G
Guest
Guest
thanx for your thoughts i really find them to be funny
P
Phad_Vickers
Guest
Okay, I'll bite.
What is wrong with Vault0? Personally, I don't really like Fallout Tactics... I like RPGs- but that doesn't mean that FOT isn't a bad game.
IIRC, and spoilers ahead for people not familiar with the end of FO1 and FO2...
1) The Fallouts are buggy too...even after their patches. Beware of your car in Fallout2...
2) It specifically says that on Fallout's website that no new patches will ever come out for the RPGs. They each only had a couple at most...less that FOT
3) Examples
4) It's not JA2. Go play it then. You want a tatical multiplayer with the fallout system, play FOT. Not all games have to be the same for Multiplayer...you have both, right? Something called variety
5) A wolf and a coyote are both canines, evolved differently. Deathclaws in Chicago could be different then the ones in CA
6) Fallout2 had ones that were as smart as humans, and could talk...dispite their lack (assuming) of vocal cords. It makes just as much sense as the ones in Fallout2
7) There were PSI and telepaths in Fallout1
8)
The vaults were created by the U.S government to not just save people from the war, but to experiment on the people in various conditions... some had their weapon rooms unlocked, others were all male except for a female etc. Vault 13 just happened to be the one that was to remained closed until the Enclave/U.S government needed unradiated human genetic stock...
Why is it too farfetched to have the U.S military locked away in a 'special' vault to 'save' the vaults once the war is over. The country would have certain expectations...the best and brightest saved for the future... so if at all else, Vault 0 could have just been a vault to appease the country while the war was coming.
On the BrotherHood of Steel, I recall reading that they were originally a military that..were saved by a barracks? Bunker? Fallout1 and 2 never really go into the specifics of where the Brotherhood came from...not really deep anyway, and a military being protected by a 'barrack', i.e vault isn't too far of a stretch in my mind.
Not to mention that if the military was not in the vault to begin with...their survival rates would have been slim to nothing. The only people that survived the war was the U.S government, people on a nuclear sub, and people from the Vaults... as far as California is concerned anyway...
9) They have to look like they're from Forbidden planet now? Fallout has to model itself off of something else? As for the bladerunner line...well, ever look at the .233 handgun recently?
10) Do tell...
What is wrong with Vault0? Personally, I don't really like Fallout Tactics... I like RPGs- but that doesn't mean that FOT isn't a bad game.
IIRC, and spoilers ahead for people not familiar with the end of FO1 and FO2...
1) The Fallouts are buggy too...even after their patches. Beware of your car in Fallout2...
2) It specifically says that on Fallout's website that no new patches will ever come out for the RPGs. They each only had a couple at most...less that FOT
3) Examples
4) It's not JA2. Go play it then. You want a tatical multiplayer with the fallout system, play FOT. Not all games have to be the same for Multiplayer...you have both, right? Something called variety
5) A wolf and a coyote are both canines, evolved differently. Deathclaws in Chicago could be different then the ones in CA
6) Fallout2 had ones that were as smart as humans, and could talk...dispite their lack (assuming) of vocal cords. It makes just as much sense as the ones in Fallout2
7) There were PSI and telepaths in Fallout1
8)
The vaults were created by the U.S government to not just save people from the war, but to experiment on the people in various conditions... some had their weapon rooms unlocked, others were all male except for a female etc. Vault 13 just happened to be the one that was to remained closed until the Enclave/U.S government needed unradiated human genetic stock...
Why is it too farfetched to have the U.S military locked away in a 'special' vault to 'save' the vaults once the war is over. The country would have certain expectations...the best and brightest saved for the future... so if at all else, Vault 0 could have just been a vault to appease the country while the war was coming.
On the BrotherHood of Steel, I recall reading that they were originally a military that..were saved by a barracks? Bunker? Fallout1 and 2 never really go into the specifics of where the Brotherhood came from...not really deep anyway, and a military being protected by a 'barrack', i.e vault isn't too far of a stretch in my mind.
Not to mention that if the military was not in the vault to begin with...their survival rates would have been slim to nothing. The only people that survived the war was the U.S government, people on a nuclear sub, and people from the Vaults... as far as California is concerned anyway...
9) They have to look like they're from Forbidden planet now? Fallout has to model itself off of something else? As for the bladerunner line...well, ever look at the .233 handgun recently?
10) Do tell...
[font size=1" color="#FF0000]LAST EDITED ON Dec-02-02 AT 11:55PM (GMT)[p]> What is wrong with
>Vault0?
Plenty, because it doesn't fit into the setting and history that was set down before.
> 1) The Fallouts are
>buggy too...even after their patches.
> Beware of your car
>in Fallout2...
Fallout 2 was a hatchet job. Fallout 1 is stable and at least finished. FOT still has perks that don't work that can still be selected. No documentation about those broken perks are anywhere in the patch files or distributed files that I'm aware of (could be wrong). Shitty, isn't it?
> 2) It specifically says
>that on Fallout's website that
>no new patches will ever
>come out for the RPGs.
> They each only had
>a couple at most...less that
>FOT
Just because the others might have problems, doesn't excuse FOT from being patched half-ass. In fact, this is what's biting Interplay in the ass, is the crappy support and games that haven't been through a QA dept.
> 3) Examples
Too many to name, and they should be really obvious.
> 4) It's not JA2.
> Go play it then.
> You want a
>tatical multiplayer with the fallout
>system, play FOT. Not
>all games have to be
>the same for Multiplayer...you have
>both, right? Something called
>variety
No shit it's not JA2. But the developers said it would be like JA2 with the Fallout setting. Unfortunately, it's also a poor tactical game, given the amount of bugs and it's not really finished. Also, the multiplayer is imbalanced as hell, given that restrictions need to be introduced, drugs imbalance the hell out of things, and some weapons make most others quite useless in comparison without sonme return balance.
That's poor.
> 5) A wolf and
>a coyote are both canines,
>evolved differently. Deathclaws in
>Chicago could be different then
>the ones in CA
Okay, just get a damn clue about how DeathClaws were made. NOW. It seems quite obvious you haven't played Fallout and Fallout 2.
> 6) Fallout2 had ones
>that were as smart as
>humans, and could talk...dispite their
>lack (assuming) of vocal cords.
> It makes just as
>much sense as the ones
>in Fallout2
Go play Fallout 2 and get a clue about this. No, it doesn't make sense that the ones in FOT could talk, considering FOT was set before Fo2, and the reason they could talk is rather contrived, given the Beastlords.
> 7) There were PSI
>and telepaths in Fallout1
Again, try to play Fallout 1 with your memory on. I doubt that the Beastlords had assimilated a number of people into themselves. Oops, forgot that, hm?
Also, the Hubologists were something stupid BIS put in.
> Why is it too
>farfetched to have the U.S
>military locked away in a
>'special' vault to 'save' the
>vaults once the war is
>over. The country would
>have certain expectations...the best and
>brightest saved for the future...
>so if at all else,
>Vault 0 could have just
>been a vault to appease
>the country while the war
>was coming.
You might want to play Fallout and Fallout 2 again, and try talking to a few more people, and doing a bit more background digging in certain subjects.
> On the BrotherHood of
>Steel, I recall reading that
>they were originally a military
>that..were saved by a barracks?
>Bunker? Fallout1 and 2
>never really go into the
>specifics of where the Brotherhood
>came from...not really deep anyway,
>and a military being protected
>by a 'barrack', i.e vault
>isn't too far of a
>stretch in my mind.
>
>Not to mention that if the
>military was not in the
>vault to begin with...their survival
>rates would have been slim
>to nothing. The only
>people that survived the war
>was the U.S government, people
>on a nuclear sub, and
>people from the Vaults... as
>far as California is concerned
>anyway...
>
The above makes it almost painfully obvious that you haven't played Fallout and Fallout 2.
> 9) They have to
>look like they're from Forbidden
>planet now? Fallout has
>to model itself off of
>something else?
That was from the time-frame when the robots were designed from. The boxies, the neo-boxies, the Robbies, etc. Do you have a clue about the setting, or are you just acting as an apologist?
>As for
>the bladerunner line...well, ever look
>at the .233 handgun recently?
Which was a modified from a rifle, and was an easter egg of sorts. Intended to be special and rare, but was thrown in ad nauseum into Fallout 2.
That doesn't excuse that the robots were supposed to be taken from 40's-60's sci-fi comic books and movies.
>
> 10) Do tell...
Nah. I'll just suggest you go out and buy the dual-jewel case of Fallout and Fallout 2, play in some way that allows you to discover the setting, and then if you post again, you have some idea about the setting.
>Vault0?
Plenty, because it doesn't fit into the setting and history that was set down before.
> 1) The Fallouts are
>buggy too...even after their patches.
> Beware of your car
>in Fallout2...
Fallout 2 was a hatchet job. Fallout 1 is stable and at least finished. FOT still has perks that don't work that can still be selected. No documentation about those broken perks are anywhere in the patch files or distributed files that I'm aware of (could be wrong). Shitty, isn't it?
> 2) It specifically says
>that on Fallout's website that
>no new patches will ever
>come out for the RPGs.
> They each only had
>a couple at most...less that
>FOT
Just because the others might have problems, doesn't excuse FOT from being patched half-ass. In fact, this is what's biting Interplay in the ass, is the crappy support and games that haven't been through a QA dept.
> 3) Examples
Too many to name, and they should be really obvious.
> 4) It's not JA2.
> Go play it then.
> You want a
>tatical multiplayer with the fallout
>system, play FOT. Not
>all games have to be
>the same for Multiplayer...you have
>both, right? Something called
>variety
No shit it's not JA2. But the developers said it would be like JA2 with the Fallout setting. Unfortunately, it's also a poor tactical game, given the amount of bugs and it's not really finished. Also, the multiplayer is imbalanced as hell, given that restrictions need to be introduced, drugs imbalance the hell out of things, and some weapons make most others quite useless in comparison without sonme return balance.
That's poor.
> 5) A wolf and
>a coyote are both canines,
>evolved differently. Deathclaws in
>Chicago could be different then
>the ones in CA
Okay, just get a damn clue about how DeathClaws were made. NOW. It seems quite obvious you haven't played Fallout and Fallout 2.
> 6) Fallout2 had ones
>that were as smart as
>humans, and could talk...dispite their
>lack (assuming) of vocal cords.
> It makes just as
>much sense as the ones
>in Fallout2
Go play Fallout 2 and get a clue about this. No, it doesn't make sense that the ones in FOT could talk, considering FOT was set before Fo2, and the reason they could talk is rather contrived, given the Beastlords.
> 7) There were PSI
>and telepaths in Fallout1
Again, try to play Fallout 1 with your memory on. I doubt that the Beastlords had assimilated a number of people into themselves. Oops, forgot that, hm?
Also, the Hubologists were something stupid BIS put in.
> Why is it too
>farfetched to have the U.S
>military locked away in a
>'special' vault to 'save' the
>vaults once the war is
>over. The country would
>have certain expectations...the best and
>brightest saved for the future...
>so if at all else,
>Vault 0 could have just
>been a vault to appease
>the country while the war
>was coming.
You might want to play Fallout and Fallout 2 again, and try talking to a few more people, and doing a bit more background digging in certain subjects.
> On the BrotherHood of
>Steel, I recall reading that
>they were originally a military
>that..were saved by a barracks?
>Bunker? Fallout1 and 2
>never really go into the
>specifics of where the Brotherhood
>came from...not really deep anyway,
>and a military being protected
>by a 'barrack', i.e vault
>isn't too far of a
>stretch in my mind.
>
>Not to mention that if the
>military was not in the
>vault to begin with...their survival
>rates would have been slim
>to nothing. The only
>people that survived the war
>was the U.S government, people
>on a nuclear sub, and
>people from the Vaults... as
>far as California is concerned
>anyway...
>
The above makes it almost painfully obvious that you haven't played Fallout and Fallout 2.
> 9) They have to
>look like they're from Forbidden
>planet now? Fallout has
>to model itself off of
>something else?
That was from the time-frame when the robots were designed from. The boxies, the neo-boxies, the Robbies, etc. Do you have a clue about the setting, or are you just acting as an apologist?
>As for
>the bladerunner line...well, ever look
>at the .233 handgun recently?
