How good is Fallout Tactics' story?

[Roshambo]

Okay, I will take your point about the timing of the game - between FAllout 1 and 2. Chasing the master's army does give an indication. I missed that.

Wait...didn't you say...lemme dig up a quote:

"I loved the opening story in Fallout Tactics."

Wow. Irony.

THe place where we diverge appears to be, that I don't care that the robots looked different and that the cars sounded like gas driven vehicles. It boils down to the fact that you take the little details far more seriously than I do. That is fine.

Your having not minded the discrepencies of FOT has no bearing about the story being good.

Frankly, you posted up a verbal fellating of the game here and have been steadfastly mixing up the two. You like the game, fine. You like the story despite you seem to be playing with your eyes closed, fine. Don't bother trying to say it's a good story, especially in a storyteller merit it does quite poorly.

All you are going to do now is tell me I shouldn't post about this game if I don't care about the setting.

Well, I doubt you should be arguing when you really don't have a clue about what you are arguing about. That is a hint for your own sake.

Some details are there from the old games - ghouls, mutants, a modified BOS(I know they were different but the bunkers were there, the paladins were there, the big guns were there, it felt similar), power-armour, rotgut, raiders with slaver tendencies, books that increase skill (guns and ammo), deathclaw enemies (having them on your side was a crap idea), occasionally amusing dialogue (could have been better because it was Fallout but because the emphasis was on combat, I didn't mind), they kept quite a few of the old guns - vindicator, laser rifle, plasma, rifle, hunting rifle, H&K CAWS, laser pistol, plasma pistol, (they needed to add in new weapons because it was a combat game first and needed a wider variety of weapons than the earlier Fallout games offered.

Note the boldface. That's the important point here.

I think it is more about the game atmosphere and the things you see around your characters while playing, the things you pick up in your inventory that make it seem Fallout - iguana on a stick, fruit, all those nice little touches are far more important to the Fallout feeling

The irony here is that you obviously have no clue what Iguana-on-a-stick is and where it comes from.

than the fact that Deathclaws could talk or that the BOS didn't hate outsiders with a vengeance (Anyway, its not like they're just opening th gates to everyone in Tactics, there is the matter of the 85% attrition rate on the training. They only take the best the wastes have offer.)

Damn, even after being presented with the background of the BoS, you still refuse to show even a faint glimmer of a clue. The BoS didn't "hate outsiders with a vengeance". Where you decided to pull that steaming lump of shit out of your ass, I have no idea, but please refrain from doing so in the future if you'd please.

But really, it should be about whether you liked the story, not whether it fit with your holy canon.

Really? That's kind of funny, since most people hate it when something deviates from the initial setting. You know why a lot of people dislike the new Star Wars movies? There's a hint. It's also a reason why the game bombed after its initial presale.

Sure, you personally might not have minded that they let the setting go to hell in a handbasket, ignored any previous setting design points, etc. That doesn't make it a good game nor good story. On the contrary, that makes it a bad story, especially when compared to Fallout 1&2, and even on its own merit.

That is why I hope you never have a future in game design, nor have any influence upon any game in development.

I know they changed the BOS and that it could have made sense to rename the organisation but I expect the designer thought it would be nice to let the player actually do something for the BOS rather than join them and not feel like part of the Brotherhood like in Fallout 1. I didn't let a few discrepancies ruin a good Tactical combat game which used my favourite character system.

Moo, I say.

It takes a real fool to ignore the point of Vault 0 and many more glaring points and try to tell people "Hey, there's nothing wrong with it".

Therefore, in this, I've rendered your presence in this thread irrelevent at best, having proven that it is not truly the story you are discussing, but instead that you like the game regardless of story, setting, and continuity flaws, which is in turn exacerbated by the fact that you have displayed little knowledge of the FOT story to begin with (notably, the intro).

I just dare you to try and prove me wrong there.

 

[Reaper]

My point, the one I tried to put forth in my last post, was that I liked the story even though it did not, as you say, exactly fit with the old games.

I was exaggerating about the old Brotherhood hating outsiders with a vengeance - I was tryin to understand why you think taking in recruits who pass an incredibly difficult training program is so different from the old Brotherhood where they were wary of outsiders because they did not want the fools in the wastes to misuse the technology. THe new Brotherhood didn't want that, but they decided new blood from outside their bunkers was necessary.

Oh, Iguana on a stick - made from humans as you discover in Fallout 1 because you find out the doc in Junktown sends on the the 'meat' to Bob in the Hub. Regardless of your repeated comments about me not playing the earlier games, I did. You keep saying I must have played them with my eyes shut - no I just don't need to have Fallout 1 and 2 regurgetated into a tactical combat game to make it Fallout Tactics. Not every single joke and product from the first 2 games had to make appearance to make the games seem like Fallout.

