Fallout 1 and 2

if you're planning on doing combat put 10 in agility. No questions

also pick gifted trait if you wanna cheat

Yes

nice bait m8

I think fallout 4 would be more suited to you.

Todd?

Yes

EEEEH ARE GAME GOID EEEEEH IS GOOD LIKE FALLOUT NV UUUHHH, RETARD FUXK YOU CUNT *FARTS*, HMMMMM JUST LIKE MA USED TO MAKE

Todd? Who is that?

Attached: Blodd_Bloward.jpg (288x288, 23K)

If your conception of Fallout starts and ends with Bethesda's Fallout-branded games, then understand that they are nothing alike, so that's not a good measure for whether you'll get anything out of the originals. If you like New Vegas, then you're fine as long as you can get past the mechanical differences.

Yes

Yes

Yes, but don't expect those games to hold your hand.

I recommend playing Fallout 1, 2 and then New Vegas, because NV is actually a sequel of sorts.
Then you can play Fallout 3 and 4 - these are spinoffs.

>shitty fps games made by someone else
>sequels/ spinoffs

Yes

Yes

new vegas was made by Obsidian. some of the original developers went to Obsidian.

>these faggots saying 3 and 4 are spin offs not knowing what fallout about

>muh writing

Yes

No, they're not worth playing at all other than for the feels. There's definitely a good game in there, but after playing Baldurs Gate 2 and New Vegas, I can't go back to fallout 1 or 2.

Attached: 1234248665097xg0.jpg (600x600, 66K)

What is fallout about? Please tell me.

Yes even when Fallout 2 drags way too much also try Tactics

Depends on how much jank and clunk you're willing to turn the blind eye on.

F1 is the better of the two. No BS "All of the Vaults are really Government Psychological Experiments!" crap. No "OMG! BoS Power Armor! OMG! OMG! OMG!" garbage.

F1 is what the entire series should have been. F2 is what happens when F1 became too popular. F3 is what happens when the console kiddies got ahold of it.
F4 is what happens when the console kiddies modded F3 to their liking.

I'm guessing that F5 is going to be a re-themed Rage 2 game at this point.

>still
Its not like they stopped being good
Retard

>fallout 1
yes
>fallout 2
only if you enjoyed 1

Old game gud, new game bad.

I wonder what kind of sad and empty life one must lead to make this kind of posts. I hope everything works out for you user.

They are some of the greatest PC games ever made.
Fallout 1 is great.
Fallout 2 is overrated and not as good, but it is still a decent game.
Yes, they are both worth playing, now more than ever since you can experience them bug-free.

Attached: 1547324477150.jpg (400x492, 19K)

No, when you stop playing, it makes you appreciate 21st century life more, with it's running water, electricity, soft toilet paper and lack of radioctive monsters wanting to eat your spleen.

Play FO1 first, then if you complete it and like it get FO2 with the Restoration patch. The resulting game is several times larger than the original and will give you way, way more play time. FO1's biggest flaw is that it's just such a small game, but I agree that the atmosphere and storyline is better.

Wow. That's so creative, assuming that I have a sad and empty life because my opinions differ with yours.

Please elaborate. I want to read the rest of it.

Yes

no

Yes

Attached: 1556972882680.jpg (694x530, 20K)

I wanna say yes but my true neutral alignment forces me to say no in a Cain effort to balance the scales on this thread.
so no.

Tried playing F1. Got bored to death

zoom zoom zoom

Attached: fallout_series (1).png (811x1095, 1.73M)

Yes

Wouldn't be a Yea Forums thread without some buzzwords thrown in it

your attention span is fucked mate

Attached: 1563776959924m.jpg (1024x576, 52K)

Yes

Yes they are

It's alright I liked New Vegas so that means I'm still in the cool kids club

No. Even the writing isn't very good. It's a little snappier than the Bethesda fallouts but nothing about it is particularly interesting or stand-outish

fuck you

New Vegas is literally zoomer tier

You cannot contain my superiority. "Seethe", as the cool kids say

Attached: giga chad 2.jpg (1281x1200, 120K)

>somebody took the time to make this

Yes

Look man perhaps your brain has been destroyed from over stimulation a flashing colors and thus unable to enjoy things that aren't like visual crack.

