I love the new ones, but yes the originals are far superior.
Comment has been collapsed.
The one that I like the most isn't on here. It's just Fallout Brotherhood of Steel. I had plenty of fun on that one.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's not here because it never existed. Even Bethesda didn't know about such a game, as showcased in the recent Fallout complete collection, which very much lacked any game of that title. Because it never existed.
Comment has been collapsed.
I realize it's not a good game in any sense, but insisting some fandom thing never existed when someone else is trying to actually discuss it is more obnoxious than anything.
Anyway, it's probably not on the poll because it's not on Steam
Comment has been collapsed.
What do you expect from him? Of course stubborn users deny it's existence because of lack of knowledge and unhealthy obsession with their own opinions. Narcissists at their finest, lol.
Comment has been collapsed.
Eh, talgaby's a pretty good guy. It's just a thing that I've seen countless people do that contributes nothing to the discussion, and isn't as funny as they think it is. His opinion that BoS is an awful game that shouldn't be considered part of the series is valid, and I have no problem with him voicing that. But this bit about how it doesn't exist just derails the conversation completely. At best, it's the equivalent of commenting with "+1" or "lol" since it usually just gets ignored.
Comment has been collapsed.
To add to AttackSlug's comment: you'll find out that many Fallout fans, especially ones who are among the old guard, being fans of the series since the end of the nineties or the start of the millennium, maintain a position that BoS was so bad and so not Fallout in any way, that it is considered damnatio memoriæ by a hefty portion of the community. (And by that I pretty much mean all older players who didn't meet the franchise with BoS. It's only the lengths one may go to deny its existence varies.)
Also, wasn't really joking about that Bethesda, the new owner, doesn't acknowledge its existence, nor I heard about anything of them even trying to capitalise on it, even though, in theory, disks can be in circulation and it could be re-released on consoles like many older-generation games.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's not denial saying something that never existed never existed.
Comment has been collapsed.
With this reasoning, so does this exist:
https://www.google.com/search?client=opera&q=loch+ness+monster&sourceid=opera&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
Comment has been collapsed.
In fact, why do you keep saying it doesn't exist, when in fact it does?
Comment has been collapsed.
Because nobody of the Fallout franchise fanbase, not the old ones like me or even the Bethesda fans acknowledge its existence. It was a lazy, boring, repetitive top-down button mashing dungeon crawler that had zero with anything Fallout-related apart from the title. It had less of Fallout lore than FO3.
Comment has been collapsed.
let me explain it in simpler words:
"you aren't a true fallout fanboy if you like BoS"
and
"you are not allowed to like something i don't"
both apply :3
Comment has been collapsed.
But I'm not a fanboy. Never was. The games I liked were Fallout Brotherhood of Steel, and Some OG Fallout 1 and 2. (original cd case). Point is, I'm not a fanboy.
Comment has been collapsed.
Fallout 2 with Fallout restoration Project
Fallout 1
Fallout Tactics
Comment has been collapsed.
F1 or NV. Sadly I've never finished the second one.
Never played tactis :(. F3 is a nice adventure but a weak fallout.
Comment has been collapsed.
I love all of them, but Fallout 3 is my all time favorite game ever. I'm still playing in Fallout 4, 40+ hours right now, and i'm not 100% sure it will not disappoint me in the end, but it's amazing so far. Thanks for giveaways! :)
By the way, i played in Fallout 2 long before FO3 release and it's not very far from it in my all-time favorites list.
Comment has been collapsed.
fallout 2 and new vegas, but i need more time to decide after playing fallout 4.
Comment has been collapsed.
what do you think about F4 so far? without spoilers, just your opinion about story and gameplay
Comment has been collapsed.
it's fun so far, but that applies to all the fallout titles i played.
the simplified a lot of things but at the same time added base building, crafting, mods, etc.
Comment has been collapsed.
Gotta love the many FO4 votes from people who most likely didn"t even finish the game.
Comment has been collapsed.
What does that have to do with anything? Is the only reason you like games because of the endings?
Comment has been collapsed.
Let me use an example: it's like stating the latest season is your favourite in a television series.
…when you have watched only the first four episodes.
Plus yes, as long as people maintain the notion that Fallout 4 is an "RPG", a genre defined by the quality of the immersion and storytelling if the game, saying you love it before even knowing how the story unfolds is premature and rushed. Remember how Mass Effect 3 was the best one of the series for that three days before many early rush gamers found out how it ended? Or how Life is Strange had like 20 negative reviews before the release of the final episode, but now is slowly edging towards a thousand?
Comment has been collapsed.
So if the first 4 episodes of a tv series are more enjoyable for you than an entire previous season, you're opinion is incorrect? How the hell does that make any sense?
