PDA

View Full Version : Fallout opinion requested



vinraith
20-06-2011, 06:19 PM
And no, I don't mean "is it good?" because we all know the answer to that.

Having recently grown frustrated with New Vegas (somewhat due to technical faults with the mods I was using, somewhat due to not being the survival experience I was looking for, and somewhat I suspect for lack of a strong memory of Fallout lore) I'm thinking about revisiting the roots of the franchise. I played Fallout 1 back around when it came out, enjoyed it, but haven't been back since. My memory of it is a bit fuzzy. I tried to play Fallout 2 almost immediately thereafter, but bounced off of it after reaching the first city on several occasions. I think a lot of it was being irritated at being forced to play a tribal, some of it may also have been burnout with the engine. Anyway, it's a hole in my gaming history I'd like to correct.

For completeness sake I suppose I should say I also played and (contrary to popular reaction) quite enjoyed FO: Tactics and Fallout 3, though in neither case did I think the inclusion of Fallout lore really made them better games (and in FO3's case, I sincerely believe it would have been a better game without the franchise tie in at all).

Anyway, all that is a long-winded intro to a simple question: do I go straight to playing Fallout 2? Are dim memories of Fallout 1 sufficient? Do I really need to go back and play the first one again? And either way, are there any mods I should be aware of for either of them that are friendly to a "sort-of first play through?"

Rinox
20-06-2011, 06:29 PM
I don't know about any mods, but to give a simple answer to a simple question regarding F2:

Nope, there's really no need to have active memory of F1 to enjoy it. Basic knowledge of the Fallout universe works just fine (and even without it it's ok).

Flint
20-06-2011, 06:36 PM
do I go straight to playing Fallout 2? Are dim memories of Fallout 1 sufficient?
You don't really need any knowledge of F1. There's some connections between the two and a couple of shared areas/characters that will have additional value for a F1 veteran, but none of it is very crucial. Even so, the game still always provides you with enough information to get a grasp of what's going on (the opening "war never changes" cinematic pretty much explains F1's major plot strands, characters from F1 will state what the Vault Dweller did, etc). Few of my friends went straight into F2 without playing the first one first, and none of them ever felt like they were missing out any importantk nowledge. You can pretty much


Either way, are there any mods I should be aware of for either of them that are friendly to a "sort-of first play through?"
About the only important mod regarding either is the Fallout 2 restoration project that adds in a lot of the stuff that was planned to be included but had to be removed due to time constraints. It's not mandatory to have it, the core game works great as it is, but it certainly adds tons more content. A lot of people love it, I'm a bit ambivalent: I'd say one might get the best value out of it after you've first completed the vanilla game.


I tried to play Fallout 2 almost immediately thereafter, but bounced off of it after reaching the first city on several occasions. I think a lot of it was being irritated at being forced to play a tribal, some of it may also have been burnout with the engine.
The starting parts are the game's weak point (most notoriously the terrible tutorial temple that was forcedly wedged in). However, after you've advanced beyond the first few towns in the starting village's near vicinity, the whole tribal angle is more or less practically forgotten. So don't worry about that stuff lasting for very long.

Jockie
20-06-2011, 06:38 PM
Well I'd say if you're looking to complete your knowledge of the lore, Fallout 1 is a must, a lot of the key events surrounding the creation of Supermutants, about organisations like the Brotherhood of Steel and Followers of The Apocalypse (who are not even in Fo2) take place in the original. Plus you visit places like the Hub, Klamath (birthplace of the NCR) and meet (and influence) the players who shaped the Fallout world into what it is now (circa New Vegas). If you know all that stuff and are comfortable with your level of knowledge, you should be fine hopping in to Fallout 2.

I think most people actually consider Fallout 3 to be non-canon, because of badly they used the existing back-story (Brotherhood of Steel is the most oft-cited example of that).

