Why Tactics and Fallout BoS are rated so low???

dogy_kane

dogy_kane

First time out of the vault
Okay, don't get me wrong, I'm just wondering if Fallout Tactics and Fallout Brotherhood of Steel are worth getting, or not???

I played F3 and NV first, then beat F1 and 2
I'm thinking about Tactics and BoS at the moment but seems they are both rated kinda low, especially BoS.
Why is that???
is that because of shitty story settings? or bcoz something else?

I checked few gameplay videos of Tactics and BoS on YouTube, the interface of Tactics seems a bit chaotic and game engine of BoS looks too funny to be taken serious, but I couldn't notice any in-depth difference by simply watching those videos.
If you have played either of them, I would appreciate your opinion, but please, give some detailed explanation if you can, don't just simply say 'Ops, bcoz they are not like original Fallout!' I don't mind the changes of gameplay, I want to know why certain changes are bad for real, thx! 8-)
 
Well, Tactics was a bit of a deviation from the prior games in that it is a tactical RPG like Jagged Alliance. While Tactics is usually considered a decent game in itself, it does contain quite a few lore-contradicting things so many consider is semi-canon.
Tactics is certainly worth a try if you like gameplay in the style of Jagged Alliance.
BoS is just... Well, the gameplay is not exactly what you'd expect from Fallout. And while action games are not bad per se, BoS doesn't manage to be a decent game, unlike Tactics. It's very much lore-contradicting and the overall tone, story, everything is just completely off.
Fallout 3 has been accused of being rather juvenile, but BoS is just a different league in that regard.
Well, you're free to give it a try, but it really just isn't very good. NMA has a closed section on BoS all the way down just above the Vats. There you'll find why BoS is not liked around here.
 
Interesting enough I rate the storyline of Fallout BOS/POS above that of Fallout 3.

At least they tried to do something new instead of rehashing Fallout 1 and 2.
 
You would have to really play it to fully understand.

But as others have said Tactics wasn't bad, just lore breaking and a heavy tactical game with rpg elements.

BoS, if the game were not called Fallout it would be considered a sub-par Baldurs Gate clone. Honestly, they could have done better considering gamers like Hunter The Reckoning were much more fun and more indepth.

The biggest problem people had with BoS was that it was simply named Fallout and the shady reasons it was named so. Its rpg system was just bleh, its action/gameplay, as mentioned above,abysmal. However, it hit rock bottom when it was given a Fallout title when the came could be further from the truth. Essentially, BoS was not only one big insult to Fallout/RPG fans but also to the console crowd, on par with John Kerrys 'your smart or you'll get stuck in Iraq' comment.
 
thx for all the replie folks!

have been playing Tactics for a number of missions now
Now I do see why some people bash it, bt personaly I kinda like it

The action part is certainly more intense than Fallout 1 & 2 but role playing elements are reduced to almost non-existent, no memorable characters and very little dialogues, no freedom of choices of development of story. Post apocalyptic atmosphere is also kinda bad, for most time there is no atmospheric soundtracks and the depth of that world isn't good as well.

However, it does give a strong sense of battlefield, since the player-characters are much easier to die than the protagonists of other Fallout titles, the feeling of pressure is much stronger.

Above all, love how Midwest Brotherhood has turned into a quasi-Fascist military power, in some way, I'm so tired of BoS always being white knights/good guys, kind fulfilled my wish of joining Enclave, cold-bloodly slaughtering every miserable soul who dares to (or just accidentally) stand on the way of Brotherhood is real enjoyable!!! LoL
 
The Dutch Ghost said:
Interesting enough I rate the storyline of Fallout BOS/POS above that of Fallout 3.

At least they tried to do something new instead of rehashing Fallout 1 and 2.
Click to expand...

To be fair though, I've had bowel movements I'd rate above the storyline of Fallout 3.
 
dogy_kane said:
...very little dialogues...
Click to expand...

There is no dialogue in the whole game, unfortunately. Wait until you see the exchanges between those on guard duty... True American spirit.

dogy_kane said:
Post apocalyptic atmosphere is also kinda bad, for most time there is no atmospheric soundtracks and the depth of that world isn't good as well.
Click to expand...

If anything, I'd say the textures and specifically pre-War posters added much to the atmosphere. The soundtrack itself often has howling wind of sorts - like a desolate wasteland.

I also agree on the action part. I played in real time, and it was hell being fired at. Especially since guns in Tactics are actually made to kill. Random enemy pops up - and you're dead.
 
Sub-Human said:
I also agree on the action part. I played in real time, and it was hell being fired at. Especially since guns in Tactics are actually made to kill. Random enemy pops up - and you're dead.
Click to expand...

It is a bit ridiculous how weak your characters are in the Tactics, I'm now run in the missions of fighting mutants, despite being armed with Metal Armor MKII (Haven't got any Power Armor yet), my squad get instantly killed whenever a mutant fires upon me.
 