Which was a modified from a rifle, and was an easter egg of sorts. Intended to be special and rare, but was thrown in ad nauseum into Fallout 2.
That doesn't excuse that the robots were supposed to be taken from 40's-60's sci-fi comic books and movies.
>
> 10) Do tell...
Nah. I'll just suggest you go out and buy the dual-jewel case of Fallout and Fallout 2, play in some way that allows you to discover the setting, and then if you post again, you have some idea about the setting.
Saint_Proverbius
Vault Senior Citizen
> 5) A wolf and a coyote are both canines,
> evolved differently. Deathclaws in Chicago
> could be different then the ones in CA
You might have a point if a coyote was a reptile.
> evolved differently. Deathclaws in Chicago
> could be different then the ones in CA
You might have a point if a coyote was a reptile.
P
Phad_Vickers
Guest
*Chuckle*
Is that your only defense? Go play the game again?
I just went through Fallout 2- and I stated what I learned from that game- and to let you know, I am still making my way through Fallout1- while I'm not the fanatic that has played the game a dozen times through, that does not mean that my questions on the matter are any less valid then another's. Hell, you're probably not even reading this anymore.
>Plenty, because it doesn't fit into the setting and history that was set down before.<
And since when did Fallout have such a specified History? The games don't have official manuals out for stories- this isn't a PnP game, or a series of books like Tolkien's collection where there are many documents that were officially released as history.
>Fallout 2 was a hatchet job. Fallout 1 is stable and at least finished. FOT still has perks that don't work that can still be selected. No documentation about those broken perks are anywhere in the patch files or distributed files that I'm aware of (could be wrong). Shitty, isn't it?<
Not any more than purchasing the other games out there that have multiple bugs in them. A buggy game has nothing to do with it's content.
>Just because the others might have problems, doesn't excuse FOT from being patched half-ass. In fact, this is what's biting Interplay in the ass, is the crappy support and games that haven't been through a QA dept.<
Your point is? None of the Fallouts are perfect- all could use more support.
>Too many to name, and they should be really obvious.<
Lovely. Here goes your suporiority approach again.
>No shit it's not JA2. But the developers said it would be like JA2 with the Fallout setting. Unfortunately, it's also a poor tactical game, given the amount of bugs and it's not really finished. Also, the multiplayer is imbalanced as hell, given that restrictions need to be introduced, drugs imbalance the hell out of things, and some weapons make most others quite useless in comparison without sonme return balance.<
And it's been compared to JA2. It's similiar, with a Fallout setting...what you want JA2 with Fallout on the cover instead? We already talked about the bugs, as for Multiplayer, you have access to drugs just as much as the other person- that's fair to me. Some weapons will always be stronger than others- you're suggesting a 10mm pistol should be equal to a Vindicator?
>Okay, just get a damn clue about how DeathClaws were made. NOW. It seems quite obvious you haven't played Fallout and Fallout 2.<
Okay, then, point out why this doesn't work hm? Deathclaws aren't even real. Yes, the old ones are from FEV and radiation, and no one 'really' knows where they came from except for the smart ones- that were fed Mentats and had their intelligence improved by the Enclave to become better killing machines. Now, why doesn't this work hm? One little difference, such as location can produce different results...
>Go play Fallout 2 and get a clue about this. No, it doesn't make sense that the ones in FOT could talk, considering FOT was set before Fo2, and the reason they could talk is rather contrived, given the Beastlords<
They could have gained the english language from the telepathy they shared with the above mentioned beastlords. Or gained intelligence. The Enclave doesn't have to be the only ones who can make the Deathclaws smarter- especially when they didn't give the Deathclaws vocal cords... *cough*
>Again, try to play Fallout 1 with your memory on. I doubt that the Beastlords had assimilated a number of people into themselves. Oops, forgot that, hm?
Also, the Hubologists were something stupid BIS put in.<
The fact that people were capable of PSI in Fallout1 is all that's needed- hell, even if there wasn't- that does not rule out why there can not be telepaths that obtained powers to controls 'beasts' in other parts of the country
>The above makes it almost painfully obvious that you haven't played Fallout and Fallout 2.<
Played Fallout1, heading for the Glow and completed Fallout2- I still haven't come across anything contradicting
the posibility that they could have started from a vault...
>That was from the time-frame when the robots were designed from. The boxies, the neo-boxies, the Robbies, etc. Do you have a clue about the setting, or are you just acting as an apologist?<
No, I'm playing Devil's advocate actually. I don't like FOT, as already stated- But I don't see why it has to endure such sheer condemnation as 'skullfuck'ing Fallout's setting.
>Which was a modified from a rifle, and was an easter egg of sorts. Intended to be special and rare, but was thrown in ad nauseum into Fallout 2.
That doesn't excuse that the robots were supposed to be taken from 40's-60's sci-fi comic books and movies.<
How the hell do you know how all of the robots are supposed to look like, let alone what setting they're in? Just because FOT takes place in the same universe, does not mean they can't add new things- it's how you keep something fresh. A gun's graphic from BladeRunner is already in there, so they add some robots... HOW is this such a bad thing?
>Nah. I'll just suggest you go out and buy the dual-jewel case of Fallout and Fallout 2, play in some way that allows you to discover the setting, and then if you post again, you have some idea about the setting.<
Already done. Had the games from some time now, before FOT in fact. A post nuclear setting- where just about all life on earth was destroyed in a two hour, WWIII over resources in the 21st Century. It doesn't matter who fired first, just that the world ended. That's the main, general setting...for example there are Canadians in the Fallout Universe- but no mention of Vaults being up there...so how they survived...
The majority of the survivors of the United States were saved by underground Vaults that had a secretive
goal as well, to be experiments to see what would happen-
Fallout 1- Grey falls into a container of FEV that was being experimented on by the U.S government before the war to create super soliders- he tries to perfect the human race by forcing all humans to evolve with FEV into mutants...
Fallout 2-U.S Government, or Enclave's recent tampering with their 'virus' before the war, FEV ,could destroy the mutants...and then non-radiated humans could repopulate the earth.
Fallout Tactics- Takes place between 1 and 2, with a splinter group of the BOS and eventually looks like has them fight the main unit by the end- not sure, I don't really like the game much *G* DISPITE that, I still don't see how it hurts the whole universe. Fallout 1 and 2 are parts of the universe...so is Fallout Tactics. Nothing says that Tactics has to stick exactly to the RPGs- especially when it takes in a different place of the U.S.
You might actually want to explain why my views don't work...except telling me to go play the games again- your views, your opinions and readings of what happened in the game are not the only valid ones you know...
Is that your only defense? Go play the game again?
I just went through Fallout 2- and I stated what I learned from that game- and to let you know, I am still making my way through Fallout1- while I'm not the fanatic that has played the game a dozen times through, that does not mean that my questions on the matter are any less valid then another's. Hell, you're probably not even reading this anymore.
>Plenty, because it doesn't fit into the setting and history that was set down before.<
And since when did Fallout have such a specified History? The games don't have official manuals out for stories- this isn't a PnP game, or a series of books like Tolkien's collection where there are many documents that were officially released as history.
>Fallout 2 was a hatchet job. Fallout 1 is stable and at least finished. FOT still has perks that don't work that can still be selected. No documentation about those broken perks are anywhere in the patch files or distributed files that I'm aware of (could be wrong). Shitty, isn't it?<
Not any more than purchasing the other games out there that have multiple bugs in them. A buggy game has nothing to do with it's content.
>Just because the others might have problems, doesn't excuse FOT from being patched half-ass. In fact, this is what's biting Interplay in the ass, is the crappy support and games that haven't been through a QA dept.<
Your point is? None of the Fallouts are perfect- all could use more support.
>Too many to name, and they should be really obvious.<
Lovely. Here goes your suporiority approach again.
>No shit it's not JA2. But the developers said it would be like JA2 with the Fallout setting. Unfortunately, it's also a poor tactical game, given the amount of bugs and it's not really finished. Also, the multiplayer is imbalanced as hell, given that restrictions need to be introduced, drugs imbalance the hell out of things, and some weapons make most others quite useless in comparison without sonme return balance.<
And it's been compared to JA2. It's similiar, with a Fallout setting...what you want JA2 with Fallout on the cover instead? We already talked about the bugs, as for Multiplayer, you have access to drugs just as much as the other person- that's fair to me. Some weapons will always be stronger than others- you're suggesting a 10mm pistol should be equal to a Vindicator?
>Okay, just get a damn clue about how DeathClaws were made. NOW. It seems quite obvious you haven't played Fallout and Fallout 2.<
Okay, then, point out why this doesn't work hm? Deathclaws aren't even real. Yes, the old ones are from FEV and radiation, and no one 'really' knows where they came from except for the smart ones- that were fed Mentats and had their intelligence improved by the Enclave to become better killing machines. Now, why doesn't this work hm? One little difference, such as location can produce different results...
>Go play Fallout 2 and get a clue about this. No, it doesn't make sense that the ones in FOT could talk, considering FOT was set before Fo2, and the reason they could talk is rather contrived, given the Beastlords<
They could have gained the english language from the telepathy they shared with the above mentioned beastlords. Or gained intelligence. The Enclave doesn't have to be the only ones who can make the Deathclaws smarter- especially when they didn't give the Deathclaws vocal cords... *cough*
>Again, try to play Fallout 1 with your memory on. I doubt that the Beastlords had assimilated a number of people into themselves. Oops, forgot that, hm?
Also, the Hubologists were something stupid BIS put in.<
The fact that people were capable of PSI in Fallout1 is all that's needed- hell, even if there wasn't- that does not rule out why there can not be telepaths that obtained powers to controls 'beasts' in other parts of the country
>The above makes it almost painfully obvious that you haven't played Fallout and Fallout 2.<
Played Fallout1, heading for the Glow and completed Fallout2- I still haven't come across anything contradicting
the posibility that they could have started from a vault...
>That was from the time-frame when the robots were designed from. The boxies, the neo-boxies, the Robbies, etc. Do you have a clue about the setting, or are you just acting as an apologist?<
No, I'm playing Devil's advocate actually. I don't like FOT, as already stated- But I don't see why it has to endure such sheer condemnation as 'skullfuck'ing Fallout's setting.
>Which was a modified from a rifle, and was an easter egg of sorts. Intended to be special and rare, but was thrown in ad nauseum into Fallout 2.
That doesn't excuse that the robots were supposed to be taken from 40's-60's sci-fi comic books and movies.<
How the hell do you know how all of the robots are supposed to look like, let alone what setting they're in? Just because FOT takes place in the same universe, does not mean they can't add new things- it's how you keep something fresh. A gun's graphic from BladeRunner is already in there, so they add some robots... HOW is this such a bad thing?
>Nah. I'll just suggest you go out and buy the dual-jewel case of Fallout and Fallout 2, play in some way that allows you to discover the setting, and then if you post again, you have some idea about the setting.<
Already done. Had the games from some time now, before FOT in fact. A post nuclear setting- where just about all life on earth was destroyed in a two hour, WWIII over resources in the 21st Century. It doesn't matter who fired first, just that the world ended. That's the main, general setting...for example there are Canadians in the Fallout Universe- but no mention of Vaults being up there...so how they survived...
The majority of the survivors of the United States were saved by underground Vaults that had a secretive
goal as well, to be experiments to see what would happen-
Fallout 1- Grey falls into a container of FEV that was being experimented on by the U.S government before the war to create super soliders- he tries to perfect the human race by forcing all humans to evolve with FEV into mutants...
Fallout 2-U.S Government, or Enclave's recent tampering with their 'virus' before the war, FEV ,could destroy the mutants...and then non-radiated humans could repopulate the earth.
Fallout Tactics- Takes place between 1 and 2, with a splinter group of the BOS and eventually looks like has them fight the main unit by the end- not sure, I don't really like the game much *G* DISPITE that, I still don't see how it hurts the whole universe. Fallout 1 and 2 are parts of the universe...so is Fallout Tactics. Nothing says that Tactics has to stick exactly to the RPGs- especially when it takes in a different place of the U.S.
You might actually want to explain why my views don't work...except telling me to go play the games again- your views, your opinions and readings of what happened in the game are not the only valid ones you know...