Comment has been collapsed.
Because it can still turn out to be the 3rd season of Heroes. Or the ending of the film 'High Tension'. Just because you know some part of the beginning of a story, you won't know the rest. If things would work like this, the latest Bond movie wouldn't be a snorefest based on the opening scene alone.
Or to go to the extreme a bit: watch the first five episodes of the 26-episode Neon Genesis Evangelion. Tell what the series is about and how the plot will continue based on what you saw only. Form an opinion on what the series is like and what is its message. Watch the rest. Realise how wrong you were in everything, down to what genre it really belongs to.
Comment has been collapsed.
Except Fallout 4 STILL isn't a movie or tv series; gameplay, customization, exploration, and tons of other factors are part of it. You aren't supposed to go just straight through the story and suddenly say "Wait a minute, I [love/hate] this game!" after watching the last cutscene or finishing the last quest or whatever. The game could have the best story in the world, but if the only gameplay was taking three steps at the beginning then watching like 10 hours of cutscenes without any interaction, I definitely wouldn't rate it better than a game with a crappy story, but really fun gameplay and lots of things to do, explore, collect, whatever, like you would, apparently.
Comment has been collapsed.
And gameplay cannot change? I just finished Karmaflow last week: it went from a cinematic musical to a jump-only puzzle platformer with memorisation segments in its four worlds. Heck, according to the achievements, most FO4 players haven't even started up the much-advertised base building part of the game. Or how about when Fallout 3 went from open world dungeon crawler to linear corridor shooters when they started adding the DLC? And speaking of which: Fallout 4 isn't even out yet, because the content of all the DLCs isn't even announced yet. People who bought the entire pack for 90 dollars haven't even seen over the third of the game because it's not even released yet.
Comment has been collapsed.
Spoiler alert: Fallout 4 is secretly going to become the next Rockband.
P.S. The DLC is supposed to be based on user feedback, if you want to judge a game based on its DLC, which again, I guess you do. I prefer just enjoying what's there.
Comment has been collapsed.
Okay, regardless of the rest of the discussion: you actually believe that? Their entire community were begging them to fix their own scripting engine for an entire decade, from Morrowind to Skyrim, and they left the exact same bugs in it that were patched by the exact same fixes for every game, because they couldn't even steal the patch for themselves (even though they stole the entire Real Time Settler mod from New Vegas). They backed out form the first paid mod scandal after days of pure internet rage with practically nobody supporting them, only to bring it back in the form of bethesda.net.
And you honestly, really believe that the DLC, a DLC for a game they have already been developing for almost four years, DLC that takes several months to write, code, record and test apiece, DLC which is scheduled to release within the next 12-14 months, will be, in the future, based on current user feedback? Do you know how much time it took them to make a DLC based on actual user feedback? Seven months. Seven months it took to retcon the entire third act of Fallout 3, one of the stupidest endings in recent years, with a DLC called Broken Steel.
Comment has been collapsed.
Considering its an RPG, I would say having a good story to tell is a pretty important part scoring it. But since most people probably wouldn't have finished the game by now, it's way too soon to judge the game.
Comment has been collapsed.
Okay, got it, I can't realize I've enjoyed playing my games until I've beaten them, makes sense. (not)
Comment has been collapsed.
You can enjoy a game fine, but it wouldn't make sense to rate and judge an RPG without finishing the story, especially if you're going to be comparing it to other titles.
Comment has been collapsed.
So in order to compare games, I have to pretend they are books? I can't decide which games I like based on gameplay, graphics, customization options, gunplay, atmosphere, etc.? I still don't understand this at all...
Comment has been collapsed.
The series is primarily a role playing game. The entire point of a role playing game is to have the player be a character in some setting and to tell a story from the player's interactions with the world. All the things you've listed do factor into judging a game, but it would be ridiculous to make a full review without knowing the story when RPGs are all about storytelling.
Comment has been collapsed.
Who here has made a full review? I don't see a single full review posted in this thread, can you show me one? I never saw anybody even mention having a full review, and the question certainly didn't ask you to have a full review, so I have no idea where that came from. Anyways, I'd still prefer a fun game over a good story, that's why I play games, instead of reading books. Soooo... Yeah, I rest my case.
Comment has been collapsed.
You're comparing multiple games from the same franchise. You could make a case that you don't need a full grasp of the game to compare the original Interplay games and the newer Bethesda games purely based on the fact that you don't like one over the other for gameplay, though it would be an ignorant reason to prefer one over the other. However, the main difference between 1/2 and 3/NV/4 mainly resides within story including setting, characters, and tone. Sure there are gameplay differences between them all, but the primary change is the story. In order to compare and contrast the titles you should have an understanding of the games as a whole, including story.
