Good Old Reviews: Fallout

Sarah LeBoeuf

New member
Apr 28, 2011
2,084
0
0
Good Old Reviews: Fallout



Good Old Review's month of classic role-playing games continues with Interplay's Fallout.

It's the year 2161, and decades of war and nuclear destruction have rendered the United States of America a wasteland. Many survivors live underground in vaults, completely unaware of what fresh air and natural light are like. This post-apocalyptic, futuristic setting sounds all too familiar in 2013, but I imagine it was a lot fresher in 1997, when Interplay Entertainment released Fallout. Even after 16 years, Fallout offers an intriguing, sometimes addictive gameplay experience for the first-time player. That said, it's also clearly showing its age and can be really cheap; as a first-time player I often found myself quitting out of frustration, only to jump right back in.

Vault 13 is where the game's protagonist has lived his or her entire life. It may not be paradise, but at least it's safe from radiation, mutants, and the violent gangs that roam the wasteland. Unfortunately, the Water Chip, responsible for providing fresh water to Vault 13's inhabitants, is broken, and it's up to one inhabitant--the player, of course--to find a replacement. With a Pip-Boy 2000 in hand, the protagonist is sent into the real world for the first time, leaving the safety of Vault 13 behind.

For an older title, I was a little surprised at the almost overwhelming amount of information Fallout introduced me to right off the bat. There are three pre-made characters ready to go, and they can be tweaked to each player's specifications. Skills and stats will affect your approach to the game; you can be diplomatic, stealthy, or always ready for a fight, depending on your character. I picked Natalia, described in her character bio as intelligent and resourceful, and chose not to deviate too far from her given stats. Not being familiar with the game, I didn't want to create a character that would impede my progress.

After leaving Vault 13, there's almost no direction given to the player, which I found really jarring at first. Part of this is because in the 1990s, game manuals provided much more relevant information, and sure enough there was a tutorial of sorts in the PDF manual. After clicking the icons on-screen I became familiar with my inventory, where I could equip weapons and armor or use healing mechanisms, my skills, and the Pip-Boy 2000.

[gallery=1943]

My first attempt at Fallout was not successful. There's an in-game time limit counting down until Vault 13's water supply runs out, and I wasted many of those days running back and forth between Vault 13 and the abandoned, run-down Vault 15 before wandering into a town, saying the wrong thing to an inhabitant, and promptly being murdered. In addition to obvious threats like monsters and gang members, sometimes people will just attack for something you said or because you walked into the wrong door in a seemingly safe area. It's frustrating, but taught me an important lesson about playing Fallout: save often.

There are plenty of different settings to explore in Fallout, all of which can be found by wandering around the area map or talking to locals to find out what's nearby. From rat-filled abandoned vaults to radscorpion-infested caves, the wasteland is a dangerous place, and I had to learn how to fight quickly. Combat itself is turned-based, but takes place right in the environment and starts as soon as you're approached by a foe. There's no cutting away to a separate battle screen. After equipping my weapon, attacking was as simple as clicking the offending enemy, assuming it was within range. How successful the attacks are depends on a variety of things, including the character's abilities. Thankfully, the game provides a few meager weapons at the start, so at least I didn't have to fight rats with my bare hands.

Though Fallout initially frustrated me, I always found myself going back for more, setting aside more modern titles to make time for this 16-year-old game. As a fan of old-school adventure games and RPGs, this one really appealed to me, even though the path to victory was frequently unclear. Fallout was my introduction to the post-apocalyptic series, and after a few hours I was left with the impression that I would have adored this game if I'd played it in 1997. In 2013, it loses some of the appeal, but it holds up relatively well for a game of that era. The exploration and combat can be satisfying, and personally, I never get tired of a good post-apocalypse story. It's definitely not for everyone; the cheap deaths and lack of direction are sure to aggravate some gamers. Despite how many times I died at the hands of seemingly harmless citizens or overpowered mutants however, and how many hours I wasted trying to find the right supplies, I enjoyed my time with Fallout, and I'd recommend it to others. This is especially true right now, since the game is currently <a href=http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/130467-GOG-Winter-Sale-Discounts-600-Games-Fallout-Series-Free>free at GOG, along with its sequel and Fallout: Tactics. Just remember: save your game. Save your game a lot.

