/vr/ - Retro Games

[Anonymous No.609593]

Opinions on the old Fallout games? I've only played the newer ones and feel dumb calling myself a fan without playing the previous entries.

[Anonymous No.609604]

They're good. And the talking heads in those games come with 50% less potato-face.

[Anonymous No.609640]

>>609604
Hey! What if I liked potato face?

[Anonymous No.609650]

they're fantastic, if unbalanced. but such are crpgs. go play 'em, don't sweat your built or anything

[Anonymous No.609663]

>>609650
unbalanced how? Like are energy weapons are objectively better than everything else?

[Anonymous No.609901]

>>609650
>>609663
I'm not sure where the "unbalanced" criticism comes from. You can play many different character types in both Fallout 1 and 2 and complete them.

I think what the previous poster was getting at was that they're easily meta-gamed. Much of the game's locations are fixed, so if you know exactly where to go and what to do you can speedrun the whole thing in less than an hour. But really this criticism could be leveled at any open sandbox-style RPG.

[Anonymous No.609915]

>>609901

Yeah, this is more or less what I meant. The first time I played Fallout 1 I kinda screwed up the build I was going for, said "fuck it" and started speccing the skills I found more useful. Went from a smooth-talking thief type lady to blowing people away with a plasma rifle. And that was how I beat it. Revisiting it I find it easier to stick to the character I want to play, but that's because, well, I know how to get past pretty much every situation in the ideal way for who I want my character to be.

[Anonymous No.609929]

they're 1000000000 times better than shit that 3 and NV is

[Anonymous No.609953]

>>609929

QFT

[Anonymous No.610203]

>>609929
Whine, whine, bitch, whine.

[Anonymous No.610217]

>>609593
I liked the first a lot more than 2.

[Anonymous No.610229]

>>610203

You think he's whining but he's right. 3 and NV are just too easy.

In 3 and NV you can end up with 10 in all stats and 100 in all skills. And you don't even have to even try.

FO1 and FO2 your character tends to be a bit more "specialised" than "super mary sue/marty stu"

[Anonymous No.610234]

there really should be no need for this "x old game is better than y new game" shit on a board where you shouldn't, yaknow, talk about new games

[Anonymous No.610238]

I'm in a similar situation, only having played the newer games. The first one has that whole time limit thing, which is a major turn off for me in any game, so I'm about to give the second a go.

So, what are some tips and starting information that would be good to know? In this situation, I know I'm actually worse off having played 3 and New Vegas, considering certain things work very differently. Perception would be an excellent example.

[Anonymous No.610254]

>>610203
Not to say that the guy you quoted expressed his opinion in a particularly nuanced way, but what the fuck kind of a response is that? If you disagree, do it with an argument.

[Anonymous No.610264]

>>610254
If you want to have cat fight like a couple of queers, take it to /v/.

[Anonymous No.610273]

>>610238
There's basically no time limit at all in the first Fallout after you've installed the official patches. It effectively became infinity days because of people like you, and you're still bitching about it.

[Anonymous No.610287]

>>610264
If you're concerned about people starting a "cat fight like queers", you should stop responding in such a needlessly provocative manner.

[Anonymous No.610295]

Well this thread sure went to shit, try again some other time, OP.

[Anonymous No.610298]

>>610238

The first game's time limit isn't even that bad.

The second game also has a time limit but it's like 4 years. 4 years game time which is still ridiculously long.

[Anonymous No.610323]

>>610298
The second game has a time limit for the initial quest to save Arroyo (it's less than 4 years, but I don't remember the exact length). After that, I think the only time limitation left is the one that's hardcoded into the engine, which is a little over 13 years. You'll *never* get to 13 years, though, unless you deliberately wait it out by resting constantly, and even then it takes quite a bit of real world time to reach that limit.

[Anonymous No.610387]

I liked them a lot. After completing the game, try creating a character with minimum intelligence and charisma. Then the real odyssey shall begin.

[Anonymous No.610408]

>>610387
this this this

makes a very interesting and humorous game, if slightly difficult in parts

Personally, I like #2 more but #1 is still a fantastic game. Just avoid corners because you can't push your party members and you can get trapped

[Alfhedil Elf-Hewer No.610418]

Let's just say you're not going to have any of the information you need to progress, and there's a severe time limit on the main quest.

[Anonymous No.610457]

my favorite part about Fallout is shooting things in the groin and reading a detailed critical hit description from the left, no other game does that.

[Anonymous No.610464]

>>609604
Did someone say potato face?

[Anonymous No.610481]

>>610323

I'm pretty sure the GECK quest to save Arroyo is about 4 years or very close to it within certain approximation.

[Anonymous No.610486]

>>609593
They're excellent. The original Fallout is still my favorite.

[Anonymous No.610508]

Fallout 1, 2, and Tactics are all great games that you should try out provided you have the time/money/bandwidth.
Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel is an abomination that should never be experienced by any sane human being on planet Earth.
On another note, Fallout 1 and 2 are three times as violent as Fallout 2 and New Vegas, despite having a 10+ year age gap.

[Anonymous No.610513]

>>610508

*Fallout 3 and New Vegas

[Anonymous No.610543]

Fallout 1 and 2 are fun to play, but read up how to build a good character, because you can easily mess up and turn the whole game into a drag. Having said that, it's not as forgiving and actually difficult if you play carelessly.
Fallout tactics is a very different type of game, I don't really recommend it unless you like tactical role-playing games

[Anonymous No.610567]

Bump for shared interest. I recently picked up 1,2, and Brotherhood of Steel on sale. I'd like to know what I'm in for and what I should put points in my character for.

[Anonymous No.610595]

>>610508
I wouldn't say that Tactics is great. Closer to good. The idea itself wasn't so bad, they could've executed it in similar way to Silent Storm, Jagged Alliance or X-Com, but they ended with not-so-good mix between real time and turn-based game.

[Anonymous No.610606]

>>610567
If I recall correctly, Guns, Speech and Heavy Weapons/Energy Weapons is a solid build. Be sure to never make your INT or AGI your dump stat. And STR of 4 should let you use most of the guns in game.

[Anonymous No.610614]

>>610606
Actually, having low INT can be VERY interesting, but not necessarily on your first playthrough. Try it some time.

