Fallout 1 & 2

[Khazoth]

So, I gave them another chance, and dear lord how does anyone find this enjoyable? I hate Final Fantasy but even Final Fantasies combat system is better then these games. The quests were all confusing, the controls were confusing, there is no autosave, and there are far too many ways to screw up just by accidental clicking or harmless exploration.


What do you think of the games?

 

[ioxles]

I don't know what to say really, I love these games and never really had any problems with the control or combat mechanics (even though there was always room for massive improvement, just as well it wasn't as incomplete as Arcanum though), I didn't really find anything confusing either.

I guess all I can tell you is to stick with it. You'll like it. I promise.

But that is coming from someone who loves Final Fantasy's as well.

 

[Khazoth]

They are excellent that which you complain about was the charm of the original fallouts. Not having a designated marker to guide you to quest and figuring out the world for yourself trial and error was the charm. Autosave however is a lack but pc gaming was still new. The idea that making gaming more acessible is killing "historic" gamers.

Are you serious? So you're saying gaming should revert to the days of arcade games where only the hopelessly lifeless has any chance of progression?

 

[Lordmarkus]

I'm playing through Fallout 1 & 2 so I can move on to Fallout 3. I have just finished Fallout 1 and my only thought on that game is that it's simply a masterpiece. Great atmosphere, awsome weapons and armor, great characters and a story that is very compelling. Sure, I hated it first time I played it because i had no motivation but that was soon over.

Trivia: Fallout 1 is the 5th best game I have played.

 

[Knonsense]

So, I gave them another chance, and dear lord how does anyone find this enjoyable? I hate Final Fantasy but even Final Fantasies combat system is better then these games. The quests were all confusing, the controls were confusing, there is no autosave, and there are far too many ways to screw up just by accidental clicking or harmless exploration.


What do you think of the games?

I really enjoyed them. I'm not sure what you dislike about the combat. Could you clarify?

I do agree that the controls can be somewhat confusing, but I really don't have room to complain when I don't read manuals (like this one: http://www.replacementdocs.com/download.php?view.487 ).

It's nice that it's challenging to figure things out. It's kind of nice to get some encouragement to explore the world, where in modern day RPGs it seems like it's "go to point a, then point b, then you win." And real life is more confusing than Fallout anyway.

Also, save your own damn game. It's not very hard.

I suppose that most people have games that are too old or obtuse to get into, though. I couldn't get into Wasteland for some reason. Probably the fact that it asked me to read a page from the manual because memory was too scarce to store dialog in there. And the fact that I had to look the manual up on the internet added to this.

 

[Khazoth]

Fallout 1&2 are RPGs, not shooters in which you occasionaly have to scroll trough text like Fallout 3 or Mass Effect. If you don't like them, you don't like RPGs.

Now there might be a strong case to imply I hate Turn Based RPGs. Since Septerra Core was the only Turn Based RPG I liked. But to say that I hate JRPGS.. I've always liked RPGS, infact the first two fallouts reminded me of Planescape: Torment, if the developers wore blindfolds throughout the development process, while being beaten with tire irons..

Planescape: Torment was an example of a GOOD rpg.


Also? Fallout 3 IS an RPG, I love how being a shooter automatically makes the game a chimps adventure in button smashing. Was Oblivion not an RPG because it was first person? Thief was in first person too, does that make it not a stealth game?

Also, save your own damn game. It's not very hard.

That might work, if the game didn't punish you for exploration or accidental clicking the wrong conversation path.

 

[Zacharine]

In retrospect the Fallout 1&2 control mechanics and combat might seem stiff and ungainly in comparis to many modern games. But that's just it. Fallout 1&2 were part of defining the genre. They were innovative. There really were no precedents for something like that on such a scale.

And they free-open world was something quite new also. Almost all games before were liniar 'go there, do that' kind of games. Fallouts gave the option of going whereever the heck you wanted. Some areas were closed off, but not by imaginary chest-high obstacles but locked doors, steel-walled military installations and broken elevators.

It was that open world, that unlinear gameplay and those revolutionary gaming mechanics that drew so many of us to those games. Not to mention the story and the plot twists.

But nowadays many people who try them don't like them. Why? 'Bad graphics' they say. 'Bad gameplay' they say. And since they tend to expect either Crysis level insano-graphics and gameplay mechanics that were improved and built from those introduced in the original Fallouts, naturally they won't like them. For most the RPG element is something to be avoided and story is automatically regarded as background filler between shooting scenes.

That isn't what Fallout 1&2 are about. Fallout places heavy emphasis on story, dialogue, RPG, choices and an open world. And if you expect it to be something it clearly isn't, you will indeed be sorely disappointed.