P
Phad_Vickers
Guest
Reptiles were recently recovered with feathers attached...supposedly one of the links between the dinosaurs and today's current birds.
No telling what FEV, radiation and millions of dead mammals could do to a new reptile...might even give them fur *G*
No telling what FEV, radiation and millions of dead mammals could do to a new reptile...might even give them fur *G*
Saint_Proverbius
Vault Senior Citizen
> Reptiles were recently recovered
>with feathers attached...supposedly one of
>the links between the dinosaurs
>and today's current birds.
>
> No telling what FEV,
>radiation and millions of dead
>mammals could do to a
>new reptile...might even give them
>fur *G*
Bears and dogs came from the same base animal, yet we categorize them as two different species. I'd say the distinction between a reptile and a mammal would be much more significant than that, wouldn't you?
Want to continue this, or just stop? Up to you, sport.
>with feathers attached...supposedly one of
>the links between the dinosaurs
>and today's current birds.
>
> No telling what FEV,
>radiation and millions of dead
>mammals could do to a
>new reptile...might even give them
>fur *G*
Bears and dogs came from the same base animal, yet we categorize them as two different species. I'd say the distinction between a reptile and a mammal would be much more significant than that, wouldn't you?
Want to continue this, or just stop? Up to you, sport.
[font size=1" color="#FF0000]LAST EDITED ON Dec-03-02 AT 09:44PM (GMT)[p]
> *Chuckle*
>
> Is that your only
>defense? Go play the
>game again?
Is that your defense? That anything can go into the game?
> I just went through
>Fallout 2- and I stated
>what I learned from that
>game- and to let you
>know, I am still making
>my way through Fallout1- while
>I'm not the fanatic that
>has played the game a
>dozen times through, that does
>not mean that my questions
>on the matter are any
>less valid then another's.
>Hell, you're probably not even
>reading this anymore.
You might want to pay attention this time, or take notes if you're going to waffle around in this any more.
> >Plenty, because it doesn't fit into the setting and history that was set down before.<
>
> And since when did
>Fallout have such a specified
>History? The games don't
>have official manuals out for
>stories- this isn't a PnP
>game, or a series of
>books like Tolkien's collection where
>there are many documents that
>were officially released as history.
Hello? You did play the games, right? Try the holotapes, moron. Try the explanations by the researchers and the background given by the story, characters, etc. Try a lot more that explains the setting. Since there isn't any written material, you have all that is the Fallout universe at your disposal to get a clue about it. There's a problem, you're being stupid and arguing without a clue about it.
"There isn't any written books." That has to be one of the lamest excuses I've ever had the misfortune to read.
How about they make a Mario with a 8' cock growing out of his forehead for the next GameCube title? By your flawed logic, it would fit.
> >Fallout 2 was a hatchet job. Fallout 1 is stable and at least finished. FOT still has perks that don't work that can still be selected. No documentation about those broken perks are anywhere in the patch files or distributed files that I'm aware of (could be wrong). Shitty, isn't it?<
>
> Not any more than
>purchasing the other games out
>there that have multiple bugs
>in them. A buggy
>game has nothing to do
>with it's content.
Spoken like a true clueless newbie to gaming design. Bugs and fixing them, are often the result of spending too much time on useless shit. The reason why Fallout 2 had numerous bugs compared to Fallout, is because of all the useless crap.
The reason why FOT was poor in both regards is it had stupid, unrelated material with poor implementation, which used up their limited time for development.
> >Just because the others might have problems, doesn't excuse FOT from being patched half-ass. In fact, this is what's biting Interplay in the ass, is the crappy support and games that haven't been through a QA dept.<
>
> Your point is?
>None of the Fallouts are
>perfect- all could use more
>support.
Fallout 1 had the least amount of bugs, yet this still doesn't excuse poor QA standards. Nice spin attempt again, but you fail.
> >No shit it's not JA2. But the developers said it would be like JA2 with the Fallout setting. Unfortunately, it's also a poor tactical game, given the amount of bugs and it's not really finished. Also, the multiplayer is imbalanced as hell, given that restrictions need to be introduced, drugs imbalance the hell out of things, and some weapons make most others quite useless in comparison without sonme return balance.<
>
> And it's been compared
>to JA2. It's similiar,
>with a Fallout setting...what you
>want JA2 with Fallout on
>the cover instead? We
>already talked about the bugs,
>as for Multiplayer, you have
>access to drugs just as
>much as the other person-
>that's fair to me.
You're dumb, kid, or you haven't played a game like that.
You're just hitting each other like a Punch and Judy Show, waiting for a critical to hit to even hurt the other person, then oops, they are dead. It severely imbalances the game.
>Some weapons will always be
>stronger than others- you're suggesting
>a 10mm pistol should be
>equal to a Vindicator?
No, I'm not. Don't mouth-stuff.
What I'm saying is that there isn't a variety of high-end weopons viable enough for use, often just resulting in a P-J or M2 match all around. How boring is that?
> >Okay, just get a damn clue about how DeathClaws were made. NOW. It seems quite obvious you haven't played Fallout and Fallout 2.<
>
> Okay, then, point out
>why this doesn't work hm?
> Deathclaws aren't even real.
What does that have to do with anything?
> Yes, the old ones
>are from FEV and radiation,
>and no one 'really' knows
>where they came from except
>for the smart ones- that
>were fed Mentats and had
>their intelligence improved by the
>Enclave to become better killing
>machines. Now, why doesn't
>this work hm? One
>little difference, such as location
>can produce different results...
News flash, moron. DeathClaws only came from one place, of one origin. Which you would have known if you had played either Fallout 1 or 2. The above proved that you are either with poor memory, or are bullshitting me.
Also, they were not fed Mentats. Mentats are only a temporary effect. Where you pulled that out of your ass, I don't know, but put that cerebral flatulation back up your ass and back into your head and refrain from letting any further ones loose. Perhaps you could belch it back out to some drunk on the street, but not here, thank you. In fact, where you got that idea is quite beyond a few of us, so would you like to share where you managed to dredge that one up? Or is it like the rest of your displayed cluelessness here, and you're just bullshitting us in what might be a troll?
> >Again, try to play Fallout 1 with your memory on. I doubt that the Beastlords had assimilated a number of people into themselves. Oops, forgot that, hm?
>
>Also, the Hubologists were something stupid
>BIS put in.<
>
> The fact that people
>were capable of PSI in
>Fallout1 is all that's needed-
>hell, even if there wasn't-
>that does not rule out
>why there can not be
>telepaths that obtained powers to
>controls 'beasts' in other parts
>of the country
Sure, now that The Master, a very unique entity, has Psi powers, everyone and their brother now have them.
Do you also write scripts for George Lucas?
>
> >The above makes it almost painfully obvious that you haven't played Fallout and Fallout 2.<
>
> Played Fallout1, heading for
>the Glow and completed Fallout2-
>I still haven't come across
>anything contradicting
>the posibility that they could have
>started from a vault...
Keep on sailing, Captain Clueless.
> >That was from the time-frame when the robots were designed from. The boxies, the neo-boxies, the Robbies, etc. Do you have a clue about the setting, or are you just acting as an apologist?>
> No, I'm playing Devil's
>advocate actually. I don't
>like FOT, as already stated-
>But I don't see why
>it has to endure such
>sheer condemnation as 'skullfuck'ing Fallout's
>setting.
No, you're playing "Clueless Dumbfuck".
> >Which was a modified from a rifle, and was an easter egg of sorts. Intended to be special and rare, but was thrown in ad nauseum into Fallout 2.
>
>That doesn't excuse that the robots
>were supposed to be taken
>from 40's-60's sci-fi comic books
>and movies.<
>
> How the hell do
>you know how all of
>the robots are supposed to
>look like, let alone what
>setting they're in?
Kid, and I call you that because you present yourself as someone who doesn't think the world existed beyond 1980, call it a hunch.
Or, you could take a look at the styling, the concepts, the TV ads, the obvious state of technology like tubes and bulky electronics, styles of the cars, styles of the writing, and more, and get a clue. Or go ask your father what the styles were like before you were even considered for the sperm bank's cups.
>Just
>because FOT takes place in
>the same universe, does not
>mean they can't add new
>things- it's how you keep
>something fresh.
They could keep it in the style. Going outside of the style/setting isn't "keeping it fresh", it's skullfucking the setting.
>A gun's
>graphic from BladeRunner is already
>in there, so they add
>some robots... HOW is this
>such a bad thing?
With each paragraph, you present yourself as an also-ran of the human race.
> >Nah. I'll just suggest you go out and buy the dual-jewel case of Fallout and Fallout 2, play in some way that allows you to discover the setting, and then if you post again, you have some idea about the setting.<
>
> Already done. Had
>the games from some time
>now, before FOT in fact.
> A post nuclear setting-
>where just about all life
>on earth was destroyed in
>a two hour, WWIII over
>resources in the 21st Century.
>It doesn't matter who fired
>first, just that the world
>ended. That's the main,
>general setting...
Your grade: F-
Take note of the styling.
Okay, I'll put it simply for you. It's what life after a nuclear war would be, if done in the views of someone making a 40's-60's sci-fi pulp.
Since you missed that, you may now go hang your head in shame, or go whine to your parents that the people on the "interweb thingy" are being mean to you because you're posting stupid crap and getting your own ass handed to you as a new hat.
> *Chuckle*
>
> Is that your only
>defense? Go play the
>game again?
Is that your defense? That anything can go into the game?
> I just went through
>Fallout 2- and I stated
>what I learned from that
>game- and to let you
>know, I am still making
>my way through Fallout1- while
>I'm not the fanatic that
>has played the game a
>dozen times through, that does
>not mean that my questions
>on the matter are any
>less valid then another's.
>Hell, you're probably not even
>reading this anymore.
You might want to pay attention this time, or take notes if you're going to waffle around in this any more.
> >Plenty, because it doesn't fit into the setting and history that was set down before.<
>
> And since when did
>Fallout have such a specified
>History? The games don't
>have official manuals out for
>stories- this isn't a PnP
>game, or a series of
>books like Tolkien's collection where
>there are many documents that
>were officially released as history.
Hello? You did play the games, right? Try the holotapes, moron. Try the explanations by the researchers and the background given by the story, characters, etc. Try a lot more that explains the setting. Since there isn't any written material, you have all that is the Fallout universe at your disposal to get a clue about it. There's a problem, you're being stupid and arguing without a clue about it.
"There isn't any written books." That has to be one of the lamest excuses I've ever had the misfortune to read.
How about they make a Mario with a 8' cock growing out of his forehead for the next GameCube title? By your flawed logic, it would fit.
> >Fallout 2 was a hatchet job. Fallout 1 is stable and at least finished. FOT still has perks that don't work that can still be selected. No documentation about those broken perks are anywhere in the patch files or distributed files that I'm aware of (could be wrong). Shitty, isn't it?<
>
> Not any more than
>purchasing the other games out
>there that have multiple bugs
>in them. A buggy
>game has nothing to do
>with it's content.
Spoken like a true clueless newbie to gaming design. Bugs and fixing them, are often the result of spending too much time on useless shit. The reason why Fallout 2 had numerous bugs compared to Fallout, is because of all the useless crap.
The reason why FOT was poor in both regards is it had stupid, unrelated material with poor implementation, which used up their limited time for development.
> >Just because the others might have problems, doesn't excuse FOT from being patched half-ass. In fact, this is what's biting Interplay in the ass, is the crappy support and games that haven't been through a QA dept.<
>
> Your point is?
>None of the Fallouts are
>perfect- all could use more
>support.
Fallout 1 had the least amount of bugs, yet this still doesn't excuse poor QA standards. Nice spin attempt again, but you fail.
> >No shit it's not JA2. But the developers said it would be like JA2 with the Fallout setting. Unfortunately, it's also a poor tactical game, given the amount of bugs and it's not really finished. Also, the multiplayer is imbalanced as hell, given that restrictions need to be introduced, drugs imbalance the hell out of things, and some weapons make most others quite useless in comparison without sonme return balance.<
>
> And it's been compared
>to JA2. It's similiar,
>with a Fallout setting...what you
>want JA2 with Fallout on
>the cover instead? We
>already talked about the bugs,
>as for Multiplayer, you have
>access to drugs just as
>much as the other person-
>that's fair to me.