[Anonymous No.610698]

>>610567

>Luck - 10
>Jinxed trait

[Anonymous No.610721]

>>610606

I'm thinking of having my speech and energy weapons high, how early on can I expect to get my hands on an energy weapon on FO 1 and 2?

Also, in FO 3 and New Vegas, perception needs to be pretty high if you expect to hit anything more than 5 inches away from your face. Should I dump points in perception on 1 and 2 as well?

>>610614

What happens if you make a character with low intelligence?

[Anonymous No.610734]

>>610567
>I'd like to know what I'm in for and what I should put points in my character for.
F1: Great RPG.
F2: Rushed sequel with more pop-culture.
Brotherhood of Steel: Known as Piece of Shit in the community.

Points: Agi decides your number of actions in combat. Int opens up a fair bit of dialogue as does speech. There are good options for most weapons but I rather like small guns/plasma weapons.
Pick the trait Gifted for extra stat points as they're easily worth the minor skill exchange.

[Anonymous No.610739]

>>610721
>how early on can I expect to get my hands on an energy weapon on FO 1 and 2?
If you know where to go then early.
But expect to wait until maybe midgame for FO1 and take another weapon skill to start with.

[Anonymous No.610742]

>>610721

>how early on can I expect to get my hands on an energy weapon

Not soon enough unless you know where to look.

[Anonymous No.610754]

>What happens if you make a character with low intelligence?
Your dialogue choices becomes retarded and NPCs treat you accordingly.

[Anonymous No.610778]

I really enjoyed the first Fallout. It's still in my old computer's CD drive. Never played the sequels, but I did play Arcanum, which is a spiritual sequel to Fallout (and also made by Tim Cain).

[Anonymous No.610795]

>>610778
You didn't miss that much. F2 is enjoyable and all but beyond a few UI improvements I don't think it did things quite as well as F1.
Then again I kind of fixate on the pop-culture shit. Scientology complete with Tom Cruise and L. Ron Hubbard didn't help.

[Anonymous No.610798]

>>610739
>>610742

OK, so energy weapons and something else to hold me over until I find a laser rifle.

[Anonymous No.610803]

>>610754
there's also a quest when you speak with a retard and talk like the most refined people on earth.

[Anonymous No.610804]

>>609593
I still replay them both once in a year, so.. They're GOLD

[Anonymous No.610812]

>>610795
The best experience is using that restoration mod for Fallout 2.

[Anonymous No.610859]

>>610804
Oh, and if you want to have a character that can stand his ground and see as much as possible. Create it like this:

>Don't put any stat on 10, because you can have an operations that gives +1
>take GIFTED and SMALL FRAME traits
>Make strength 4 (yes, 4) - you later find an armor that gives +4 and operations gives you another +1 making it 10. Untill then, give your stuff to teammates
>make agility 9
>make perception 8-9
>make inteligence high (8-9, rather 9)
>leave charisma on 2 you get with gifted, it does pretty much nothing except increasing number of followers which you can achieve by perks
>make luck 6 to make certain perks avaible (more criticals, better criticals)
>rest goes into endurance and honestly speaking, the most I give here is 4

Now for what you should tag:
>science is a must
>then goes the lockpick/repair (I like to tag lockpick and make repair high as an non-tagged skill)
>weapon skill - you can either tag small guns and stick to them, but the best way is probably tagging energy weapons and just pumping SG to about 100 that let's you survive

[Anonymous No.610878]

The game is cool and all but i always encounter deathclaws in the desert and get fucked by them,

[Anonymous No.610884]

>>610859
Note, you could also tag speech instead of lockpick/repair and talk your way through the game, but it's not optimal for your first playthrough

The other thing, books can give you up to 91% in skill and if you're past that, you can lower adjacent attributes with drugs or change difficulty to high, so your skills go below 91% and can increase by reading.

Rather don't pick steal as it's not essencial and depends on save/load abuse. If you do, make sure to be behind someones back and in stealth. You can also abuse that for easy experience taking items one by one, but then again it's save/load way.

Before you end the game, wander a little around the desert, because there're some cool random encounters to find.

[Anonymous No.610887]

>>610884
Oh, "adjacent" wasn't the best word, sorry about that - not a native speaker.

[Anonymous No.610893]

So, i never finished fallout because i was lazy as fuck.
Give me a proper character build so i can try to finish.

[Anonymous No.610896]

>>610893
see my post
>>610859

[Anonymous No.610898]

>>610878
Dear god. That is the single greatest image I've ever seen on this site. A +1 to you good sir.

[Anonymous No.610920]

>>610893
Oh, and don't go HURR DURR WEAPON SKILL TO DA MAX, you can make it 150-180 at max. Science, repair and lockpick are far more important.

[Anonymous No.610926]

>>610920
And even another tip. When you're sth like level 5, don't spend all your skill points when you level up. Save some, so when you get somewhere where for example high lockpick skill is needed, you can pump it on the spot.

[Anonymous No.610941]

>>610229
>NV
>perfect 10 SPECIAL

no, just F3goty

[Anonymous No.610950]

As someone who only began playing them in 2011, they're both good. You have to understand though, you can't play the game the way it wants to be played. It's too dated and has too many useless features for that. You want to roleplay as a scientist/repairman/salesman? Too bad, those skills are literally useless. But if you do some research before making a character and play the game the way it has to be played, then you will have a good time.

[Anonymous No.610953]

>>610950
Science and repair useless? Lol, I think we have played different games.

[Anonymous No.610954]

>>610953

When did you ever use repair in Fallout 1?

[Anonymous No.610978]

>>610954
Fix the water thingy in Ghoul Town. Of course, the ghoul would give you a book if you are not high enough level to fix it.

[Anonymous No.610980]

>>610721
>What happens if you make a character with low intelligence?

If your INT is normal, you will encounter a few incredible dumbasses in the game, they're only there to be stupid.

If your INT is low, you will encounter those same people, but their dialogue will make them look like fucking genius philosophers. That's because your low INT character is a fucking moron. It's really fun to play that way

[Anonymous No.610993]

>>610978

The Repair skill is not at all necessary for that, since it's required to advance the story. All it amounts to is an event that GAVE you skill points in repair, rather than roadblocking you because it wasn't high enough.