... and it's surprisingly accurate.

Yes

Untrue. I'm a big fan of light yoghurt, the really bland, tasteless kind, you know? Kinda like Fallout 1

Well maybe you are just gay

Yes

Yes

As somone who installed it and tried to play it several times between 2010 and now, and only succeeding this year, I can safely say yes.

That is also true

Yes

Dont bother playing it it aged like shit. The only people who replay this are nostalgic boomers who can't aim

Fallout 1: yes
Fallout 2: no

Literally unplayable is you're younger than 30.

I played both after 3 and NV, having started the series at 3, and I really enjoyed 1 and 2. 1 has better atmosphere, tighter storytelling, and clearly more budget, but it is a little bitt clunkier. 2 has the benefits of being longer, having way more content, and the existence of New Reno.

Attached: shrugtilt.gif (500x578, 2M)

made a smart scammy scummy con-man
one of the best RPGs experiences I ever had

Attached: .png (294x260, 102K)

Oh also, as much as I say FO1 has better storytelling, convincing the Master to kill himself is and always will be dumb. Yeah thematically I get it, that he's so up his own ass that he never predicted for such a simple yet fatal flaw in his plan making everything he did for nothing but...how the fuck do you not notice that? How does someone else like Lieutenant not point it out to him? His entire plan hinged on X being the case and he never bothered to check of X was possible.

>FO2 is bad because it's filled with pop-culture references
You have to keep in mind that at the time it came out, the only other thing really doing that was MST3K. It wasn't common and if anything was part of its charm.

I'm gonna save and use this picture.

Yes

Yea Forums has completely blown the pop culture thing out of proportion, it really isn't that noticeable, and having played through the game several times I can only think of a few actual references off the top of my head.

They're both shit, but they're better than new vegas at least.

For most of the game, it's out of proportion. For San Francisco however it's completely accurate to describe as such because for whatever reason, 90% of the pop culture shit is in that city.

Yes

They werent even good the year they got released. But kids in here think they look more mature if they pretend to like it.

Yes

Can you give examples? For some reason whenever I've played FO2 I've generally avoided San Fran in favour of Reno and NCR.

A giant section of San Francisco is making fun of Scientologists. Keep in mind that back then not everyone was doing that as the only real leak out on how crazy they were was a book written in 1990 titled A Piece of Blue Sky by a former member, and it was less about the Xenu shit and more of how Scientology is a scam masquerading as a religion.

SF has good storylines and quests, it just also has the whole Hubologists thing.

Yes.
FO 1 > FO 2

If you are not uneraged and have above 3 braincells, yeah!

Funny thing is the Hubologists came back in FO4's dlc, and they really lay thick the whole "scientology exists to siphon money out of its adherents" bit

yeah. from what I remember shit's really fun if you pick the right perks.

>Implying you need to be good at aiming to play single player Fallout games

Fallout 1 is gaming kino, you're probably just a zoomer retard who skips text and can't go 5 meters without an oversized hud telling you what you need to do, don't downplay it on "muh aiming"
t. High rank CSGO boomer who probably shits on you in every online game bar SC2 - but you probably don't even know what an RTS is lmao

Attached: 1562345980932.jpg (470x470, 31K)

It's an updated and more polished version of an older chart.
What you say isn't true at all. Let me explain the problem:
- Fallout had pop culture references. The idea behind the game was that if you didn't get the reference, you wouldn't know a reference was being made. So you can recognize the Maltese Falcon name from the bar, but if you don't, you will think "cool name for a bar". Random encounters were excluded from this rule, however. That said, they were usually extremely short and usually amounted to one "image" and nothing else.
- Fallout 2 had pop culture references. Unlike Fallout, Fallout 2 characters will randomly start spouting exaggerated lines that don't really fit the tone of the conversation. For instance, a Fallout 2 character early in the game starts quoting Goodfellas in what (I consider) was the worst dialogue in the game. As in, literally starts quoting most of the scene, as opposed to a single line ("I'm funny how? Like I'm a clown?"). Then we have the Hubologists and two celebrities which are an obvious reference to something. Random encounters are not brief references anymore: you have Monty Python dressed in Power Armor, and that bridge troll as well.

