BOS_Warlord
First time out of the vault
I never played fallout 1 or 2, or BOS. But what would you think if Bethesda did a remake of them in the style of 3 or NV
Questions for the fans of the old games
- Thread starter BOS_Warlord
- Start date
First time out of the vault
Joelzania
Look, Ma! Two Heads!
They'd be shit.
There's just no way. The world is too large, the NPCs too many, the combat balanced entirely differently. One deathclaw was supposed to make you crap your pants in the first Fallout. Power Armor made you like unto a God, and it did the same to your enemies-- no taking out Enclave soldiers with a hunting rifle in the Core region, sorry. High-radiation areas were an actual danger. These things just don't translate into Bethesda's engine.
What yamu said. Plus there'd be no reason at all for them to do it. They'd have to put a huge amount of work into a product that would alienate the fans of the old games by overhauling and rebalancing the games to suit the new engine, as well as the fans of the new games whom have come t. Nobody would win.
BOS_Warlord
First time out of the vault
I also find alot of fans of 1 and 2 despise 3, but seem more tolerant of NV, I personally prefer new vegas over 3, seems more in depth. And yeah Radiation in Fallout 3 does nothing, however in Searchlight in NV i died of rad poisoning in the fire station
Knight Captain Kerr
Still Mildly Glowing
Why do that when you can just play Fallout 1, 2 and Tactics?
They are pretty cheap and pretty easy to run. I would rather they make a new game.
They are pretty cheap and pretty easy to run. I would rather they make a new game.
Moonrabbit
First time out of the vault
If it were possible to recreate FO1 and 2 with the graphics alone of FO3, nothing else changed and nothing left out... It would be incredible. But also impossible. Nobody is going to invest that kind of money into a project like that. It would take forever to produce and probably be abandon somewhere along the way.
Seriously, FO2 is incredible as is. I just beat FO3 and started a new character, but I'd almost rather start a game of FO2.
I've made countless characters in the 12 years I've been playing it. Even before downloading the Killap restoration pack, I was discovering new things I hadn't been able to access with other characters.
I spent 106 hours on FO3, I could have done it in less.
Last time I played FO2 with the restoration pack, I spent 63 hours on it and could have spent longer.(I don't think the EPA had been added in at that point, either.)
The experience is much richer, it's not spread thin.
You can have unique experiences, too. It feels special when you do something like take a screenshot of the recently liberated Navarro airbase, surrounded by every NPC companion that you know of.
I suggest playing at least part way through with a well-rounded, combat oriented character to get the feel of it, then start over with a specialized, high charisma/speech and or high intelligence/science character so you can get the full story, which has far more depth and information than FO3.
If you have a netbook, throw it on there. I usually start a new game before I travel, so I have something to do on the flight, then get sucked back into it.
I love the story and characters in FO1, but I don't find myself wanting to go back to it as often. 2 has enough back story in it that you don't NEEED to play the first one first.
Seriously, FO2 is incredible as is. I just beat FO3 and started a new character, but I'd almost rather start a game of FO2.
I've made countless characters in the 12 years I've been playing it. Even before downloading the Killap restoration pack, I was discovering new things I hadn't been able to access with other characters.
I spent 106 hours on FO3, I could have done it in less.
Last time I played FO2 with the restoration pack, I spent 63 hours on it and could have spent longer.(I don't think the EPA had been added in at that point, either.)
The experience is much richer, it's not spread thin.
You can have unique experiences, too. It feels special when you do something like take a screenshot of the recently liberated Navarro airbase, surrounded by every NPC companion that you know of.
I suggest playing at least part way through with a well-rounded, combat oriented character to get the feel of it, then start over with a specialized, high charisma/speech and or high intelligence/science character so you can get the full story, which has far more depth and information than FO3.
If you have a netbook, throw it on there. I usually start a new game before I travel, so I have something to do on the flight, then get sucked back into it.
I love the story and characters in FO1, but I don't find myself wanting to go back to it as often. 2 has enough back story in it that you don't NEEED to play the first one first.
Moonrabbit
First time out of the vault
I think there's some merit is updated graphics. I enjoy in FO3 how you can look at the ground, littered with junk, and spot items that could easily be overlooked, where in FO2 it either stands out like a sore thumb or if it's behind something you need to move the mouse around until it highlights(Unless you have the perk.) There were points when I could see a street level view as being useful, if only for assessing combat situations, or examining areas.
Also, while I have an imagination and I know how to use it, I like spotting small design details, like the spaghetti strainer breast cups on the female raiders.
I agree, it would definitely change the game somewhat, but the short of it is that if companies were putting FO2 levels of content into games with graphics like FO3, nobody would be complaining.
Also, while I have an imagination and I know how to use it, I like spotting small design details, like the spaghetti strainer breast cups on the female raiders.
I agree, it would definitely change the game somewhat, but the short of it is that if companies were putting FO2 levels of content into games with graphics like FO3, nobody would be complaining.
EvilBastrd
First time out of the vault
Yamu said:
I don't understand when people slurp on something by making a ridiculous statement "can't kill Enclave with no durp durp murp hunting rifle durp". No shit.
But unless you trying to short cut the game, you won't run into Enclave with a hunting rifle or even sniper rifle as your best weapon. It will be a gauss rifle, and you will be minutes away from APA and a pulse rifle.
And a gauss rifle to the eyes turns Enclave into a bloody shitpile. A pulse rifle turns them into dust.
It is hardly hard. Unless you are trying to shortcut and fail a outdoorsman roll.
Moonrabbit said:
I would walk into the forest and hang myself...complaining all the way. Just leave the oldies alone, and don't even think about using Bethesda's crappy engine to make FPS versions. FO3 aesthetics are horrible, compared to the two oldies.
T
TorontoReign
Guest
.Pixote. said:
Obviously you don't know how "immersive" a first person view can be...
TorontRayne said:Obviously you don't know how "immersive" a first person view can be...
If I need a immersive first person view, I'll go for a walk down the street.
EvilBastrd said:
Sorry, maybe I wasn't clear enough in making my point: In Fallout 3, you CAN kill an Enclave soldier with a single shot from an early-game weapon. Rather easily. Or beat a group of thugs with flamers and sniper rifles using nothing but a 10mm pistol and your pajamas. Or emerge from your Vault, immediately set out into the wasteland to find a Super Mutant, and then beat its head in with a tire iron. The first two Fallouts aren't very difficult games once you get the hang of them, but you can't traipse through them from start to finish with little to no fear of death. Lumping them in with the Bethsoft-era Fallouts and calling them all easy is kind of like lumping Dennis the Menace in with Charles Manson and calling them both troublemakers.
EvilBastrd
First time out of the vault
Yamu said:
Well, then I think you should give FO2 another play.
Because I just 1 shot killed the Navarro base commander with .44 DE in the eyes. Fairly early weapon. Only 109% small guns. I then 1 shot killed the quartermaster with the red ryder bb gun. And finished off the base with said weapon.
There is a learning curve for all games. Am I saying FO3 is hard? Hell no.
But to say you can't kill Enclave with pussy weapons is bullshit. I would test with laser and plasma pistol but this particular character saved at Navarro had crap ew skill. If you start FO2 with good Int and above avg PE and tag SG you could be pulling off eye shots consistently by level 2.
And if you count Vault suit as pajamas, I can wipe out the rig in those, too.
Sure, they mucked up armor in FO3. NV somewhat fixed. But no eye shots in either.
I died a lot when learning FO3. Just like FO1. But once you master the style of the any game, it is easy. Just seemed to me you kinda comparing a master of FO3 and ease of playing and saying FO1 or 2 was tougher. I disagree and say a master is a master.