Come back on Saturday, December 21st to read Andy Chalk's take on the dungeon crawler <a href=http://www.gog.com/game/stonekeep>Stonekeep.

Permalink
 
Jul 31, 2013
181
0
0
I consider Fallout 2 to be a lot more fun. Mostly because there's just....more. More freedom, more locations, more quests, more characters, more story, more weapons, more tongue-in-cheek pop culture references etc....

I kind of have a hard time playing FO1 after FO2. That stupid time limit just kills the enjoyment.
 
Feb 24, 2011
219
0
0
" I would have adored this game if I'd played it in 1997. In 2013, it loses some of the appeal, but it holds up relatively well for a game of that era."
could you elaborate? I guess it's just a personal thing but fallout and games of the same genre (crpgs, not to be confused with arpgs like fallout 3)appeal to me much more these days than any modern game could
 

Sidmen

New member
Jul 3, 2012
180
0
0
SanguiniusMagnificum said:
I consider Fallout 2 to be a lot more fun. Mostly because there's just....more. More freedom, more locations, more quests, more characters, more story, more weapons, more tongue-in-cheek pop culture references etc....

I kind of have a hard time playing FO1 after FO2. That stupid time limit just kills the enjoyment.
I always have trouble starting up a game in Fallout 2. That beginning village and the opening test always annoys me. I much prefer the rat-filled cave of Fallout 1. I miss games that just let you play without being molested for an hour in a "training" area.
 

Sarah LeBoeuf

New member
Apr 28, 2011
2,084
0
0
Laurents van Cauwenberghe said:
" I would have adored this game if I'd played it in 1997. In 2013, it loses some of the appeal, but it holds up relatively well for a game of that era."
could you elaborate? I guess it's just a personal thing but fallout and games of the same genre (crpgs, not to be confused with arpgs like fallout 3)appeal to me much more these days than any modern game could
Sure! I was a teenager in the late 90s and just starting to get into games that had RPG elements, like the Final Fantasy series, Saga Frontier, and later EverQuest (my first and only MMO obsession). I loved finding games that let me explore and run wild and figure things out at my own pace, and being a fan of apocalypse tales, I think Fallout would have been right up my alley. My budget was also a lot more limited in 1997, since I was 15, so another game that I could spend dozens of hours playing and replaying would have been ideal.

That's not to say it's a bad game now, or that I've grown out of that (still love RPGs of all kinds)--I just think that I could've been a lifelong Fallout fan if I'd played this one when it was new. Playing it now was enjoyable, but I'd rather be playing the stack of new games I have waiting for me. Like you said, though, just a matter of preference. :)
 

piinyouri

New member
Mar 18, 2012
2,708
0
0
Laurents van Cauwenberghe said:
" I would have adored this game if I'd played it in 1997. In 2013, it loses some of the appeal, but it holds up relatively well for a game of that era."
could you elaborate? I guess it's just a personal thing but fallout and games of the same genre (crpgs, not to be confused with arpgs like fallout 3)appeal to me much more these days than any modern game could
Did you play Fallout back when it came out?
If you did then that's probably why. :p

I'm with the reviewer here.
I tried F1 way back when GOG had a free download of it.
And I remember sitting there playing, thinking to myself the exact same thing.
The game wasn't bad. At all.
Just pretty dated. I really felt its clunkiness, and the game is kind of dull to look at. (Not talking graphics, more aesthetics, but even more than that, the limited ways they had to express that back then. Which I realize is not their fault and I'm not blaming them, but seeing it now...it's a hard hurdle to get over.)

