[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/vr/ - Retro Games

View post   
File: 710 KB, 1920x1080, fallout 1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9653582 No.9653582 [Reply] [Original]

is pic rel worth playing in current year or will I be missing the QOL changes that made the Bethesda releases better?

>> No.9653617

Those are completely different series sharing nothing but some references. Yeah it's good but not if you expect it to be Skyrim with guns

>> No.9653637

>>9653617
>Those are completely different series sharing nothing but some references.
Retard

>> No.9653931

>>9653582
the later ones are very similar. I honestly didn't even notice the change from 2D to 3D until near the end of new vegas

>> No.9653947

Most people like Fallout 1 more than 2 and I'd say FO1 is much easier for a newbie to get into. Just set combat speed to maximum in the menu. It's really not a very tough or cerebral CRPG but the atmosphere is dense, the worldbuilding is wonderful and its a great journey. They're pretty accessible.

>made the Bethesda releases better

How do you know they're better if you've never played the old ones?

>> No.9654225

>>9653582
its literally the best game of the entire franchise

>> No.9654237

>>9653582
Yes its worth playing. 1 and 2 are fantastic games, just plays very different compared to bethesda
>>9653947
>most people like 1 over 2
Ive noticed the opposite

>> No.9654668

>>9653582
>QOL changes that made the Bethesda releases better
LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

>> No.9654681

>>9653637
He's not wrong though.
Retard

>> No.9654814

>>9653637
Bethesda sharted all over original lore to the point where new Fallout has about as much in common with old Fallout as it has with Wasteland.

>> No.9654816

>>9654237
1 is very well paced, short and replayable. 2 is a bit of a bloater

>> No.9654831

>>9653582
>Bethesda releases
>Better
You will be filtered HARD.
Best to stay away.

>> No.9654874

>>9653637
>>Those are completely different series sharing nothing but some references.
>Retard
Retard

>> No.9656331

>>9653582
the classic games are effectively different games from the bethesda games in both gameplay & setting.

the classic games are isometric turn based strategy games and with the exception of tactics take place in a completely different region from the newer games (with the exception of new vegas). if that interests you then sure it's worth it.

>>9653947
it makes sense that he'd think that when you consider that the bethesda games are significantly more popular than the classic ones or even new vegas.

NMAgrogs & NVfags are just a very vocal minority.

>> No.9656467

>>9654874
>Retards

>> No.9656583

>>9653582

Fallout 2 is much more interesting story wise, and many people prefer it due to the scale of the world and the sheer freedom in it - but I prefer the much tighter and focused experience of Fallout.

>> No.9657142

>>9656583
The world, atmosphere and factions of Fallout 1 are all much better designed and written than Fallout 2. I think the second game plays out more accordingly to a true RPG experience due to the freedom of choice presented though so I can't fault people for enjoying it more.

>> No.9657238

>>9653582
You guys might like the Fallout 1/2 Community Edition. It has bug fixes, some quality of life improvements and runs on Linux amongst other platforms.

Fallout Community Edition
https://github.com/alexbatalov/fallout1-ce/
Fallout 2 Community Edition
https://github.com/alexbatalov/fallout2-ce/

>> No.9657250

The first Fallout I played was Fallout 3 on Xbox 360 during the big hype around it. I then played New Vegas which I also loved and then finally went back and tried Fallout 1 and 2. I ended up loving F1 & 2 more than the later games, to the point I never even tried playing F4 or anything else.
I definitely think if you can appreciate them for what they are, people absolutely will enjoy them. They are quite different to the newer ones, the closest would be New Vegas, but even that is pretty different in gameplay and style.

>> No.9657452

>>9653582
>Bethesda releases
>better

Nah.

As someone who just recently played through every numbered game (and New Vegas), I gotta say that 1 and 2 are the best. While I prefer 2, 1 is also great.

3 and 4 are shitty shooters that forgot what made the originals good and decided to replace the missing spots with "Green guys are like big mean orcs, right?".

New Vegas was mostly Obsidian trying to stuff delicious, warm F1 and F2 into the shitty F3 engine. They succeeded in a lot of ways, but it's still all wrapped in a shitty shooter.

>> No.9657758

>>9657238
How do these compare to Fallout 1's Fixt/Et Tu/Unofficial patch and Fallout 2's Unofficial patch/Restoration Project?

>> No.9658026
File: 226 KB, 1275x954, F1.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9658026

>>9653582
I love all kind of shooters except for military shooters but Fallout 3 and 4 are simply garbage.
Fallout 1 is really good but it doesn't hold your hand, and the time limit is tricky for slow people like me, but ultimately was enjoyable, i have yet to finish Fallout 2 but i liked the expanded freedom in the game.

