T
TorontoReign
Guest
I told you this before brother buy you a cheap XP laptop at a pawn shop or something.
Your opinion is worthless
- Thread starter JustAShcookius
- Start date
I told you this before brother buy you a cheap XP laptop at a pawn shop or something.
FalloutNV
First time out of the vault
Issue is Lot of Fallout 1- 2 players will Try to make out your Not true fallout fan if don’t play the Original games. Even though they are Compete outdated trash with Great Story but poor characters. So sorry if Like new Fallout Games better I'm bad my opinion is Meaningless.
Ugly Kid
Still Mildly Glowing
I don't have the brain power to come up with an argument right now but you have a horrible take
Gizmojunk
Antediluvian as Feck
Well of course how does one know, if they haven't played them, and also ... if the originators are Fallout, and the later games are self evidently not, and don't try to be, then how does being a fan of those games make one a fan of Fallout? Since they are not at all like Fallout to begin with?
A thing (or method) is only outdated if there exists a better way to achieve the same effect or result. So far there hasn't been one; is Chess outdated?
With FO3, Bethesda doesn't even try to compete with Fallout; they are fine with just mechanically mimicking their TES game using the new world setting. They get to sell it all over again to the same people, plus anyone else that wants to play it.
_________
So ask the question supposing someone is introduced to Skyrim, but it's heavily modded with a new campaign, and re-engineered game mechanics that make it turn based ISO-3D; say that they like it —a lot. When they buy the game for themselves, and it's not at all what they were expecting, are they then a fan of Skyrim or of the mod?
FO3 is an Oblivion total conversion mod. FO4 is not even faithful to FO3... neither are faithful to the Fallout series.
Last edited:
FalloutNV
First time out of the vault
You make great points however Fallout NV is Still best of the series Fallout original or Not.Well of course how does one know, if they haven't played them, and also ... if the originators are Fallout, and the later games are self evidently not, and don't try to be, then how does being a fan of those games make one a fan of Fallout? Since they are not at all like Fallout to begin with?
A thing (or method) is only outdated if there exists a better way to achieve the same effect or result. So far there hasn't been one; is Chess outdated?
With FO3, Bethesda doesn't even try to compete with Fallout; they are fine with just mechanically mimicking their TES game using the new world setting. They get to sell it all over again to the same people, plus anyone else that wants to play it.
_________
So ask the question supposing someone is introduced to Skyrim, but it's heavily modded with a new campaign, and re-engineered game mechanics that make it turn based ISO-3D; say that they like it —a lot. When they buy the game for themselves, and it's not at all what they were expecting, are they then a fan of Skyrim or of the mod?
FO3 is an Oblivion total conversion mod. FO4 is not even faithful to FO3... neither are faithful to the Fallout series.
Morgan_
Duckerz
True. New Vegas is best.
Been playing the first one off and on and it just doesn’t click as well as NV does. The first game is responsible for all the foundational “bones” they made with world building ofc and as such takes credit in part for the later games success, but NV is still written better with less exposition.
NV also has a better designed world than the originals. This shows up in a number of ways from either how you come across these places, bow they relate to one another, or simply the places themselves and the kind of presence they have. The first two Fallouts suffer from this with every settlement being one story shacks with less well designed, or written quests.
All the pieces of the NV puzzle are higher quality and fit together much better than the first two games. From writing, to quests, locations (especially vaults), characters and gameplay. These fit together better than previous entries and as a result the atmosphere NV generates is better much more often.
The greatest moments in the first game for me, so far, is coming across the West Tek facility and talking to the ZAX computer, or meeting certain npc’s that leave an impression. Everything else is very ho-hum. These are the only part’s to have a similar impact or memorable feel as meeting House after entering Vegas, making it into Boomer territory, completing the Nightkin quest, just running around in the world itself, etc.
TL;DR:
The first games struggle with delivery and consistency as opposed to NV.
Fallout 1 & 2:
10/10 bones
7/10 execution
Fallout NV:
10/10 bones
9.5/10 execution
Been playing the first one off and on and it just doesn’t click as well as NV does. The first game is responsible for all the foundational “bones” they made with world building ofc and as such takes credit in part for the later games success, but NV is still written better with less exposition.