I'm sure there is more but I only played through Fallout 2 once. But the point is that the references aren't one liners. Rather, you are being constantly reminded "this is a reference which you either get or don't". And in the latter case, it's fairly annoying. Since I had seen Monty Python and the Holy Grail I did enjoy the two references, particularly the one with the Brotherhood of Steel.

Here is a comparison of the references btw.

fallout.fandom.com/wiki/Fallout_cultural_references
fallout.fandom.com/wiki/Fallout_2_cultural_references

Yes

That doesn't discount what I said. When FO2 came out, no one else other than MST was really filling themselves with pop culture references. It made it stand out.
>And in the latter case, it's fairly annoying.
To you.

Games used to have so much soul. I feel truly sorry for all the youngsters here, you have no idea what you're missing and understandably you don't want to play older games because they're just not streamlined for the modern player, meaning you actually need to invest in time to figure them out.

>in b4 nostalgia
You can say that all day but it's true, games today are nothing but overpriced waypoint simulators. The gaming industry went to shit the day they decided games should feel like movies.

I can't really word it properly but I would say it means games treat you as an intelligent entity. The problem I have with modern game. Sure some games are rollercoasters and they throw every possible thing at you, but at the end of the day I'm sitting there and taking the experience in. In other words, it feels much more like watching a movie.

Take Fallout for example. It's one of the greatest RPGs I ever played. It had everything, the atmosphere, the story, the whole game felt like whatever you did had a tremendous impact, for good or worse. I still remember many moments from that game and I played it decades ago. By contrast, take a popular RPG from the modern era. I played through Witcher 3 recently. Don't get me wrong, it's a good game, and I'm seriously impressed with the technology behind it. But for the love of everything that's holy, why is it that all that I do in the game is go from one waypoint to another, watch one sequence after another, and spend most of the time looking in the corner of the screen at the minimap? I really feel like the dumbest person ever playing through that. It's just not engaging. I would prefer the game just throw you into the world and let you explore on your own. Find your own adventures and stop holding my hand on every turn. I don't understand how with all the technology we have today we can't produce a good RPG in the vein of Fallout. As in, a truly immersive experience where the player feels true freedom.

Attached: Junktown_Entrance.png (640x480, 152K)

>he has divergent opinions HOW AWFUL
have sex

Yes. They have aged very well.

>To you.
And the creators of Fallout, who specifically set out to avoid such problems in the first game, but left during the development of Fallout 2.

>And the creators of Fallout
And? I'm supposed to automatically change my opinion because people who made the first game felt differently? Fuck off with that appeal to authority bullshit. I know what I like.

Every faggot says NOSTALGIA THIS NOSTALGIA THAT

I'm gonna give you faggots one (1) chance, I will illegally download Fallout 2 and approach it with an open mind for at least 2 hours, if it is shit I will make a thread about it and kill this debate once and for all.

I didn't want it to come to this.

Just make sure the 2 hours starts after the tutorial. Everyone, including I'm pretty sure the creators, think it was a mistake.

I'm not appealing to authority. I'm just saying that the game was designed a certain way on purpose.

Temple of Trials takes around ten minutes. It's tedious and annoying, but it's not like OKami where the tutorial is 40 hours.

But it's really bad

What is it with Bethesda and the Brotherhood of Steel? Why are they so obsessed with them?

>Fallout 2 is criticized for being goofy and whacky
>The same game that deals with slavery, systematic genocide, environmentalism, racism, isolationism and other topics

have fun.

Effectively you are since the only real reason to bring them up is to say "see, even the creators say you're wrong"

They're on the boxart of the first game and are a major part of the story.

>he actually fell for it

based

Fallout 2's really good and it's apparent why it's special pretty much the second you leave the temple of trials. Just a warning though: the temple of trials fucking sucks. There are ways to cheese and even skip it, but for most character builds you just need to grin and bear it.