[Anonymous No.610996]

>>610993
That's why I said take lockpick and make repair 100

[Anonymous No.610997]

>>610954
to fix the water of ghoul's city (they will die if take the chip)

[Anonymous No.611001]

>>609929
Nah dude, NV was ALMOST up to par.
Not quite there, mind you, but ALMOST.
NV was at least 10000000 times better than 3, anyway.

[Anonymous No.611004]

>>610996
Oh and you can take down force fields with repair.

[Anonymous No.611006]

And when did you ever use the SCIENCE skill in Fallout 1?

Protip: Never.

[Anonymous No.611013]

>>611006
Computers

[Anonymous No.611015]

>>611013

Which computer, you son of a bitch?

That's right, I'm calling you out.

[Anonymous No.611037]

>>611015
Super Mutant Base.

[Anonymous No.611038]

>>611015
I'm obviously not going to point you exact ones, but there are computers that make use of science skill.
Truth is however, that most of them are in F2.

[Anonymous No.611045]

>>611006
Shady Sands farmer.
You can teach him crop rotation.

[Anonymous No.611053]

>>610464
It's a Tambourine.

I haven't tried my hand at FO1, but 2 was so absolutely unforgiving at the start that it put a bad taste in my mouth.

[Anonymous No.611067]

>>611053
That's why it was great. What did you expect in a post nuclear desert?

[Anonymous No.611075]

>>611045

For nothing but an XP boost. Mathematically you're losing progress if you invested points into science to pass that skill check.

[Anonymous No.611086]

>>611067
Not having to reload three times between cities because I ran into a raiding party who has three guns when I'm level 2 and have a spear that I can't hit for shit with, and melee is one of my tags.

I understand what they were going for, by no means do I think the game should be easy. But the curve is pretty steep at the start. And it's not like Suliek is the best help either. More often than not, he dies within your first three fights because he runs up to a party with three machine guns instead of running.

[Anonymous No.611090]

>>610980

That's pretty hilarious, I'm going to do that on a second play through.

[Anonymous No.611112]

Nostalgia faggotry general?

Okay then.

Fo2 >Fo3 > Fo NV > Fo 1 > The other shit

Only hardcore neck beards think the original Fallout games were flawless though. Honestly though, the difficulty elitism that comes with the older fan base is the worst thing about this series.

[Anonymous No.611119]

>>611086
Protip - you spawn far enough from them (at least if you have more than 5 perception) to flee. Also, you have left Arroyo on the second level? And where did you head from there? To Klamath or on the other end of the map?

[Anonymous No.611120]

>>611112
The only faggot here is you for putting fo3 on your list.

[Anonymous No.611123]

>>611120
I rest my case.

[Anonymous No.611135]

>>611119
If I have a melee build, I'm going to have weak perception to offset my better than average strength and agility.

I don't recall super well (As this was two years ago) but if you beat the Temple of Trials and do all of the quests in Arroyo, you end up at level 2 or 3. That's of course, skipping most of the fights in the Temple of Trials. And that's less skipping than "tactical retreat."

[Anonymous No.611146]

>>610238
If you couldn't find the water chip in 150 days, you suck.

If you couldn't find the water chip after sending water caravans to the vault, you suck.

The time limits were there because your vault was dying, they make perfect sense.

[Anonymous No.611150]

>Fallout/Fallout 2
>unforgiving
Goddamn, people, the first two Fallouts are some of the easier RPGs from that era.

[Anonymous No.611154]

>>611146
I have completed almost every possible quest, seen all random encounters and still didn't need caravan, so I just don't get it, why people have such problems.

[Anonymous No.611159]

>>611123
You're still wrong. While I truly think FO3 is better than NV, the original two games were way better than either FO3 or NV.

[Anonymous No.611165]

>>611154

lack of quest compass or some other shit, I personally don't get it either.

[Anonymous No.611167]

>>611154
Heck, the first time I've played, I wasn't aware of the limit.

[Anonymous No.611171]

>>611154
Yeah, there's really no reason for it.

My first play through of FO2 was different though. I nearly missed the time limit because I walked right by where the location of V13 was stored.

[Anonymous No.611190]

>>611006
There was a computer in the Military Base on the first floor you could use Science with. You could also blow up the master by going to the 4th basement floor of the cathedral vault and setting the nuke timer

Someone didn't try and find all of the endings.

[Anonymous No.611203]

>people posting minmaxed character builds as advice for new players

why don't you just link to a complete guide/walkthrough? some people are so fucking retarded, why ruin the game like that?
especially since fallout and its stat system is really easy to get into with lots of possible character builds ("babbies first RPG").

[Anonymous No.611214]

>>611203
I agree. When I see these threads I try not to post character build information because it really ruins the fun of the game. It took me several play throughs to find a build that wouldn't get me killed by the time I was at the end of the game.

[Anonymous No.611217]

>>610508
I really wish I could that gif of a human dying to burst fire. Love that death.

[Anonymous No.611242]

>>611217
Well it seems I'm stupid for not checking out the first result for "fallout death gif".
Jesus there's a lot of death.

[Anonymous No.611249]

>>611203
Yeah, as long as you have a weapon skill at a decent level and non-fucked ability scores you should be able to manage.

[Anonymous No.611262]

>>609593
OP, you should really try Fallout 2, if nothing else.

Fallout 1 is pretty fun on its own, but it's really, really dry. There's almost none of that humor that started coming into the later series, and so if you don't have a massive hard on for the setting, it might get tedious. But the Master is awesome.
Fallout Tactics consists of nothing but combat, and the less said about Brotherhood of Steel the better.

But Fallout 2 is definitely work playing. Black Isle really hit their stride there.

[Anonymous No.611308]

>>609593
Bethesda smoothed over a lot of the more fucked up stuff that you could do in the originals, especially 2.

In FO2, I always play as a woman because you can whore yourself around and get stuff for cheap/free (even though you occasionally get "poisoned" from too much fucking around). The sex, slavery, and cruelty you could engage in were toned way down in the Bethesda games.

In FO1 (and maybe 2, never tried it) you could be super-Godmode and beat the game without fighting at all because completing quests nets a shitton of exp, and if you max out speech and science you can beat the 2 final dungeons without hurting anybody.