 

[Bakery]

The combat of Fallout 2 (and presumably 1) is slow, clunky and feels unnatural. The user interface is difficult to understand and hard to use. It took me half an hour to figure out how to lockpick the first door of the temple in Fallout 2. It's difficult to tell what items do, what they're meant for and how to even use them. The screens were slow to load for a reason beyond me considering that my PC runs Fallout 3 on max setting no worries.

I didn't come across any story at first. All I was given to start off with was "our village is dying, go into this temple for some reason". An RPG should give you a reason to get through the boring low levels fighting rats and spiders. The story should hook you straight away. Fallout 2's story didn't.

No tutorial meant I had no idea what any of the skills or perks did or how to use them. I couldn't customise my character in the way I wanted, so I had to go with one of the preset builds and this separated me from the game further.

This user un-friendliness put me off the game within 20 minutes. I tried to push off but I was actually pissed off within 40. It seemed as if the game didn't want me to play it. This might have been fine back in the day and might be part of the fun of it but by today's standards, it's not acceptable.

I'm sure Fallout 1&2 are plenty of fun if you get into them but I have no motivation to do that. I'd rather watch slow mo cutscenes of super mutant brain fragments thanks.

 

[hypothetical fact]

Don't play them man, it's like seeing stock footage of a train coming towards your tv. Dull to you but back in the day it had families screaming.

The following is everything wrong with Fallout:
The gameplay is outdated, the story is basic, the gameworld is originalthough repetitive (the desert will grow old) and that's what everyone gets caught up in, the combat is monotonous as fuck, the majority of the characters are filler, he main quest is short, the sidequests while varied - are short and without reward, the allied AI shoots you in the back, the map while semingly large is just a mass of randomly generated nothing with a few specks of actual game, every graphic is reused to hell and back, without the fanmade patch it is the buggiest glitchfest you will ever play, there is no balance between skills, or perks, or weapons, or traits, sending skills above 100% takes a million points and barely does anything, the game is difficult until you get power amour at which point you are invincible, specialising as a certain character or role is pointless as a jack of all trades can do everything, there are definitive best weapons making everything else redundant and the final boss is a complete let down.

The following is everything wrong with Fallout 2:
The gameplay is outdated, the story is basic, the gameworld is original though repetitive (the desert will grow old) and that's what everyone gets caught up in, the combat is monotonous as fuck, the majority of the characters are filler, he main quest is short, the sidequests while varied - are short and without reward, the allied AI shoots you in the back, the map while semingly large is just a mass of randomly generated nothing with a few specks of actual game, every graphic is reused to hell and back, without the fanmade patch it is the buggiest glitchfest you will ever play, there is no balance between skills, or perks, or weapons, or traits, sending skills above 100% takes a million points and barely does anything, the game is difficult until you get power amour at which point you are invincible, specialising as a certain character or role is pointless as a jack of all trades can do everything, there are definitive best weapons making everything else redundant and the final boss is a complete let down.

 

[compensating]

I have to admit, that the first time I played Fallout, the combat system kind of aggravated me. I didn't like the hexes, or the turn based combat, or the fact that combat was "slow". After I learned the intricacies of combat in the game I absolutely loved it and what kept me playing until I learned the combat was the incredibly deep world that the creators introduced me to. A world so well written and atmospheric that to this day Fallout remains my #1 RPG of choice.

In Fallout 1 & 2, you have every freedom in the world like going to the last city as soon as you leave the starting town. Will you make it there alive? Doubtful, but it can be done. There is also no single character that is so important as to need them alive. In new games, there are plenty of NPC's that you can't kill OR ones that if you DO kill you get a game over. Not in Fallout. For example: once this shop keeper who also happened to be the town drug dealer would not sell me a very nice machine gun at a price that was acceptable so I shot him and stole his entire inventory selling it later for lots of money. Also in one town there are some little kids who will steal from you as you walk past, so I stole my item back and punched the kid, problem solved.

The dialogue in the game is well written and the amount of dialogue choice is just incredible and luckily is also based on your characters intelligence, charisma, and speech skill. Kind of like Mass Effect but many years earlier. You can probably talk your way out of almost any situation, so the game supports many ways to win even if you aren't a combat heavy character. Also the more charisma you have the more followers you gain which would make up for not having high stats in other areas.

I do find the game to be unforgiving if you make mistakes, such as messing up a bomb defuse and blowing yourself up into little pieces. However for me that just underscores the realistic version of a very harsh place where people are struggling against each other and their natural desires and ends up as a very brutal very real type of place. The consequences of failure match the type of place the Fallout universe is.

I've been PC gaming for so long that I am quite aware of saving before you do anything important as to avoid replaying 6 hours of work. Even with Fallout 3's auto save feature, by level 20 I had over 600 saves. Right now I'm about to copy all this writing so that if I hit post and it doesn't go through I won't have to retype this essay.