Giaddon
20-06-2011, 06:39 PM
The GOG forum has a great post laying out the mods:

http://www.gog.com/en/forum/fallout_series/fallout_2_mods/page1

You do not need to play FO1 to understand FO2. In fact, I find 1 and 2 very different (with 1 being neater, more structured, and 2 being large and sprawling.)

Flint
20-06-2011, 06:41 PM
Klamath (birthplace of the NCR)
Nitpicking (my apologies): Shady Sands.

vinraith
20-06-2011, 06:43 PM
Well I'd say if you're looking to complete your knowledge of the lore, Fallout 1 is a must, a lot of the key events surrounding the creation of Supermutants, about organisations like the Brotherhood of Steel and Followers of The Apocalypse (who are not even in Fo2) take place in the original. Plus you visit places like the Hub, Klamath (birthplace of the NCR) and meet (and influence) the players who shaped the Fallout world into what it is now (circa New Vegas). If you know all that stuff and are comfortable with your level of knowledge, you should be fine hopping in to Fallout 2.

I remember the supermutant creation stuff, if somewhat hazily, as well as the BoS and... were those actually the gun runners in LA in FO1? I don't remember the Followers being in FO1 at all, and half wonder if I just outright missed them the way I did the whole companion function on my first playthrough. Hmm. Eh, maybe I should go back to the first and brush up.

Lightbulb
20-06-2011, 06:50 PM
...but bounced off of it after reaching the first city on several occasions. I think a lot of it was being irritated at being forced to play a tribal, some of it may also have been burnout with the engine. Anyway, it's a hole in my gaming history I'd like to correct.

I played the second one before the first. You play as a distant descendent so no need to play the first one.

Once you get out of the first town no one knows you are a tribal so don't worry about that.

Spoiler:

































I just took some TNT and blew up the first trader and stole all his stuff. Such a shame games these days don't let you kill merchants and steal ALL the stuff you KNOW they have because they were trying to sell it to you.

That will net you some decent weapons and armour and you can put your tribal past behind you. Also there is no way the later towns magically know what you did so no worries there...

Flint
20-06-2011, 06:51 PM
the BoS and... were those actually the gun runners in LA in FO1?
No, BoS were BoS in F1. They gave you the quest to go to Glow etc, you were required to meet them to advance the plot.


I don't remember the Followers being in FO1 at all
Guys in purple robes in the Cathedral.

SirKicksalot
20-06-2011, 06:56 PM
I played Fallout 1 for the first time in 2008. Now it's my favourite RPG of all time.

But I didn't like Fallout 2. It's one of those sequels that tries so hard to be bigger and better than the first one, it throws a lot of crap in the mix and in the end it's not satisfying. It's too much. Also the original Fallout (and New Vegas) have the perfect amount of goofy and slapstick content, but Fallout 2 has way too much and I hate that.

You don't have to replay F1, but I think it's a much more coherent and well-thought game than the second one. And it has Keith David.

I never played Fallout: Tactics, but I hear it's the first game that featured Riddick as a playable character! I might have to pick it up soon.

vinraith
20-06-2011, 06:56 PM
No, BoS were BoS in F1. They gave you the quest to go to Glow etc, you were required to meet them to advance the plot.


No, I remember the BoS clearly, I mean the guys in Fallout 1 in what I think was the ruins of Los Angeles who had a ton of crazy custom-built big guns. They were in a seriously fortified structure with, I believe, a glowing green moat around it.




Guys in purple robes in the Cathedral.

Wow, still no bells ringing. I don't even remember a cathedral.

Flint
20-06-2011, 07:00 PM
No, I remember the BoS clearly, I mean the guys in Fallout 1 in what I think was the ruins of Los Angeles who had a ton of crazy custom-built big guns. They were in a seriously fortified structure with, I believe, a glowing green moat around it.
Ah, sorry, misunderstood. You remember the gun runner area correctly, but they never had any connection any of the bigger factions of the series. They were just gun runners.

vinraith
20-06-2011, 07:04 PM
Ah, sorry, misunderstood. You remember the gun runner area correctly, but they never had any connection any of the bigger factions of the series. They were just gun runners.