In short, the original 2 gave you more choice with how you wanted to play. That said, NV is awesome and worthy of the Fallout name, aside from the glitches I don't get what people hate so much about it. 3 is okay, but doesn't really feel like Fallout once you escape the vault and visit Megaton for the first time.

[Anonymous No.611318]

>>611308

>That said, NV is awesome and worthy of the Fallout name, aside from the glitches I don't get what people hate so much about it.

gamebryo for starters?

[Anonymous No.611334]

>>610457
Yeah I HATED that they took out groin and eye shots from the Bethesda game's VATS. A shot to they eyeball with any .223 FMJ gun was almost always an instant, gory kill. Also, it was really funny that if you criticalled someone in the groin they would sometimes pass out for a few turns

[Anonymous No.611346]

>>610508
Yeah, I'de say overall the first two were more "raw" than 3 and NV in pretty much every way, I've never played a game that allowed me to be such an awful fuckhead if fairly realistic ways (as opposed to setting off the nuke in 3, that was retarded. Why build a city around an undetonated nuke?

[Anonymous No.611382]

>>610878
Is that actually from the game?

[Anonymous No.611394]

>>610954
To fix the broken power armor in the BoS's bunker

[Anonymous No.611409]

>>611382

No.

[Anonymous No.611424]

>>611346
It was a reference to the Planet of the Apes 2. Still, why would anyone want to reference that god awful "AND THAT'S HOW EVERYONE DIED THE END" movie.

[Anonymous No.611427]

>>611308
It was basically possible to get through FO2 with a speech-centric character, but Frank Horrigan would be hostile no matter what you did. He couldn't be reasoned with, and you had to kill him. So if you weren't prepared for that, he'd rape you.

However, I seem to recall there being a way to circumvent fighting him yourself -- you could hack the turrets to fire on him and convince a squad of enclave troopers to fight him in your stead (because Frank had gone full psycho and was shooting anyone who tried to escape, Enclave or not).

I can't remember if all of them were enough to bring him down, though. That guy was a beast.

[Anonymous No.611438]

>>611308
>aside from the glitches I don't get what people hate so much about it
alright, no /vr/ but I'll reply anyway.
FO:NV might have been an improvement over the abysmal FO3, but it's still the same shitty engine and gameplay.
It's a shooter. It's a very bad shooter. The animations (and graphics in general) are bad but the gore effects are so fucking terrible and ugly and amateurish that alone ruins the game for me.
The ideas and humor felt stale, just a personal thing maybe.
The UI and inventory management is probably the worst in any RPG I've played.
I've tried to give this game another chance like 5 times now, it just doesn't feel right. It's shit compared to the originals.

You can make a good RPG with bad shooting elements (VTM:B) or a shooter with bad RPG elements (Borderlands). The modern Fallouts are complete failures on every level in my eyes, maybe also because they took a good series and turned it into some casual abomination like so many others.

[Anonymous No.611441]

>>611427
Its been awhile since I've played FO2, I don't really recall that fight. Could you do the Super Stimpack trick on him where you inject someone with 5 or 6 SS's then rest an hour?

[Anonymous No.611464]

>>611346
I always set off the nuke just to spite them.

That town is built of jagged edges and dangerous catwalks, to the point that even the NPCs can and will fall off the edge to their deaths. And it's built around a nuclear bomb, with a guy standing near it preaching about how the "great light" will purify them in holy fire.

Those dumbasses WANT to die.

And I get a sweet apartment, and the sky turns that lovely shade of green, and the only person I actually give a crap about in that whole town survives anyway. Why wouldn't I push the button?

[Anonymous No.611479]

>>611441
I don't believe so, no. I'm pretty sure he'd auto-talk to you once you got too close, and then open fire right after. So it was impossible to get close enough to try.

[Anonymous No.611491]

>>611479
Now I actually want to try this. Enter combat mode just out of the range that he will auto-talk to you with SS's in the weapons slot, just keep pressing the combat button really fast to keep him from talking to you, then walking back out of his range and then rest.

[Anonymous No.611535]

They're great games, but some serious flaws:

Skill implementation is a drawback imo. The character system is great, but in the actual game quite a few of the skills are virtually useless. Also, the progression is unbalanced completely in favor of small guns. Tag melee or unarmed and you make combat significantly more difficult, tag laser weapons or big guns and you'll get no weapon suitable until half way (or more) through the game. Tag throwing and you're retarded.

The town hostility system is a bit fucked. Commonly you'll kill one guy and the whole town will be after you. On the one hand I think "murders" should be costly to your character, but on the other hand some of it seemed overkill. I guess proportionate consequences are very difficult to build into a game though.

AI is shit too. You can afford mediocre AI in real time games, but turn-based tends to really bring out how silly the AI is behaving. NPCs will either attack you, move towards you until they can, or flee. Funnily enough that's what they still do, even in FO3 and NV. Well there you go, that's me ripping on my favorite games.

[Anonymous No.611541]

>>611464
>And I get a sweet apartment

Tenpenny Tower sucks. It's a fucking headache getting to and from your apartment each time. The Megaton house is nice and convenient. You fast-travel right to the door.

[Anonymous No.611575]

This thread got me to download FO1. What build should I try? Science is not useful I take it?

I remember someone telling me that very low intelligence is humorous, but I think I'll save that for a later playthrough.

[Anonymous No.611582]

>>611575

High agility and perception. Invest in small guns. Don't stress about the rest.

[Anonymous No.611593]

>>611575

Small guns, lockpick, speech master race!

You can buy shitloads of manuals to increase your other skills later on in the game. Make sure you have at least 8 Action Points, have 6 ST, have at least 7 INT. Everything else is optional!

[Anonymous No.611596]

>>611582
Thanks. In the modern fallouts I always went with lockpicking, science, and sneak because it's fun. Also strength/ intelligence.

Too bad this is one of those games with a combined wiki with all the games. I hate that shit.

[Anonymous No.611605]

Is it wrong to call myself a Fallout fan if the only Fallout games I have played were FO3 and NV? I think NV is infinitely superior.

[Anonymous No.611628]

>>611605

As long as you think NV is infinitely superior. Preferring FO3 over NV is the mark of the devil-pleb.

