Fallout 1 there is always this constant quest pushing you forward: Find the water chip and later on destroy the mutant threat. In Fallout 2 on the other hand once Hakunin's messages are over and Arroyo is demolished by the Enclave it sort of stops. Yeah you need to find your tribe and save them but that urgency to find them kind of diminishes when there isn't anything to connect you too it anymore. One day you're out to save the tribe the next you're in a boxing ring fighting Mike Tyson. One day you witness an elder die in front of you as your village burn and the next day you're digging graves outside of Reno. Once that final message by Hakunin goes through your kind of on your own and no matter how long you wait to complete the main quest there is no urgency to complete it, you can lollygag around and do whatev's.
Hell, there isn't even all that much dialogue with other NPC's about it, some of the GECK dialogue is just jokes. Finding the Water Chip was urgent and it shows with the dialogue, finding a GECK on the other hand is like a wild goose chase where every time you think you are near it it ends comically (drunk in Klamath passing out, Renesco getting pissed off, stuff like that) the storyline just doesn't take itself seriously enough outside of Arroyo to feel like it matters. From what I remember in Fallout 1 whenever there was hints of a water chip it actually lead somewhere and whenever it was talked about the protagonist was more serious about his quest to save his vault.
However, while I think Fallout 1 is better it doesn't change the fact that Fallout 2 has more stuff to do in it. I can't become a pornstar or get fucked by a super mutant in Fallout 1, so when it comes to just mindless fun in a good cRPG I think Fallout 2 takes the cake, but as an art-piece I think Fallout 1 does a much better job.
Fallout 2 allows you a lot of opportunity to roleplay different things but it loses sight of what is important, which is the main quest. In Fallout 1 there is always this constant quest pushing you forward: Find the water chip and later on destroy the mutant threat. In Fallout 2 on the other hand once Hakunin's messages are over and Arroyo is demolished by the Enclave it sort of stops. Yeah you need to find your tribe and save them but that urgency to find them kind of diminishes when there isn't anything to connect you too it anymore. One day you're out to save the tribe the next you're in a boxing ring fighting Mike Tyson. One day you witness an elder die in front of you as your village burn and the next day you're digging graves outside of Reno. Once that final message by Hakunin goes through your kind of on your own and no matter how long you wait to complete the main quest there is no urgency to complete it, you can lollygag around and do whatev's.
Hell, there isn't even all that much dialogue with other NPC's about it, some of the GECK dialogue is just jokes. Finding the Water Chip was urgent and it shows with the dialogue, finding a GECK on the other hand is like a wild goose chase where every time you think you are near it it ends comically (drunk in Klamath passing out, Renesco getting pissed off, stuff like that) the storyline just doesn't take itself seriously enough outside of Arroyo to feel like it matters. From what I remember in Fallout 1 whenever there was hints of a water chip it actually lead somewhere and whenever it was talked about the protagonist was more serious about his quest to save his vault.
However, while I think Fallout 1 is better it doesn't change the fact that Fallout 2 has more stuff to do in it. I can't become a pornstar or get fucked by a super mutant in Fallout 1, so when it comes to just mindless fun in a good cRPG I think Fallout 2 takes the cake, but as an art-piece I think Fallout 1 does a much better job.
shihonage
Made in USSR
.Pixote. said:
We'll see.
is there really a need for a remake anyway? If I want the experience of F1 or F2 then I will play F1 and F2.
Why not do with Fallout what Fallout did with Wasteland? Creating a game that is similar in spirit, not just a copy with better graphics.
That way you can do a lot of new things and keep what made the old games good.
Why not do with Fallout what Fallout did with Wasteland? Creating a game that is similar in spirit, not just a copy with better graphics.
That way you can do a lot of new things and keep what made the old games good.