New Fallout Fan's First Playthrough Of Fallout 1/2

Another is the V.A.T.S's targeting system which I see much better then in the newer games, not only able to target their eyes/groin and afflicting blindness or knocking them unconscious respectively made me realize how much better the system could of been in the newer games.
Believe it or not... V.A.T.S. is a retronym; Bethesda recycled the name of a map location in Fallout's Mariposa military base.



*Notice Frame #1 of that video shows a Fallout 1 supermutant very close up, in profile.

It always bothered me that Bethesda's engine was totally capable of running the entire game realtime with the art style of the Fallout 1 rendered cutscenes... but they didn't do it. :(



They assigned meaning for each letter; Vault-Tec Assisted Targeting System. It does not exist in Fallout 1 & 2 as a Vault-Tec product, or as a tangible object at all. It is simply the UI for an aimed shot; and depending on character Traits, it's not even an option for all characters to have it.

Graphics: I genuinely love the art style of both games, any particular character having a talking head made em truly unique compared to the other npc's and they still look great to this day. The sprites also look quiet nice my favorites being the super mutants, when I first saw the mutants were able to one hand a minigun due to their mass strength was an amazing attention to detail (really made me wish the new mutants were more like this.)
Yeah.

You might like this:
(Skip a bit, to the 1 minute mark.)



I even enjoyed the overworld look of the map, and the towns/settlements themselves highlights were Lost Hill's, Arroyo, NCR, Vault City and Navarro, even in the random encounters areas they would mostly match with the corresponding environment which again is a nice attention to detail.
This detail was lost in Fallout 2 IIRC. I hope you visited the coast in Fallout 1; special map with the Ocean on it.
 
Last edited:
An FPS is an inherently weaker format for RPG combat because in an isometric a pacifist non-combatant character literally couldn't fight even if they wanted to. Whereas in an FPS RPG every character is one decision away from being a player controlled John Wick.
True. That's mostly why I like Fallout 2 more than the newer games, but I'd still probably enjoy Oblivion with guns combat wise more, than a pretty wonky and dated turn based combat system that's really slow, mostly just because of the speed of combat.

Nothing really beats Baldur's Gate for me tho, no game post BG has had the strategic depth and maneuverability that those games gave me, not the mention, combat was usually fast, as to not waste my time waiting for 30 fucking characters to take 1 turn.

But I guess it's a highly subjective thing lol.
 
Fallout was envisioned (before development) as a G.U.R.P.S. simulator. They lost the IP license, so they made their own, but the game was essentially the one they had in mind after three years of working on it.
I'm aware of this.


they simply replaced it with the combat from Oblivion; about as far from appropriate as can be imagined.
Probably why I find it more fun. Fallout combat wise was a slow mess that basically just felt like a chore to get through in order to get to the next dialogue sequence or exploration, whereas Fallout 3 was significantly more tolerable, and probably more fun, relatively speaking.

As to which is better job, or more fun—that's up to the player preference of course.
Well of course, that's why I made sure to keep it entirely subjective, you can definitely make an argument for the OGs being better, I just won't agree.
 
The curious detail about turn based combat, is that the player always has the knowledge of every action that came before theirs. Ideally this influences their course of action.

*This is actually lost on older games that play too fast on modern systems. The old SSI Gold Box games could play well enough on later Pentiums despite being written for 8086 machines, but once the player's combat turn ended—everything flicked instantly into a new position; blink of the eye, and every turn for all (possibly dozens) of enemies happened at once, and the player had no idea what transpired. Their own characters could reappear instantly dead. Hence it was unplayable.

Fallout does not play too fast to see what occurs, but I would not (myself) play the game with combat sped up.... but then I would intentionally replay the Regulator fight, and liked starting three way wars in New Reno.
icon_twisted.gif


Probably why I find it more fun.
I liked Oblivion's combat too, just not for a Fallout sequel, of course.

I had high hopes for FO3 when I bought the Oblivion CE (because I had just learned of them buying the IP, and announcing FO3). It never once occurred to me that they would clone Oblivion as their Fallout sequel. I've read that the under the hood their FO3 world is still called Tamriel in the files.

__
 
Last edited:
An FPS is an inherently weaker format for RPG combat because in an isometric a pacifist non-combatant character literally couldn't fight even if they wanted to. Whereas in an FPS RPG every character is one decision away from being a player controlled John Wick.

You could offset this by doing things like making reloading speed, recoil control, bullet spread et cetera heavily dependant on weapon skill but it's still not quite the same.
I guess you could use Morrowind combat system. If your weapon skill is low, you will miss a lot. Like a real RPG should be. But then you get all the people complaining about seeing the bullets go through the enemies and it still missed.

You could just make it so that in Fallout, the bullets that do not hit the enemy would actually miss the enemy model, but you would still get people complaining that the enemy was right dead center on the sights and you missed. :lol:

There's no winning this. >_>
 
Superhot; with APs instead of free movement; Bethesda's V.A.T.S.

Not perfect, not even approaching ideal IMO, but much better and closer to the proper series combat than what we got.

 
Last edited:
Back
Top