Yeah, I just meant as a connection to FO: NV.

Actually my memory of FO1 is better than I thought, except that for some reason I still can't place the Followers, which is just odd.

Flint
20-06-2011, 07:10 PM
Yeah, I just meant as a connection to FO: NV.
That explains then why I felt this was a bit unclear, I've not yet touched New Vegas so no idea what happens in there. Sorry!

Jockie
20-06-2011, 07:25 PM
Nitpicking (my apologies): Shady Sands.

heh, obviously I need to replay it!

vinraith
20-06-2011, 08:20 PM
The starting parts are the game's weak point (most notoriously the terrible tutorial temple that was forcedly wedged in). However, after you've advanced beyond the first few towns in the starting village's near vicinity, the whole tribal angle is more or less practically forgotten. So don't worry about that stuff lasting for very long.

This is very good to hear, btw. I still don't entirely know which way I'm going to go on this (starting on FO1 or FO2) but knowing the above at least increases the odds I'll be able to push through the intro and really get going on FO2 when I get to it.

Thank you everyone for your advice, tips, and recollections. I don't think the decision's any clearer, but at least it's better informed!

Wizardry
20-06-2011, 08:36 PM
Just play through Fallout 1 again before moving onto Fallout 2. Fallout 1 is a very, very short CRPG. Very short. First time players can complete it in around 20 hours. It shouldn't take you long at all, especially if the memories come flooding back.

vinraith
20-06-2011, 08:53 PM
@Wizardry

It's funny, I distinctly remember it clocking at 40 hours for me when I played it, but then I'm notorious for exploring, dicking around, and generally taking ages to complete RPG's (and really any game that allows exploration). You're undoubtedly right that this time it would be much shorter, and if your estimates are valid I should be able to knock it out in a weekend or two.

Squiz
20-06-2011, 09:15 PM
Btw, GOG has FA1, 2 and Tactics for cheap (2,99$ each) at the moment. I shall pick one of those up I guess.

vinraith
20-06-2011, 09:30 PM
Btw, GOG has FA1, 2 and Tactics for cheap (2,99$ each) at the moment. I shall pick one of those up I guess.

Yup, that (along with my recent attempts to play NV) kind of prompted this, although I still have my old disc copies of all three Interplay Fallout games.

ColOfNature
20-06-2011, 09:36 PM
Fallout 3 is yet another game I never completed: in fact I just reinstalled it to have another go, and I was wondering what the general verdict was on the DLC? Any of it worth buying?

vinraith
20-06-2011, 09:40 PM
Fallout 3 is yet another game I never completed: in fact I just reinstalled it to have another go, and I was wondering what the general verdict was on the DLC? Any of it worth buying?

You'll probably want Broken Steel, simply because it raises the level cap, fixes the end, and lets you keep playing after you complete the main quest (which is, as usual with Bethesda games, the least interesting thing about the title).

If you have any interest in making it more of a harsh wasteland survival game, I highly recommend Fallout Wanderer's Edition. FO3 isn't a particularly good Fallout game, in that it meshes poorly with canon and doesn't make much narrative sense, but as a desolate post-apocalyptic survival and exploration game FO3 with FWE is one of the best games I've ever played.

Wizardry
20-06-2011, 10:13 PM
Oh and by the way, Wasteland is better than Fallout.

Drake Sigar
20-06-2011, 10:23 PM
I’ve found modern technology has spoilt me to the point where I can no longer get through some of the older RPGs. Planescape Torment’s insane reading comes to mind (and with that admission a thousand RPG gamers just imagined collectively punching me in the face. Well you’ll never find me, so there!). Thankfully Fallout 2 is NOT one of those unfortunate games. It's still enjoyable even today, and you don’t need any prior knowledge of the previous title.

