I recently played the classics for the first time...

Boggle ( Vel )

Boggle ( Vel )

First time out of the vault
First off, Fallout 3 was the first Fallout game I ever had the chance of playing. It was very magical and awed me back when I first played it, I never understood why it was called Fallout 3 though until I did research and found the first few games. I had owned them for 4 years now ( I had bought them for the sake of owning them ), and only recently after losing my second Fallout 4 character to some stupid game breaking bug I decided to take a look.

Wow. These games are absolutely fantastic, coming from Fallout 4 anyway Fallout 2 kicked my ass. The quests, the locales, the absolutely ridiculous stuff in the game that they couldn't possibly get away with ( During a shootout in new reno a kid got caught in the crossfire by one of the bodyguards, was more than a little shocking to watch him blown to bits. ) Other details too, such as all the people in New Reno making fun of my power armor, or the fact that some of the NPC's would just run away from me if I approached them in Power Armor. That's another thing too, it was damn exciting that Power Armor wasn't littered everywhere, when I finally got everyone in my party in a suit of it, it felt amazing. Not to mention it most certainly felt more powerful than anything.

I also played Fallout 1, much shorter, much easier too, I got the sniper perk with a turbo plasma rifle though so that might be why anyway. Was interesting to meet the original Brotherhood.

I still haven't touched tactics ( Don't know if I will, I've had more problems trying to run it than anything ). Mostly resolution problems, I will have to research more into that I guess. I really enjoyed my time with 1&2 though, they were some very nice treats. I still can't hate Fallout 3, it introduced me to the series and set the foundation for New Vegas. I can admit that it's story is horrible, that Vault 87 is stupid, that the continued existence of the Enclave is silly, but I can't deny that it was my gateway into the series.

Anyways, I'm probably sticking around. I really enjoyed 1&2 ( Playing through 2 with the restoration pack currently ), I just thought I'd share my experience with these two games.
 
I had the opposite experience with Fallout 1 and 2 in terms of first play through difficulty. I found Fallout 2 easier in comparison. On later play throughs it inverted, but I believe that has a lot to do with being shorter (and thus, making myself able to learn more of the quirks of the game and story).
 
Fallout 2 kicked my ass until I learned the tactic of kiting, then the Temple of Trials became a breeze when I could punch an ant or scorpion while they wasted their turns trying to reach me.
I did find Fallout 1 easier for some reason, I remember in my last run I somehow one shotted the Lieutenant thanks to the turbo plasma rifle, a weak spot shot, and I think the criticals perk. I never tend to reach a high enough level to get the sniper perk though unfortunately.
 
Fallout 1 was easier for me, mainly cause Fallout 2 had too many random encounters. It was a bit ridiculous that one mile away from some well armed raiders was a tribal raiding group, and then two miles away there were geckos. Not to forget the vast amount of fucking dogs everywhere.
 
Dr Fallout said:
Fallout 1 was easier for me, mainly cause Fallout 2 had too many random encounters. It was a bit ridiculous that one mile away from some well armed raiders was a tribal raiding group, and then two miles away there were geckos. Not to forget the vast amount of fucking dogs everywhere.
Click to expand...
I encountered WAY more fire gecko encounters as well as raider encounters. It's still better then my experience from Fallout 4 where there were ghouls next door to mutants next door to raiders, literally all next door to each other.
 
Yes, it's amazing how much more complex and reactive (and therefore, immersive) the world is in Fallout 1 and 2 compared to the later entries in the series. Technology has advanced, but world building, role playing (in sense of stat and perk selection), story telling, and the mechanics of meaningful choice have all seriously regressed.

I also think combat is much smoother in the originals as well; the new games are just poor man's shooters where the only xombat strategy that is rewarded is button mashing and spamming stims.
 
I'm like that, too. Fallout 2 was my strongest exception. Fallout 1, quite a bit of time between playing 2 and 1. I believe one or two full years.
 
Is it bad if I say that I really don't care about the originals? They have great stories, dialogue and choice/consequences, but I find the gameplay and aesthetic (though not the technical fidelity) to be really clunky and poor. It's a personal disdain of turn-based RPGs I suppose, but still... New Vegas is really a far superior game.
 
Ben Soto said:
Is it bad if I say that I really don't care about the originals? They have great stories, dialogue and choice/consequences, but I find the gameplay and aesthetic (though not the technical fidelity) to be really clunky and poor. It's a personal disdain of turn-based RPGs I suppose, but still... New Vegas is really a far superior game.
Click to expand...

You'll notice that while everyone is here for the fantastic writing and C&C, there's still a civil war worthy debate between the side of the isometric turn-based classic styled supporters and the more modern, action-oriented first/third person styled supporters. Any attempt to discuss this tends to spiral the thread down into a long argument. So don't be concerned - there's no general consensus on this yet, I assume.

It's never bad to dislike anything. Everyone has their own opinions. I somewhat agree with you, to an extent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top