Finally I'd like to say that in Fallout 2, if you choose to sleep with that mobster girl and/or her mother (yes AND) be prepared for the consequences...

 

[Knonsense]

Never played them, and the only reason I would is boredom.

You have made a heroic addition to our discussion. I salute you.

Also? Fallout 3 IS an RPG, I love how being a shooter automatically makes the game a chimps adventure in button smashing. Was Oblivion not an RPG because it was first person? Thief was in first person too, does that make it not a stealth game?

Also, save your own damn game. It's not very hard.

That might work, if the game didn't punish you for exploration or accidental clicking the wrong conversation path.

First off, if you save before your dreaded exploration, this won't be an issue. What did you think I meant when I said "save your own game"? If there is a reasonable chance of extreme peril, you should probably save your game. If you enter a new area, you should probably save your game just so that you will have periodic game saves. This will have a better end result than an autosave if you get it right. I'll make it even simpler.

F6 is quicksave.
F7 is quickload.

The level of freedom that you achieve in a relatively traditional RPG is generally lost to some extent in action RPGs. That's a big difference between traditional RPGs and action RPGs.

 

[Matt Yeomans]

Fallout 1 & 2 have aged almost as badly as Edward Furlong.

Yeah, I said it.

But that's not to say Edward Furlong won't provide you with a great time; you just don't really want to look at him or, well, touch him.

 

[Bakery]

Fallout 1 & 2 have aged almost as badly as Edward Furlong.

Yeah, I said it.

I was thinking the same thing.

 

[Lordmarkus]

I have to admit, that the first time I played Fallout, the combat system kind of aggravated me. I didn't like the hexes, or the turn based combat, or the fact that combat was "slow". After I learned the intricacies of combat in the game I absolutely loved it and what kept me playing until I learned the combat was the incredibly deep world that the creators introduced me to. A world so well written and atmospheric that to this day Fallout remains my #1 RPG of choice.

I felt exactly the same way. I had played nothing but FPS for a year (World in Conflict too but thats fastpaced as fuck) so I really didn't know what to expect from Fallout. I had seen Fallout 3 with it's shiny graphic, awsome wasteland and first person view so I fellt that I needed to play the first games. Sure, haven't played any rather old games, only Half-Life 1 with it's expansions. But then again, Half-Life is FPS and Fallout is a RPG but i still draw lines between them.

What I got was game that was dated, I didn't understand a thing (stupid me didn't find the manual). Didn't understand the controls or the batteling system. Got bored and googled for first and best walkthrough and played untill I came to Junkyard. Once again I got bored and didn't touched the game for nearly half a year. Luckily I picked up the game again, now with motivation and a brain that understood the controls. After round a month i had played through Fallout and was simply awstruck (don't blame me on slowness, blame TF2 and CoD 4).

Dialogues fun, atmospere was tense and story that was utmost compelling (I have vague memories of mentioning this before). My expectations on Fallout 3 couldn't be higher.

 

[la-le-lu-li-lo]

fallout 3 was the shit, but i never played the old ones. /:

 

[asinann]

So, I gave them another chance, and dear lord how does anyone find this enjoyable? I hate Final Fantasy but even Final Fantasies combat system is better then these games. The quests were all confusing, the controls were confusing, there is no autosave, and there are far too many ways to screw up just by accidental clicking or harmless exploration.


What do you think of the games?

This is how all RPG's were before the developers dumbed them down so the general population could play them.

 

[The Madman]

Why is it that every time someone finds they dislike a game that others enjoy, they feel the need to rant about it as though anyone genuinely gave a damn about their wretched opinions? WHY? I mean (It only took one sentence before I became a hypocrite! Record?) I dislike Final Fantasy and jrpg's in general, same with MGS among other games. Hate em, loathe the game mechanics and loathe the plots. If I wanted an overly convoluted story told with horrible pacing and dialogue so bad and cliche that the very heavens cry every time some overpaid voice actor grumbles his lines for the game, I'd read a Tom Clancy novel. But you don't see me ranting about it (Well... making topics about it anyway.).

Meanwhile Fallout among other rpg's of that genre represent a gaming pinnacle for me! An rpg where I can forge my own path? Where the dialogue is sharp and well written and my foes intriguing? Where I'm free to not only play my character as I wish but to have the game react accordingly? Where not only am I free to say what I wish, but what I say actually matters and that importance is conveyed properly? Amazing!

THAT is a Role Playing Game. To actually play a role as you choose, not be guided along by some invisible game directors whims and have to tolerate the horribly derivative and predictable stories most games offer. Pah! I spit on those stories! And if I *MUST* be guided through a specific story, allow me to play it how *I* wish, to alter it, if only slightly, with my actions and to have the game play, if only slightly, different each time. That's why I play rpg's!