>> No.9658290

>>9657452
>They succeeded in a lot of ways, but it's still all wrapped in a shitty shooter.
This is the main problem with NV and the reason I am always skeptical of people calling it a 10/10. The game and it's concepts are great but it's always going to feel mostly like shit because of the Engine it's on.

>> No.9658350

>>9657452

I mean - it's really like comparing an apple to a cow. 3, NV and 4 are totally different game designs in the same universe.

I enjoyed all of them, but just in very different ways. Fallout and Fallout 2 are more classic hardcore RPGs, 3, NV and 4 are action games with RPG elements.

If you come to 3 expecting full on GURPS or D&D rules or something, you'll be disappointed. If you come to Fallout 1 and 2 expecting big action set pieces, you'll be disappointed.

>> No.9658358

>>9658290
>>9657452
>engine
What are you on about, it may be ugly but surely /vr/ wouldn't care. As for bugs, they've mostly been ironed out and it doesn't really matter anymore

>> No.9658490

>>9657238
It is the new engine, as far as i understand. So far, is it mod compatible? What are the advantages over unofficial patches and sfall?

>> No.9658519

>>9653617
lol wtf? Your post should be removed for poor attempts at trolling and off topic retardation.

>> No.9658524

>>9658358
It's more than ugly, it's just bad.

>> No.9658537

>>9658519
If you'd actually play those games, you'd know. That's not even a controversial view. Bethesda retconned all the important lore from original games, they're essentially in two different continuities. And they sure play very differently.

>> No.9658610

>>9657452
i enjoyed 3, 4 and even 76 more than NV because the worldspaces were more interesting to explore than the empty desert that is the mojavie and i don't find the "cowboys & LARPers" conflict that is the NCR vs legion all that interesting and borderline masturbatory in some places.

maybe if it was more like the classic games instead of a glorified FO3 expansion or if they were able to fully realize what they had planned and didn't copypaste 3 out of the 4 MQ paths i probably would've appreciated it more because i felt the DLCs for NV was leagues better than the base game's whole hoover dam kingmaker story. even old world blues which i felt was the worst one of the NV DLCs.

>> No.9658680

>>9658537
This. The east coast Fallout games basically pretend the original games don't exist, aside from references here and there. The fact that the entire eastern seaboard isn't a single sheet of glass is already pretty dumb. But then you tell us deathclaws migrated across the entire continent, along with the BoS? Oh and also there was ANOTHER facility doing FEV research on the other side of the country....for some reason. None of it fits. Fallout is a post apocalyptic western, its story is inherent to the American west. Shoving everything wholesale into the east coast doesn't work, everything feels out of place or alien.

>> No.9659104

This thread feels like a troll but I'll give my two cents anyway.
I've played through Fallout 1 a few times and Fallout 2 once (2 is a slog).
It's one of those games where I think /v/ namedrops it and pretends to have played it for cred more than anything.
One - it's very short if you know what you're doing. Two - if you *don't* know what you're doing, it's a massive pain in the ass and you can soft- and occasionally hard-lock yourself out of certain things. It's also really, really buggy. The tabletop system used doesn't translate to desktops well and you'll find you're either a 1hp warrior or borderline invincible with a thin middle ground.
There are some interesting things here and there and I can sort of see why someone in the 90s would go ga-ga over it if I squint really hard. But for the most part I'm nonplussed about the cult surrounding these games. I'd only recommend it if you're really curious or have nothing better to do. And you should use a guide, don't listen to spergs trying to fish for gamer cred.

>> No.9659385

Fallout 1 is a tight and well developed game. There aren't any areas that had large cuts made to their content, it's tone is consistent across all of the dialogue and interactions and there are memorable moments that are scripted and memorable moments that will just happen naturally.

The time limit is either ballbusting or an afterthought depending on whether you know where to find everything but during your first playthrough it gives a definite sense of purpose. You aren't going to be walking all the back to Vault 13 just to hang out and it de-facto keeps you from wandering off into really late game areas or wasting a bunch of time noodling around. But the game also does not hold your hand.. You can just go ahead and start walking left as soon as you leave Vault 13 and see how it works out, nothing stopping you from getting to the Military Base if you get really lucky with the encounters you have on the map. Overall it's one of my favorite RPGs I have ever played and I would consider it a "must play" if someone is picking out examples of the genre. It also helps that it's free from grinding or trying for rare drops. If whatever is shooting at you is packing a plasma rifle, it's dropping that plasma rifle.