Similar to how I, a big Morrowind fan, can't understand why some people can't overlook the (from my perspective) small flaws and see all the great stuff about it.
Though over time I have come to realize how a first time player could be easily frustrated and even bored by the game.
It's all perspective, and this is what I would assume the reviewer meant. : ]

I'm sure someone more capable can give a more succinct version of my overly verbose response.
 

Sarah LeBoeuf

New member
Apr 28, 2011
2,084
0
0
piinyouri said:
Laurents van Cauwenberghe said:
" I would have adored this game if I'd played it in 1997. In 2013, it loses some of the appeal, but it holds up relatively well for a game of that era."
could you elaborate? I guess it's just a personal thing but fallout and games of the same genre (crpgs, not to be confused with arpgs like fallout 3)appeal to me much more these days than any modern game could
Did you play Fallout back when it came out?
If you did then that's probably why. :p

I'm with the reviewer here.
I tried F1 way back when GOG had a free download of it.
And I remember sitting there playing, thinking to myself the exact same thing.
The game wasn't bad. At all.
Just pretty dated. I really felt its clunkiness, and the game is kind of dull to look at. (Not talking graphics, more aesthetics, but even more than that, the limited ways they had to express that back then. Which I realize is not their fault and I'm not blaming them, but seeing it now...it's a hard hurdle to get over.)

Similar to how I, a big Morrowind fan, can't understand why some people can't overlook the (from my perspective) small flaws and see all the great stuff about it.
Though over time I have come to realize how a first time player could be easily frustrated and even bored by the game.
It's all perspective, and this is what I would assume the reviewer meant. : ]

I'm sure someone more capable can give a more succinct version of my overly verbose response.
So true! Nostalgia and familiarity can be a big factor in how much you enjoy older games. It's like when people try to play FFVII for the first time and complain that it's dated or melodramatic or ugly and I'm like "What are you talking about it's so good!"
 
Feb 24, 2011
219
0
0
piinyouri said:
Laurents van Cauwenberghe said:
" I would have adored this game if I'd played it in 1997. In 2013, it loses some of the appeal, but it holds up relatively well for a game of that era."
could you elaborate? I guess it's just a personal thing but fallout and games of the same genre (crpgs, not to be confused with arpgs like fallout 3)appeal to me much more these days than any modern game could
Did you play Fallout back when it came out?
If you did then that's probably why. :p

I'm with the reviewer here.
I tried F1 way back when GOG had a free download of it.
And I remember sitting there playing, thinking to myself the exact same thing.
The game wasn't bad. At all.
Just pretty dated. I really felt its clunkiness, and the game is kind of dull to look at. (Not talking graphics, more aesthetics, but even more than that, the limited ways they had to express that back then. Which I realize is not their fault and I'm not blaming them, but seeing it now...it's a hard hurdle to get over.)

Similar to how I, a big Morrowind fan, can't understand why some people can't overlook the (from my perspective) small flaws and see all the great stuff about it.
Though over time I have come to realize how a first time player could be easily frustrated and even bored by the game.
It's all perspective, and this is what I would assume the reviewer meant. : ]

I'm sure someone more capable can give a more succinct version of my overly verbose response.
no, the first time i played it was last month, i would have played it when it came out but i was 2 then :D
some of the things are pretty dated but the game is still a blast to play imo.
 
Feb 24, 2011
219
0
0
Sarah LeBoeuf said:
Laurents van Cauwenberghe said:
" I would have adored this game if I'd played it in 1997. In 2013, it loses some of the appeal, but it holds up relatively well for a game of that era."
could you elaborate? I guess it's just a personal thing but fallout and games of the same genre (crpgs, not to be confused with arpgs like fallout 3)appeal to me much more these days than any modern game could
Sure! I was a teenager in the late 90s and just starting to get into games that had RPG elements, like the Final Fantasy series, Saga Frontier, and later EverQuest (my first and only MMO obsession). I loved finding games that let me explore and run wild and figure things out at my own pace, and being a fan of apocalypse tales, I think Fallout would have been right up my alley. My budget was also a lot more limited in 1997, since I was 15, so another game that I could spend dozens of hours playing and replaying would have been ideal.