Sub-Human said:
I also agree on the action part. I played in real time, and it was hell being fired at. Especially since guns in Tactics are actually made to kill. Random enemy pops up - and you're dead.
Click to expand...
This is definitely true, which is why it sometimes takes me awhile to get back into it because I have to remember the old school approach of saving every time I do anything successfully. It's not so bad once you get used to it but given that I only just got to the more action heavy later missions (when I last played a couple years back), I'm not sure how bad the end game is.

Fallout Tactics isn't horrible but it's not great either. It would have been really nice had loot been handled more like XCom (original) where you get everything at the end of the mission and storing items wasn't manually putting crap in lockers. Also the quartermaster stuff could have been less tedious. Basically item handling in general didn't translate well from Fallout 1&2 to Tactics. Not that it was completely unproblematic in those games as well...

All in all, I had fun with Tactics. I haven't tried BoS but if I could get my hands on it for $5 or less I might give it a spin just to experience how bad it is. I should probably just watch a "Let's play" of it...
 
Personally I'm a Tactics fan. I recently found out about the Redux unofficial patch and will be doing a re-playthrough soon

The mission where you drive through the town and have to destroy the barricades was pure golden.

There *are* some moments of dialogue. Or at least people talking at you :lol: There are some dynamic elements of the game, notably your actions with deathclaws, ghouls and muities, that affect if/how many of those become playable characters

I remember I got it when it first came out and got terribly destroyed repeatedly in multiplayer, which was neat
 
I'm yet to check whether did FOT Ghouls can be harmed by radiation. but one weird thing is for sure... Automated turrets do suffer overdose!!! i've proven it in Peoria mission meow.
 
Archea47 said:
Personally I'm a Tactics fan.
Click to expand...

Me too. Loved it right away when it came back in the days and I still do. I was instantly addicted when I recently started to play it again. It has been both fun and challenging.
 
The storyline in Tactics sure leaves a lot to be desired, but man, I really wish they re-made Fallout 1 and 2 to adopt some of the combat system. I don't mean the real-time stuff; I'm talking about the ability to have a somewhat customizable party, a system where you get better party members/equipment available from your home base as you complete more quests, and a ton of different weaponry that really made a lot of the combat skills more effective.

Throwing especially benefited from a huge variety of grenades with different damage types and effects. Even just the ability to set party members to passive/aggressive states and to only attack if they have a certain % chance to hit gave Fallout combat a whole new level of strategy. You could set up ambushes, or overwatch to provide covering fire for an advancing shotgun/melee specialist to get up close, or have different party members be able to enter a building from different entrances simultaneously for more effective room-clearing... And none of this even required the real-time mode be enabled; it would work even with turn-based combat.

Fallout: Tactics did a lot of exceptional things with the Fallout series in terms of game mechanics, and it's really too bad it was never adopted in any games with more of an RPG focus or at least a better storyline.
 
dogy_kane said:
Sub-Human said:
I also agree on the action part. I played in real time, and it was hell being fired at. Especially since guns in Tactics are actually made to kill. Random enemy pops up - and you're dead.
Click to expand...

It is a bit ridiculous how weak your characters are in the Tactics, I'm now run in the missions of fighting mutants, despite being armed with Metal Armor MKII (Haven't got any Power Armor yet), my squad get instantly killed whenever a mutant fires upon me.
Click to expand...

Well come to Tactics. I`m big big fan of Tactics since the day it was relesed. True it have no dialog, nor many RPG elements but it`s a war game, and still third best Fallout there is. Contradictions are minor (non-existent compared to F3 :roll: ), and it gives many new, fresh factions fitting fallout world.
 
Saying Fallout Tactic is not a bad RPG like saying Jagged Alliance 2 is not a bad RPG.

FT is another genre but still carry the trapping of a Fallout RPG. so people expecting a fallout RPG get a rude surprise playing it.

imagine baldur gate series. lighten the quests and stories. Add more combat. you get Icewind Dale series.

Samething with fallout tactics. You lighten most of stories and quests of a fallout game. Add more combat and companions management. viola, you get tactics.

As for how good tactics is, let me say this. if you get tired of JA2 and want to play the next game, try Fallout Tactics. It's the logical newer game for ja2 fans.
 
Everyone pretty much covered it. These two games are simply horrible, all the way around.

Especially for people who loved Fallout due to its RPG elements.
 
Eh, no argument there. i remember fallout fans screaming to high heaven over tactics during its release time.
 
Fallout Tactics is probably my favourite game out of the lot. To me its the one I got the most immersed in. The characters, the story, the combat, the game world, the enemies, the combat etc

Not that I don't love 1 + 2 just as much but I can always reinstall tactics and play it start to finish loving every minute.
 
Even with the lore contradictions i think tactics is just as good as fallout 1 or 2. It has interesting innovations both related to game-play and background story.

Now as BOS goes i would really suggest people to not play it ... its a waste of time really. Huge lore problems ... naive action game-play ... pure hack & Slash ... utterly poor background story ... and ... Attis ... bergh !!!

just to enphatize how much i hate BOS let us say i gave my tactics custom campaign an entire chapter to re-tell this story in my way and to channel my frustration into the 3 poor initiates ... slaughtering them, over and over again [sadistic laugh]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top