I'm not saying that you can't just enjoy a game based on early first impressions. In fact, a game should strive to have good first impressions. However, you can't compare multiple titles and choose your favorite without having a complete understanding of all the games you're comparing.
Comment has been collapsed.
Wait, so now I can't have an opinion on any of the Fallout games until I've played and beaten ALL of them? You're getting even more ridiculous, now. So even people that only play a couple can't choose one over the other, or those who only play one can't have it be their favorite of the series? I mean, sure, in that case their favorite could change when playing others, but that doesn't mean the other one was never their favorite. But if that were the case, no one can have a favorite Pokèmon game or Tales Of game?
I mean, so far, Tales of Zestiria is my favorite even though I haven't beaten it, or say, Tales of the Abyss, but I mean, according to you, I don't like Zestiria more than Symphonia or Symphonia: Dawn of the New World.
And saying an RPG is all about storytelling is like saying a nap is all about where you take it, when some people have better naps on say a couch over a bed. Or saying a book is all about the quality of the print.
Besides, I STILL play games to play and enjoy them and enjoy/explore different worlds and have fun, not in order to watch a book like you.
EDIT: Which consoles have you played all the other Fallouts on, or did you not vote? Because according to you and your Steam account, you can't have a favorite Fallout. So I'm just curious.
Comment has been collapsed.
You're trying to choose your favorite game out of all the games. How can you choose one of the other if you don't have a full understanding of them all? It doesn't mean that you can't have an opinion on the series, but you can't make a complete judgement unless you familiarize yourself with all the games.
Considering an RPG is a role playing game, a good story should be one of the most important things, just like how an FPS should have engaging shooting mechanics primarily whether they be arena or tactical based. It doesn't mean a good story is the only deciding factor, but it plays a good amount into it. You don't play a Fallout game just to shoot people, just like you don't play DOOM for the story.
I own the original Fallout games on GOG and have a physical copy of Fallout 3. I have Fallout NV on Steam and I do not yet own Fallout 4 and probably won't be playing it for a while.
Comment has been collapsed.
So you don't have a favorite and didn't vote here, got it. Maybe I'll remove my vote, then.
EDIT: I play games to play games, including Fallout, not just to shoot people or just for the story, and I don't get why that's so wrong.
Comment has been collapsed.
mass effect 3 was pretty good, till i reached the ending. it changed my view on the game completely...
Comment has been collapsed.
I was aware of the ending being bad before starting playing the Mass Effect trilogy (just read about disappointment without spoilers), but after reaching the end of the third game, man, that was worst than I thought
Comment has been collapsed.
You didn't enjoy playing any of the game because the ending was bad? Okay, so once you saw the end, you realized, "wait a minute, this game wasn't fun at all, why'd I waste all my time and money enjoying parts of this game?" THAT sure makes sense...
Comment has been collapsed.
hype does that to people.
i bet they also say deus ex mankind divided and hitman 2016 are the best in both franchises, just based on trailers. -.-
Comment has been collapsed.
And Mankind Divided so far was advertised as a Splinter Cell clone TPS/FPS instead of a first-person cRPG. >_>
I gave up on anybody getting close to the first game's design quality, but DX3 was at least a really great attempt, especially for a console game.
Comment has been collapsed.
I went with New Vegas because of the crafting and hardcore mode, which made it much more interesting. The tone also felt like a return to the first two Fallout games.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'd like option none because i have never ever played a Fallout game
Comment has been collapsed.
Look at the vote of how many poor misguided souls are out there thinking otherwise. (Most likely because their first Fallout was FO3.)
Comment has been collapsed.
I was a big fan of Fallout series long before FO3 release, but i still think FO3 is amazing game and it definitely sequel that i expected. For me it's always weird to see so much people who complained about new Fallout's, this series for me was always about exploring and atmosphere, and Bethesda did great job IMO.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, they were supposed to be a complex cRPG with a large emphasis on dark satire of 1950s America. Both of aspects which were completely disregarded or– the more likely case– not really understood by Bethesda, so they just reskinned Oblivion, took some random elements they saw on the wiki on the Fallout entries, and called it a day. I mean if you look at it, FO3 is a TES game: the Chosen One escapes from yet another prison at the beginning, only to wind up in the conflict of the White Knights of Goodness and the Evil Orks over the Legendary Castle, and your job is to find the Myterious Wizard, who happens to be your dad. When you find him, he sends you on a quest for a Mighty Artefact of Magicness that can cleanse the land from the Evil Curse when placd into the mage Tower, but the newly emerged Black Knights of Evilness led by their Enigmatic Emperor try to take over the mage Tower for their own nefarious deeds.