Squiz
20-06-2011, 10:37 PM
Taking this even further OT, I have to agree with Drake. PS:T didn't do it for me either, as far as I can tell after a few hours in. I found the animations of the characters to be be superior to other similiar games like Baldur's Gate and I had nothing against a bit more talking and less fighting, but the characters per se didn't do it for me. Is it possible that the game gets better further in? I remember beating one of the first tasks (some job for an old man living in a city of junk with some kind of tailed daughter) and something that had to do with a living wall, if this gives you any idea of how deep I was into the game.

Coming back to the topic: I found FA2 a bit boring too and stopped after playing for some hours. I remember getting some overpowered armor and then steamrolling most of the enemies. Maybe that wasn't the best approach. I think I'll pick up FA1 then for some more classic experience.

vinraith
21-06-2011, 01:17 AM
Oh and by the way, Wasteland is better than Fallout.

I've been meaning to do something about that.

vinraith
21-06-2011, 01:19 AM
Taking this even further OT, I have to agree with Drake. PS:T didn't do it for me either, as far as I can tell after a few hours in. I found the animations of the characters to be be superior to other similiar games like Baldur's Gate and I had nothing against a bit more talking and less fighting, but the characters per se didn't do it for me. Is it possible that the game gets better further in? I remember beating one of the first tasks (some job for an old man living in a city of junk with some kind of tailed daughter) and something that had to do with a living wall, if this gives you any idea of how deep I was into the game.


It's supposed to get better when you get further in, but I confess I've never managed it for pretty much the same reasons as you. I didn't care about any of the characters, and consequently wasn't invested in the central mystery.

Flint
21-06-2011, 09:39 AM
In my experience it first does get better and then takes a nosedive. I bought it a while ago and was massively addicted to it for quite a while: it has a bit of a slow start because you're dumped into this crazy new world with no exposition etc, but when you start spending more time in it (and especially when you move further to the city, which is after the talking wall bit) it really sucks you in. I personally was really grabbed by the characters, the world and the unraveling mystery surrounding everything, and I didn't mind reading loads of text either due to it being so greatly written. However, I've been struggling to complete it recently because the game sinks into the loads-and-loads-of-combat pithole in its final chapters, which isn't very pleasant considering how the combat system is so utterly terrible. It's a great shame because I really loved everything before. And also because if the Baldurs Gate series shares PS:T's combat mechanics, I'm not quite sure if I'm up for those games after all.

arienette
21-06-2011, 09:49 AM
I much prefer Fallout 2, even if there is more comedy, it's a big enough game that there's also plenty of serious stuff. However, I can't believe, especially since you mentioned mods, that we made it this far into the thread without mentioning 'Killap's Restoration Patch'. Highly recommended for a better Fallout 2 experience, no links on me but google's always there.

DarkFenix
21-06-2011, 12:55 PM
Fallout 2 was the best of the series in my opinion. I actually do need to find one of these fan-made patches sometime to give it a more rounded experience.

Personally I like Fallout 3, I just think of Fallout 3 onwards being a completely different series of games, entirely unrelated to Fallout 1, 2 and Tactics. I enjoy them and I appreciate what they're teaching Bethesda about RPG making, they just aren't Fallout.

BenWah
21-06-2011, 06:49 PM
Here's the fallout 2 restoration patch.
One of the best games ever, when played with the patch.

http://www.nma-fallout.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=56087&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0&sid=00afa5f6ca61e1559e40af980c4bcccd

Squiz
29-06-2011, 09:41 PM
So, let's turn this thread from an opinion request into an experience report. Thanks to GOG's recent sale (still going on until the 4th of July), I got my hands on all the old Fallout titles (I count Tactics as one of the series, despite what some people might think) and decided to venture into the games I missed out on back when they were released. First things first, Fallout 1 to kick things of. This might get spoiler heavy, so maybe it'll be a good idea to white the text from now on.

There. After a few evenings, I've nearly finished the main plot (or so I presume) and had both positive and negative experiences with this game.