Also, why doesn't Vault 0 fit in. The Enclave mention the Vault experiment. I know Vault 13 was supposed to be the control one but that plan got messed up (Jeffrey Jones was a good choice for the voice of te president), but why is the idea of a supervault so dumb? The idea of an oil platform and its inhabintants surviving without supplies from the mainland for years and years sounds more far fetched to me.

 

[Reaper]

I just watched the Tactics opening story again, and you are right. The original Brotherhood is presented as much more aggresive than they were in the 1st game. THat is a discrepancy.

Still, I will stick to my point that despite the inaccuracies and places where it deviates from the old Fallout history, the story in Tactics is still a good one. It is about a groups determined to bring order to the wastes. But there is a greater element of struggle put in by making it about the slinter faction from the BOS because that means they don't have the great technological and military resources of the old Brotherhood. This makes their quest that much harder and makes the player feel like he is struggling to acheive the greater good - not just some footsoldier who is 1 man man in a huge army. The new BOS is small enough to make their task seem difficult.

What were they supposed to call themselves? The Techno lovers who will let outsiders in. They are still a Brotherhood of Steel - the name doesn't give any indication of ideology apart from a combination of military and Technological power and knowledge.

 

[Roshambo]

My point, the one I tried to put forth in my last post, was that I liked the story even though it did not, as you say, exactly fit with the old games.

You liked the story, but that doesn't make it a good one.
Especially when it pisses over the setting numerous times.
That is something most writers will tell you "That is a bad thing."

I was exaggerating about the old Brotherhood hating outsiders with a vengeance - I was tryin to understand why you think taking in recruits who pass an incredibly difficult training program is so different from the old Brotherhood where they were wary of outsiders because they did not want the fools in the wastes to misuse the technology. THe new Brotherhood didn't want that, but they decided new blood from outside their bunkers was necessary.

New recruits is just a fraction of their different attitude.

Oh, Iguana on a stick - made from humans as you discover in Fallout 1 because you find out the doc in Junktown sends on the the 'meat' to Bob in the Hub.

Good boy. Now explain why it is found far away from both locations.

You can't, can you?

That's what I was trying to get you to think about, although thinking about things doesn't seem to be a priority of yours aside from pernicious fanboying for FOT.

Regardless of your repeated comments about me not playing the earlier games, I did. You keep saying I must have played them with my eyes shut - no I just don't need to have Fallout 1 and 2 regurgetated into a tactical combat game to make it Fallout Tactics.

You're obviously not getting the point.

Not every single joke and product from the first 2 games had to make appearance to make the games seem like Fallout.

That's funny, you just rationalized that FOT was pretty much Fallout because it had some things from Fallout 1&2, nevermind of what and why they were, and then you post that.

So which are you going with?

Also, why doesn't Vault 0 fit in. The Enclave mention the Vault experiment. I know Vault 13 was supposed to be the control one but that plan got messed up (Jeffrey Jones was a good choice for the voice of te president), but why is the idea of a supervault so dumb?

Let's see...the vault The Master was in was the main Vault-Tec vault. If there was some mention of another main vault in...wait...main Vault?

Yeah, they also make this super, overseer vault, and then have absolutely no records or knowledge of it at any of the other vaults.

The idea of an oil platform and its inhabintants surviving without supplies from the mainland for years and years sounds more far fetched to me.

Hmmm, I wonder how those in Vaults survived...

Read, as this was already beaten to death and the story violates more than what "good" it was for.


I'll even use a quote from Saint_Proverbius and hope you cash in the Cluepon:

When you build a setting on a theme, you have to employ that theme in the setting where ever you use it.

Look at FireFly on FOX. It's a Spaghetti Western with a Sci-Fi backdrop. Imagine if they ditched the western theme and went with WW2 War Action or some other motiff mid season. You'd have a serious break in the style of the show.

Imagine if Lucas dropped the whole "mystic knight" thing from Star Wars suddenly. Then again, it wouldn't shock me if Lucas did that, but it'd still screw up the setting.

Imagine LOTR: Two Towers ditching the norse/celtic fantasy theme and moving to an Egyption lore theme.

Get the point yet?

 

[Reaper]

Okay I will rephrase my point and hopefully end this ugly argument, which I admit I think you won.

I agree that it was not a great Fallout story, but I also don't think it 'pissed all over it' as you said.