Fallout 2 is a sequel that was meant for people who had played the first one and wanted more to do. It has much more content but it is of a much more inconsistent quality overall. I won't say it is bad but it is not the experience the first one gives either.

>> No.9659395

>>9653617
>>9654681
>WAHHH BETHESDA WAS NEVER GOOD! MUH FALLOUT DIED IN 2008!
GIVE it a fucking rest dammit.
>>9654814
Indeed polarizing.

>> No.9659403

>>9659395
>STOP SAYING THE TRUE THING BECAUSE IT'S BEEN YEARS
Nah. It's still true.

>> No.9659443

Why does nobody ever talk about mods like nevada, olympus, 1.5 etc.?

>> No.9659501
File: 18 KB, 360x261, 1431475938628.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9659501

>>9659403
>Its true because BETHESDA BAD! NEW VEGAS IS THE TRUE FALLOUT 3! I DON'T LIKE BETHESDA SO I'LL PLUG MY EARS LALALALALAELELELA!
You NMA fucks are about as bad, if not worse, than Nintendo age Final Fantasy fans and many Sonicfags after 2006.

>> No.9659526

>>9659501
Bethesda took a series made up of a specific type of game that grognards loved (focused on mechanical complexity, TRPG roots, and in-depth discussions with NPCs).... and decided the best type of sequel to make would be in a genre nearly as far from that as possible. an FPS- only halfheartedly splicing whatever elements of the originals they weren't too lazy to put in.

It's like if Lucasarts bought FIFA from EA, and decided to turn it into a visual novel where you get to romance a bunch of brazilian soccer players. Of course the people who loved the original don't like a bastardization with the same name of a game series they loved.

>> No.9659527

>>9659501
Yeah, Bethesda bad. In fact they are even worse than their reputation would lead you to believe.

>> No.9659536

>>9658610
>even old world blues which i felt was the worst one of the NV DLCs.
Worst take on /vr/ right now. OWB is a master piece in video game writing and I'll fight anyone who disagrees.

>> No.9659564

>>9659526
Have you ever actually played 3? If anything the game suffers from trying too hard to stay close to the isometric games, 3 borders on being a flat-out remake of 1. The plot is almost identical.
They didn't have to include VATS, they could've just told you to eat shit and have skill points only affect spread or something if they were even there at all. 3D VATS is IMO a clever albeit flawed solution to the problem. But it was by no means necessary given they owned the IP and could do whatever they wanted with it.
If Troika or whoever bought the rights back I guarantee the game would've still been in 3D and almost certainly in first-person. It would likely be another VTM:B-tier "rushed gem", 2/3rds finished and needed a million community patches just to make it playable. If you think any sane developer was going to release an isometric game in 2008 you need to seriously touch grass.

>> No.9659596

>>9659564
>the plot is almost identical
Exactly. They didn't give a shit about the plot or story, so they just copied stuff from the original game. But where F2 allowed you to go through the entire game without directly or indirectly killing a single person, or where F1 allowed you to make plot-changing decisions like buying water from the merchants, F3 cut those choices down to the most barebones 'good vs evil' stuff possible... in cases where you HAVE choices. Which you don't, in most cases.

And as far as VATS goes, you know they didn't choose it as a reference to the original's turn-based system. It was all about 'look at this cool gore mechanic where you can shoot off heads and legs and they explode!' They marketed it pretty heavily toward the same doritos-and-mountain-dew crowd that played Halo and Cowadooty.

You probably were still in kindergarten when it came out, but you're forgetting a shitton of top-down RPGs that came out around that time. NWN 2, for example,

>> No.9659669

>>9659596
Don't forget how if you bring Fawkes along to the reactor at the end of the game, if you ask him to go in instead of yourself (since he's IMMUNE to radiation), he says something like "No, I can't deprive you of your destiny".

Fuck Bethesda. Don't even get me started on how bad the story of Fallout 4 was. It's like the devs don't really give a shit about the setting, they're just forced to make it by the higher-ups who purchased the franchise rights as a profit decision.

>> No.9659729

>>9659536
OWBs tires way too hard to be funny, the loot from it isn't anything special and you can find better player home mods on the nexus (which was the primary influence for the sink).

dead money was infinitely better.

>>9659596
>>9659526
>They marketed it pretty heavily toward the same doritos-and-mountain-dew crowd that played Halo and Cowadooty.
>implying any FPSfag be it a codkiddie or quakedad cares about what is effectively aimbot in a singleplayer game of all things.
have sex or touch a titty. i don't care which but you'll feel alot better after you do one of those things.