Positive: After all the years and despite the aged graphics and the very simple aesthetics of the world, I still got sucked into the post-apocalyptic setting. I love how everybody has his own goals and tries to use you for his own good. The environment is both simple and detailed. Cities are generally boring to look at and don't possess much character, but there are lots of details to discover, like for example small cupboards and panels that you can interact with. I feel this is somethig missing in most modern games - level design has moved on, it has become important for developers to consider ease of accessability, small items get highlighted, secrets cease to be real secrets (this might be both good and bad). I love the Vault Jumpsuit aesthetics and the whole Pipboy / Action Boy design used for the menu.

Negative: The time limit you start out with. Directly tied to the first major quest, the clock keeps ticking down, preventing the player (at least this was true for me) to take his time to explore the world. Then the difficulty spikes. No problem with challenges, especially in games featuring tactical combat, but enemies hitting you with damage of around three times your maximum health (I am looking at you, Super Mutants) at a time you really aren't prepared for it ruined a lot for me. Interestingly, this changes right after you got the Power Armor. Muties become easy to defeat, other enemies can't even touch you. Maybe the progression of the difficulty could have been handled better, but then again, the game is really old and one of the pioneers (?) of the genre.

All in all it seems to be a good game, maybe a bit unbalanced and short. For somebody who really got into the franchise with Fallout 3 (I am so sorry) it still holds enough magic and interesting content to make me want more of Postapocalyptica.

Mistabashi
29-06-2011, 10:14 PM
@ Squirrelfanatic ~

Yeah, the timer is one of the more annoying aspects of the first game. They dropped that idea in the second one, and it's also much more open and sprawling with more side-quests and generally more stuff to do at the various settlements. For my money Fallout 2 is the better game, although the plot isn't as strong as the first one.

Also, they added the ability to tell your companions to get the fuck out of your way, something which was at times infuriating in the first one :)

Squiz
29-06-2011, 10:50 PM
Mistabashi: I am really looking forward to the second one. I remember playing it, but I don't know how long ago that was. In any case I don't remember much of it, so I am all open for the "new" experience. And yes, followers are tiresome sometimes. Especially since they don't level in the first game and die really, really fast in the later stages. Poor Dogmeat, he was such a sturdy fella in Fallout 3.

Kablooie
29-06-2011, 11:20 PM
Just finished Honest Hearts.

It seems to be drawing mixed reactions, but I liked it a great deal. Very different environment, more challenging combat and supply issues, interesting NPC's. You get what you pay for, it needed more depth, needed to be more fully realized, but for the money it's definitely worth it, I'd say. The ADD-crowd got bored with it I believe, I thought it charming and beautiful, especially after the morbidity of Dead Money.

On the minus side I got more crashes than I've seen before (my game doesn't crash often, but it occurs) from FNV with this DLC. Your mileage may vary, of course.

8-bit
29-06-2011, 11:51 PM
wasn't the time limit removed from the first game in a patch? I certainly don't remember there being one when I played it a couple of years ago.

Wizardry
30-06-2011, 12:06 AM
The water chip time limit remained, but the mutant invasion time limit was removed (or set to something like 13 years). The water chip time limit is great. It adds a sense of urgency. You can always explore once you've solved the water problem, so it doesn't detract from that aspect. Time limits are great for many reasons.

Flint
30-06-2011, 12:46 AM
I think time limits are always a horrible idea, but I never found the one in F1 all that evil. The map's small enough to not really make it a problem. Still would've preferred it without one though.

Wizardry
30-06-2011, 12:49 AM
"You need to get us a water chip else we'll all die! But don't rush or anything. We have enough water to last us until the end of time itself."

Flint
30-06-2011, 12:52 AM
Sounds good to me. I realise not having time limits can cause unrealistic scenarios but it's one thing where I can happily separate gameplay from "immersion". I'd much rather enjoy the game than taint the fun by stressing over time.

Wizardry
30-06-2011, 12:59 AM
But have you considered that part of the fun may actually come from the time pressure?

Flint
30-06-2011, 01:02 AM
No, because time pressure is never fun for me. It's pressure and stress.

Wizardry
30-06-2011, 01:10 AM
What if the game is turn based?