Gah! Meanwhile here you are; a member of a generation used to ONLY that sort of hand-holding experience, complaining when you're suddenly given free reign to do as you wish.

All that aside, the gameplay may not have aged terribly well, but the story and free-form gameplay of Fallout is as unique now as the day it was designed, and if you're so incapable... so inept at trying to decipher and enjoy a game simply because it's old and creaky, then I pity you and feel nothing but sorrow at all the amazing games you are going to miss because of that.

Go now, go with my pity. I shed a single dramatic yet dignified tear for you, and hope only that someday you shall learn the error of your ways and perhaps begin the quest anew to play these old games, and finally join the enlightened ones.

 

[Kif]

I don't think I've ever met anyone who played and didn't enjoy Fallout 1 or 2 before... well, this is quite a shock... Did you become a fluffer in New Reno, that might put some people off I guess?

Does that mean you don't like Planescape torment too?

 

[Zacharine]

I feel something should be said about the comparison between the Fallout 3 and 1&2 skill/perk system.

In Fallout 3 i got bored because it's ridiculously easy to gains stats (Hey, a bobblehead! WTF, +1 STR? How is that supposed to work?) and perks are available at every single level. Yeah.... How am I supposed to feel I achieved something when I've gained ten perks by the level 10 and three of my skills are already maxed out thanks to those +5 and +10 to skill perks.

To those of you who never played Fallouts 1&2... Perks were available only at every third level. Skills besides lockpick, hacking and talking counted for something. No skill points in energy weapons? Sorry, that Solar Scorcher is pretty useless to you, you couldn't hit the broad side of a barn! Unlike in FO3 where you can fight every single battle as an FPS style. I used almost exclusively the minigun and I had no relevant weapons skill. How? Get used to the motion the barrel makes and you'll be slaughtering super-mutants at level 3. That is not RPG.

And while some perks were more useful than others in FO 2(Who cares about +exp perks? The point of exp is to gain those rare perks and skills, not waste them on something like this!) most could be used for something. Drug resist? Well, useless for many but if you like to be a walking tank having +50% Ap for combat and incabable of feeling pain, then drugs are your thing.

Radiation wasn't as easily removed as in Fallout 3 (hey, my own house. Cool, buy the med table and no need to fear radioation ever again! Wait, this is supposed to be a nuclear wasteland...?) and in some cases closed off avenues to objectives (We at Vault City are pure and unmutated. You seem to have a sixth toe. Out with you, you... you... Wastelander! Mutant!).

Really, I felt most let down by FO 3 due to the lack of reaction to different choices and railroad-like quest solving. Sure, the game world was open, but there were honestly at maximum two or three intelligent solutions to any quest. In FOs 1&2 you could think of a dozen potential ways to fulfill the quest. Free a slave? Easy, kill the guard. Kill everyone. Kill the boss, dismantling the slavers. Convince/intimidate the boss to let him go. Buy him. Bribe the guard. Find explosives and blow up the outer wall to his cell. Sneak around the guards and lockpick him out. Become a slaver and request the slave as a favour for many jobs well done. Convince the one wanting to free him that he isn't worth the effort.

While FO 3 was an enjoyable game during the first walkthrough, it lacks clear replay value. Play it once, visit everything and you've pretty much seen all there is to see.

So far I've played FO 2 from beginning to end six times and always the story manages to grab me in and I'm left pondering how I'm going to do things this time around. There is always something new around the corner, a new way of doing things or a new conversation just waiting to happen.

 

[veloper]

So, I gave them another chance, and dear lord how does anyone find this enjoyable? I hate Final Fantasy but even Final Fantasies combat system is better then these games.

Granted. While FF sucks completely ofcourse, the combat in FO is poor.

The quests were all confusing, the controls were confusing,

How so? While it does require brain functions to play, it's nothing a 10 yr old couldn't figure out.

there is no autosave,

Who needs autosave? Save manually, before you try something risky. Actions in FO can have ramifications much later in the game, so relying on autosave wouldn't work anyway.

and there are far too many ways to screw up just by accidental clicking or harmless exploration.

Not really. The game isn't supposed to be easy. You could also run away from random encounters if you created a decent character.

I doubt there has ever been made an RPG that is without significant flaws. Combat is where FO 1&2 fail (FO3 is rather mediocre in that area also).
The strength of those 2 games is the difference your choices make in the game world.
The charm is the setting, the atmosphere and the writing is well above average.

Since combat isn't everything and there are genres (TBS) that are all about delivering the best combat gameplay, the original FOs may not be the best games out there, but they make excellent contenders for best RPG ever, doing best those game elements an RPG should be all about.