[Anonymous No.611646]

>>611628

When NV came out, there was good reason to prefer Fallout 3. It's better now that it's patched.

[Anonymous No.611652]

>>611646

This is offtopic but what reason might that be?

[Anonymous No.611661]

>>611652
Not sure what he means, I had some severe framerate issues whenever there were a handful of NPCs on screen, far worse than you'd expect given the game's visuals.

[Anonymous No.611669]

Not /vr/, but i've never gotten an answer for this, why do people like fallout NV better?

I love the atmosphere of 3 so much more, and las vegas is safe as fuck so once I got there I felt no incentive to leave.

So what is it /vr/?

[Anonymous No.611678]

>>611652

Well for one thing the game was insufferably buggy at first. The patches also changed a lot of game balance issues. the DR thing made energy weapons and machine guns nearly useless until the patches came to the rescue.

[Anonymous No.611681]

>>611628
Guess I'm a pleb, but can you answer this:
>>611669

[Anonymous No.611682]

>>611646
Yeah, no. I'll take bugs over shitty writing in RPG every time.

[Anonymous No.611683]

>>611669

>muh atmosphere

FO3 was a theme park to put it in few words.

[Anonymous No.611684]

>>611669
>Not /vr/, but i've never gotten an answer for this, why do people like fallout NV better?
Better writing, better gameplay
>I love the atmosphere of 3 so much more
Then you are beyond help

[Anonymous No.611691]

>>611684
Hey, the atmosphere in F3 wasn't bad, writing and consistency with previous games was the problem.

[Anonymous No.611692]

>>611669

Meltdown.

[Anonymous No.611694]

>>611684
>better writing
both games had shit writing and pretty awful gameplay. the only thing that made it enjoyable was exploring the world, and 3 had a much more interesting world to explore.

[Anonymous No.611695]

>>611596
I don't recall sneak ever being useful to level in 1/2. Then again, maybe I haven't used it enough.
The only run where I tagged it is my Kenshiro run, because pic related.

[Anonymous No.611702]

>>611669

atmosphere does not game make, fallout 3 being a third game in the series was bound by some rules made by earlier iterations to be a good sequel. Bethesda didn't give a fuck about them and fallout 3 became a very polarizing game.

[Anonymous No.611706]

>>611702
fine I can except that fans of 1 and 2 would find modern fallouts bad, but why the praise for NV in comparison?

[Anonymous No.611710]

>>611706

NV was made by the same people that made 2, it was a true sequel.

[Anonymous No.611713]

>>611694
fact

[Anonymous No.611715]

>>611694

>subways

[Anonymous No.611720]

>>611706
Because it makes sense in continuity with F1/2 and wasn't nearly as retarded as F3. Not saying there are no bad parts in NV story though. And both games are basically unplayable without a ton of mods, the engine, SPECIAL implementation and VATS system are horribly bad.

[Anonymous No.611723]

>>611691
>Hey, the atmosphere in F3 wasn't bad
No, it was terrible. Full of stupid schlock. Even at it's worst Fallout 2 was never that bad.

[Anonymous No.611724]

>>611710
so the only reason is because
MUH ORIGINAL CREATORS?

Honestly, I'd be all for "gameplay enhancements" if they actually made a decent shooter/rpg. They killed the only thing that made 3 fun, exploring an interesting world.

[Anonymous No.611727]

>>611720

NV is playable without mods.

[Anonymous No.611728]

I would've preferred to see Van Buren finished than have Fallout 3 and New Vegas.

[Anonymous No.611730]

>>611715
>sand

[Anonymous No.611731]

>>611706

I don't know, I think NV was a meh game hampered by technological limitations/ineptitude of people who worked on it (I do think it was limitations though)

[Anonymous No.611732]

You can play FO3 or FONV without playing any of the previous games.

Can the same be said for FO2? Is it better? Should I start with that?

[Anonymous No.611734]

>>611727
If you like being invincible 30 minutes into the game without even trying, sure.

[Anonymous No.611735]

>>611724

Yes the reason is the "Original creators" (which is wrong because 1 and 2 were developed by different people). They were experienced in making a Fallout game and they made a sequel to their own game. They also weren't Bethesda and their shitty open world RPG design, they actually made an RPG and not an exploration simulator.

[Anonymous No.611739]

>>611732

FO2 is all about revisiting the world from FO1 and seeing how the protagonist from the first game changed it.

[Anonymous No.611740]

>>611732
Play F1 first, there is no reason not to.

[Anonymous No.611743]

>>611732
Personally, Fallout 2 is Fallout 1 with everything being bigger.
It has more humorous moments and it's debatable which one is better, but since you play as a savage that has no understanding of the world outside his tribe, anything you might not understand can be explained to you if you ask.

[Anonymous No.611751]

Are you hopeful?

Or cynical?

[Anonymous No.611757]

>>611735
ah, so it's company loyalty rather than objectively looking at the games as their own separate entities. This sounds like kids arguing over whether infinity ward or treyarch is better...

I just hope fallout 4 has a better atmosphere and is more fun to explore, i'd be fine with the enhancements from NV, but the most important thing to fallout for me is location, I hope they pull it off.

[Anonymous No.611763]

>>611757

Jesus fuck you're Dense.

[Anonymous No.611767]

>>611739
>>611740
>>611743
Thanks. Also thank christ for a GOG version. I can't imagine trying to start up an ISO from 1997.

[Anonymous No.611768]

>>611751
>cynical?
It's made by Bethesda.

[Anonymous No.611770]

>>611763
nice response. really constructive.

[Anonymous No.611775]

>>611768
I didn't know that. I thought they were just publishing it, similar to NV.

Maybe they'll learn from their mistakes?

[Anonymous No.611783]

>>611751
i'm just hoping for a hardcore mode that is actually difficult and not just a hunger bar

[Anonymous No.611784]

>>611763
>Dense
>capitalization

Here we go with the /v/ tier stupidity.

[Anonymous No.611789]

>>611735

>(which is wrong because 1 and 2 were developed by different people

wait a minute, it wasn't developed by different people - it was made by the same people but with an advantage of some new names (Chris Avellone is probably most well known). some people went away from Interplay midwork though (Jason Anderson, Tim Cain and Leo Boyarsky who went to make Troika Games), don't believe me then check the credits.