The point I have been trying to make but I kept getting sidetracked by trying to argue a specific Fallout reference with you, was that Fallout Tactics did not have a great Fallout story (it was not Fallout with extra combat) but the story worked as a self contained idea, using references from Fallout to add to the post-nuclear war setting. (I realise that not every post-nuclear setting is the same, hence my comment that they did not make it perfectly Fallout)

Did you not think that the opening movie made you like the BOS you were part of. THey were struggling to make the world a better place. They were a bit harsh but they looked damn cool. Any story about a group of tough, survivors in the wastes can be great as long as it does not become too ridiculous. I think the Tactics story, as much as I have seen of it, at least survived on its own merits - maybe it shouldn't have been called 'Fallout' Tactics but I really don't care about that. As I said before I care more about the story in this game than who well it fits into the other Fallout games. (I have not reached the end. When I do, I suppose there is a chance I will come back here and join Rosh's full throated chorus in denouncing Tactics because the ending was crap)

For now, I stick to my guns that I though the story was good (not great in the continuity area, but good anyway.)

Yes this is my 'opinion' but this is a forum and opinions are all we ever get when the question asks how good something was.

 

[fdanarchy50]

FoT is one one of the best games out there.

It's plot may not have been the best, but it touched on issues like racism, the co-dependence upon others, acceptance, and mutual co-operation for survival, as well as loyalty to a cause. Take Barnaky for instance: he is, for pretty much the first half of the game, your mentor. The first time i played the game, i felt a sense of loss when Barnaky was captured and Dekker started briefing me.

In the last mission, when he overrides his robot programming, you feel glad to have him back on your side.

And yes, i do think the opening story is bull, but you got to have something to explain the BoS you are in, and the introduction of characters like gamorra or wtf his name is in the mutant camp really fleshes the story out. It speaks alot for the character of original BoS members and how they adapted after they crashed, whether they went insane or founded military organizations. The ghouls worshipping the nuke, and the beastlords controlling the deathclaws because of the mother, really pieces the story together even if it doesn't keep the continuity of the Fallout universe. Yes, i know Humvees are gas-powered, but the Highwayman in FO2 was fusion powered, and the robots don't fit in the FO universe and where the fuck did they come from?

But if you ain't looking at every detail to make sure it's grammatically correct, you might just find an enjoyable game, not as focused on role-playing as the first two FO games(tactics was intended to be a squad based combat game), but enjoyable none the less.

Chalk one up for good voice acting. Or maybe it's the drugs.

Either way, I think it's one of the best games out there.

 

[[PCE]el_Prez]

Beastlords are by far the lamest enemy ive ever faced in any game. The 2nd lamest would be Reavers (what the fuck is a reaver anyway?).

 

[Derec]

Whew, just read through this entire thread in one sitting...

I have to ask Roshambo one question, though. Do you just think that any Fallout fan who could *possibly* have enjoyed Fallout Tactics is an idiot?

 

[Mohrg]

Reaver? You mean the thing from "Star Craft?"

Mohrg

 

[[PCE]el_Prez]

hell if i know, ask the FT developers. their the ones who put them in teh game.

 

[Chronus]

About as good as a rock and some gravy sauce for dinner...

 

[Vandori]

My take on the FOT judgment thus far is that the majority of the people here are following what a few more vocal people are saying about the game. Do you dislike the game because it is a poor game, doesn’t play well and is no fun for you… or do you dislike it because everyone else dislikes it and you don’t want to go to the trouble of saying otherwise?

You've got a select few that seem to control the majority and lead them all in what we will believe. Case in point, I read this 4 page thread on why Fallout Tactics was shit. I will concede that the game is not straight out FO, but with consideration given to what they had to work with, and what kind of game they wanted, some things had to be changed to fit or make things work. Extra vehicles… vehicles were a part of the game, not so much a common resource in FO, but it was a part of the game.

It’s been interesting watching the more hardcore ‘fanatics’ on the forums. It seems like you are too closely guarding what you personally believe is Fallout without granting even the slightest flexibility on any issues. “FO is 1950s sci-fi!!!111!”

Consider this…
IMI Desert Eagle – designed 1979
AK-112 5mm Assault rifle (taken straight from game) – doesn’t even exist! Earliest is the AK-47 from 1947 which I’ll let slide.
FN P90 – Fabrique Nationale, not Heckler and Koch, whoops. Developed in the 80’s
FN FAL – 1946, tolerable.
6 barrel chain guns? Seem to mirror the General Electric miniguns that were patented around 1970.

There were rifles in the 1950’s, largely WWII type or later variations of them. Such as the M1 Carbine and Garand, Grease Gun, M-14, Thompson, most of which were more common in 1950s USA.