>but you're forgetting a shitton of top-down RPGs that came out around that time. NWN 2, for example.
and there were a shitton of arena shooters & classic style FPSes around that time too but like those FPSes none of those top-down RPGs were relevant until around the mid-2010s when something like pillars or nu-XCOM came out.

like anon said touch grass.

>> No.9659865

>>9659596
I can sort of see where you're coming from about things like pacifist runs, but I still think you're overcaking FO1. Most of the choices are rather black and white, and clearly have an optimal outcome you're nudged towards both in-game and out, just like in FO3. Like, sure, you don't *have* to help fix the water pump, but unless you're RPing as someone who just really hates ghouls, why wouldn't you? You don't *have* to holocaust the Khans, but again, why wouldn't you? It reminds me of SC2 in a way in that you theoretically have a lot of choices but those alternatives mostly amount to friendly characters dying and locking you out of benefits.

>> No.9659870

>>9658537
>>9658680
>>9659669
>It's like the devs don't really give a shit about the setting, they're just forced to make it by the higher-ups who purchased the franchise rights as a profit decision.
>implying that they're leaving money on the table by ignoring grognards who'll never be happy with anything they do.
at the end of the day FO4 is still the most played game in the franchise on steam and is basically the best selling fallout ever (on top of being one of bethesda's best selling game) while new vegas had it's #2 spot taken by 76 and almost lost it's #3 spot to shelter. also fallout alternatives like wasteland or underrail along with any fallout older than NV is practically dead on steam.

>inb4 "b-but just because people like it doesn't mean it's good"
voting with your wallet cuts both ways and you'd be making the same argument if our positions were switched.

>inb4 "steam numbers aren't absolute"
and you are 200% correct in that but steam is the only one who has those metrics available to the public AFAIK.

>> No.9659876

>>9659870
Yo I don't give a shit how it sold or what the rating is. Bethesda rapes and disrespects the source material and waters it down for an idiot general audience. What are you arguing? Why are you here?

>> No.9659893

>>9653582
Funny, I just started playing this for the first time yesterday evening and am really enjoying it. Any quality of life stuff I should know about? I'm just playing on default settings.

>> No.9659942

>>9659876
>Yo I don't give a shit how it sold or what the rating is. Bethesda rapes and disrespects the source material and waters it down for an idiot general audience.
like i said you wouldn't be saying that if the "idiot general audience" actually agreed with you.

>> No.9660027

>>9657758
This is still a work in progress, but, Et Tu compatibility will come as soon as sfall is integrated.
>>9658490
sfall modifications will eventually all be integrated. You may monitor it's progress through here.
https://github.com/alexbatalov/fallout2-ce/issues/29

>> No.9660089

>>9654237
>>9654816
FO1 is definitely better paced, but at the same time that's mostly because there's very little actual content. Even if you 100% the game, it's like...15 hours at best, which isn't much for a CRPG. 2 is kinda bloated yes, but I think overall the good content outweighs the bad. It's more similar to NV in that it has lots of little towns and each one has its own set of problems for the MC to resolve, unlike 1 which is like 6 locations totals.

>>9656331
>when you consider that the bethesda games are significantly more popular than the classic ones or even new vegas.
Yeah but that's because those games have the normalfag factor on their side. I'm not going to be an elitist and say shit that normalfags like it automatically bad, but when 4 is the best-selling game in the franchise, there's an indication that quality is not the factor in consideration here.

>> No.9660092

>>9657758
>Fallout 1's Fixt
I like it, just ports over 2's gameplay improvements into 1.
>Restoration Project
It was fine, before Killap got his head up his ass about providing the ultimate FO2 experience. Get the github ver of the Unofficial patch that only does the bugfixes.

>> No.9660095

>>9658290
>>9658524
I'm gonna be honest, if CRPG players were bothered by engines, we wouldn't have stuck with the Infinity Engine as long as we did.

>> No.9660121

>>9659870
>at the end of the day FO4 is still the most played game in the franchise on steam and is basically the best selling fallout ever (on top of being one of bethesda's best selling game)
That isn't exactly a good argument when 4 is objectively a much worse game than even 3. Like 3 is...fine. It's Oblivion with guns so even if it's not the deepest rpg in the world, there's something there. 4 being the most popular just shows how niche western rpgs had become as a genre because that game is not an rpg, not even remotely.

I'm just glad stuff like Pathfinder has shown there is still a sizeable market for ultra-sweaty, autistically numbers-focused games. A market Bethesda will never go back to because 1 million sales simply isn't enough for them because even back when they made true rpgs, they only really made 1 game on that level and it's Daggerfall.