[Anonymous No.611794]

>>611784
Note: This poster is not the person you were arguing with

[Anonymous No.611797]

>>611794
I'm not arguing with anyone, just came in to see how the thread was going and instantly noticed that.

[Anonymous No.611798]

>>611789

I was under the impression it was different developers entirely, at least different leads.

[Anonymous No.611803]

>>611751
considering 3 had better atmosphere than NV, and NV introduced some mechanics that I enjoy, I'm excited enough

[Anonymous No.611806]

>>611783
Was Skyrim hard? (really asking, I haven't played it).

[Anonymous No.611815]

>>611806
it was pretty easy, oblivion level, you got so OP in the endgame too.

[Anonymous No.611817]

>>611806
No. You should at least try Skyrim though, imo. I only got 10 hours out of it but enjoyed myself while it lasted.

[Anonymous No.611829]

>>611806

It was just terribly broken.

[Anonymous No.611982]

>>611775
>Maybe they'll learn from their mistakes?
Yeah, like how they learned from the mistakes they made with Oblivion, and "fixed" it by making Skyrim even less of an RPG and more of a big dumb action game.

[Anonymous No.611990]

>>611982

They fixed Oblivion's retarded leveling system.

[Anonymous No.611991]

>>610464
/mu/ pls go

[Anonymous No.611993]

>>611789
>it wasn't developed by different people
The team was almost entirely different and had a lot more management involved.
Anderson, Cain and Boyarsky left Interplay after the prototype design for it was finished.
Pretty much the only guy who worked on both was Christopher Taylor and SPECIAL wasn't really *that* special.

[Anonymous No.612040]

>>611990
Yeah, by getting rid of attributes entirely.
Which is my point: they "fixed" Skyrim by simply gutting everything that was problematic in Oblivion.

[Anonymous No.612106]

If you play Fallout, you might consider reading ONLY the character creation parts of Per Jorner's guides:
http://user.tninet.se/~jyg699a/fallout.html
http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/The_Nearly_Ultimate_Fallout_2_Guide

The most important thing he will tell you is that (and genuinely don't look at this spoiler if you're the kind of person who doesn't mind missing some content for the sake of playing the game totally unspoiled) SPECIAL doesn't work nearly as intended, and most skills are good for a few encounters or extremely minor boosts. Speech is essential for getting access to a LOT of the game's content. Lockpick is disproportionately invaluable. Small guns are great from the beginning of the game to the end, while energy/big guns only come in later, and melee is very hard. By tagging these three skills, and basically ignoring END and STR, you make a good "generalist" (generally a sniper), who can then boost a few essential subskills like Science, and basically breeze the game.

Also Oblivion was an intentional dilution of Morrowind in the same way that Fallout 3 was an intentional dilution of Fallout. Skyrim was a gussied up version to convince casualfags that it was a good game again, in case they had been swayed by some WRPG nerd to see its faults. Expect exactly the same from Fallout 4: high "production quality" masking an extremely hollow centre. Go Google comparisons of Skyrim's dungeons to Morrowind's, or count the enemy types, or the number of lines of dialogue, or the spell/skill types, or the plot and sidequest branches. It's Oblivion 2.

[Anonymous No.612849]

I'm probably the only one here, but I really couldn't get into it. Too bit too open-ended with zero sense of direction and the combat was frustrating as all Hell.

[Anonymous No.612954]

>>611203
True, I played FO1 for the first time last year using a guide to help build my character, and it felt empty. I still enjoyed it, but at times it felt like I might as well have cheated to make myself invincible and have max stats.

[Anonymous No.612960]

>>612040

>they "fixed" Skyrim by simply gutting everything that was problematic in Oblivion.

Thank God for that. Now they can add stuff to a stable base in the next ES.

[Anonymous No.612974]

>>612960

That's not how game development works, stop defending Bethesda.

[Anonymous No.612976]

>>612960
If anything they'll remove even more for the sake of "streamlining" it

[Anonymous No.612986]

>dissing Fallout 1.

[Anonymous No.613123]

>>609593
You should feel dumb calling yourself a fan. That said, play the original 2, come here for help instead of bitching about how it's "too complicated" and "I don't understand these rpg mechanics it's not like Fallout 3 or skyrim at all!"
>hold shift (or change the options) to run
>end combat after all enemies are dead (or you ran far enough away) so that you don't waste AP while walking
>change the combat speed in the options if you feel it's too slow

[Anonymous No.613209]

>>610734

I'm of the opposite opinion; Fallout 1 feels a lot more rushed and sparse to me. The writing is solid in most of the major spots, but feels rather empty in other places. The "Tell me Abouts" feel half-finished.

Fallout 2 on the other hand struck me as much more even overall; even side characters generally feel pretty fleshed out as people with their own ways of talking and mannerisms. And this was over a lot more locations that the first game.

[Anonymous No.613495]

>>613123
>>/v/

[Anonymous No.613506]

>>613123
>insulting OP for no reason

>claiming he said shit he didn't

>being this hostile

The fuck is wrong with you?

[Anonymous No.613869]

>>613506
Yesterday there was a thread where OP called the game shitty because it was too slow having to use Action Points to move. /vr/ told him how dumb he was and then he felt bad. I'm just doing it now so it doesn't happen later.
>It might still happen

[Anonymous No.614226]

>>611720
God, F3's entire population was so stupid. Everyone is stupid assholes. I remember going through the game picking all the villainous options just because I hated absolutely everyone.

Exploring the ruins sure was fun, though.

Figures the most enjoyable part of the game would be the part that involves not interacting with any other characters.

[Anonymous No.615209]

>>611806
Skyrim can be hard if you actually change the difficulty to make it hard and don't just play an assassin.

If you want a difficult Skyrim playthrough, play a mage.

That was my first play through and it actually required a lot of thought in some fights.

[Anonymous No.615953]

>>611086

You can run for the exit grid during random encounters. Doing so will end combat and pop you out on the world map.

Yes, you might take a few bullets, but enemies aren't always super accurate and often the AI will burn a lot of AP trying to get close to you for a better shot and not shoot at all.

You can't WIN those fights early on, but you certainly can SURVIVE them. Just don't try to take every encounter face-on.