However, as the development of FO3 is being laid out before us the developers themselves are saying that 9mm and .45 caliber ammunition would be more in line with the modern day (minding that FO2 takes place in roughly 2200AD) weapons. Obviously the world takes on 1940's/2000 mixture with enough elements of both and plenty of the pulp sci-fi stuff tossed in for good measure.

You’ve got your laser blasters, gauss guns (Rail-guns essentially, using magnetic systems to propel steel slugs...), plasma weapons, robots and super computers that take up a hell of a lot of room.

But as a further example of the FO fanatics that exist in this community... the devs talk about moving from 10mm and .44 magnum rounds, making the .45 and 9mm weapons more common ... the response? "That's not Fallout!!!!!!!!11!!!" Which is funny because, uh, yeah, it IS fallout. If the developers make 92F Berettas and Colt .45s commonplace, then that is Fallout.

Let’s take Star Wars as an example: Episode 1 and all the midichlorian stuff? Lots of people say that's not Star Wars and that it sucks... yeah, it does suck. But sorry to tell you folks, it IS Star Wars. Why? Well, because Lucas says so. I'm not going to get into why I think Lucas is insane though, that’s a different post for a different time.

Fallout Tactics was made by a separate developer, so it's not Fallout in so far as to say FO3 is going to go "Oh yeah, the robots and shit in Chicago, that was totally a big deal and happened not long ago." It is fallout to the extent that it effectively keeps the feel and environment (Post-apocalyptic survival in the wasteland) while presenting a different story and location. I like to think of it as Microforte's vision of Fallout.

It's not canon, it’s expanded universe.

Yet the Fanatics cannot keep their rabid tendencies down long enough to realize that the game was good, it added some things that FO 1 and 2 would've benefited from (Crouching, anyone?) not mention added a nice spin to some of the graphics. Cause frankly, the metal armor and advanced power armor was some hot shit. Save for the bat ears on the advanced armor helmet... it was still cool.

The presentation of FOT is great in most respects, dodgy in others (Hairy/intelligent deathclaws being one), but all together offers a neat little package that is good for what it is. A tactical strategy game set in the Fallout universe. Set in the fallout universe.

It’s a lot like the Star Trek show Enterprise. It’s been torn apart by the rabid Trek fans because it isn’t faithful to the original Trek shows and movies. It messes up the timeline, etc, etc.

However if you look at things like how the ship is more high-tech than the Enterprise in the original series… hell, its general design is very similar to that of the late generation/deep space 9 ship designs than the ‘soda cans and a Frisbee’ design of the original series. But you make do with what works and what doesn’t.

Obviously, I wasn't expecting a perfect translation of the Fallout universe... but well, it would seem that most everyone did. Shame that...

What we got was a good interpretation of the Fallout setting from someone else. It’s Fallout through the eyes of Mircoforte. Does that make it perfect? No.

However it’s not like they raped the franchise. Think about it.
The game played how? Well, it was turn based with an RT option. The turn based was well done. The SPECIAL system carries over. You’ve got your iguana on a stick. That’s not to say it would be called exactly that… but you’d imagine a lizard on a stick is pretty common. People have got to eat after all.

You had your aimed shots, rad scorpions, crippled limbs, stim packs, drugs and all the armor you had in the original, plus that totally boss environmental armor which was crap in combat, but looked pretty cool.

Plus Nuka cola, raiders, mutants, ghouls, most everything translated pretty well. The weapons were creative, with a primarily modern day twist. The world was sufficiently post apocalyptic to follow through with the ‘nuked planet’ feeling.

You want to pick apart the story? That’s fine, seems like what all the fanatics like to do.
So the BoS was wary of outsiders, didn’t think they could handle some of the better technology right way. Understood. I can go with that too, I wouldn’t start handing out plasma rifles and rocket launchers to people who had just survived a nuclear war and were just clawing their way out of the rubble.

However it is very valid that a fully isolated organization like the BoS could run the risk of running out of scribes and paladins if they didn’t take in new recruits.

If you want to get picky it doesn’t say in either Fallout that the BoS is having internal problems, but it wouldn’t be surprising if there were a few dissenters. I don’t think the big airship was smart, but it’s not entirely outside the BoS’ technical capabilities.

As for naming conventions of the ‘New Brotherhood’ it wouldn’t be too far fetched if the paladins and scribes on this mission (If I recall, it was a mission to remove the dissenters quietly and not a “Get out and don’t come back!” type of thing.) were so loyal to the Brotherhood, so devoted and possibly blinded by said devotion that they would continue on under the BoS name, but instead would adopt their ideas to further their survival.