You're dumb, kid, or you haven't played a game like that.
You're just hitting each other like a Punch and Judy Show, waiting for a critical to hit to even hurt the other person, then oops, they are dead. It severely imbalances the game.
>Some weapons will always be
>stronger than others- you're suggesting
>a 10mm pistol should be
>equal to a Vindicator?
No, I'm not. Don't mouth-stuff.
What I'm saying is that there isn't a variety of high-end weopons viable enough for use, often just resulting in a P-J or M2 match all around. How boring is that?
> >Okay, just get a damn clue about how DeathClaws were made. NOW. It seems quite obvious you haven't played Fallout and Fallout 2.<
>
> Okay, then, point out
>why this doesn't work hm?
> Deathclaws aren't even real.
What does that have to do with anything?
> Yes, the old ones
>are from FEV and radiation,
>and no one 'really' knows
>where they came from except
>for the smart ones- that
>were fed Mentats and had
>their intelligence improved by the
>Enclave to become better killing
>machines. Now, why doesn't
>this work hm? One
>little difference, such as location
>can produce different results...
News flash, moron. DeathClaws only came from one place, of one origin. Which you would have known if you had played either Fallout 1 or 2. The above proved that you are either with poor memory, or are bullshitting me.
Also, they were not fed Mentats. Mentats are only a temporary effect. Where you pulled that out of your ass, I don't know, but put that cerebral flatulation back up your ass and back into your head and refrain from letting any further ones loose. Perhaps you could belch it back out to some drunk on the street, but not here, thank you. In fact, where you got that idea is quite beyond a few of us, so would you like to share where you managed to dredge that one up? Or is it like the rest of your displayed cluelessness here, and you're just bullshitting us in what might be a troll?
> >Again, try to play Fallout 1 with your memory on. I doubt that the Beastlords had assimilated a number of people into themselves. Oops, forgot that, hm?
>
>Also, the Hubologists were something stupid
>BIS put in.<
>
> The fact that people
>were capable of PSI in
>Fallout1 is all that's needed-
>hell, even if there wasn't-
>that does not rule out
>why there can not be
>telepaths that obtained powers to
>controls 'beasts' in other parts
>of the country
Sure, now that The Master, a very unique entity, has Psi powers, everyone and their brother now have them.
Do you also write scripts for George Lucas?
>
> >The above makes it almost painfully obvious that you haven't played Fallout and Fallout 2.<
>
> Played Fallout1, heading for
>the Glow and completed Fallout2-
>I still haven't come across
>anything contradicting
>the posibility that they could have
>started from a vault...
Keep on sailing, Captain Clueless.
> >That was from the time-frame when the robots were designed from. The boxies, the neo-boxies, the Robbies, etc. Do you have a clue about the setting, or are you just acting as an apologist?>
> No, I'm playing Devil's
>advocate actually. I don't
>like FOT, as already stated-
>But I don't see why
>it has to endure such
>sheer condemnation as 'skullfuck'ing Fallout's
>setting.
No, you're playing "Clueless Dumbfuck".
> >Which was a modified from a rifle, and was an easter egg of sorts. Intended to be special and rare, but was thrown in ad nauseum into Fallout 2.
>
>That doesn't excuse that the robots
>were supposed to be taken
>from 40's-60's sci-fi comic books
>and movies.<
>
> How the hell do
>you know how all of
>the robots are supposed to
>look like, let alone what
>setting they're in?
Kid, and I call you that because you present yourself as someone who doesn't think the world existed beyond 1980, call it a hunch.
Or, you could take a look at the styling, the concepts, the TV ads, the obvious state of technology like tubes and bulky electronics, styles of the cars, styles of the writing, and more, and get a clue. Or go ask your father what the styles were like before you were even considered for the sperm bank's cups.
>Just
>because FOT takes place in
>the same universe, does not
>mean they can't add new
>things- it's how you keep
>something fresh.
They could keep it in the style. Going outside of the style/setting isn't "keeping it fresh", it's skullfucking the setting.
>A gun's
>graphic from BladeRunner is already
>in there, so they add
>some robots... HOW is this
>such a bad thing?
With each paragraph, you present yourself as an also-ran of the human race.
> >Nah. I'll just suggest you go out and buy the dual-jewel case of Fallout and Fallout 2, play in some way that allows you to discover the setting, and then if you post again, you have some idea about the setting.<
>
> Already done. Had
>the games from some time
>now, before FOT in fact.
> A post nuclear setting-
>where just about all life
>on earth was destroyed in
>a two hour, WWIII over
>resources in the 21st Century.
>It doesn't matter who fired
>first, just that the world
>ended. That's the main,
>general setting...
Your grade: F-
Take note of the styling.
Okay, I'll put it simply for you. It's what life after a nuclear war would be, if done in the views of someone making a 40's-60's sci-fi pulp.
Since you missed that, you may now go hang your head in shame, or go whine to your parents that the people on the "interweb thingy" are being mean to you because you're posting stupid crap and getting your own ass handed to you as a new hat.
G
Guest
Guest
> *Chuckle*
Join the circus.
> Is that your only defense? Go play the game again?
If you played through Fallout and had any appreciation for consistency, you'd notice the glaring inconsistencies between Fallout, Fallout 2 and ESPECIALLY Fallout Tactics.
To say that consistency isn't important is like saying that TV Series' that don't follow up on their previous episodes are 'well written'. Reminds me of old bullshit TV series that had zero continuity and played like cartoons instead of mature features.
It's one thing to have a 'short feature' show like the Twilight Zone or Night Visions, but it'd be another thing to have Buffy destroy the world in one episode and have her save it the next. Consistency is important in a series. Fallout is a series, and thus requires consistency.
> I just went through Fallout 2- and I stated
>what I learned from that >game- and to let you >know, I am still making >my way through Fallout1- while >I'm not the fanatic that >has played the game a >dozen times through, that does >not mean that my questions >on the matter are any >less valid then another's. >Hell, you're probably not even >reading this anymore.
An uneducated opinion is an invalid opinion.
>>> And since when did >Fallout have such a specified >History? The games don't >have official manuals out for >stories- this isn't a PnP >game, or a series of >books like Tolkien's collection where >there are many documents that >were officially released as history.
Look above at the paragraph above.
>
>> Not any more than >purchasing the other games out >there that have multiple bugs >in them. A buggy >game has nothing to do >with it's content.
Fallout 2 had features (like the car trunk) which couldn't be used until patches were released several months later. The fact that it was touted as a main feature of Fallout 2, compounded with the fact that it was completely unusable makes it an extremely poor release.
> >> Your point is? >None of the Fallouts are >perfect- all could use more >support.
Cease with your incessant mouth stuffing. I must reiterate that we're discussing the point that Fallout 2 and Fallout Tactics contained 'features' that were virtually unworkable. Fallout Tactics still is, and it wont even play on my computer if I don't download the unofficial sound bug patch. Where's the official patch you ask? Microforte went on vacation and never came back.
> Lovely. Here goes >your suporiority approach again.
Only someone suffering from an ego problem would point out the supposed 'superiority complex' of others. This is an observation, not an accusation.
> And it's been compared >to JA2. It's similiar, >with a Fallout setting...what you >want JA2 with Fallout on >the cover instead? We >already talked about the bugs,
Sure, why not. JA2's a far better game than FOT, and FOT doesn't even TRY to be as good as it even though it claims to be better. So much for honor in advertising.
>as for Multiplayer, you have >access to drugs just as >much as the other person- >that's fair to me.
You suppose that cheats in online games are okay, as long as everyone has access to them. Pathetic reasoning.
>Some weapons will always be >stronger than others- you're suggesting >a 10mm pistol should be >equal to a Vindicator?
Did he say that? No. The fact that some guns are just more powerful than everything else in the game creates a tremendous imbalance in the multiplayer setting. The gun in question isn't even a minigun. It's the Pancor Jackhammer, and it's the most powerful gun in the game, and also one of the cheapest.
Amazing!
>> Okay, then, point out >why this doesn't work hm? > Deathclaws aren't even real. > Yes, the old ones >are from FEV and radiation, >and no one 'really' knows >where they came from except >for the smart ones- that >were fed Mentats and had >their intelligence improved by the >Enclave to become better killing >machines. Now, why doesn't >this work hm? One >little difference, such as location >can produce different results...
If you played Fallout and actually cared to read the Holodiscs you'd know of the origins of the Deathclaw. What happened in FOT was just the result of poor writing/lack of research. Now, if I was making a sequel to a movie, game, or book, I'd at least read the script in question, too.
>> They could have gained >the english language from the >telepathy they shared with the >above mentioned beastlords. Or>gained intelligence. The Enclave >doesn't have to be the >only ones who can make >the Deathclaws smarter- especially when >they didn't give the Deathclaws >vocal cords... *cough*
Do not rationalize idiocy. The talking deathclaws in FO2 were bad and nonsensical enough. Compound that horrifying development and lack of developmental foresight with an even more horrifying addition to an already skewed franchise by applying hair and telepathy to Deathclaws and the result is a design monstrosity.
>> >> The fact that people >were capable of PSI in >Fallout1 is all that's needed-
They were failed experiments who had a tendency to explode when let out of their cages. They died. End of research progress.
It's difficult to recreate an anomaly due to the sheer amount of possible research combinations involved. Recreating an anomaly in under 40 years and PERFECTING it is just out of the question.
>hell, even if there wasn't- >that does not rule out >why therecan not be >telepaths that obtained powers to >controls 'beasts' in other parts >of the country
Plot devices are lame.
>>> Played Fallout1, heading for >the Glow and completed Fallout2- >I still haven't come across >anything contradicting >the posibility that they could have >started from a vault...
That's what a lack of perception will do to you. Try reading the stuff in the game sometime.
>>> No, I'm playing Devil's >advocate actually. I don't >like FOT, as already stated- >
Perhaps you could attempt to research your 'points of view' before you put them forth. Arguing in the form in which you present yourself is nothing but an expression of inanity.
>But I don't see why it has to endure such sheer condemnation as 'skullfuck'ing Fallout's >setting.
That's what having a lack of perception will do to you.
>>>
> How the hell do >you know how all of >the robots are supposed to >look like, let alone what >setting they're in? Just >because FOT takes place in >the same universe, does not >mean they can't add new >things- it's how you keep >something fresh. A gun's >graphic from BladeRunner is already >in there, so they add >some robots... HOW is this >such a bad thing?
Anime != Fallout
Fallout = 50s post-apoc comic book future setting a.k.a. pulp fiction.
>> Already done. Had >the games from some time >now, before FOT in fact. > A post nuclear setting- >where just about all life >on earth was destroyed in >a two hour, WWIII over >resources in the 21st Century. >It doesn't matter who fired >first, just that the world >ended. That's the main, >general setting...for example there are Canadians in the Fallout Universe- >but no mentionof Vaults >being up there...so how they >survived...
For some reason, FOT features working oil refineries. Why is that? A lack of consistency, that’s what. Not to mention the Titan warhead in the Ghoul town. I wonder what happened to the 50s setting.
>>> Fallout Tactics- Takes place >between 1 and 2, with >a splinter group of the >BOS and eventually looks like >has them fight the main >unit by the end- not >sure, I don't really like>the game much *G*
Yeah, a splinter group complete with Japanese Zeros, X-80 Space Fighters, an F117 and gas powered blimps. I wonder.
>DISPITE that, I still don't >see how it hurts the >whole universe. Fallout 1 >and 2 are parts of >the universe...so is Fallout Tactics.
That’s what a lack of perception will do to you.
> Nothing says that Tactics >has to stick exactly to >the RPGs- especially >when it takes in a >different place of the U.S.
The rules of consistency apply to a sequel in a series. Your lack of perception will blind you from this simple fact.
> You might actually want >to explain why my views >don't work...except telling me to >go play the games again- >your views, your opinions and >readings of what happened in >the game are not the >only valid ones you know...
I just did. You should feel proud for taking up half an hour of my time. What a waste.
Join the circus.
> Is that your only defense? Go play the game again?
If you played through Fallout and had any appreciation for consistency, you'd notice the glaring inconsistencies between Fallout, Fallout 2 and ESPECIALLY Fallout Tactics.