[Anonymous No.615980]

>>612106

Speech is definitely disproportionately useful in the game, as it's pretty much the only way to find the diplomatic solution to a questline.

I wouldn't consider Lockpick super-critical for experiencing the most game content. Most of the places accessed by it are a little extra loot, which gives you a leg up early on. If you manage your cash/loot well though you can easily find enough dynamite/plastic explosives to bomb your way through most locked doors (and the ones you can't bomb can usually be picked with assistance from an electronic lockpick/lockpick set).

And really that's true of most of the other skills in the game. Most of them just simply change your approach to the quests in the game; if you play to your strengths you'll do fine.

[Anonymous No.617517]

They're just as deep in content as 3 and NV. I you can get past the admittedly confusing controls, you'll have a whole lot of fun.

[Anonymous No.617620]

>>611262
Advocatus diaboli here - actually Fallout 1 is a lot more gritty in comparison with F2. A lot f people find that the endless references and wacky humor in F2 doesn't help them with immersion.

As for balance in Fallout - the games are great when it comes to the sandbox potential, and it's true you can finish the game with pretty much any character, but some weapon choices are straight up better. The most efficient build in FO1 is the sniper that transitions from Small Guns to Energy Weapons. It works well in FO2 due to eye criticals being so strong. Hell, you don't even have to get tags in Energy Weapons or anything.
Melee Weapons is viable and can be fun with Super Sledgehammer, but it's just not as much "pwnage".
Unarmed, for instance, is great for certain segments of FO2 where you can fight unarmed for money.
Throwing, on the other hand, is worthless, and Big Guns can be uncomfortable due to the amount of ammo you need to keep and carry with you - it does pack a punch, particularly in FO2, especially since in FO2 you have a car to pack stuff into.

Otherwise, they're great games. I liked Tactics because it made for a decent tactical game, Jagged Alliance style. It's not "great" and its replayability value is rather low, and it's non-canon, but it's fun for what it is.

[Anonymous No.617673]

I'd say play 1 and 2,there both great games that surpass the newer titles. Just don't bother with tactics or don't buy it at least.

[Anonymous No.618235]

>>609663
>unbalanced how?

Like you can even complete the first one with nothing but punching and sneaking.

[Anonymous No.618921]

I'm about to replay Fallout 2 and was planning on installing some mods for the first time. Any specific ones I should get?

[Anonymous No.619019]

>>618921
sfall's all you need.

[Anonymous No.619094]

>>619019
What about Restoration Mod?

[Anonymous No.622531]

>>610698
>Luck - 10
>Leave vault
>Instantly get the crashed UFO random encounter

[Anonymous No.622605]

you should feel dumb for calling them "entries". fuck it, you're full blown retard OP

[Anonymous No.622645]

>>618921
Whichever one unfucks the starting temple and doesn't pigeonhole you into a melee class.

[Anonymous No.622941]

>>622645

Starting temple ants are not particularly hard, and you can often sneak by them or even just keep running away from them. You can also kite them if you have high AP; throw a punch and then move four or five tiles (the insects have pretty poor AP and will use it all up trying to reach you).

Neither is the last challenge that difficult. Note you can fight him hand to hand, which isn't too hard if you've got an HP reserve and punch/kite him. Alternately, you can talk him out of the fight - trivial if you have good Speech, or finally you can either lockpick the door or pick his pocket for the key.

[Anonymous No.623838]

Fallout 1 was a great game.

Fallout 2 is more of the same, with an improved engine,
bigger but less interesting and well designed than Fallout 1.
Still a fine game though.

Fallout Tactics is, well, a tactical combat "sim" like Commandos or Desperados.
Not what everyone expected, despite being told up front, so it get's a lot of unjustified flack.
Ok game.

[Anonymous No.623890]

Here's what's the difference between old and new Fallout games.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJJaGSV75y0

And here's what's the difference between Fallout 3 and New Vegas:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvwlt4FqmS0

[Anonymous No.623932]

>>615209
>That was my first play through and it actually required a lot of thought in some fights.

Only because the game was poorly designed. The worst school of magic to deal damage was Destruction and not only was it the worst to deal damage, it was also behind using regular non enchanted weapons in terms of damage.

[Anonymous No.623971]

>>623932
I'm playing through Morrowind with a non-destruction mage at the moment.

Summoning sucks ass and eats mana like crazy.

At some point I just started punching everything until my hand-to-hand hit 100 so I switched to blunt weapons.
I one-hit pretty much everything using Sunder with blunt weapons 40 or so.

I just use magic for utility stuff and buffs.

haven't been using alchemy since I know it's broken as fuck.

All Elder Scrolls game are broken one way or the other.
They can be hard as shit or easy as fuck depending on what kind of character you play.

Usually, if you want the game to be hard(er), it's enough to pick the "wrong" class for your race.
Like a Breton warrior or an Orc mage.
But of course that's only until you find some overpowered gear.

[Anonymous No.623985]

>>623971

Oblivion had good magic though.

[Anonymous No.624024]

Fallout 2 question:

Is there any way to save Arroyo? I rushed there after my fourth Hakunin vision and everything was destroyed

[Anonymous No.624073]

>>624024

Check the vault.

[Anonymous No.624167]

Am I a huge casual for hating click-to-move?

[Anonymous No.624172]

>>624167

Definitely.

[Anonymous No.624183]

>>624172
It's so shitty though. The camera moves if the cursor gets too close to the edges of the screen, and the screen is only 640x480, so unless you're only moving like 2 hexagons you can't be precise about movement at all.

[Anonymous No.624187]

>>624183

Fullscreen.

[Anonymous No.624197]

>>624183

Get a high resolution mod.

[Anonymous No.624198]

>>624187
Playing in fullscreen doesn't change the resolution, it just upscales.

[Anonymous No.624248]

>>623985
It was more or less the same as Morrowind
but with half as many spells.

[Anonymous No.624687]

>>609593
I played the first one really liked it. Hated #2, liked 3 but haven't played new vegas yet. I'd say go ahead and try one of the older ones but they might not be to your liking.