The real question is: Why do Bethesda treat the Brotherhood like unambiguous good guys, when the first game makes it clear that they're anything but?

Yes, but only if you're not a zoomer.

>Why do Bethesda treat the Brotherhood like unambiguous good guys
They don't. Lyons isn't on his crusade for the good of humanity, he's doing it because the Super Mutants are his Moby Dick, as that one Outcast said. And in FO4 they've gone full "purge the mutant, purge the unclean"

I played both games a long time ago, just so you know, the game has a slightly big learning curve, I recommend you to tinker with the game some hours, read a manual, and try the tutorial, after that you should be good to go!
Pretty good games honestly, the atmosphere is pretty different and too pessimistic.

Not really. You made it seem like it's only me who has this issue, but I clearly am not as the developers went on to make it that way and, upon seeing the backslash Fallout 2 received for its pop culture references, New Vegas went on to hide most of the FO2-levels of blatant ones behind an optional Trait.

>There are "people" on this board who consider New Vegas one of their favorite games of all time but haven't touched 1 or 2

Attached: That's terror.png (110x128, 24K)

Plus, Fallout 1 has one of the best villains in any game, F1's story is amazing.

After playing FO1 and FO2 I've always wanted someone to remake New Vegas in the classic Fallout engine.

NV just does everyone they did and has gameplay though

>upon seeing the backslash Fallout 2 received for its pop culture references
I never heard that shit until the internet was more widespread. Before that everyone loved FO2 and considered it an improvement over 1 because of the sheer amount of content it had.

get the fixt mod. dont know if there's an equivalent for fo2.

Attached: Isometric New Vegas.jpg (1192x670, 205K)

It would certainly be a lot easier than remaking FO1 in NV or FO4.

Restoration mod.

I bought Fallout like 4-5 years ago, played 10 mins then dropped it until last week and I'm kinda sad I waited so long to finally play it.

Take 5 minutes to figure out how everything works, play for like a half hour to an hour to get some decent gear and then you're on your way. The difference in the writing compared to the newer Bethesda games is honestly shocking

they're fun

Attached: 1527895386972.webm (340x258, 2.07M)

Fallout 1 also has one of the best endings in any game ever.

Attached: Fallout_1_Ending_Killing_the_Overseer.gif (249x240, 1.82M)

ZOOM'D

It's called Wasteland 2

Why hasn't anyone made FO1 total conversion mod on FO3/NV engine?
Nostalgia goggles be damned FO1&2 are unplayable compared with 3.

Is it weird that I unironically think Fallout 1 and 2 look significantly better than any of the 3D games? Even the talking heads still look great.

Attached: Killian.jpg (640x480, 106K)

They've tried, too much work.

Would it? I mean, it has its advantages (no voice acting to record, aside from talking heads) and it certainly would make for a more impressive game for a multitude of reasons. But I feel like coming up with the spritework is harder than modelling and texturing.
Though I appreciate the render (seen it before) I prefer the classic Fallout aesthetic which has a much sharper look. Here everything looks too "painted".

Because FO1 takes place over hundreds of miles of landscape, it's hard to properly compress that on one single map compared to what the old games did.

It isn't unplayable at all. Take ADD meds and try playing it again

i have never seen a boomer who is good at vidya and fallout 1,2 are complete shit stop chooking on the nostalgia dick so hard and put down the monster it tastes like shit

ATOM RPG, if anything. Wasteland 2 is not really like classic Fallout, but ATOM RPG is almost a 1:1 copy. Where the ATOM team fucked up was making every single fucking NPC someone you can actually talk to, which leads to pointless conversations.

There's a reason why classic Fallout and games like The Witcher don't let you do that. Aside from being more realistic (why would everyone talk to you other than to give you the time of day?), it makes the important NPCs stand out.
No, I agree with you too. They look like actual people, and it helps everyone has disinct faces over GameBryo's "unique faces" based on one template, which leads to different characters looking like distant cousins.

>unplayable
Back to fortnite please.

>you take a sip from your trusty vault 13 canteen
That first sip of the day...