To say that consistency isn't important is like saying that TV Series' that don't follow up on their previous episodes are 'well written'. Reminds me of old bullshit TV series that had zero continuity and played like cartoons instead of mature features.
It's one thing to have a 'short feature' show like the Twilight Zone or Night Visions, but it'd be another thing to have Buffy destroy the world in one episode and have her save it the next. Consistency is important in a series. Fallout is a series, and thus requires consistency.
> I just went through Fallout 2- and I stated
>what I learned from that >game- and to let you >know, I am still making >my way through Fallout1- while >I'm not the fanatic that >has played the game a >dozen times through, that does >not mean that my questions >on the matter are any >less valid then another's. >Hell, you're probably not even >reading this anymore.
An uneducated opinion is an invalid opinion.
>>> And since when did >Fallout have such a specified >History? The games don't >have official manuals out for >stories- this isn't a PnP >game, or a series of >books like Tolkien's collection where >there are many documents that >were officially released as history.
Look above at the paragraph above.
>
>> Not any more than >purchasing the other games out >there that have multiple bugs >in them. A buggy >game has nothing to do >with it's content.
Fallout 2 had features (like the car trunk) which couldn't be used until patches were released several months later. The fact that it was touted as a main feature of Fallout 2, compounded with the fact that it was completely unusable makes it an extremely poor release.
> >> Your point is? >None of the Fallouts are >perfect- all could use more >support.
Cease with your incessant mouth stuffing. I must reiterate that we're discussing the point that Fallout 2 and Fallout Tactics contained 'features' that were virtually unworkable. Fallout Tactics still is, and it wont even play on my computer if I don't download the unofficial sound bug patch. Where's the official patch you ask? Microforte went on vacation and never came back.
> Lovely. Here goes >your suporiority approach again.
Only someone suffering from an ego problem would point out the supposed 'superiority complex' of others. This is an observation, not an accusation.
> And it's been compared >to JA2. It's similiar, >with a Fallout setting...what you >want JA2 with Fallout on >the cover instead? We >already talked about the bugs,
Sure, why not. JA2's a far better game than FOT, and FOT doesn't even TRY to be as good as it even though it claims to be better. So much for honor in advertising.
>as for Multiplayer, you have >access to drugs just as >much as the other person- >that's fair to me.
You suppose that cheats in online games are okay, as long as everyone has access to them. Pathetic reasoning.
>Some weapons will always be >stronger than others- you're suggesting >a 10mm pistol should be >equal to a Vindicator?
Did he say that? No. The fact that some guns are just more powerful than everything else in the game creates a tremendous imbalance in the multiplayer setting. The gun in question isn't even a minigun. It's the Pancor Jackhammer, and it's the most powerful gun in the game, and also one of the cheapest.
Amazing!
>> Okay, then, point out >why this doesn't work hm? > Deathclaws aren't even real. > Yes, the old ones >are from FEV and radiation, >and no one 'really' knows >where they came from except >for the smart ones- that >were fed Mentats and had >their intelligence improved by the >Enclave to become better killing >machines. Now, why doesn't >this work hm? One >little difference, such as location >can produce different results...
If you played Fallout and actually cared to read the Holodiscs you'd know of the origins of the Deathclaw. What happened in FOT was just the result of poor writing/lack of research. Now, if I was making a sequel to a movie, game, or book, I'd at least read the script in question, too.
>> They could have gained >the english language from the >telepathy they shared with the >above mentioned beastlords. Or>gained intelligence. The Enclave >doesn't have to be the >only ones who can make >the Deathclaws smarter- especially when >they didn't give the Deathclaws >vocal cords... *cough*
Do not rationalize idiocy. The talking deathclaws in FO2 were bad and nonsensical enough. Compound that horrifying development and lack of developmental foresight with an even more horrifying addition to an already skewed franchise by applying hair and telepathy to Deathclaws and the result is a design monstrosity.
>> >> The fact that people >were capable of PSI in >Fallout1 is all that's needed-
They were failed experiments who had a tendency to explode when let out of their cages. They died. End of research progress.
It's difficult to recreate an anomaly due to the sheer amount of possible research combinations involved. Recreating an anomaly in under 40 years and PERFECTING it is just out of the question.
>hell, even if there wasn't- >that does not rule out >why therecan not be >telepaths that obtained powers to >controls 'beasts' in other parts >of the country
Plot devices are lame.
>>> Played Fallout1, heading for >the Glow and completed Fallout2- >I still haven't come across >anything contradicting >the posibility that they could have >started from a vault...
That's what a lack of perception will do to you. Try reading the stuff in the game sometime.
>>> No, I'm playing Devil's >advocate actually. I don't >like FOT, as already stated- >
Perhaps you could attempt to research your 'points of view' before you put them forth. Arguing in the form in which you present yourself is nothing but an expression of inanity.
>But I don't see why it has to endure such sheer condemnation as 'skullfuck'ing Fallout's >setting.
That's what having a lack of perception will do to you.
>>>
> How the hell do >you know how all of >the robots are supposed to >look like, let alone what >setting they're in? Just >because FOT takes place in >the same universe, does not >mean they can't add new >things- it's how you keep >something fresh. A gun's >graphic from BladeRunner is already >in there, so they add >some robots... HOW is this >such a bad thing?
Anime != Fallout
Fallout = 50s post-apoc comic book future setting a.k.a. pulp fiction.
>> Already done. Had >the games from some time >now, before FOT in fact. > A post nuclear setting- >where just about all life >on earth was destroyed in >a two hour, WWIII over >resources in the 21st Century. >It doesn't matter who fired >first, just that the world >ended. That's the main, >general setting...for example there are Canadians in the Fallout Universe- >but no mentionof Vaults >being up there...so how they >survived...
For some reason, FOT features working oil refineries. Why is that? A lack of consistency, that’s what. Not to mention the Titan warhead in the Ghoul town. I wonder what happened to the 50s setting.
>>> Fallout Tactics- Takes place >between 1 and 2, with >a splinter group of the >BOS and eventually looks like >has them fight the main >unit by the end- not >sure, I don't really like>the game much *G*
Yeah, a splinter group complete with Japanese Zeros, X-80 Space Fighters, an F117 and gas powered blimps. I wonder.
>DISPITE that, I still don't >see how it hurts the >whole universe. Fallout 1 >and 2 are parts of >the universe...so is Fallout Tactics.
That’s what a lack of perception will do to you.
> Nothing says that Tactics >has to stick exactly to >the RPGs- especially >when it takes in a >different place of the U.S.
The rules of consistency apply to a sequel in a series. Your lack of perception will blind you from this simple fact.
> You might actually want >to explain why my views >don't work...except telling me to >go play the games again- >your views, your opinions and >readings of what happened in >the game are not the >only valid ones you know...
I just did. You should feel proud for taking up half an hour of my time. What a waste.
Saint_Proverbius
Vault Senior Citizen
> Is that your only
>defense? Go play the
>game again?
It's a good one, as most of the problems with Fallout Tactics and the Fallout setting are glaringly obvious to anyone that's actually played the RPGs, particularly the first one.
All the gas powered vehicles should have tipped you off, when there's a special encounter in the original designed specifically to explain why there are no cars in the game. Fallout 2 had a big piece of plot about why there's no oil, either.
Therefore, it's safe to say that the cars in Fallout Tactics weren't a good idea.
Neither was the oil refinery in Fallout Tactics, which still had gasoline canisters.
> And since when did
>Fallout have such a specified
>History? The games don't
>have official manuals out for
>stories- this isn't a PnP
>game, or a series of
>books like Tolkien's collection where
>there are many documents that
>were officially released as history.
Fallout's history is well established within the games. There's the intro slide shows which talk about the Great War. There's holodisks. There's Zax, the computer in Fallout. There's people in the game you can talk with that give historical information.
Saying there's no documentation on Fallout's history is just ignorant.
> Not any more than
>purchasing the other games out
>there that have multiple bugs
>in them. A buggy
>game has nothing to do
>with it's content.
No, but content can be erroneous.
> Your point is?
>None of the Fallouts are
>perfect- all could use more
>support.
Fallout - No broken perks
Fallout 2 - Cult of Personality didn't work, IIRC.
Fallout Tactics - At least 10 known perks that were broken, including Sniper, Squad Leader, Loner, Way of the Fruit, and so on.
You're comparing apples to oranges here.
> And it's been compared
>to JA2. It's similiar,
>with a Fallout setting...what you
>want JA2 with Fallout on
>the cover instead?
Actually, that's how FOT was pitched. "Imagine JA2 in the Fallout universe."
Frankly, it wasn't JA2, and the Fallout universe was half assed, at best.
Speaking of which, where, in FOT, were the Pre-Great War slug throwers that were common in Fallout and Fallout 2? There is no 10MM weapons or ammo in FOT, no 14MM pistol or ammo, and so on. Instead, they replaced things like that with WW2 rifles and various other real world or antique weapons.
> We
>already talked about the bugs,
>as for Multiplayer, you have
>access to drugs just as
>much as the other person-
>that's fair to me.
Except that drugs were horribly ill-balanced for multiplayer. Trauma Packs, for example, gave huge resistances with no side effect at all.
>Some weapons will always be
>stronger than others- you're suggesting
>a 10mm pistol should be
>equal to a Vindicator?
In a multiplayer game, for the same cost, yes the guns should be somewhat equal rather than everyone running around with pancors.
> The fact that people
>were capable of PSI in
>Fallout1 is all that's needed-
>hell, even if there wasn't-
>that does not rule out
>why there can not be
>telepaths that obtained powers to
>controls 'beasts' in other parts
>of the country
Psychers were rare in Fallout, and Grey's psychic abilities were derived from FEV, not cave radiation.
> How the hell do
>you know how all of
>the robots are supposed to
>look like, let alone what
>setting they're in? Just
>because FOT takes place in
>the same universe, does not
>mean they can't add new
>things- it's how you keep
>something fresh.
Because the setting is from the point of view of 1950s pulp sci, perhaps? When you make a setting with a point of view, then all things in that setting should at least have that theme. Instead, FOT gave us ANIME ROBOTS AND MECHA!
> A gun's
>graphic from BladeRunner is already
>in there, so they add
>some robots... HOW is this
>such a bad thing?
Ever seen BladeRunner? It's a retro-future setting as well. Ever listenned to the song, "One More Kiss, Dear"? The style of the cars?
Even then, it was put in the game to be an easter egg. A special reference to a movie with a similar style as Fallout's retro-future theme.
>defense? Go play the
>game again?
It's a good one, as most of the problems with Fallout Tactics and the Fallout setting are glaringly obvious to anyone that's actually played the RPGs, particularly the first one.
All the gas powered vehicles should have tipped you off, when there's a special encounter in the original designed specifically to explain why there are no cars in the game. Fallout 2 had a big piece of plot about why there's no oil, either.
Therefore, it's safe to say that the cars in Fallout Tactics weren't a good idea.
Neither was the oil refinery in Fallout Tactics, which still had gasoline canisters.
> And since when did
>Fallout have such a specified
>History? The games don't
>have official manuals out for
>stories- this isn't a PnP
>game, or a series of
>books like Tolkien's collection where
>there are many documents that
>were officially released as history.
Fallout's history is well established within the games. There's the intro slide shows which talk about the Great War. There's holodisks. There's Zax, the computer in Fallout. There's people in the game you can talk with that give historical information.
Saying there's no documentation on Fallout's history is just ignorant.
> Not any more than
>purchasing the other games out
>there that have multiple bugs
>in them. A buggy
>game has nothing to do
>with it's content.
No, but content can be erroneous.
> Your point is?
>None of the Fallouts are
>perfect- all could use more
>support.
Fallout - No broken perks
Fallout 2 - Cult of Personality didn't work, IIRC.
Fallout Tactics - At least 10 known perks that were broken, including Sniper, Squad Leader, Loner, Way of the Fruit, and so on.
You're comparing apples to oranges here.
> And it's been compared
>to JA2. It's similiar,
>with a Fallout setting...what you
>want JA2 with Fallout on
>the cover instead?
Actually, that's how FOT was pitched. "Imagine JA2 in the Fallout universe."
Frankly, it wasn't JA2, and the Fallout universe was half assed, at best.