Flint
30-06-2011, 01:19 AM
What would that have to do with whether or not a time limit is a bother?

TillEulenspiegel
30-06-2011, 01:26 AM
Means it's not running in real time, so careful planning wins over frantic flailing about. I'm very much a no-stress gamer myself, but a time limit can force interesting choices. Depends on how it's done, and how much information I have to begin with.

EndelNurk
30-06-2011, 01:28 AM
In general I dislike time limits as well. I can't remember the Fallout one being nasty though, at least not the water chip one.

Flint
30-06-2011, 01:31 AM
I see what you mean. It's still a bit of a no-no for me though, I simply find time limits a gameplay element that's always to the detriment of overall enjoyment. It doesn't always wreck the whole game, eg Fallout is still an amazing game even with its time limits (plus it was lenient enough considering the scale of the game... not that I knew that on my first playthrough), but it's just not a mechanic I enjoy in any form, real-time or turn-based.

Wizardry
30-06-2011, 01:45 AM
The Magic Candle games used it to great effect. You had a time limit, but you could split your party up and send characters off to work for money. So basically, the time limit made role-playing greater by requiring you to make choices for each character rather than just moving a group together through dungeons, killing enemies.

OctaneHugo
30-06-2011, 01:49 AM
I'm not a big fan of time limits but I found Fallout 1's to not get in the way too much. I count that and the 2nd among the best games ever and my favorites ever.

J Arcane
30-06-2011, 05:08 AM
Personally, I'm a bigger fan of FO1 than FO2. I always felt it gave you a much better start, for one, and it felt like a much better balance between freedom and direction. FO2 always felt very directionless to me, there was a point where I just didn't know where the hell to go but if I went to the wrong place things tended to murder me quite mercilessly.

The water chip timer thing does suck though, and the weird thing is I don't remember having as much of a problem with it when I played years ago as I did when I've tried to play more recently.

Squiz
30-06-2011, 08:48 AM
Seeing how few people experience the time limit as problematic, I guess the problem lies somewhere in how I approached the game. I think that the time given would suffice for dealing with the quest (although it seems I tend to miss hints where to go and stumbled across the map for a bit), but at the same time the game lures you to explore the world and to help people out. I agree with Wizardry here, the pressure forces the player to make interesting decisions or at least interesting considerations. "Do I help this village out with its problems? That would net me a nice amount of cash and the goodwill of the villagers. But it would also cost me / the Vault about a week of time and our time is ruuuaaanning out, our time is ruuuuaaanning out...". At least you don't loose access to those sidequests if you decide to tackle them later. It would be terrible if the player gets punished for trying to succeed within that time limit.

So time limits can be great for motivation but they go down easier with a good amount of guidance and directions given to the player. Note to myself: Be smarter about your decisions and pay close attention when playing such games. Don't be such a wuss. :P

deano2099
30-06-2011, 10:32 AM
I hate time limits, but thought the Fallout one was quite an elegant piece of design. It sets you loose in this wasteland, but gives you a solid objective and a generous but not ridiculous amount of time to complete it. There's room for a bit of exploration but you have to keep the goal in mind.

Once you're done, you can go back and pick up anything you missed or didn't have time for, so you don't lose out. It's a neat way of doing directed exploration to introduce the player to the world, and I think actually gets people in to the concept of actually exploring the wasteland as a whole, rather than: go to town A, do all quests in town A, go to town B, repeat, and so on.

Squiz
30-06-2011, 11:22 AM
Once you're done, you can go back and pick up anything you missed or didn't have time for, so you don't lose out. It's a neat way of doing directed exploration to introduce the player to the world, and I think actually gets people in to the concept of actually exploring the wasteland as a whole, rather than: go to town A, do all quests in town A, go to town B, repeat, and so on. Actually, I felt something like this: SPOILER Go to town A, check if the waterchip is there, then go to town B, check if it is there, then go to town C, check etc. with single crumbs of information given to you at every town / outpost. SPOILER END

As I said before, the time limit would have been much easier to swallow if you had an idea of what lies ahead of you. I don't want the game to tell me: This is your route, you've got to check these three towns before you succeed. That would be boring and defy the idea of exploration. But I would love to get SPOILER the hint that after this major quest, there WILL be time for exploration. When I started out on my journey, I really thought that the waterchip would be the whole story, so I tried to explore as much as possible, which in turn led me to feel pressured too much.

airtekh
30-06-2011, 12:41 PM
I've tried to play Fallout on several occasions.