Consider the survivors of the crash… probably weren’t as many as there could have been. They would need new people to be able to do anything on a larger scale than “Hey, this is a nice village, we’re gonna move in now. Where’s the fridge?”

As for the vault 0, reavers and super robots? Eh, the robots were already established, and considering that the east coast holds a very large percentage of the industrial capacity for the USA it’s not surprising that the mechanics therein might be somewhat more advanced. Of course, I would’ve liked to have seen all the previous FO robots in there as well… the new ones were kind of required to fill out the game.

Reavers were, eh, whatever. Another group that this time worshipped technology instead of hoarded it. Fine by me, not entirely impossible, though I think they probably should’ve worn more than leather and cloth wrappings.

Beastmasters felt like a total tack on type thing, but you don’t end up spending a lot of time dealing with them in the game anyway…

As for Vault 0, I think that’s probably the biggest mistake they could’ve made. However, I think a ‘nexus vault’ would’ve been far more acceptable in terms of its size, technology and use. Creating the ‘master vault, or the ‘main control vault’ is a bit much considering things previously stated in FO1.

If it was a “Massive vault constructed to be the center of east coast post-war life.” It would’ve been better than “The one vault to rule them all.”

At any rate, I think some people here were expecting too much from a game that wasn’t meant to be a straight translation of FO1 and 2. Like I said, it falls more into the realm of expanded universe than full on canon.

Think a few more of you need to realize that.
It’s only official if Black Isle does it.

 

[Methidox]

The story is full of holes and reads like a grade-school adventure yarn. It has the faithfulness of Bill Clinton. There are some aspects of the game that are interesting and it still carries the post-apoc setting. I give it one bandaged, bloody, stump of a thumb up.

ROFL, that is the funniest shit ever

 

[Human Shield]

The argument isn't that it is the worst game ever (I'd say it is mediocre). It doesn't respect any cannon or anything laid down in the first game.

I believe in a little something called craftsmanship and when you try to add on to someone else's work, you respect that work.

That is why a Mona Lisa 2 made out of cubes wouldn't be accepted.

Tactics shows a complete lack of research and honor to cannon, I think that is just a wicked thing to do. If they wanted something different they can make their own post-nuclear game, but don't ruin something else.

And this isn't an argument for hyper-conservation. Fallout has its own setting and timeline, any games made with the Fallout name should work with the facts set in the original. For a Star Wars sequel you don't say the Death Star wasn't their real weapon and that they have a super Death Star.

If the game agrees with the first Fallout then it IS Fallout. Developers (not the original people mind you) can come and go and throw in needless inconstancies but their mistakes will be ignored because I for one refuse to let idiots ruin a great work of craftsmanship.

Play the game if you think it is fun but don't ever think it is a Fallout game.

 

[The physopathic Polock]

el_Prez]Beastlords are by far the lamest enemy ive ever faced in any game. The 2nd lamest would be Reavers (what the fuck is a reaver anyway?).

Sure. The Reavers were a twisted mix of raiders, tribals, and the BoS proper. The Beastlords didn't make sense because it was 40 years before the Enclave made the first intelegent Deathclaws, and the DEathclaws probabalt didn't exist beyonf the Southwestern United States. This one kills the "regional differences" excuse.

My take on the FOT judgment thus far is that the majority of the people here are following what a few more vocal people are saying about the game. Do you dislike the game because it is a poor game, doesn’t play well and is no fun for you… or do you dislike it because everyone else dislikes it and you don’t want to go to the trouble of saying otherwise?

No, because we happened to realize that the vocal folks are right about the cannonical points against the game.

You've got a select few that seem to control the majority and lead them all in what we will believe. Case in point, I read this 4 page thread on why Fallout Tactics was shit. I will concede that the game is not straight out FO, but with consideration given to what they had to work with, and what kind of game they wanted, some things had to be changed to fit or make things work. Extra vehicles… vehicles were a part of the game, not so much a common resource in FO, but it was a part of the game.

The vehicles themselves wern't the problem; the fact that they ran on gas, not Fusion Batteries, was.

It’s been interesting watching the more hardcore ‘fanatics’ on the forums. It seems like you are too closely guarding what you personally believe is Fallout without granting even the slightest flexibility on any issues. “FO is 1950s sci-fi!!!111!”