And they literally just threw guns in it.
Heck, Point Lookout even gave up and has a magical tome of demonic summoning in it. In a pulp sci-fi. I mean there is being lazy and there is not even trying to mask that it was a reused cancelled Oblivion DLC. Even the scenery was obviously a TES map.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, if we talking about story (but i never said that it was great in FO3), in Fallout 1-2 main storyline was not that great too. It has unique and amazing world, but mainline in both was very linear and simply, literally "Find water chip, save your people". Yes, gameplay was different, but world and atmosphere was amazing in both old and new Fallout's. And atmosphere was created not because rich story, but art, world and sound design. For example, FO2 has amazing OST, Vault City theme is simply genius, but FO3, even with not that great OST, have amazing radio and main menu theme. In FO2 was a lot random encounters with interesting places, in FO3 they simply put them on world map, and you easily can miss all this not marked places if you'll didn't look around and always use Fast Travel.
You are too prejudice to new Fallout's, like many other veterans (i'm not sure if "oldfag" is correct name in this case). New Fallout's is great, they same and different from previous games from series at the same time. Sorry if you'll find some strange wording, i'm still improving my english knowledges and didn't prepared for such discussions.
Comment has been collapsed.
The main plot of Fallout 2 was simple as a stick. And that would make any self-conscious stick rage with the comparison, it was that simple.
Not really in FO1, if you consider it was water chip + Unity… especially the latter part was quite complex.
Still, the quests in either one were an intricate web of tasks. Just think about the Bishops/Westin/Raiders/Vault City quest line and how many possible outcomes it had.
Not to mention the richly detailed backstory of the world and what happened in it.
What do you get in FO3? Tasks that fall into three category: 1) kill someone 2) get some specific item 3) get an infinite number of a specific item. How would that compare to, just a random example of "find the real killer of the Wright kid, his motive, and the method of the killing"?
Fallout 3 was a good dungeon crawler with a great map. gave it eighty-something in my review, spent over half thousand hours in it. But it was a TES game with guns and everything Fallout-related just showed incompetence or zero knowledge of the source material.
Comment has been collapsed.
As i said before, and i don't think that FO3 have great story and quests. To be fair, not all of them was awful, intro sequence in Vault 101 when you grow as child year by year (it's better than in Fable IMO) and Megaton atom bomb questline (when you can blow up whole city and feel like a true villain) is great and memorable. Yes, they lack of variety , but still was great experience.
And i never get this TES comparing. I played all TES games, but i didn't like any of them. Yes, they developed by same company, but for me this series was always very different, i played over 300+ hours in Fallout 3 (with mods and DLCs, of course), but didn't even finish main quest in Skyrim and forget about it after 40-50 hours. Same now with Fallout 4, already played 40+ hours and still want more
Comment has been collapsed.
Havent played 4 yet (dont own it and not sure when I ever will) but I liked New Vegas quite a bit.
Comment has been collapsed.
Fallout 2, then NV actually, then Fallout 1 and then the order of the rest isn't that important.
Comment has been collapsed.
My first Fallout was F3, but...
My favorite one is Fallout 2 (+ Restoration Project). Followed by Fallout and New Vegas.
Comment has been collapsed.
That poll option is for Fallout Tactics, which is apparently alright. (I haven't played it.) It was released with the subtitle Brotherhood of Steel but no one uses that any more since it's pretty confusing when there's another game called Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel.
Comment has been collapsed.
i've played tactics. no story, fights are ok, but whats the point?
fallout is better with the story. plus, in tactics, you get a group from the start, and it has (had) bugs.
Comment has been collapsed.
The only part that interests me is the Deathclaw party members. We can have androids and vampires in Bethesda's Fallout, but you can't bring back sentient Deathclaw friends?
Comment has been collapsed.
i loved the deathclaws. even better than Marcus the sherif ;)
Comment has been collapsed.
I only played New Vegas and Fallout 1. I definitely prefer New Vegas.
Comment has been collapsed.
It used to be Fallout 2 / New Vegas, but now that I've been playing FO4 this whole week, man I don't know anymore. I think it may actually be this one.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm very pleased to see 2 winning. The people of SG have a fine taste
Comment has been collapsed.
Fallout 2.
It did have some silly stuff, and the plot wasn't as good as Fallout 1, but the world was bigger, it fleshed out the world more and you had more options.
Fallout tactics wasn't great. It had an annoying habit of spamming random encounters. Like, you can run into 20 random encounters just by going 1mm on the world map. It made travelling really tedious, and I gave up trying to play it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Comment has been collapsed.