[Anonymous No.625023]

>>624183
FUCK SAKE ITS THE YEAR OF OUR LORD TWENTY THIRTEEN THERE ARE MODS YOU FUCKING CRETIN.

http://www.nma-fallout.com/

FAG

[Anonymous No.625143]

[Anonymous No.625163]

[Anonymous No.625169]

[Anonymous No.625198]

>>625169

[Zangief !!YG0uo46UrxQ No.625213]

>>609593

Fallout 1 is the very best RPG of all time in my opinion, no other game I can think of sets a mood and immerses you into the world like it does

It saddens me what Fallout games have become

[Anonymous No.625420]

So I'm replaying Fallout 2 with mods for the first time and figured it was about time I crawled my way to Navarro to pick up the Advanced Power Armor...
Imagine my surprise when Navarro wasn't there.

[Anonymous No.625431]

>>625420
Mod fixes a lot, really adds to the game in a big way if you've done a vanilla playthrough. Only shows up after you get the map from BOS

[Anonymous No.625450]

>>625431
Yeah it really feels like a completely different experience.
Just the fact that you could visit Sulik's home village almost blew my mind.

[Anonymous No.625464]

>>625450
The new areas, and the new and fixed endings are the best part. No more always fucked Gecko.

[Anonymous No.625495]

>>625213
>It saddens me what fallout games have become
Why is it we can never have a thread about fallout without someone whining and crying about the new ones? I enjoy them all.

[Anonymous No.625603]

>>625464
Wait, couldn't you save Gecko in the original?
You know, by optimizing the plant and bringing the economic data to McClure?

[Anonymous No.625654]

Killing everyone in there could be a great idea, but I don't think I have the equipment. What do ?

[Anonymous No.625682]

>>625603
You didn't optimise it but VC still always annexed it in the ending. You could never have a free Gecko.

[Anonymous No.625720]

>>625682
Ah, right.

[Anonymous No.626449]

>>624024
You cannot prevent the attack on Arroyo, as it's a necessary catalyst for the end-game showdown and provides you an incentive to explore and discover Navarro/San Fran.

>>625603
The questline exists, but the actual "switches" behind the scenes never get toggled due to a bug so the good ending never actually plays in the ending cinematics.

[Anonymous No.626457]

>>625654

Consider exploring the rest of the game world first. Hit up the LA Boneyard and explore; perhaps you might find someone who can help you out in terms of equipment.

[Anonymous No.626649]

would i need to get any extra patches with the GoG versions of FO1 + 2?

[Anonymous No.626686]

>>626649

Not really. However, there are fan-made high resolution patches out there, and the Fallout 2 Restoration patch is highly recommended. (If you'd rather not get any additional content, at least pick up the Unofficial Fallout 2 Patch - it fixes many bugs not covered by the last official patch).

[Anonymous No.626710]

playing for the first time
how impaired will gameplay be if a roll a stupid character with barley any int?

[HardAsFeathers No.626730]

I was in a similar predicament but i noticed a deal on steam and thought why not. I haven't got through loads but even though I am used to the newer Fallout's I still find Fallout 1 good fun.

[Anonymous No.626740]

>>626710
You won't be able to do a lot of stuff. Characters with less than 3 Int get a new set of "retard" dialog options - not something I'd recommend for the first time through, but it's pretty funny.

[Anonymous No.626741]

Amongst my favorite video games of all-time. Seriously. Fucking opened my eyes to CRPGs in '97. I thought you could do anyyything

[Anonymous No.626807]

>>625198
You can earn bonus EXP for not getting hit!?!?!

[Anonymous No.628217]

>>625163

>my name is none

Ahah I've had that happen to me before. Felt like such an idiot when I realized I hadn't entered an actual name.

[Anonymous No.628330]

>>610273
never install the patches..

Always go to the water dealers or whatever and pay to get more time.

[Anonymous No.628357]

I hope Bethesda brings back the talking deathclaws. Despite the fact only two survived.

[Anonymous No.628473]

>>628217
>tfw go through temple of trials
>tfw realize you never named your character
>tfw have to go through temple of trials again

[Anonymous No.628485]

>>626807

The way the sentence is phrased implies you can, but nothing of the sort actually happens - you get the same experience (I do kind of wish that you did get bonus experience though).

It's just a nice little flavour text that lets you know that yea, you're that good at this; it's quite satisfying seeing that come up after a perfectly executed battle.

[Anonymous No.628560]

Fallout 1 and 2 is my favorites games because rpg, interesting setting and dark humor. The only real downside with the game is the ai controlled companions. As for Fallout 3 I don't like at all, but then again I never really liked any of Bethesda's games.

[Anonymous No.628573]

>>628560
>companions

Feh. I released them from their bondage and burdens, and told them to wait until doomsday.

I walk alone.

[Anonymous No.628631]

>>610878
>you will never have an intellectually elevated confrontation with a talking rat
>you will never become his closest friend because of that intellectual binding
>you will never dislodge people's entrails together as a means of self-preservation

[Anonymous No.628893]

>>610878

I don't think I ever discovered this exchange in Fallout 1. Does this actually occur with high enough Speech/Int?

[Anonymous No.628920]

>>628893
Its just a joke image

[Anonymous No.628938]

>>610878
Is that based on Lukan the Witless from Arcanum?
The way of speaking is... familiar.

[Anonymous No.629223]

>>628938
...no?

[Anonymous No.630840]

>>610878
>yfw that's from ribbit

[Anonymous No.631129]

even if you play the older ones, you shouldn't call yourself a fan of anything. that's plain stupidity

[Anonymous No.634857]

>>611669

>better atmosphere
>200 years after the bombs dropped
>people still living in "houses" built of scrap metal in a down that looks like a dump

Play fallout 1/2 shit actually makes sense. People live in adobe houses. New Vegas they live in the houses that were spared due to Mr. House.

Fallout 3 makes no sense. It's a kid's idea of what post-nuclear would be.

[Anonymous No.634892]

>>634857

Y'know, I heard somewhere that Fallout 3 was originally meant to take place only 20 years after the bombs fell. Which would make everything actually make sense.
Everything is still bombed all to hell. A few shanty towns have been constructed, but in between radiation, raiders, and mutants, they're all still struggling just to survive.
It was basically a prequel.

But then they added Harold in, and realized that it would make no sense if Harold were a mutant tree before he'd become a mutant, so they hastily changed it from 20 years to 200, and then didn't change anything about the plot or setting to accommodate it.