I prefer the way the older games handled presenting the world to the player; streamlining the overworld travel makes for a lot less down time and each hub felt like it had more to do. There's too much downtime in the newer ones where you're just sort of aimlessly wandering.

/fit/ sipboys 2017, before monster ultra became a boomer meme. Take me back
>tfw when 2 for 4$

The talking heads were good because they were really expensive clay models scanned by computers that they moved through claymation. There's a reason FO2 had way less talking heads, because it ate up a giant chunk of 1's budget.

Boomers actually think this is a good game, phahahahahah how pathetic

Attached: 957184ce015e2fb87c4e7fef2b3b1eae.jpg (640x480, 76K)

From monday's NV thread

Attached: Screenshot_2019-07-22-07-57-12-1.png (720x495, 69K)

Found the zoomer with the attention span of a goldfish.

t.killed by rats leaving the Vault

>ecause FO1 takes place over hundreds of miles of landscape
You mean a giant map where you see yourself walking from point A to point B in 2 seconds with the occasional single screen of encounters?
Amazing expansive map you got there

That implies he has played the game. He probably thought the graphics were bad (he would be wrong) and skipped straight to Fallout 76.

seething nostalgia boomers have arrived, you dont need a long attention span to realize that the game is shit

How is the game shit?

Can't buy microtransactions.

>this is one of the best games ever made
The absolute state of boomers. No wonder they shit up our country with their shit opinions and shit tastes

>you dont need a long attention span to realize that the game is shit
True, but you do need a long attention span to be taken seriously.

All fallout games are overrated garbage, change my mind

how is it good

Yes, the world map is for the sake of convenience because the world would be too big otherwise. To say nothing of FO2 which takes place over several thousand square miles.

Yes

>High levels of player agency
>Multi faceted world interaction
>Completely open ended exploration
>High replayability
>Great aesthetic
>Great OST
>Great story
You also didn't answer my question.

Fallout 3 doesn't have microtransactions.
Better atmosphere.
Feels like you're a small pebble in a set world.
Better exploration. Abandoned ruined towns each have their own stories and character.
Take off your nostalgia goggles.

Goddamn you have no idea how much I want this

>shit tier story
>laughable ost
>combat feels like shit
>atmosphere is genuinely mediocre compared to the first 2 proper fallout games

>Better atmosphere.
Disagree. No Fallout game has ever matched the atmosphere Fallout has.
>Feels like you're a small pebble in a set world.
This is the opposite of my impression. In New Vegas I can accept that, since you are pretty much someone's pawn. But in Fallout 3, you are wasteland Jesus, right down to sacrificing yourself before Bethesda retconned the ending.

There's no such thing in Fallout. You don't sacrifice yourself: the Overseer kicks you out because he is afraid to be cucked out of his Vault dwellers.
>Better exploration. Abandoned ruined towns each have their own stories and character.
I also disagree with this. The exploration in Fallout 3 is bad. And this goes for New Vegas too.
>Take off your nostalgia goggles.
I played Fallout 3, New Vegas, Fallout and Fallout 2, in that order. All within a span of four years.

>Better atmosphere
Zoom zoom zoom

With a question this dumb, bing bing wahoo is probably more your speed

>Yea Forums hates the OG Fallouts now
What the FUCK went wrong?

Why not just make a good game in that engine instead of taking shit putting it in that engine

The answer is in the first 4 characters of your post

>fallout main series
Wasteland 1, Fallout 1, Fallout 2, Wasteland 2

>spinoffs
Fallout Tactics

>dumpster fire shit with no relation to Fallout but uses the name after acquiring the rights to cash in on its brand
All the rest

Low levels of player agency
Low replayability
Shit aesthetics
Shit OST
Average story

Yes, but they can be a bit clunky at times.

i dont really care about graphics, but does the gameplay/rpg mechanics hold up still?

Based sub 40 iq poster

if anything RPG mechanics have been getting downgraded heavily recently and Fallout set the standard for ACTUAL roleplaying back then so yes?

Yes.
If anything, they're only stronger now because of streamlined RPGs have become.