NV also has a better designed world than the originals. This shows up in a number of ways from either how you come across these places, bow they relate to one another, or simply the places themselves and the kind of presence they have. The first two Fallouts suffer from this with every settlement being one story shacks with less well designed, or written quests.
All the pieces of the NV puzzle are higher quality and fit together much better than the first two games. From writing, to quests, locations (especially vaults), characters and gameplay. These fit together better than previous entries and as a result the atmosphere NV generates is better much more often.
The greatest moments in the first game for me, so far, is coming across the West Tek facility and talking to the ZAX computer, or meeting certain npc’s that leave an impression. Everything else is very ho-hum. These are the only part’s to have a similar impact or memorable feel as meeting House after entering Vegas, making it into Boomer territory, completing the Nightkin quest, just running around in the world itself, etc.
TL;DR:
The first games struggle with delivery and consistency as opposed to NV.
Fallout 1 & 2:
10/10 bones
7/10 execution
Fallout NV:
10/10 bones
9.5/10 execution
Gizmojunk
Antediluvian as Feck
So far... every Fallout IP game after Tactics [Tactics too, but least so] seems like a spinoff title to me. Spinoffs can be good, but are meant to be very different from the source material. It's difficult to impossible to directly compare games that do not directly compete at providing a similar experience.
It's like comparing a hammer to a pipe wrench; they are both good tools, and they can both be used for pounding—but which is the best tool? Is the pipe wrench a better hammer? Certainly the hammer is not the best wrench.
It's like comparing a hammer to a pipe wrench; they are both good tools, and they can both be used for pounding—but which is the best tool? Is the pipe wrench a better hammer? Certainly the hammer is not the best wrench.
Funny that people who can't even bother playing the originals say that another game is better than the originals lol. I think New Vegas is better than 2 but not the original game.
For real, funny though. Anyway, I think TES Arena sucks! I played 10 minutes of it back in 2011 but trust me when I say it sucks! I can't tell you why but I know it does.
For real, funny though. Anyway, I think TES Arena sucks! I played 10 minutes of it back in 2011 but trust me when I say it sucks! I can't tell you why but I know it does.
FalloutNV
First time out of the vault
Nothing come Close to Masterpiece which is Fallout NV it's the peak of the series & RPG games. The storytelling is Amazing, the writing is genius the Role playing is Inspiring the Characters are most remarkable of the series. The World is more interesting than standard over used post war of first Two games. The main character hero has more Variety & Interesting backstory Not coming from way over used vault instead being Courier. The factions are more interesting to than other games, Amazing soundtracks epic side missions & overall greatness that will never be matched until at least fallout 5. Fallout 1 & 2 have great stories however lack compete package of Fallout NV or Fallout 3.
These aren't even straight up RPGs though, they use action combat. RPGs use abstractions between what a player chooses to do and how well a character performs it. Dark Souls is also an action RPG but I wouldn't call the peak of RPG games. I wouldn't call many AAA "RPGs" the peak of RPG games when they're not even going to emulate RPG systems and instead favor first person shooter action ones.
Not sure what you mean by this seeing as they all take place in the same fictional place and the progression of society from Fallout 1 to 2 to NV is fairly obvious while Fallout 3 is a theme park without much regard as to what makes sense. Things like, why are there only three or four settlements of people? Where are their farms? Who do they trade with? Why is one of them overtly evil and have an issue with their neighbor to the point that they'd destroy it in nuclear fire because they think it's an "eyesore?" If they're hunters and gatherers where are those people? Why are they never talked about or seen? Why does a mercenary company hunt you down with hundreds of men if you're a messiah of the wastes?
Overused lol okay. You really just don't know much about Fallout 1 or 2 I guess. You come out of a Vault in Fallout 1, 3, 4, and 76. You don't come out of a Vault in Fallout 2, Tactics, and New Vegas (Pretty sure you don't come from a Vault in Brotherhood of Steel but I can't say certainly). I'm not really sure who you think is overusing that trope but there's a clear line there as well.
I mean I get you guys are going to get the Fallout games you want. The fans of the original games are not. That's fine, it's over, Bethesda bought the IP and has only let one other studio work on the franchise since. Microsoft owns it but there's no known knowledge if any other in-house studios will be able to use the IP. But you're going to meet resistance when you talk down the first two games here, especially if you say Fallout 3 is better than them.