That's not to say it's a bad game now, or that I've grown out of that (still love RPGs of all kinds)--I just think that I could've been a lifelong Fallout fan if I'd played this one when it was new. Playing it now was enjoyable, but I'd rather be playing the stack of new games I have waiting for me. Like you said, though, just a matter of preference. :)
fair enough, the only big problem i had with fallout is that the UI was slightly clunky. but i find something really charming about the game
 

LiMaSaRe

New member
Mar 6, 2012
86
0
0
The game doesnt hold your hand and put an objective marker in front of you every 10 feet? Dialogue actually has consequences, and people wont just let you wander onto their property? Fights are difficult and not scaled so that you always have the edge? These all sound like positives to me Andy.
 

Nejira

New member
Oct 16, 2009
22
0
0
It was a very good game. I dont remember having problems with the timer, as long as you go to get the waterchip back to the vault you can go save the world afterwards. Altertively you can purchase water from the water merchants to deliever it at the vault which buys you some more time.

You should give Fallout 2 a try as well, as it has some very good gameplay too. And for a fallout experience with more modern style of play we got New Vegas and Fallout 3, also two good games.
 

Sarah LeBoeuf

New member
Apr 28, 2011
2,084
0
0
LiMaSaRe said:
The game doesnt hold your hand and put an objective marker in front of you every 10 feet? Dialogue actually has consequences, and people wont just let you wander onto their property? Fights are difficult and not scaled so that you always have the edge? These all sound like positives to me Andy.
Hi, I'm not Andy. :) I get what you're saying, but I think there's a balance to be had between complete hand-holding and "Here you go, into this world full of threatening things that will kill you and derail all of your progress in an instant, no explanation needed, good luck!" Maybe I'm just too used to modern RPGs and JRPGs, though. I certainly didn't expect to be shot just because I wanted to enter someone's home uninvited and demand they talk to me... hmmm okay maybe you have a point.
 

scorptatious

The Resident Team ICO Fanboy
May 14, 2009
7,405
0
0
I purchased this game off of GoG after playing through Fallout: New Vegas a few times.

I really did like it. It was atmospheric, challenging, and had a good story. What I didn't really like was the RNG during battles. I've died several times and most of those deaths involve enemies pulling off criticals and insta-killing me. There really isn't much for me to do about that other than to constantly save and reload.

Still though, I had a lot of fun with this game and 2 and made me enjoy New Vegas much more now that I know some of the history behind some of the characters and factions in that game.
 

Sarah LeBoeuf

New member
Apr 28, 2011
2,084
0
0
scorptatious said:
I purchased this game off of GoG after playing through Fallout: New Vegas a few times.

I really did like it. It was atmospheric, challenging, and had a good story. What I didn't really like was the RNG during battles. I've died several times and most of those deaths involve enemies pulling off criticals and insta-killing me. There really isn't much for me to do about that other than to constantly save and reload.

Still though, I had a lot of fun with this game and 2 and made me enjoy New Vegas much more now that I know some of the history behind some of the characters and factions in that game.
Fallout definitely did a good job of making me want to jump into the more modern games in the series. I agree that it was atmospheric and challenging (not impossible, sometimes cheap, but whatever) and now I'm hopping on the Fallout 4 rumor hype train. I always wanted to play Fallout 3 and never got around to it, actually; maybe that's a good goal for when the holiday season rush dies down.
 