Attached: Fallout 1 vs Fallout 3.jpg (914x400, 122K)

are boomers really this delusional?

>cant disprove anything properly

An argument can be made for WL1 but 2 is so far removed from FO in terms of setting and design you just can't connect the two.

Apart from the obvious example of the combat being a slog with large numbers of NPCs, I really don't see it.

They hold us as well as any late 90s/early 00s CRPG.

I actually like 4 more than 3

1 and NV are my fav tho

I just want somebody to remake f1/f2 in unity or some shit, to rework combat so it would be more tactical, rather than be only about getting prepared to fight and luck, speed up animations so most of the fights wouldnt take eons because some two hobos in nearby bar had to make their turns despite not beeing even close to be part of the fight
give you controll over companions so marcus wouldnt blast you away with his minigun because random doggo was infront of you
and Ui changes so you could see more than three or four items in inventory/shops

I just started playing 1, did the quests around Shady Sands, then went to a bandit camp (khans, I think?) that are surprisingly not hostile despite not having much to say, so where do I go next?

pretty cool little game, wish I played it earlier

>didn't like FO3 or 4
>liked NV quite a bit
>booted up FO1 expecting to drop it after 5 minutes
>mfw ended up loving it for 50 hours instead
Good stuff.

Attached: 1412024316298.gif (226x200, 496K)

Junktown

literally me except I liked 4 and loved NV

At least 4 was better than 3

>tfw really want to replay FO2 Restoration but I have a Mac now
Fuck, every once a while something like this comes along and makes me consider getting a cheap Windows shitbox

should I go back and take Ian first? I didn't have money for him but I convinced him we can share loot but then I figured I don't wanna share so I dropped him

I'm 26.

Depends on what sort of build you're using; if you're not running something that is somewhat combat focused, then I would recommend taking Ian. Just be warned that Ian can cause more problems than he solves during combat. You can also pick up two companions in Junktown.

Absolutely. I didn't fully complete either game until 2015 and I loved them.

also I still don't know why nobody has bothered making a true port of FO1/FO2 for phones/tablets. The game would work perfectly with a touch-based UI

I have 8 agi and 100 in small guns so I figure I can handle stuff on my own? at least the radscorpion quest I did solo.

No fuck all the boomers in this thread
It's clunky as fuck and the graphics are utter garbage and an eye sore
You have to use a specific build or you constantly die and the dialogues are like reading a boring fan fiction wall of text
Just play fallout 3 or NV aka the best fallout and you're all good

just play wasteland 2 bro, and then stop and realize it is shit

>100 in small guns
You'll be fine

>You have to use a specific build or you constantly die
I'm bad a video games and I don't find these difficult at all, you must be really terrible.

Why would you have a mac

I'd love Switch ports for 1 and 2.

You'll be fine and like I said, there are two recruitable companions in Junktown and Ian will always be available. Just as a forewarning, one of the companions in Junktown can only be recruited if you defuse the central conflict in Junktown a certain way.

>lmao u bad
Nice argument retard

this, don't listen to boomers they are lost and confused

playing classic games is actually very popular and hip among the youth :)

>muh graphics
Still looks great to me.
>clunky as fuck
Actually, Fallout 1 and 2 are easy to play if you would just sit down for more than a minute to figure out the combat and controls. But I think you prefer the game holding your hand.
>you have to use a specific build or you constantly die
Sounds like user error to me.

Fallout 1 and 2 are seriously some of the most aesthetically pleasing games and the atmosphere is unrivaled.

Attached: Destroy_master.png (400x275, 183K)

>and the atmosphere is unrivaled.
phahahahahahahahahahhaahahahahahahahahahahahahhaahhahaahahaha

Attached: Fallout-Screenshot-4-1024x576.jpg (1024x576, 166K)

>the opinion of one massive cum-guzzling turbo faggot, based on a mere two hours of game play, approached with an "open mind", will be what ends the debate
we did it boys.

Attached: 1540516433969.png (232x260, 99K)

>it's another episode of retards using mods and blaming it on the game

>unrivaled.
phahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahaahahahhahahahahaha

Attached: 59112b295bafe3040b3fc0dc.jpg (470x352, 43K)

Seething zoomer.