Speaking of which, where, in FOT, were the Pre-Great War slug throwers that were common in Fallout and Fallout 2? There is no 10MM weapons or ammo in FOT, no 14MM pistol or ammo, and so on. Instead, they replaced things like that with WW2 rifles and various other real world or antique weapons.
> We
>already talked about the bugs,
>as for Multiplayer, you have
>access to drugs just as
>much as the other person-
>that's fair to me.
Except that drugs were horribly ill-balanced for multiplayer. Trauma Packs, for example, gave huge resistances with no side effect at all.
>Some weapons will always be
>stronger than others- you're suggesting
>a 10mm pistol should be
>equal to a Vindicator?
In a multiplayer game, for the same cost, yes the guns should be somewhat equal rather than everyone running around with pancors.
> The fact that people
>were capable of PSI in
>Fallout1 is all that's needed-
>hell, even if there wasn't-
>that does not rule out
>why there can not be
>telepaths that obtained powers to
>controls 'beasts' in other parts
>of the country
Psychers were rare in Fallout, and Grey's psychic abilities were derived from FEV, not cave radiation.
> How the hell do
>you know how all of
>the robots are supposed to
>look like, let alone what
>setting they're in? Just
>because FOT takes place in
>the same universe, does not
>mean they can't add new
>things- it's how you keep
>something fresh.
Because the setting is from the point of view of 1950s pulp sci, perhaps? When you make a setting with a point of view, then all things in that setting should at least have that theme. Instead, FOT gave us ANIME ROBOTS AND MECHA!
> A gun's
>graphic from BladeRunner is already
>in there, so they add
>some robots... HOW is this
>such a bad thing?
Ever seen BladeRunner? It's a retro-future setting as well. Ever listenned to the song, "One More Kiss, Dear"? The style of the cars?
Even then, it was put in the game to be an easter egg. A special reference to a movie with a similar style as Fallout's retro-future theme.
P
Phad_Vickers
Guest
*G* Anwsers instead of insults 
>It's a good one, as most of the problems with Fallout Tactics and the Fallout setting are glaringly obvious to anyone that's actually played the RPGs, particularly the first one.
All the gas powered vehicles should have tipped you off, when there's a special encounter in the original designed specifically to explain why there are no cars in the game. Fallout 2 had a big piece of plot about why there's no oil, either.
Therefore, it's safe to say that the cars in Fallout Tactics weren't a good idea.
Neither was the oil refinery in Fallout Tactics, which still had gasoline canisters. <
You know, I never considered that *sheepish grin* Most vehicles that were still running at the war were using energy as the price of gasoline was so high, and then you have that Hummer running in the intro with a very distinct Gasoline engine sound...I never realised that. Thank you
>Fallout's history is well established within the games. There's the intro slide shows which talk about the Great War. There's holodisks. There's Zax, the computer in Fallout. There's people in the game you can talk with that give historical information.
Saying there's no documentation on Fallout's history is just ignorant.<
Which I didn't say, I was just pointing out that not everything was set in stone. The war in Europe for example was due to the the Commonwealth dissolving, among other things- but it doesn't specify everything. China was sabatoged by the U.S, the U.S managed to tap into the last oil reserve under the ocean- China invaded Alaska. But it doesn't for example state what the area in Chicago is in. It states that oil was nearly gone, and that prices were obscene...it doesn't state that there could have been some oil squirreled away by companies...
>No, but content can be erroneous.<
Which would be why the reason that the content was harming the setting could be viable. Asking how FOT ruins the universe and getting the answer 'bugs' is not, and something I hope we can agree on *G*
>Actually, that's how FOT was pitched. "Imagine JA2 in the Fallout universe."
Frankly, it wasn't JA2, and the Fallout universe was half assed, at best.
Speaking of which, where, in FOT, were the Pre-Great War slug throwers that were common in Fallout and Fallout 2? There is no 10MM weapons or ammo in FOT, no 14MM pistol or ammo, and so on. Instead, they replaced things like that with WW2 rifles and various other real world or antique weapons.<
True- but it was meant to be more of a tatical and realistic in those terms as I saw it. I find WWII weapons more fitting in with Fallout's theme myself though...
I also was not aware that it was actually advertised as a JA2 clone with Fallout setting...
>Except that drugs were horribly ill-balanced for multiplayer. Trauma Packs, for example, gave huge resistances with no side effect at all.<
Everyone has access to the trauma packs however- and there is nothing forcing people to use them...you could play with friends instead of the stranger that slapped on the packs.
>In a multiplayer game, for the same cost, yes the guns should be somewhat equal rather than everyone running around with pancors.<
If a pistol costs the same amount as the pancor- of course. But overall damage and cost aren't the only factors...distance as well. Every game has these problems, balancing is extremely difficult and there is always a favorite weapon.
>Psychers were rare in Fallout, and Grey's psychic abilities were derived from FEV, not cave radiation.<
But my point is- FEV doesn't have to be the only cause, and the beastlords, while prominant in that single area are not necessarilly present in every community all over the Fallout Universe.
>Because the setting is from the point of view of 1950s pulp sci, perhaps? When you make a setting with a point of view, then all things in that setting should at least have that theme. Instead, FOT gave us ANIME ROBOTS AND MECHA!<
True, but it's not as if they revamped the entire theme into an anime, and that does not necessarilly destroy the setting- The setting will always have that mid century theme, but yes, I'm starting to see your points- while not entirely true to that theme though, it hardly 'skullfucks' it either.
>Ever seen BladeRunner? It's a retro-future setting as well. Ever listenned to the song, "One More Kiss, Dear"? The style of the cars?
Even then, it was put in the game to be an easter egg. A special reference to a movie with a similar style as Fallout's retro-future theme.<
True, and Fallout has always been the one to have many, many easter eggs. If one of the main guns resembles the one from BladeRunner, why can't one of the robots?
-Much to the others dismay in this thread, I might stick around these forums... some people will actually answer questions instead of 'go play the game'. I did play it, didn't see their point of view and so asked why...
When someone actually takes the time to explains his views this place is much more enjoyable
>It's a good one, as most of the problems with Fallout Tactics and the Fallout setting are glaringly obvious to anyone that's actually played the RPGs, particularly the first one.
All the gas powered vehicles should have tipped you off, when there's a special encounter in the original designed specifically to explain why there are no cars in the game. Fallout 2 had a big piece of plot about why there's no oil, either.
Therefore, it's safe to say that the cars in Fallout Tactics weren't a good idea.
Neither was the oil refinery in Fallout Tactics, which still had gasoline canisters. <
You know, I never considered that *sheepish grin* Most vehicles that were still running at the war were using energy as the price of gasoline was so high, and then you have that Hummer running in the intro with a very distinct Gasoline engine sound...I never realised that. Thank you
>Fallout's history is well established within the games. There's the intro slide shows which talk about the Great War. There's holodisks. There's Zax, the computer in Fallout. There's people in the game you can talk with that give historical information.
Saying there's no documentation on Fallout's history is just ignorant.<
Which I didn't say, I was just pointing out that not everything was set in stone. The war in Europe for example was due to the the Commonwealth dissolving, among other things- but it doesn't specify everything. China was sabatoged by the U.S, the U.S managed to tap into the last oil reserve under the ocean- China invaded Alaska. But it doesn't for example state what the area in Chicago is in. It states that oil was nearly gone, and that prices were obscene...it doesn't state that there could have been some oil squirreled away by companies...
>No, but content can be erroneous.<
Which would be why the reason that the content was harming the setting could be viable. Asking how FOT ruins the universe and getting the answer 'bugs' is not, and something I hope we can agree on *G*
>Actually, that's how FOT was pitched. "Imagine JA2 in the Fallout universe."
Frankly, it wasn't JA2, and the Fallout universe was half assed, at best.
Speaking of which, where, in FOT, were the Pre-Great War slug throwers that were common in Fallout and Fallout 2? There is no 10MM weapons or ammo in FOT, no 14MM pistol or ammo, and so on. Instead, they replaced things like that with WW2 rifles and various other real world or antique weapons.<
True- but it was meant to be more of a tatical and realistic in those terms as I saw it. I find WWII weapons more fitting in with Fallout's theme myself though...
I also was not aware that it was actually advertised as a JA2 clone with Fallout setting...
>Except that drugs were horribly ill-balanced for multiplayer. Trauma Packs, for example, gave huge resistances with no side effect at all.<
Everyone has access to the trauma packs however- and there is nothing forcing people to use them...you could play with friends instead of the stranger that slapped on the packs.
>In a multiplayer game, for the same cost, yes the guns should be somewhat equal rather than everyone running around with pancors.<
If a pistol costs the same amount as the pancor- of course. But overall damage and cost aren't the only factors...distance as well. Every game has these problems, balancing is extremely difficult and there is always a favorite weapon.
>Psychers were rare in Fallout, and Grey's psychic abilities were derived from FEV, not cave radiation.<
But my point is- FEV doesn't have to be the only cause, and the beastlords, while prominant in that single area are not necessarilly present in every community all over the Fallout Universe.
>Because the setting is from the point of view of 1950s pulp sci, perhaps? When you make a setting with a point of view, then all things in that setting should at least have that theme. Instead, FOT gave us ANIME ROBOTS AND MECHA!<
True, but it's not as if they revamped the entire theme into an anime, and that does not necessarilly destroy the setting- The setting will always have that mid century theme, but yes, I'm starting to see your points- while not entirely true to that theme though, it hardly 'skullfucks' it either.
>Ever seen BladeRunner? It's a retro-future setting as well. Ever listenned to the song, "One More Kiss, Dear"? The style of the cars?
Even then, it was put in the game to be an easter egg. A special reference to a movie with a similar style as Fallout's retro-future theme.<
True, and Fallout has always been the one to have many, many easter eggs. If one of the main guns resembles the one from BladeRunner, why can't one of the robots?
-Much to the others dismay in this thread, I might stick around these forums... some people will actually answer questions instead of 'go play the game'. I did play it, didn't see their point of view and so asked why...
When someone actually takes the time to explains his views this place is much more enjoyable
P
Phad_Vickers
Guest
But Fallout's creatures were never realistic in the first place- if you have beastlords, and centaurs and floaters...
What is so wrong with making a new variation of the above creature when it's from a different area of the country?
What is so wrong with making a new variation of the above creature when it's from a different area of the country?
[font size=1" color="#FF0000]LAST EDITED ON Dec-04-02 AT 04:42PM (GMT)[p]>
> But Fallout's creatures were
>never realistic in the first
>place- if you have beastlords,
>and centaurs and floaters...
First, you have to figure out how they were each created and stick with it.
> What is so wrong
>with making a new variation
>of the above creature when
>it's from a different area
>of the country?
Because they only came from one point of origin. Which is fairly obvious to anyone who has played Fallout 1 or 2.
I believe at this point it's very obvious you haven't played Fallout 1 or 2, at least to not any depth.
> But Fallout's creatures were
>never realistic in the first
>place- if you have beastlords,
>and centaurs and floaters...
First, you have to figure out how they were each created and stick with it.
> What is so wrong
>with making a new variation
>of the above creature when
>it's from a different area
>of the country?
Because they only came from one point of origin. Which is fairly obvious to anyone who has played Fallout 1 or 2.
I believe at this point it's very obvious you haven't played Fallout 1 or 2, at least to not any depth.
[font size=1" color="#FF0000]LAST EDITED ON Dec-04-02 AT 04:40PM (GMT)[p]>
>
> *G* Anwsers instead of
>insults
Yay, more waffling without a clue.
> You know, I never
>considered that *sheepish grin*
>Most
>vehicles that were still running
>at the war were using
>energy as the price of
>gasoline was so high, and
>then you have that Hummer
>running in the intro with
>a very distinct Gasoline engine
>sound...I never realised that.
>Thank you
That's not surprising in the least.
> Which I didn't say,
>I was just pointing out
>that not everything was set
>in stone.
It fairly well is set in stone if it's been put forth by material already in a game.
You know, like DeathClaws coming from only one point of origin, contrary to your "there could be different kinds for different parts of the country" nonsense.
> But it
>doesn't for example state what
>the area in Chicago is
>in.
Wrong. Try playing Fallout 1 again. Pay attention to what people say about the Mid-West.