Kuala BangoDango

New member
Mar 19, 2009
191
0
0
Sarah LeBoeuf said:
I certainly didn't expect to be shot just because I wanted to enter someone's home uninvited and demand they talk to me...
Part of the issue here, as well as being attacked without warning in "safe" cities may have been due to forgetting (or not knowing) to un-equip weapons when entering those areas. Usually you can see text comments above people's heads (so not the usual chat screen) to the effect of "You better holster that weapon while you're here." You then have about 15 seconds or so to put your gun away (swap to empty hands) or they assume you're there for violent reasons and attack you. These text warnings can be hard to notice sometimes.

Other things that can start unexpected fights, if I recall correctly, is looting someone's house while they are in the same room and notice it. Just wait for NPC's to wander off. Not sure about that one though as it's been a while since I played it and may be confused with other games with "thief"-catching measures in place.
 

Carrots_macduff

New member
Jul 13, 2011
232
0
0
hilarious how at the end of the article it says its free on gog right now yet the first facebook comment says "lost my copy, i guess ill get another from steam" lol

ive been trying to convince my friends to get tactics so we can play together, its pretty good too, at least what ive played of it. which isnt much admittedly but if nothing else it still has mission briefings narrated by Ronald Lee Emery!
 

Tanis

The Last Albino
Aug 30, 2010
5,264
0
0
'Time Limit':
MODS TO THE RECUSE!

While I still own the original box for all three games, I do agree that FO1 was rather hard to deal with when it came to the time limit.

At least there's mods out there that fix it, which gives you more time to enjoy its great world.
 

Carrots_macduff

New member
Jul 13, 2011
232
0
0
Tanis said:
'Time Limit':
MODS TO THE RECUSE!

While I still own the original box for all three games, I do agree that FO1 was rather hard to deal with when it came to the time limit.

At least there's mods out there that fix it, which gives you more time to enjoy its great world.
i love the time limit and its one of the reasons i prefer the first game to the second. (fallout 2 has a time limit i think but its so long that you wouldn't normally reach it without doing absolutely everything and taking forever to do it)

for me it solves the dilemma of certain more modern rpgs *cough (thanks bethesda) wherein you're set loose in a massive world and given no direction whatsoever.

in fallout 1 you're still set loose in a massive world, and can travel any direction you wish, but by starting you off with a goal and a limit you need to complete it within, you're given much more of a sense of purpose, because you're not just exploring all these places because i don't know, you're actually looking for something.
 

Product Placement

New member
Jul 16, 2009
475
0
0
Sarah LeBoeuf said:
...there's almost no direction given to the player...
Sarah LeBoeuf said:
...even though the path to victory was frequently unclear...
Sarah LeBoeuf said:
...lack of direction...
...Ok. This obviously bothered you but I'd like to better understand this particular complaint of yours.

I mean, you're given a pretty clear goal, from the get go: Find a new water chip. It's something you can pretty much ask almost every person of power about, in every settlement (granted most of them have no idea where to find one but few can point you in the right direction). You're initially given the location of the nearest vault and you're pretty much guarantied to find Shady Sands that's right next to it. That town is then supposed to serve as a point where you're given information about nearby settlements and even has the option of extending the water supply, for your vault, so that you can have more time to find the chip.

Once you do find the damn thing, you're given your secondary goal, which technically has no countdown timer, although the more time you spend dilly dallying about, the more villages get overrun, which results in a worse ending narration.

I don't know. Frankly, I don't see how the game could have given you a clearer goal, given that you're supposed to be playing a character who has no knowledge or experience with the outside world and thus couldn't possibly know anything about the nearby town locations or the people of interest, without exploring/asking around first.

P.S. Regarding complaints about the time limit: It never bothered me so much. I managed to find the chip and give it back in time, on my first run (Although I'll admit that I found the option to trade water to the vault, which gave me extended time). I mean, yes, I do prefer the gameplay of Fallout 2 better, due to there being no initial countdown (despite that nagging shaman telling me otherwise), thus giving me more freedom, but it wasn't really an issue for me to begin with.