Flexibilty? You're kidding, right? Perhaps we all have some obsesion with our personal view of Fallout, but what can be said is that we know when a game [Chucky]-[Marksman]s the established of our beloved 50's pulp post-apoc sci-fi fictional World. My point about Fallout being fiction makes more sense below:

Consider this…
IMI Desert Eagle – designed 1979
AK-112 5mm Assault rifle (taken straight from game) – doesn’t even exist! Earliest is the AK-47 from 1947 which I’ll let slide.
FN P90 – Fabrique Nationale, not Heckler and Koch, whoops. Developed in the 80’s
FN FAL – 1946, tolerable.
6 barrel chain guns? Seem to mirror the General Electric miniguns that were patented around 1970.

That is total bullshit. Fallout isn't baised on the real 50's, but on a future loosely inspired by the sprit of the 50's. Like I said before, having so-called "modern" weapons dosen't mean it is violating the 50's aspects of Fallout, because Fallout isn't purely baised in the actual 50's.

There were rifles in the 1950’s, largely WWII type or later variations of them. Such as the M1 Carbine and Garand, Grease Gun, M-14, Thompson, most of which were more common in 1950s USA.

And they wern't sensical, because sticking pure 50's weapons aren't fully cannonical. because Fallout had it's own weapons. Not having them didn't fit the setting.

I could agree that having the 50's weaqpons alongside the weapons defined in Falout could work to some extent (It did. The Mauser, a pure 50's weapon, made it into Fallout 1), you can't push the old guard of Fallout weaponary out thw window just to use pre 50's weaponary, now can you.

However, as the development of FO3 is being laid out before us the developers themselves are saying that 9mm and .45 caliber ammunition would be more in line with the modern day (minding that FO2 takes place in roughly 2200AD) weapons. Obviously the world takes on 1940's/2000 mixture with enough elements of both and plenty of the pulp sci-fi stuff tossed in for good measure.

Fallout is a fictional sci-fi future. The explanations of "true to era" and "true to present" simply dosen't make sense. You pathetic atempt to pretent to agree with this is quite transparent.

You’ve got your laser blasters, gauss guns (Rail-guns essentially, using magnetic systems to propel steel slugs...), plasma weapons, robots and super computers that take up a hell of a lot of room.

This is all part of the neo-50's pulp of Fallout. Futuristic weapons and bulky super-computers.

But as a further example of the FO fanatics that exist in this community... the devs talk about moving from 10mm and .44 magnum rounds, making the .45 and 9mm weapons more common ... the response? "That's not Fallout!!!!!!!!11!!!" Which is funny because, uh, yeah, it IS fallout. If the developers make 92F Berettas and Colt .45s commonplace, then that is Fallout.

Not in a sequil or prequil. If you violate something that was already set in stone, then you'd have to expect some chalenge from the most dedicated fans. If you can't explain it in a reasionable, logical maner, then you have no reason to change it at all.

Sawyer appears to be planning a location shift to cover his [Chucky] in that respect. He thinks we would swallow the replacing of weapons by shifting the setting to Utah, Calorado, or wherever the hell...

Let’s take Star Wars as an example: Episode 1 and all the midichlorian stuff? Lots of people say that's not Star Wars and that it sucks... yeah, it does suck. But sorry to tell you folks, it IS Star Wars. Why? Well, because Lucas says so. I'm not going to get into why I think Lucas is insane though, that’s a different post for a different time.

No, no, no; unless that bullshit was in the origional story, I do not think he could get away with that. I myself admit that I don't now much about Star Wars, and yet I'll admit that my overall feeling with the prequils and the origionals didn't click somwhere.

Fallout Tactics was made by a separate developer, so it's not Fallout in so far as to say FO3 is going to go "Oh yeah, the robots and shit in Chicago, that was totally a big deal and happened not long ago." It is fallout to the extent that it effectively keeps the feel and environment (Post-apocalyptic survival in the wasteland) while presenting a different story and location. I like to think of it as Microforte's vision of Fallout.

Microforte's bastard version of Fallout, that is:

1. The power armor looked vastaly different.
2. The Llamaclaws. The Ceathclaws didn't have hair in the origional Fallout; and in Fallout 2, they were inedtified as mutated Jackson's Camileions. Because a Camileion is a lizzard, it dosen't take a genius to assune a Deathclaw is also a lizzard.
3. Gas-powered vehicles; The Great war of 2077 was over scarce oid reserves. One would assume that gas was rare if the oil was rare, huh?

These are only three examples.

It's not canon, it’s expanded universe.