FalloutNV
First time out of the vault
I'm really sleepy Right now So not going be full reply Until tomorrow, However Fallout NV is still best game of 2010s. even if half the stuff you said is Right which it's Not Fallout NV is still miles better. Anyway I do respect Fallout 1 & 2 but clearly worse then New games. For reasons I tell you tomorrow, Also debunk The points you made see you then.These aren't even straight up RPGs though, they use action combat. RPGs use abstractions between what a player chooses to do and how well a character performs it. Dark Souls is also an action RPG but I wouldn't call the peak of RPG games. I wouldn't call many AAA "RPGs" the peak of RPG games when they're not even going to emulate RPG systems and instead favor first person shooter action ones.
Not sure what you mean by this seeing as they all take place in the same fictional place and the progression of society from Fallout 1 to 2 to NV is fairly obvious while Fallout 3 is a theme park without much regard as to what makes sense. Things like, why are there only three or four settlements of people? Where are their farms? Who do they trade with? Why is one of them overtly evil and have an issue with their neighbor to the point that they'd destroy it in nuclear fire because they think it's an "eyesore?" If they're hunters and gatherers where are those people? Why are they never talked about or seen? Why does a mercenary company hunt you down with hundreds of men if you're a messiah of the wastes?
Overused lol okay. You really just don't know much about Fallout 1 or 2 I guess. You come out of a Vault in Fallout 1, 3, 4, and 76. You don't come out of a Vault in Fallout 2, Tactics, and New Vegas (Pretty sure you don't come from a Vault in Brotherhood of Steel but I can't say certainly). I'm not really sure who you think is overusing that trope but there's a clear line there as well.
I mean I get you guys are going to get the Fallout games you want. The fans of the original games are not. That's fine, it's over, Bethesda bought the IP and has only let one other studio work on the franchise since. Microsoft owns it but there's no known knowledge if any other in-house studios will be able to use the IP. But you're going to meet resistance when you talk down the first two games here, especially if you say Fallout 3 is better than them.
Last edited:
Morgan_
Duckerz
Not much to be debunked in what I said. It's verifiable that Fallout 1, 2, and New Vegas often show how things work at least in a superficial way. Fallout 3 handwaves shit. There's no farms. There's a single brahmin in Megaton. You can't keep looting canned food for 200 years and have that be the basis of your settlement's supply chain. All this shit's been said over and over again.
And what I said about the systems isn't really debunkable either. If Fallout New Vegas is the "peak of RPGs" then what a RPG is, isn't significant enough to even be distinguished as a genre. New Vegas excelled at world building and maintaining a consistent theme throughout while pushing along the factions in a logical sense that we saw in the original games as well as societies themselves. But gameplay wise, it's not really a RPG. It has stats, it has narrative decision making. It's a lackluster shooter with stat based damage and resistance values.
And what I said about the systems isn't really debunkable either. If Fallout New Vegas is the "peak of RPGs" then what a RPG is, isn't significant enough to even be distinguished as a genre. New Vegas excelled at world building and maintaining a consistent theme throughout while pushing along the factions in a logical sense that we saw in the original games as well as societies themselves. But gameplay wise, it's not really a RPG. It has stats, it has narrative decision making. It's a lackluster shooter with stat based damage and resistance values.
Morgan_
Duckerz
Damn, he even edited his post and it’s still fucked up.
Morgan_
Duckerz
T
TorontoReign
Guest
I went through and just used the words you capitalized to make a new post.
These memes really don’t make much sense.
Game: There is a chance to miss, here is that chance
Player that takes the chance and misses: Wow outdated and shit mechanics me want shooty shooty bang bang now.
Alphons
National Beholder
Balanced take: all Fallout games are ultimately flawed in some way. But all if them also have things they do better than other titles.
Gizmojunk
Antediluvian as Feck
This is true; but a couple of them are flawed for not being Fallout games.
*What's with the mantis sprite?
*What's with the mantis sprite?
Restarts the game, invests in "Pull Switch" skill and reaches 150%, never misses ever again (or close to that).
^ Real RPG mechanics working right here, never pull the switch if you don't invest in its skill.