Now that looks much better, but make it 640x480 and .png and we've got a winner.

Yes

cringe

The temple is hardly all of the problem in the early game. The first couple of hours are a dull slog, no matter what.

Should've gone with Fallout 1. Much less mind-numbing first 2 hours.

>you just need to play it for 200 hours, then it gets REALLY good
gets load of pops over here, fucking shaking because you know noone can pick this garbage up and enjoy it without nostalgia goggles

Anybody who isn't used to being force-fed the garbage that are most modern games can pick up Fallout 1 and 2 with no problems.

>Slurp shit and take it up the ass like we like how we used to take it
Fucking boomers and their Stockholm syndrome

>Where the ATOM team fucked up was making every single fucking NPC someone you can actually talk to, which leads to pointless conversations.
If an NPC has nothing unique to say they might as well not exist. If you want to populate your cities with useless nothing characters to make it look busy, stick them in the background where the player can't reach them. NPCs that don't talk are bad, and NPCs that speak from a generic pool of dialogue (classic WRPG failure of design, this one) are the absolute worst.

>Much less mind-numbing first 2 hours.
Not if you go to Navarro and deck out your character early on.

You obviously haven't played ATOM RPG.
There's nothing bad with adding characters that have simple one liners. To populate cities with characters hidden in the background where the player can't reach them is nonsensical, exactly how would that work?

>There's nothing bad with adding characters that have simple one liners
yep. I wish beth would add more inconsequential characters/buildings to their cities instead of making everything feel like a tiny fort

>anyone who hasn't played better games will like these
If they stand out on their own merit, why are you so fucking scared of someone picking the game up and giving it a chance?

that wasn't the point, you gigantic sack of shit. the point was to mock the faggot who had the audacity to claim that spending a lunchtime playing the game to cobble together a shitty, misinformed opinion would be enough to put this debate to rest.

>like we like how we
what did he mean by this?

>speak from a generic pool of dialogue (classic WRPG failure of design, this one)
Name one (1) game, besides Morrowind, that does this.

>There's nothing bad with adding characters that have simple one liners.
Yeah, that's the ideal way to deal with unimportant characters as long as they have a line unique to them, otherwise they're not characters, just obsticles to move around.

>To populate cities with characters hidden in the background where the player can't reach them is nonsensical, exactly how would that work?
You having a giggle? Games do that all the time to make cities look far farger than the actual explorable area is.

Explain why it wouldn't put the debate to rest though? Sounds to me like you're just scared what he might have to say.

Baldur's Gate. Click on two seperate nameless nobodies in town, they speak from the same pool of generic text.

>You having a giggle? Games do that all the time to make cities look far farger than the actual explorable area is.
I ask because I've never seen a game that does this, and by "this" I'm taking your comment literal: make NPCs completely unnaccessible. That would just lead to empty streets populated by a few meaningful NPCs, which is exactly what I want to avoid.

Especially since "meaningful NPCs" in RPGs literally amount to about 10 per city.

he can say whatever the fuck he wants to say, he might even actually have some valid criticisms, but it's highly unlikely that spending such an inadequate amount of time will yield anything that hasn't been said before by people who've spent more than a nap worth of time playing the game.
essentially
>wow i spent a sum total of two fucking hours
>two
>2
>count em
>on your hand (just need the one)
>valve's magic number
>1+1
>i have total mastery of the game, i have seen everything it has to offer, i am now capable of making anything beyond a rudimentary argument, my viewpoints are surely flawless, dont worry guys i'm finally going to put the argument to rest
and if you honestly think he's going to add anything meaningful to the age old debate then just neck yourself already.

Attached: 1544592096994.png (1600x1435, 1.43M)

I dont think the implication was he was just going to play it for 2 hours, it was if it's unbearably shit for 2 hours wont play more. I don't think a game can really get away with being shit for 2 hours and still be called good design, pops.

>That would just lead to empty streets populated by a few meaningful NPCs,
Not at all. Like you said, simple short lines are fine but they have to be unique to that character. Common dialogue pools are lazy and, not to be that fag but, immersion breaking.