The time limit is one of the things that really put me off it.

Squiz
30-06-2011, 10:59 PM
Just finished the first game. SPOILER Frustrating final battle. And damn, Overseers are bastards in every iteration of the series.

fiddlesticks
30-06-2011, 11:07 PM
Just finished the first game. SPOILER Frustrating final battle. And damn, Overseers are bastards in every iteration of the series.
It can be fairly frustrating. SPOILER Which is why I always go the "talk him to death" route.

Drake Sigar
30-06-2011, 11:39 PM
The water chip is easy, even if you’re being insanely thorough. What really pissed me off is when I SPOILER tried to extend the water chip time limit by sending caravans to the vault, but ended up decreasing a hidden secondary time limit on a super mutant invasion. I reloaded my last save a dozen times before I figured out what was going on and had to start all over again.

Wizardry
30-06-2011, 11:41 PM
The mutant invasion timer is (basically) scrapped in the patch.

OctaneHugo
01-07-2011, 03:28 AM
All this talk reminds me of how much I'd love a Fallout game where you just play a person and get a huge world to mess around in. Start off as a Raider. Rise through the ranks of the NCR. Be a wanderer. Start a trading company. It'll never happen but it would be amazing. I guess the Fallout MMO might supply something like it.

Squiz
01-07-2011, 07:04 AM
It can be fairly frustrating. SPOILER Which is why I always go the "talk him to death" route.

You can actually do that? SPOILER Hm, again an idea picked up in Fallout 3. I had the impression that it is possible, but then my conversation options ran out. Maybe I didn't have put enough points into the speech skill. My INT was pretty high though.

Lightbulb
01-07-2011, 08:54 AM
You can actually do that? SPOILER Hm, again an idea picked up in Fallout 3. I had the impression that it is possible, but then my conversation options ran out. Maybe I didn't have put enough points into the speech skill. My INT was pretty high though.

SPOILER: Surely the easiest way is just to plant 10 tnt on a timer at his feet?

Squiz
01-07-2011, 10:04 AM
SPOILER: Surely the easiest way is just to plant 10 tnt on a timer at his feet?

Good idea. SPOILER In theory at least. My character wouldn't have had the weight capacity for that though. He was already struggling with carrying the suit of Power Armor, a weapon, stimpacks and a Children of the Cathedral (TM) robe. :)

Lightbulb
01-07-2011, 05:40 PM
Good idea. SPOILER In theory at least. My character wouldn't have had the weight capacity for that though. He was already struggling with carrying the suit of Power Armor, a weapon, stimpacks and a Children of the Cathedral (TM) robe. :)

SPOILER Not really my idea its from: Fallout 1 Speed Run 00:09:19" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WzSOKi_t5fg. Really is a short game! :D

Squiz
01-07-2011, 06:05 PM
The video is blocked for my country. But I guess it is something similiar to this: http://speeddemosarchive.com/Fallout.html

Squiz
02-07-2011, 02:35 PM
I went ahead and started playing Fallout 2. First of all, I thought it would e a good idea to grab some patchs and mods. Higher resolution and Killaps's patch worked fine and really contribute to the smoothness of the experience.

However, I also installed the Killaps restoration project and had some troubles with that. It changes some parts of the game (as I have learned from what people wrote on the internet) and does make it a tougher challenge. Some fights that were easy to beat in the original game became some real save-reload-fests. In addition, an important quest item (SPOILER Vic's radio SPOILER END) has been locked away behind a rather tough lock which prematurely ended my first attempt at the game with a character not proficient in lock picking. Supposedly, the project adds a lot of good things, but if it at the same time means that I have to deal with such road blocks, I guess it isn't a real recommendation for first playthroughs.