Yet the Fanatics cannot keep their rabid tendencies down long enough to realize that the game was good, it added some things that FO 1 and 2 would've benefited from (Crouching, anyone?) not mention added a nice spin to some of the graphics. Cause frankly, the metal armor and advanced power armor was some hot shit. Save for the bat ears on the advanced armor helmet... it was still cool.

a.The battle poses are irrelevant to the arguement.
b.Improving the graphic and engine aren;t a bad idea, but at the cost of cannon? Please.
c.Metal armor technicalt isn't uniform, but random junk cobbled together.
d.There wasn't and Advanced Power Armor in Tactics. The so-called Powha Harmor MK2 (supposed to be Hardened Power Armor) must be what you meant.
e.Those "bat ears" of which you speak are really antlers.

The presentation of FOT is great in most respects, dodgy in others (Hairy/intelligent deathclaws being one), but all together offers a neat little package that is good for what it is. A tactical strategy game set in the Fallout universe. Set in the fallout universe.

You try to pretent to agree, but it falls so, so short. The tactical part itself was flawed at best, due in no short part to poor implimentation.

It’s a lot like the Star Trek show Enterprise. It’s been torn apart by the rabid Trek fans because it isn’t faithful to the original Trek shows and movies. It messes up the timeline, etc, etc.

Dont' be supprised when people bitch about haveing their beloved World being [Chucky]-[Marksman]ed by their owners.

However if you look at things like how the ship is more high-tech than the Enterprise in the original series… hell, its general design is very similar to that of the late generation/deep space 9 ship designs than the ‘soda cans and a Frisbee’ design of the original series. But you make do with what works and what doesn’t.

"Good graphics do not make a good game" was a quote made by someone from the Order when we were discussing a game called "Civilazation 2: Test of Time". Please note that we aren;t talking about the origional Civ2, but a cheap remake. I [Elara]ed about it in a post, then the discussion began in the same thread.

Obviously, I wasn't expecting a perfect translation of the Fallout universe... but well, it would seem that most everyone did. Shame that...

But can you blame us? We wanted a proper, decent continuation of our World, and they [Marksman]ed that up. Shame, shame, shame...

What we got was a good interpretation of the Fallout setting from someone else. It’s Fallout through the eyes of Mircoforte. Does that make it perfect? No.

And we shouldn't care. Sure, "Let them get away with crimes against the setting, ok?" Genius advice!

However it’s not like they raped the franchise. Think about it.
The game played how? Well, it was turn based with an RT option. The turn based was well done. The SPECIAL system carries over. You’ve got your iguana on a stick. That’s not to say it would be called exactly that… but you’d imagine a lizard on a stick is pretty common. People have got to eat after all.

The RT imbalanced the SPECIAL system to great effect. Iguana-on-a-stick is not the whole of the Fallout universe. Great hyperbole!

You had your aimed shots, rad scorpions, crippled limbs, stim packs, drugs and all the armor you had in the original, plus that totally boss environmental armor which was crap in combat, but looked pretty cool.

Jeez, you think a few items and references alone can support the universe, when it is so much more...

Plus Nuka cola, raiders, mutants, ghouls, most everything translated pretty well. The weapons were creative, with a primarily modern day twist. The world was sufficiently post apocalyptic to follow through with the ‘nuked planet’ feeling.

Sure, sure; "The elements if the universe alone are the universe!", when in fact it is the way they come together that matters most.

You want to pick apart the story? That’s fine, seems like what all the fanatics like to do.
So the BoS was wary of outsiders, didn’t think they could handle some of the better technology right way. Understood. I can go with that too, I wouldn’t start handing out plasma rifles and rocket launchers to people who had just survived a nuclear war and were just clawing their way out of the rubble.

Nice try, considering the fact that the Brotherhood exiles kept the same name as the origional, and were a bunch of imperialist Nazi's (rather then the Techno-Medeval para-millitary orginization they really were), and that they managed to pull blimps out of their ass (only for then to be forgotten coneniently 40 years later), how would you respond to it being acceptable compared to the origional now, huh?

However it is very valid that a fully isolated organization like the BoS could run the risk of running out of scribes and paladins if they didn’t take in new recruits.

But being a bunch of isolated nutruals meanst this: You don't loose lives to costly warfare, thus you don't loose a lot of personel. Now why recruit a bunch of morons en masse when you didn't need to?

If you want to get picky it doesn’t say in either Fallout that the BoS is having internal problems, but it wouldn’t be surprising if there were a few dissenters. I don’t think the big airship was smart, but it’s not entirely outside the BoS’ technical capabilities.

Actualy, the did have internal conflict. In Fallout 1, Maxison was in despute with the Eldes, just as the Elders argued with each other non-stop.

In Fallout 2, the BoS was in decline, and panicking about the Enclave threat because they had Vertibirds.

