Fallout 1 or Fallout 2?

[daveman247]

If you're going to play Fallout 2 don't forget to thoroughly patch the game, maybe even throw in the fan patch that includes a lot of cut content. This game was literally unplayable when it came out due to glitches. Also Fallout 2 makes quite a lot of references and call-backs to Fallout 1 which will be lost on you if you don't play it first. It isn't exactly required but I'd recommend it.

I would have thought GOG would patch the game before releasing it on their site...

 

[dyre]

If you can only play one, choose Fallout 2. It's a bigger game, with imo a more interesting world and a cooler main quest. I don't remember much about the characters or side quests, but I think they were quite good in both games. And if you liked the weirdness of Fallout NV, you'll love Fallout 2. IIRC, there's a ton of weird stuff that might or might not be references to pop culture.

Well, from what I heard Fallout 1 you can continue on after you finish the game. (Don't quote me, though) and you can't do that with Fallout 2 (without mods), so, Fallout 1 might have more hours to sink into it. They are related, btw, so you could play them in order if you want the story in order.

Fallout 2 is a much bigger game than Fallout 1 though, so unless you like going back to places you've already gone to (neither Fallout has the numerous random little building complexes and caves to explore like Fallout 3 does, so the value of post-game exploration is limited), Fallout 2 is the bigger time sink.

Ooh, I was kind of thinking that after I posted, since Interplay probably had a bigger budget for Fallout 2

That could be the reason. I'm not sure why they went out of business after those two great games though (and Planescape Torment, though that didn't sell well)!

Btw, it sounds like you haven't played those games yet. Give them a shot!

I have Fallout 1 and I've created a character and all, but I have just been trying to get over the isometric view and turn based combat. I want to experience the great stories, but I got ambushed by like 8 radscorpions and they slaughtered my ass!

Yeah, both games have a bit of a tough beginning. If you think Fallout 1 is bad, wait until you try Fallout 2

Just tough it out for a bit, and it'll be rewarding in the end, I swear!

Haha, I think I'll stalk around The Vault like I usually do, turn based is torturous to me. I know the stories are definitely worth it, it's just so slow going.

It's much less torturous when it doesn't take like ten turns to kill a scorpion, and your character will get good enough pretty quickly. You'll get decent firearms soon enough, and you'll be able to take headshots (and eye shots) in no time.

Your choice, but you're missing out

 

[Hal10k]

Oh, that's kinda disappointing. Though, at least they spawned two good developer teams.

The thing with Interplay was that, even in their "heyday", they were somewhat infamous for mismanagement, especially towards their development teams. As much as we complain about EA and whatnot these days, the worst they do is typically just dumping stuff onto the dev's desk with instructions to cram it into the game somewhere. Interplay, by contrast, would dump alphabet soup on the dev's desk, tell them to rearrange it into the new design document, verbally berate them when they asked for better tools for the job, then fire and replace them when the alphabet soup failed to meet their specifications. I have no idea where that metaphor just went, but it came back alright and I'm not going to provoke it further.

This, coupled with the fact that they had one of the meekest marketing teams I have ever seen, means that Interplay was essentially in the business of producing cult classics. Which sounds nice, but doesn't do you much good when you actually want to make new games after your old ones receive rave reviews but somehow garner negative sales.

 

[dyre]

Oh, that's kinda disappointing. Though, at least they spawned two good developer teams.

The thing with Interplay was that, even in their "heyday", they were somewhat infamous for mismanagement, especially towards their development teams. As much as we complain about EA and whatnot these days, the worst they do is typically just dumping stuff onto the dev's desk with instructions to cram it into the game somewhere. Interplay, by contrast, would dump alphabet soup on the dev's desk, tell them to rearrange it into the new design document, verbally berate them when they asked for better tools for the job, then fire and replace them when the alphabet soup failed to meet their specifications. I have no idea where that metaphor just went, but it came back alright and I'm not going to provoke it further.

This, coupled with the fact that they had one of the meekest marketing teams I have ever seen, means that Interplay was essentially in the business of producing cult classics. Which sounds nice, but doesn't do you much good when you actually want to make new games after your old ones receive rave reviews but somehow garner negative sales.

Hmm, now that I think about it, Troika Games also seemed to have pretty crappy marketing, and Obsidian obviously has its fair share of problems...

A pity all that creative talent couldn't be harnessed properly. Oh well, I'm just glad they popped off a few good games before they collapsed. Thanks for the information.

 

[Hal10k]

Hmm, now that I think about it, Troika Games also seemed to have pretty crappy marketing, and Obsidian obviously has its fair share of problems...

A pity all that creative talent couldn't be harnessed properly. Oh well, I'm just glad they popped off a few good games before they collapsed. Thanks for the information.