>> No.9660151

>>9660121
Fallout 4 is a pretty good game. It's really only on this site and on RPGCodex that this narrative it was some kind of critical bomb exists.

>> No.9660197

>>9660151
>Fallout 4 is a pretty good game.
Maybe if it actually ran well and didn't take a minute or so to load between areas even on an SSD (which I looked into and that's because apparently the game is so poorly-coded that it takes longer to load on newer hardware than stuff made at the time because the game gets "confused" by more advanced PCs)
And wasn't bugged to hell and back
And didn't have half-baked mechanics
And didn't provide anything of substance over 3 than better shooting, which shows it was not made for people that like RPGs anyway.
And if settlement building actually let you properly build anything complex without doing shit the engine didn't intend for you to do.
I'm not even going to get into why the story is bad because the mechanics themselves are bad.

Of course critics and the average player loved it, because they have and always had trash taste and those things don't bother them. It's the same reason Harry Potter, Star Wars, Madden games, and other shit like that is popular. Yes I am going to be an ultra-hipster about this because I am an ultra-hipster and say that if something is really popular, it probably had to sacrifice something in the process to get there. And that's why nothing good has been written since the 1970s.

>> No.9660212

>>9660151
Nobody's saying it was a critical bomb.
We're saying that it, like Fallout 3, and to a lesser degree Fallout New Vegas, are terrible at being Fallout games.

Of course the knuckledraggers and mouthbreathers would like it, it's got waifus and guns and panders to the least common denominators.

They took a niche game and flayed off all the sharp edges that the original fans liked, and ended up with an amorphous blob.

>> No.9660214

>>9660197
Honestly, I would take the game having longer load times over fucking sharting itself (NV Freeside to this day even with 70+ "fixes") or CTDing (Fallout 3 on W10) between screens. Not saying 4 is some kind of masterpiece but it has its substantial upsides over past games. However, this is getting wildly off-topic for /vr/ so I'll bow out.

>> No.9660248

>>9660214
>Honestly, I would take the game having longer load times over fucking sharting itself
Which would be great if 4 didn't also do that.

>> No.9660282

Is it just me or are the dialog choices a bit inconsistent? At least in 1. Sometimes you might talk to someone and have all the choices make the player sound like a stuttering child, then talk to someone else and only have options that sound like Duke Nukem quotes.

>> No.9660315

>>9656331
This.

You will have to build a viable character and think about your play style. Many newbies write the classics off from making a shit build and blame it on bad game design. Also if Op's reliant on adhd medication, then he'll probably get weeded out at character creation.

>> No.9660328

>>9660315
Never forget Doctor/Barteranon

>> No.9660337

>>9660328
I'm not familiar with that one.

>> No.9660342

>>9653582
These threads are frustrating because I think that the best answer is to just play them. They aren't exactly the same as the 3D games and honestly I think most new players will find 2D Fallout shitty at first, because they're different. But that doesn't mean I think they're bad games, no, I hold original Fallout in an extremely high standard. The setting is brilliant and they changed computer RPGs. But you need to accept that they are old games with flaws to truly be enlightened. I can't teach you to be enlightened, you need to reach it for yourself.

>> No.9660347
File: 67 KB, 434x550, rape-tom.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9660347

>>9660337
Dude on /v/ made a thread a few years back on how Frank Horrigan was effectively impossible for him to beat. People asked what his build was, he showed it and his main stats were Doctor and Barter. Queue 50 million reaction images, "shit bro you only got 2 INT" replies, and "how the fuck did you even get to the end" posts. Unfortunately I don't have a non-cancerous screencap of it so here's the thread
https://arch.b4k.co/v/thread/421143272/#421143272

>> No.9660952

>>9660347
kek, that's some serious roleplaying

>> No.9661278

>>9660952
I agree with some of the people responding though, realistically a dude that goes around healing people and trading shoud get his shit stomped in, in a fight. Just because you cna make any build you want doesn't mean they all have to be viable.

>> No.9661291

>>9661278
Yeah the unfairness just makes it more realistic.

>> No.9661354

>>9661278
It's not retro but someone in the thread brings up Dude Sex: HR as a comparison as to why it does lead to some problems. No matter how much the game seems to be about "play any way you want", eventually you are going to have to face a guy who wants to beat your face in and can't be convinced otherwise. And FO2 is the only game in the series where this happens, literally every single other game you can talk your way out of it.

>> No.9661360

>>9661354
Yeah but the game literally tells you that, if you talk your way out of the fight with your friend in the village, he straight up says that sometimes there will be fights that you can't avoid. It's foreshadowing.