J Arcane
02-07-2011, 06:37 PM
I found the restoration project rather amateurish, and I advise skipping it. The added content is poorly written and poorly scripted, and makes the whole game feel like fan-fiction. I consider it a case study in why fanboys shouldn't be allowed to work on the source canon.

Flint
02-07-2011, 06:47 PM
As far as I know though, most of the new content in the Restoration Project is taken straight out of the game's development plans and left-out pieces of code, so most of the blame can probably be shifted to Black Isle. At which point you could just say though that Black Isle was right in chopping it off when they did for whatever reason they did.

I don't think it's a terrible mod by any means but it does feel a bit out of sync with the rest of the game and I don't consider it a necessity at all, especially if you're playing the game for the first time. I personally enjoy F2 more without it but that might just be due to being more used to the un-'restored' version.

J Arcane
02-07-2011, 06:55 PM
I know it was based on Fallout Bible stuff, but I was pretty sure the actual writing at least was done by the guy who did the mod? I'm not sure, honestly. Either way, one or the other of us has the right of it I think, and I definitely wouldn't recommend it for a first time player, I think it might give them a false sense of the game's quality.

Squiz
03-07-2011, 10:40 PM
Yes, I decided to go without that mod for my second attempt at my first playthorugh. ;) Today I got quite confused with some of the more weird "features" of the game when SPOILER I blew open a chicken barn's door which had been locked by rocks and found myself confronted with a friggin Deathclaw lumbering straight at me. No NPC seemed to care about that or would share any information about "Rose's Chicken". Is this stuff supposed to be a joke or an easteregg?

bogart
03-07-2011, 10:42 PM
I think all the DLC of fallout 3 is great, aside from Anchorage...I hate that bloody virtual simulation
EDIT : And I realised my post dosen't really fit the context of whats happening, I should learn to read more than one random post in a thread

Flint
03-07-2011, 10:48 PM
SPOILER I blew open a chicken barn's door which had been locked by rocks and found myself confronted with a friggin Deathclaw lumbering straight at me. No NPC seemed to care about that or would share any information about "Rose's Chicken". Is this stuff supposed to be a joke or an easteregg?
Continuing on the spoiler line even though this isn't really spoilery: Rose says she gets the eggs for her famous omelettes from chickens. The truth is a bit less feathery. If you kill the deathclaw you'll get some exp, she'll stop selling her omelettes and your Modoc rep will lower. Just one of the odd wonders of the Wasteland.

Squiz
04-07-2011, 10:08 AM
@bogart: I think it fits in here fine. I have neither played Mothership Zeta nor The Pitt (n)or Point Lookout. It took me some time to get back into Fallout 3 after my first playthrough. I then installed a ton of mods and tweaks and tried both Broken Steel and Operation Anchorage. The former was ok I would say, if maybe a bit silly with the amount of Enclave forces thrown at you. The latter was plain boring with this horrible change in ammunition and health system and a "plot" which left me gnashing my teeth. I understand that both The Pitt and Point Lookout are supposed to be rather good. Maybe I'll give those a go when I am done with the classics. :)

I would love to try Fallout 3 with decent graphics settings and fluent gameplay on my new machine. The process of installing all the mods and tweaking them in the settings is just such an annyoing experience.

@Flint: Thanks for the clarification. I must have missed those dialogue options then. Still it would have been cooler if there were some more reactions from the NPCs or just some more background info about that.

Fumarole
08-07-2011, 01:07 AM
You can actually do that? SPOILER Hm, again an idea picked up in Fallout 3. I had the impression that it is possible, but then my conversation options ran out. Maybe I didn't have put enough points into the speech skill. My INT was pretty high though.Yes you can. In fact SPOILER you can complete the game without fighting anything at all.