For the record, Interplay technically isn't gone. The drunk chimps just gained total control of the helm shortly after Troika & Obsidian wisely abandoned ship, and now they've located the nearest whirlpool and are daring each other to steer nearer to it. You might have seen news about their lawsuit with Bethesda over the rights to produce a Fallout MMO. They're still promising to release a MDK 3 one of these days, though nobody really believes them.

 

[Darknacht]

Oh, that's kinda disappointing. Though, at least they spawned two good developer teams.

The thing with Interplay was that, even in their "heyday", they were somewhat infamous for mismanagement, especially towards their development teams. As much as we complain about EA and whatnot these days, the worst they do is typically just dumping stuff onto the dev's desk with instructions to cram it into the game somewhere. Interplay, by contrast, would dump alphabet soup on the dev's desk, tell them to rearrange it into the new design document, verbally berate them when they asked for better tools for the job, then fire and replace them when the alphabet soup failed to meet their specifications. I have no idea where that metaphor just went, but it came back alright and I'm not going to provoke it further.

This, coupled with the fact that they had one of the meekest marketing teams I have ever seen, means that Interplay was essentially in the business of producing cult classics. Which sounds nice, but doesn't do you much good when you actually want to make new games after your old ones receive rave reviews but somehow garner negative sales.

And that was before it was acquired by French publisher Titus famous for games such as Supermen 64 and Interplay declared intelligent and PC gaming dead and began focusing on absurdly dumbed down console games.

I have Fallout 1 and I've created a character and all, but I have just been trying to get over the isometric view and turn based combat. I want to experience the great stories, but I got ambushed by like 8 radscorpions and they slaughtered my ass!

Never be to proud to just run like hell.

 

[Areani]

If you're going to play Fallout 2 don't forget to thoroughly patch the game, maybe even throw in the fan patch that includes a lot of cut content. This game was literally unplayable when it came out due to glitches. Also Fallout 2 makes quite a lot of references and call-backs to Fallout 1 which will be lost on you if you don't play it first. It isn't exactly required but I'd recommend it.

I would have thought GOG would patch the game before releasing it on their site...

I wouldn't know about that. I just wanted to make sure that if you play the game that you patch it first. I accidentally (somehow) played it for a few hours unpatched and eventually realized that I couldn't proceed from a certain point, meaning I had just wasted all those hours.
Quite frustrating.

 

[FalloutJack]

So. I have recently discovered GOG.com (I dont play many PC games, so go figure).

I have browsed through the gaming catalogue and found they sell fallout 1 and 2 for about £4.

So my question is: Which one should i play? Which is better? Or are both equally good? Or have they aged terribly and i should not bother with either?

I have played both fallout 3 and NV. 3 bored me but i much enjoyed New vegas because of its weirdness. So will i enjoy these games?


PLEASE try to post no spoilers! I know how important story/ characters are in RPG's so try and not spoil them for me

UPDATE: Based on peoples comments here, and some reviews of both games on GOG i have decided to try fallout 2 due to added humour and small inprovements to gameplay. If i enjoy it and finish it, ill be sure to try the first. Thanks all!

For pure functionality, Fallout 2 is better. Fallout 1 has alot more bugs and the controls are simpler. I would recommend playing Fallout 1 AT SOME POINT, but the second one will PLAY better.

 

[efrafa_6]

Get them both, bro.

I prefer Fallout 2 myself, I think it honed the Fallout feeling perfectly IMO although Fallout 1 obviously holds a special place in my heart for nostalgia purposes.

 

[daveman247]

patches!

I played the game vanilla for a bit and noticed a few things (inconsistant framerate mostly.)
So i installed a few mods which apparently fix 800 bugs or something that were found since the games latest release. It has also added some new quests and areas to explore. And has upped the resolutiona bit. So now the game looks better (was no issue anyway but hey) AND the game runs super fast now

Enjoying it so far. Definitley a bit harder than the newer games. Good thing i like a challenge!

 

[Iwata]

If they are that cheap, without a doubt, buy both and play them in sequence.

 

[Axolotl]

Fallout 1 is the best in my opinion. It's shorter true, but it's much tighter and more focused than 2. It has a much better wasteland atmosphere of people trying to survive after the end. Also it has the Glow and the Brotherhood two of the coolest location ever in videogames. 2 I felt just went way too nuts with some of the stuff they put in, 1 was about a lone individual desperately searching a ruined world. 2 on the other hand is a more of crazy theme park ride with a posse of wacky characters crusing the wasteland in their badass car having gonzo adventures in bizzare parodies of civilisation.

Don't get me wrong 2 is brilliant with awesome stuff like The Enclave and New Reno but 1 is just better overall.

 

[Sandernista]

Get both. They're both great games.

Fallout 2 is much better, but 1 is still great.

 

[Poetic Nova]

Gett the Fallout collection (1, 2 and Tactics).

 

[Wintermoot]

why not both? last time I checked they sold both and tactics in a compilation pack for $15