> Which would be why
>the reason that the content
>was harming the setting could
>be viable. Asking how
>FOT ruins the universe and
>getting the answer 'bugs' is
>not, and something I
>hope we can agree on
>*G*
I never said bugs harmed the universe, and you can retract that bit of mouth-stuffing, shithead. I said that there was too much time used to work on stupid stuff instead of the real game, that bugs were introduced into the game. I also pointed out numerous materials that did harm the setting through content, materials that you seem to be playing a clueless spin-doctor for MicroForté.
> True- but it was
>meant to be more of
>a tatical and realistic in
>those terms as I saw
>it.
As you saw it. Precisely. Unfortunately, that doesn't exactly fit into the setting of the previous games, now does it?
>I find WWII
>weapons more fitting in with
>Fallout's theme myself though...
Yup, definitely without a clue.
> I also was not
>aware that it was actually
>advertised as a JA2 clone
>with Fallout setting...
Wow, and you decide to try and bust my chops without knowing much of anything? Hell, you are a troll.
> >Except that drugs were horribly ill-balanced for multiplayer. Trauma Packs, for example, gave huge resistances with no side effect at all.<
>
> Everyone has access to
>the trauma packs however- and
>there is nothing forcing people
>to use them...you could play
>with friends instead of the
>stranger that slapped on the
>packs.
Which is what I mentioned, that the players have to form the restrictions themselves.
Your excuse above hardly explains or excuses the imbalance in the game that made casual 10k games a pain to play, and that gameplay basically became solely limited to the clans who made up the rules. The casual player couldn't really play against someone who went full with drugs, and I'll quote someone from GSA:
"mplayer sux cause of druged up fags"
> If a pistol costs
>the same amount as the
>pancor- of course. But
>overall damage and cost aren't
>the only factors...distance as well.
> Every game has these
>problems, balancing is extremely difficult
>and there is always a
>favorite weapon.
Translation: "I just posted some shit and hope you'll try to forget this point. I really don't know what I'm talking about, so I'll just go on about distances and other nonsensical bullshit."
> But my point is-
>FEV doesn't have to be
>the only cause, and the
>beastlords, while prominant in that
>single area are not necessarilly
>present in every community all
>over the Fallout Universe.
Still doesn't explain the Beastlords, or for a greater matter, Psi abilities.
> >Because the setting is from the point of view of 1950s pulp sci, perhaps? When you make a setting with a point of view, then all things in that setting should at least have that theme. Instead, FOT gave us ANIME ROBOTS AND MECHA!<
>
> True, but it's not
>as if they revamped the
>entire theme into an anime,
>and that does not necessarilly
>destroy the setting- The
>setting will always have that
>mid century theme, but yes,
>I'm starting to see your
>points- while not entirely true
>to that theme though, it
>hardly 'skullfucks' it either.
You might want to play the original games again. It's obvious that it would take far too long to point out all the pertinent information that you're lacking, so if you go back through the games with your eyes open and read, your perception might be a bit drawn towards the setting. That's what Rex kept pointing out.
> True, and Fallout has
>always been the one to
>have many, many easter eggs.
No, it wasn't. That was BIS' fault for Fallout 2. The original had a few here and there, but none used ad nauseum.
> If one of the
>main guns resembles the one
>from BladeRunner, why can't one
>of the robots?
One of the robots? Kid, have you played FOT at all, or are you just wasting a shitload of our time? If so, I'll make sure you get the good ban.
> -Much to the others
>dismay in this thread, I
>might stick around these forums...
>some people will actually answer
>questions instead of 'go play
>the game'.
I'm not going to hold your hand and debunk every little problem of yours. You obviously have little grasp of the setting, background, and more. Quite obviously with the DeathClaws.
>I did
>play it, didn't see their
>point of view and so
>asked why...
Either you played it with your eyes closed, or you are lying.
> When someone actually takes
>the time to explains his
>views this place is much
>more enjoyable
If you displayed some knowledge about the setting, then it might not be such a chore to reply to you. As it stands, you're still around less than half a clue.
>
> *G* Anwsers instead of
>insults
Yay, more waffling without a clue.
> You know, I never
>considered that *sheepish grin*
>Most
>vehicles that were still running
>at the war were using
>energy as the price of
>gasoline was so high, and
>then you have that Hummer
>running in the intro with
>a very distinct Gasoline engine
>sound...I never realised that.
>Thank you
That's not surprising in the least.
> Which I didn't say,
>I was just pointing out
>that not everything was set
>in stone.
It fairly well is set in stone if it's been put forth by material already in a game.
You know, like DeathClaws coming from only one point of origin, contrary to your "there could be different kinds for different parts of the country" nonsense.
> But it
>doesn't for example state what
>the area in Chicago is
>in.
Wrong. Try playing Fallout 1 again. Pay attention to what people say about the Mid-West.
> Which would be why
>the reason that the content
>was harming the setting could
>be viable. Asking how
>FOT ruins the universe and
>getting the answer 'bugs' is
>not, and something I
>hope we can agree on
>*G*
I never said bugs harmed the universe, and you can retract that bit of mouth-stuffing, shithead. I said that there was too much time used to work on stupid stuff instead of the real game, that bugs were introduced into the game. I also pointed out numerous materials that did harm the setting through content, materials that you seem to be playing a clueless spin-doctor for MicroForté.
> True- but it was
>meant to be more of
>a tatical and realistic in
>those terms as I saw
>it.
As you saw it. Precisely. Unfortunately, that doesn't exactly fit into the setting of the previous games, now does it?
>I find WWII
>weapons more fitting in with
>Fallout's theme myself though...
Yup, definitely without a clue.
> I also was not
>aware that it was actually
>advertised as a JA2 clone
>with Fallout setting...
Wow, and you decide to try and bust my chops without knowing much of anything? Hell, you are a troll.
> >Except that drugs were horribly ill-balanced for multiplayer. Trauma Packs, for example, gave huge resistances with no side effect at all.<
>
> Everyone has access to
>the trauma packs however- and
>there is nothing forcing people
>to use them...you could play
>with friends instead of the
>stranger that slapped on the
>packs.
Which is what I mentioned, that the players have to form the restrictions themselves.
Your excuse above hardly explains or excuses the imbalance in the game that made casual 10k games a pain to play, and that gameplay basically became solely limited to the clans who made up the rules. The casual player couldn't really play against someone who went full with drugs, and I'll quote someone from GSA:
"mplayer sux cause of druged up fags"
> If a pistol costs
>the same amount as the
>pancor- of course. But
>overall damage and cost aren't
>the only factors...distance as well.
> Every game has these
>problems, balancing is extremely difficult
>and there is always a
>favorite weapon.
Translation: "I just posted some shit and hope you'll try to forget this point. I really don't know what I'm talking about, so I'll just go on about distances and other nonsensical bullshit."
> But my point is-
>FEV doesn't have to be
>the only cause, and the
>beastlords, while prominant in that
>single area are not necessarilly
>present in every community all
>over the Fallout Universe.
Still doesn't explain the Beastlords, or for a greater matter, Psi abilities.
> >Because the setting is from the point of view of 1950s pulp sci, perhaps? When you make a setting with a point of view, then all things in that setting should at least have that theme. Instead, FOT gave us ANIME ROBOTS AND MECHA!<
>
> True, but it's not
>as if they revamped the
>entire theme into an anime,
>and that does not necessarilly
>destroy the setting- The
>setting will always have that
>mid century theme, but yes,
>I'm starting to see your
>points- while not entirely true
>to that theme though, it
>hardly 'skullfucks' it either.
You might want to play the original games again. It's obvious that it would take far too long to point out all the pertinent information that you're lacking, so if you go back through the games with your eyes open and read, your perception might be a bit drawn towards the setting. That's what Rex kept pointing out.
> True, and Fallout has
>always been the one to
>have many, many easter eggs.
No, it wasn't. That was BIS' fault for Fallout 2. The original had a few here and there, but none used ad nauseum.
> If one of the
>main guns resembles the one
>from BladeRunner, why can't one
>of the robots?
One of the robots? Kid, have you played FOT at all, or are you just wasting a shitload of our time? If so, I'll make sure you get the good ban.
> -Much to the others
>dismay in this thread, I
>might stick around these forums...
>some people will actually answer
>questions instead of 'go play
>the game'.
I'm not going to hold your hand and debunk every little problem of yours. You obviously have little grasp of the setting, background, and more. Quite obviously with the DeathClaws.
>I did
>play it, didn't see their
>point of view and so
>asked why...
Either you played it with your eyes closed, or you are lying.
> When someone actually takes
>the time to explains his
>views this place is much
>more enjoyable
If you displayed some knowledge about the setting, then it might not be such a chore to reply to you. As it stands, you're still around less than half a clue.
G
Guest
Guest
Beastlords? In Fallout? Did you even play Fallout?
Saint_Proverbius
Vault Senior Citizen
> You know, I never
>considered that *sheepish grin* Most
>vehicles that were still running
>at the war were using
>energy as the price of
>gasoline was so high, and
>then you have that Hummer
>running in the intro with
>a very distinct Gasoline engine
>sound...I never realised that.
>Thank you
Well, even if they weren't gas powered, how many vehicles did the BOS give your squad? You have a hummer, an APC, a tank, a buggy, and so on, just for your squad. So much for the whole concept of "rare vehicles".
Heck, in FO2, you had one car and you had to travel a bit to get it running. You had to travel even more to get the thing working well. In FOT, they just handed them out like trick or treat candy.
And FOT took place 120 years after the Great War, when we can assume vehicles were last made. If you let a car sit for a month or two, it won't start.
The vehicles also didn't fit the 1950s look of the setting either. Look at all the rusted out wreckage of cars in Fallout and Fallout 2. Every single car you see had stylings of the 1950s cars. Even FOT had the 1950s car husks laying around, but they tossed in the hummer anyway.
> Which I didn't say,
>I was just pointing out
>that not everything was set
>in stone. The war
>in Europe for example was
>due to the the Commonwealth
>dissolving, among other things- but
>it doesn't specify everything.
Well, they state that the European nations started infighting due to resources, making it a global situation.
> But it
>doesn't for example state what
>the area in Chicago is
>in. It states that
>oil was nearly gone, and
>that prices were obscene...it doesn't
>state that there could have
>been some oil squirreled away
>by companies...
Gasoline doesn't last very long if it's just sitting around. It has to be periodically mixed or else it tends to break down.
Also, given the scarce oil situation, I'd say the government would have squirrelled it away. You really would have a Road Warrior-esque fuel refinery fortress out in the middle of no where.
> Which would be why
>the reason that the content
>was harming the setting could
>be viable. Asking how
>FOT ruins the universe and
>getting the answer 'bugs' is
>not, and something I
>hope we can agree on
>*G*
Well, there are other examples, like the intelligent deathclaws being made by the Enclave appearing 40 years too early in Fallout Tactics. Even the developers themselves admit that was a screw up.
> True- but it was
>meant to be more of
>a tatical and realistic in
>those terms as I saw
>it. I find WWII
>weapons more fitting in with
>Fallout's theme myself though...
WWII weapons aren't nearly as fitting as Fallout's circa 2050 or so weapons. The Sten Gun for example, was a pretty shitty weapon even in WWII. They're not exactly common place because they just didn't work well.
How common were 10MM weapons in Fallout and Fallout 2? Very. In fact, I'm betting you spent most of those games using them and their ammo as money for bartering. Travel across the Rocky Mountains, and there's none to be seen.
> I also was not
>aware that it was actually
>advertised as a JA2 clone
>with Fallout setting...
Yup, and JA2 absolutely spanks FOT in most every area as well.
> Everyone has access to
>the trauma packs however- and
>there is nothing forcing people
>to use them...you could play
>with friends instead of the
>stranger that slapped on the
>packs.
Well, here's the point. Trauma packs were cheap in the point buy. They're free damage resistance. It's a flaw in the system that was heavily exploited, so everyone used them in 10k or higher matches.
More on this next..
> If a pistol costs
>the same amount as the
>pancor- of course. But
>overall damage and cost aren't
>the only factors...distance as well.
> Every game has these
>problems, balancing is extremely difficult
>and there is always a
>favorite weapon.
Pancors are the defacto weapon in multiplayer. Factor in trauma packs being so easily exploited. You now have all those options and things distilled down to squad matches being between trauma pumped pancor gunners vs. trauma pumped pancor gunners.