As for naming conventions of the ‘New Brotherhood’ it wouldn’t be too far fetched if the paladins and scribes on this mission (If I recall, it was a mission to remove the dissenters quietly and not a “Get out and don’t come back!” type of thing.) were so loyal to the Brotherhood, so devoted and possibly blinded by said devotion that they would continue on under the BoS name, but instead would adopt their ideas to further their survival.

You'd really think so, wouldn't you. Feeling of betrail would drive them away from the bullhot dogma that blinded them so. Disillusionment would seperate them from the old order. Why keep the name, if it is a painful reminder of being stabbed in the back?

Consider the survivors of the crash… probably weren’t as many as there could have been. They would need new people to be able to do anything on a larger scale than “Hey, this is a nice village, we’re gonna move in now. Where’s the fridge?”

Sure, haggard survivors are in no position to anilate the raider scum, but the actual Brotherhjod is more concerned with defending technology then eleminate the enemy.

Besides, the real Brotherhod simply "drove the mutants away", not desired to persue them.

As for the vault 0, reavers and super robots? Eh, the robots were already established, and considering that the east coast holds a very large percentage of the industrial capacity for the USA it’s not surprising that the mechanics therein might be somewhat more advanced. Of course, I would’ve liked to have seen all the previous FO robots in there as well… the new ones were kind of required to fill out the game.

Nope. Actual Logic suggests that there are little technilogical differences between one part of a superpower and another, specificaly in the millitary-industrial complex. The "Regional Diffferences" excuse is bullshit.

I will adnit you almost seem to agree with this.

The amine bot's didn't fit alongside with 50's-pulp style robots.

Reavers were, eh, whatever. Another group that this time worshipped technology instead of hoarded it. Fine by me, not entirely impossible, though I think they probably should’ve worn more than leather and cloth wrappings.

No, the Reavers are a cheap ripoff of the BoS, raiders, and tribals.

Beastmasters felt like a total tack on type thing, but you don’t end up spending a lot of time dealing with them in the game anyway…

No!

1. Telepathy is moreso the paranormal then the general sci-fi.
2. Inelegent Deathclaws were only in Calofirnia, and only after the Enclave made 'em

As for Vault 0, I think that’s probably the biggest mistake they could’ve made. However, I think a ‘nexus vault’ would’ve been far more acceptable in terms of its size, technology and use. Creating the ‘master vault, or the ‘main control vault’ is a bit much considering things previously stated in FO1.

You must have meant Fo2.

Besides, the whole "Vault experiment" thing was flawed. It wouldn't make sense to have all Vaults at experiments, though some could be...

If it was a “Massive vault constructed to be the center of east coast post-war life.” It would’ve been better than “The one vault to rule them all.”

No it wouldn't. It would have been the same thing anyways...

At any rate, I think some people here were expecting too much from a game that wasn’t meant to be a straight translation of FO1 and 2. Like I said, it falls more into the realm of expanded universe than full on canon.

Not expanded universe, alternate universe!

Think a few more of you need to realize that.
It’s only official if Black Isle does it.

Not now. Back then, it was offical when the first game was in pre-alpha, but a sequil has to go along with was was already established in the first game.

 

[axelgreese]

Consider this…
IMI Desert Eagle – designed 1979
AK-112 5mm Assault rifle (taken straight from game) – doesn’t even exist! Earliest is the AK-47 from 1947 which I’ll let slide.
FN P90 – Fabrique Nationale, not Heckler and Koch, whoops. Developed in the 80’s
FN FAL – 1946, tolerable.
6 barrel chain guns? Seem to mirror the General Electric miniguns that were patented around 1970.

I don't really care to have this discussion but I will point out this.

The Desert Eagle is one of the few pop culture references made in Fallout,(You'll also notice a reference to Blade Runner in the .223 pistol, and a reference to Hard Boiled in the 10mm pisolt[or should I say revolver?hehe]) personally I prefer this type of reference to the shit in Fallout 2.

The AK-112 is an imaginary weapon, based on the AK, which, as you said, appeared in 1947 very much so fits the idea . (Oh and BTW, baseing imaginary weapons on real world weapons is much better than acutally having the real world weapons, ah la FO:T)

As for the FN P90 and the FN Fal, they are only avaliable in Fallout 2. (Fallout 2 wasn't as well crafted as Fallout 1)

Then the minigun, the point of the minigun is it's very large and bulky. And "Gatling guns" were avalilabe during Roosevelt's Rough Riders times (off hand I can't tell you the exact year they came about though). So I would say they're a bit of a fudge (I never liked them myself) but they certianly do fit.

 

[AaronHardy]

all i can say is that the ending vid when you don't help out the little dude floored me especialy when the bos guy run at the robots with akimbo mp5's