Which is better?

Which is better?

Attached: pixlr_20190721111936905.jpg (2048x2048, 1.57M)

2 has better worldbuilding but it's also more redd*t

2, as basically everyone agreed for many years. Sadly, most people on Yea Forums are derpy contrarians, who probably haven't played either game for years and so forget how many features are downright half-baked in 1, how crappy a lot of the dialogue writing was, how bad the weapon balance and companion AI were. It was still a great game, but 2 was just 1 but with all the shit fixed, way more content, and way more uses for minor skills.

2 is the better RPG but 1 has the stronger ambiance and narrative

these are my opinons

2. In everything.

YOU'RE OPINIONS ARE SHIT

Fallout 2

new vegas, both of these are unplayable dated garbage that Yea Forums likes to say people play to feel superior, but no one actually does

The original.

Fallout 1's main quest supports more builds though. Because of the fact that the first game's late game enemies are giant health pools, you can beat them if you're strong enough. In the second game the late game enemies are impenetrably armored. So a Fast Shot big guns combat character is fucked because it's impossible to damage them if you can't aim them in the eyes. You can only get lucky with armor-ignoring crits, and when you're fighting 10 marines at the same time, you will be killed by those same crits before you down even one of them.

1. 2 is proof that bigger is not necessarily better.

1

2 is the prime example of more =/= better

That is bullshit. I always played as fast shooting agile character.

I've tried it twice. On the easiest difficulty. It can't be done. My last setup was APA mk2. Vindicator with 3000 rounds. Zero damage on anything. Die from armor-ignoring crits from a gauss pistol. Before that I just had a mega power fist and melted everything in my path by just slapping them in the eyes. But no automatic weapon can touch the enclave.

New Vegas

Attached: 1556525969009.png (371x532, 281K)

the first
everyone who says 2 is a redditor
cringe and bluepilled
based and redpilled

>a Fast Shot big guns combat character is fucked
>laughs in bozar

Blessed post

I get FO1fags, it keeps a fairly serious tone throughout and there's practically no filler, it's THE post-apocalyptic rpg
FO2 offers so much more content though that I can't help but hold it higher, it's practically a sandbox for people who like the setting and game mechanics

I prefer 2 even with all the pop culture references.

First has better main quest. Second has slightly better game mechanics, marginal improvements in UI, way better side quests and lot more content. I prefer second based that, even if there are bit too many popular culture references and bunch of 4th wall breaking jokes.