You should be able to talk to anyone who exists in the player's space but I'm not saying they have to have something worth hearing, or that they should have interactable dialogue trees. 'Fuck off stranger' is fine if that's the feeling of that one guy.

The fact that a good number of people still regularly discuss a game despite it having been out for over 20 years is a pretty clear indication that it's a pretty fucking good game and definitely worth checking out. You wouldn't even be asking the question if it wasn't worth it because you wouldn't have seen people discussing thus giving you the idea that maybe you should play it. Same goes for any game that has been out for more than 10 years really.

>being this retarded, voluntarily
you're still willingly ignoring the fact that one retard claimed that he alone will put the argument to rest, like he's some divine arbiter of what is and is not a good game, devoid of preferences and subjective views, and we will take what he says seriously and as gospel, and from this day forth all will know whether fo2 is a good game, because he, the turbo tard, said so.
stay in school, zoom zoom, this is no place for the likes of you.

Attached: 1538213498354.jpg (254x300, 9K)

Jazz, blues, supermutants, nuka-cola and power armour, obviously. What, did you not play the games? We should really start calling games like those "falloutpunk".

Attached: 1424955308020.gif (500x281, 246K)

Cutting in here chief (just finished pirating it haha).

I won't play just play it for two (2) hours, unless it's fucking trash. If it is trash, I'm crashing this plane with no survivors; this has gone on long enough.

If it turns out to be good I will play through the game and experience as much of the content as I can whilst still having fun before forming an opinion.

I will approach this the same way I approached jury duty: with an open mind in an attempt to be as objective as possible. Hope that clears things up.

Out.

You can smell the fear...

You weren't expecting an FPS, were you?

There was BOS power armour in Fallout 1. Getting it was a major plot point in the game.

literally told you that he can make his shitty argument, it's just that; it'll be shitty and add nothing to the argument.
stop baiting for (you)'s, go do something with your shitty life

Attached: 1539990961371.jpg (245x305, 109K)

This approach was popular among soft sci-fi writers starting from at least the sixties. Just read anything out of the majority of Sheckley's works for a textbook example.

This post shows you how not to take boomers seriously. Look at how they screech and cling to their old ways, Nah man, old FO is shit. as stated by others itt with reasons why new FO is better.

Game developers are no longer avid gamers themselves. Zero passion. Nine till five (or more like 24/7 if you're in EA slave pens or somewhere similar), grab paycheck, out.

Being real with you, It's hard to get into if you are coming from the older games, Especially 4. If i wasn't stuck on vacation with a bad laptop, I doubt i would of finished em.

cope

I meant the 3D games not "older"

Attached: 1546931545570.jpg (689x795, 24K)

>Effectively you are since the only real reason to bring them up is to say "see, even the creators say you're wrong"
When the people who established a setting disagree with something in a sequel they didn't make I take their side. This is their vision, their baby. Even if I wouldn't like what they'd make. There are very often alternatives I can enjoy, but compromising one's vision sucks. And no, it's not about authority, it's about creative expression.

Yes

Cope with what? I'm enjoying new games while the last game you enjoyed was out 20 years ago. How about you fuck off to /vr/ so you could circle jerk other nostalgia faggots

>imagine fabricating this fantasy that the people you disagree with are stuck in time playing old games that you don't enjoy because you don't have the mental capacity to play anything that isn't spoon-fed lootbox shit
cope with that, zoomie

Attached: 1542414541725.png (1000x1000, 801K)

Of course. Bethesda ruined the franchise

Interplay ruined the franchise.

>implying games lost their value with time
>this whole thread
What the fuck happened to Yea Forums?

Interplay started the franchise, you moron. Go play some COD you absolute faggot.

Elections and general influx of ignorant youngfags. But mostly elections.

>Interplay started the franchise
Not sure how this is relevant. Interplay killed it by releasing garbage, like Tactics and Brotherhood of Steel.

fpbp

hell yea

what happened? can't handle your feelings?

Attached: SaltThatSnailCharlie.gif (300x151, 436K)

Yes