FOT was so poorly balanced, there's very little point in actually having a wide variety of options for combat when those two things work better than anything else.
> True, but it's not
>as if they revamped the
>entire theme into an anime,
>and that does not necessarilly
>destroy the setting- The
>setting will always have that
>mid century theme, but yes,
>I'm starting to see your
>points- while not entirely true
>to that theme though, it
>hardly 'skullfucks' it either.
Like hell it doesn't. 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?
> True, and Fallout has
>always been the one to
>have many, many easter eggs.
> If one of the
>main guns resembles the one
>from BladeRunner, why can't one
>of the robots?
Because mass producted robots wouldn't be an easter egg, would they?
>considered that *sheepish grin* Most
>vehicles that were still running
>at the war were using
>energy as the price of
>gasoline was so high, and
>then you have that Hummer
>running in the intro with
>a very distinct Gasoline engine
>sound...I never realised that.
>Thank you
Well, even if they weren't gas powered, how many vehicles did the BOS give your squad? You have a hummer, an APC, a tank, a buggy, and so on, just for your squad. So much for the whole concept of "rare vehicles".
Heck, in FO2, you had one car and you had to travel a bit to get it running. You had to travel even more to get the thing working well. In FOT, they just handed them out like trick or treat candy.
And FOT took place 120 years after the Great War, when we can assume vehicles were last made. If you let a car sit for a month or two, it won't start.
The vehicles also didn't fit the 1950s look of the setting either. Look at all the rusted out wreckage of cars in Fallout and Fallout 2. Every single car you see had stylings of the 1950s cars. Even FOT had the 1950s car husks laying around, but they tossed in the hummer anyway.
> Which I didn't say,
>I was just pointing out
>that not everything was set
>in stone. The war
>in Europe for example was
>due to the the Commonwealth
>dissolving, among other things- but
>it doesn't specify everything.
Well, they state that the European nations started infighting due to resources, making it a global situation.
> But it
>doesn't for example state what
>the area in Chicago is
>in. It states that
>oil was nearly gone, and
>that prices were obscene...it doesn't
>state that there could have
>been some oil squirreled away
>by companies...
Gasoline doesn't last very long if it's just sitting around. It has to be periodically mixed or else it tends to break down.
Also, given the scarce oil situation, I'd say the government would have squirrelled it away. You really would have a Road Warrior-esque fuel refinery fortress out in the middle of no where.
> Which would be why
>the reason that the content
>was harming the setting could
>be viable. Asking how
>FOT ruins the universe and
>getting the answer 'bugs' is
>not, and something I
>hope we can agree on
>*G*
Well, there are other examples, like the intelligent deathclaws being made by the Enclave appearing 40 years too early in Fallout Tactics. Even the developers themselves admit that was a screw up.
> True- but it was
>meant to be more of
>a tatical and realistic in
>those terms as I saw
>it. I find WWII
>weapons more fitting in with
>Fallout's theme myself though...
WWII weapons aren't nearly as fitting as Fallout's circa 2050 or so weapons. The Sten Gun for example, was a pretty shitty weapon even in WWII. They're not exactly common place because they just didn't work well.
How common were 10MM weapons in Fallout and Fallout 2? Very. In fact, I'm betting you spent most of those games using them and their ammo as money for bartering. Travel across the Rocky Mountains, and there's none to be seen.
> I also was not
>aware that it was actually
>advertised as a JA2 clone
>with Fallout setting...
Yup, and JA2 absolutely spanks FOT in most every area as well.
> Everyone has access to
>the trauma packs however- and
>there is nothing forcing people
>to use them...you could play
>with friends instead of the
>stranger that slapped on the
>packs.
Well, here's the point. Trauma packs were cheap in the point buy. They're free damage resistance. It's a flaw in the system that was heavily exploited, so everyone used them in 10k or higher matches.
> If a pistol costs
>the same amount as the
>pancor- of course. But
>overall damage and cost aren't
>the only factors...distance as well.
> Every game has these
>problems, balancing is extremely difficult
>and there is always a
>favorite weapon.
Pancors are the defacto weapon in multiplayer. Factor in trauma packs being so easily exploited. You now have all those options and things distilled down to squad matches being between trauma pumped pancor gunners vs. trauma pumped pancor gunners.
FOT was so poorly balanced, there's very little point in actually having a wide variety of options for combat when those two things work better than anything else.
> True, but it's not
>as if they revamped the
>entire theme into an anime,
>and that does not necessarilly
>destroy the setting- The
>setting will always have that
>mid century theme, but yes,
>I'm starting to see your
>points- while not entirely true
>to that theme though, it
>hardly 'skullfucks' it either.
Like hell it doesn't. 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?
> True, and Fallout has
>always been the one to
>have many, many easter eggs.
> If one of the
>main guns resembles the one
>from BladeRunner, why can't one
>of the robots?
Because mass producted robots wouldn't be an easter egg, would they?
Saint_Proverbius
Vault Senior Citizen
>
> But Fallout's creatures were
>never realistic in the first
>place- if you have beastlords,
>and centaurs and floaters...
>
> What is so wrong
>with making a new variation
>of the above creature when
>it's from a different area
>of the country?
Because it's not a variation of the same creature, it's a new creature. A bat isn't a sparrow, after all.
Carl Linnaeus would be quite amused by your statement there.
> But Fallout's creatures were
>never realistic in the first
>place- if you have beastlords,
>and centaurs and floaters...
>
> What is so wrong
>with making a new variation
>of the above creature when
>it's from a different area
>of the country?
Because it's not a variation of the same creature, it's a new creature. A bat isn't a sparrow, after all.
Carl Linnaeus would be quite amused by your statement there.
P
Phad_Vickers
Guest
>I believe at this point it's very obvious you haven't played Fallout 1 or 2, at least to not any depth. <
I played through Fallout2, and I'm playing Fallout1 at the moment, like I already said.
Where does it say the information about this in Fallout2? Where the deathclaws hm? I recruited Goris onto my team from Vault 13 and had him up until the end of the game...
Grey deathclaw, unlike all the others which were brown. Wore a robe? I left him at the oilrig on the front screen so I could sneak into the Enclave and at the end I got a screen with his corpse on it saying I slaughtered the Deathclaws at Vault13- which actually died from the Enclave after a little while.
They gave me the GECK.
As for the Fallout1, only information I've found on deathclaws in that game so far is that they are rumoured to be attacking some caravan in the Hub...
I played through Fallout2, and I'm playing Fallout1 at the moment, like I already said.
Where does it say the information about this in Fallout2? Where the deathclaws hm? I recruited Goris onto my team from Vault 13 and had him up until the end of the game...
Grey deathclaw, unlike all the others which were brown. Wore a robe? I left him at the oilrig on the front screen so I could sneak into the Enclave and at the end I got a screen with his corpse on it saying I slaughtered the Deathclaws at Vault13- which actually died from the Enclave after a little while.
They gave me the GECK.
As for the Fallout1, only information I've found on deathclaws in that game so far is that they are rumoured to be attacking some caravan in the Hub...
P
Phad_Vickers
Guest
>> If one of the
>main guns resembles the one
>from BladeRunner, why can't one
>of the robots?
One of the robots? Kid, have you played FOT at all, or are you just wasting a shitload of our time? If so, I'll make sure you get the good ban.<
Ban me? Fine, go ahead. My language on these forums so far as been clean, I'm trying to add to the discussions and I haven't flamed anyone. God, I'm tired of your b***shit. Just after you do, you might want to reread the post and find out that I'm not the only one that posted that the robots look like they're from Blade Runner. The reason I used the above example was in response to someone's earlier critcism of FOT...
I quote: '9. The robots look like they are from Assassin and Blade Runner, instead of Forbidden Planet'
Maybe you want to ban that guy too?
>main guns resembles the one
>from BladeRunner, why can't one
>of the robots?
One of the robots? Kid, have you played FOT at all, or are you just wasting a shitload of our time? If so, I'll make sure you get the good ban.<
Ban me? Fine, go ahead. My language on these forums so far as been clean, I'm trying to add to the discussions and I haven't flamed anyone. God, I'm tired of your b***shit. Just after you do, you might want to reread the post and find out that I'm not the only one that posted that the robots look like they're from Blade Runner. The reason I used the above example was in response to someone's earlier critcism of FOT...
I quote: '9. The robots look like they are from Assassin and Blade Runner, instead of Forbidden Planet'
Maybe you want to ban that guy too?
P
Phad_Vickers
Guest
>Well, even if they weren't gas powered, how many vehicles did the BOS give your squad? You have a hummer, an APC, a tank, a buggy, and so on, just for your squad. So much for the whole concept of "rare vehicles".
Heck, in FO2, you had one car and you had to travel a bit to get it running. You had to travel even more to get the thing working well. In FOT, they just handed them out like trick or treat candy.
And FOT took place 120 years after the Great War, when we can assume vehicles were last made. If you let a car sit for a month or two, it won't start.
The vehicles also didn't fit the 1950s look of the setting either. Look at all the rusted out wreckage of cars in Fallout and Fallout 2. Every single car you see had stylings of the 1950s cars. Even FOT had the 1950s car husks laying around, but they tossed in the hummer anyway.<
Yeah, but looking back, using the Hummer and such I suppose didn't see so out of place when in Fallout2 you're using a 50s style of car, called the 'Highwayman' IIRC. But it used energy, not gasoline. The fact that the BOS had the vehicles didn't seem so out of place as they're supposed to be the holders of technology...
Guess that's why I never considered it...
>WWII weapons aren't nearly as fitting as Fallout's circa 2050 or so weapons. The Sten Gun for example, was a pretty shitty weapon even in WWII. They're not exactly common place because they just didn't work well.
How common were 10MM weapons in Fallout and Fallout 2? Very. In fact, I'm betting you spent most of those games using them and their ammo as money for bartering. Travel across the Rocky Mountains, and there's none to be seen.<
True, but WWII weapons are much more in the style of the mid century- A Colt1911 was a popular gun for example... still is, today...and was used during WWII
Yes, but FOT isn't ditching the theme, I mean it's still there... it's not destroying the theme. Hurting it, most likely...I didn't know how it did that- that's why I asked.
>Because mass producted robots wouldn't be an easter egg, would they?<
And the Bladerunner gun isn't either- it was in Fallout1, but it can be found anywhere, just about, in Fallout2.
Anyway, I am seeing many of your points... as I said, I did completly miss a few...
Heck, in FO2, you had one car and you had to travel a bit to get it running. You had to travel even more to get the thing working well. In FOT, they just handed them out like trick or treat candy.
And FOT took place 120 years after the Great War, when we can assume vehicles were last made. If you let a car sit for a month or two, it won't start.
The vehicles also didn't fit the 1950s look of the setting either. Look at all the rusted out wreckage of cars in Fallout and Fallout 2. Every single car you see had stylings of the 1950s cars. Even FOT had the 1950s car husks laying around, but they tossed in the hummer anyway.<
Yeah, but looking back, using the Hummer and such I suppose didn't see so out of place when in Fallout2 you're using a 50s style of car, called the 'Highwayman' IIRC. But it used energy, not gasoline. The fact that the BOS had the vehicles didn't seem so out of place as they're supposed to be the holders of technology...
Guess that's why I never considered it...
>WWII weapons aren't nearly as fitting as Fallout's circa 2050 or so weapons. The Sten Gun for example, was a pretty shitty weapon even in WWII. They're not exactly common place because they just didn't work well.
How common were 10MM weapons in Fallout and Fallout 2? Very. In fact, I'm betting you spent most of those games using them and their ammo as money for bartering. Travel across the Rocky Mountains, and there's none to be seen.<
True, but WWII weapons are much more in the style of the mid century- A Colt1911 was a popular gun for example... still is, today...and was used during WWII
Yes, but FOT isn't ditching the theme, I mean it's still there... it's not destroying the theme. Hurting it, most likely...I didn't know how it did that- that's why I asked.
>Because mass producted robots wouldn't be an easter egg, would they?<
And the Bladerunner gun isn't either- it was in Fallout1, but it can be found anywhere, just about, in Fallout2.
Anyway, I am seeing many of your points... as I said, I did completly miss a few...