big fan of fallout 3 here, and the original fallout is on sale for 5 bucks in steam, should I get it?
Is the original fallout worth it?
- Thread starter Brad Shepard
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Their pretty good, though personally I am not a fan of the combat system, their great RPG's. Tactics is also good.
It's a very different game so don't expect to like it because you like Fallout 3. It's defiantly worth a go though, that and Fallout 2 if you do end up liking the first.
In my experience fans of 3 don't like 1 or 2. Fans of the originals don't like Fallout 3.
Like me for instance; I think 3 was a piece of shit.
So yeah, I think you're not gonna like it. "Oh man, the interface is all like... old and junk. How do these quests work? Hey, wait, this isn't what I expected at all, how could anyone play this?"
Like me for instance; I think 3 was a piece of shit.
So yeah, I think you're not gonna like it. "Oh man, the interface is all like... old and junk. How do these quests work? Hey, wait, this isn't what I expected at all, how could anyone play this?"
The difficulty is quite high and the combat system is slow and uninteresting. So yeah, watch a video or something to see how the game play works, and see if that's a deal breaker for you.
Fallout 1 and 2 are drastically different from the modern shooter/RPG hybrid Fallouts.
If you're able to get into them, they're really fun and enjoyable. The combat has always left something to be desired, but the game is still fantastic.
If you're able to get into them, they're really fun and enjoyable. The combat has always left something to be desired, but the game is still fantastic.
Taste is subjective. Once ran into a 17 year old kid at target who told me he played fallout 3 first but went back to play number one and two and thought they were far better games. He urged me to buy a combo pack of the two I was looking at, I told him I played them way back in the day, even had the big boxes and the paper manuals (to his envy) and we chatted about the games. Besides warming the cockles of my heart it also goes to show that you're wrong.Enamour said:
A lot of people will have problems with the differences but a lot won't. It just depends on what they liked about their trips to the fallout universe. While I've got your ear you should try New Vegas. If you've the elasticity to accept a bit of change it's a great return to form for the series, feels a lot like fallout 2. A LOT.
Go for it kiddo. Expect it to be different of course (it's 2d for starters) but enjoy the trip through fallout's history. Those are my memories you're playing and at the time there was in my opinion, no finer role-playing game. Also skills go to 300% here. Just a head's up. You'll find there's a lot that's different and a lot that's the same. This game had great attention to detail though. Try making a character with a 3 or less intelligence and see what I meanBrad Shepard said:
. I hope you like it and if you do check out fallout 2.
There is no simple yes/no answer to this, some people in your boat have gone back to FO1 & FO2 and loved them but many more have really struggled and given up.Brad Shepard said:
My theory on this is that FO3 attracts two kinds of gamers, i.e. the action/FPS fans and the RPG fans, the RPG fans are likely to enjoy the originals and if they aren't too hung up on old graphics will probably end up liking the originals more, as they are technically better RPGs, they have more and better quests, they have better humour, and they're just a better RPG experience.
On the other hand the action/FPS fans generally hate the originals and ***** about the "combat" until everyone's ears bleed, though some will give a nod to the games other qualities.
To be clear: there is no action combat in the originals at all, its turn-based and a little clunky, but to be frank from an RPG perspective it actually works better, it makes the stats and perks more relevant and the whole VATS thing of targeting a body part makes more sense in turn based combat.
They did a fairly good job in making FO3 but they could of made it much better, the world was superb, the look and feel was great, the stats and perks were a bit weakly implemented but I expected worse... where FO3 really fails is in capturing the humour and atmosphere of the originals and in simply not having enough quests, so thats a double fail in two of the areas that really made the originals shine.
In summary: The best elements of FO3 are not the best elements of the originals, they have different strengths and so are very different playing experiences, by all means give the originals a go but bear two things in mind: Its not more fallout 3, if you go into the originals expecting more fallout 3 you will almost certainly be disappointed, and second, these are old school RPGs we're talking about here, expect difficulty and obscurity; if you're not a veteran of these type of RPGs then expect bewilderment and frustration and maybe even boredom in the first several hours... these old games take a while to really get going... we had more patience back then ^.^
I have the first two Fallouts, can't stand them. Combat is terrible - it's click miss click miss click miss click miss poisoned click miss click miss click hit click miss. So utterly slow and dull. And then the dialogue system never seems to have the obvious choice of thing to say or ask. I put up with maybe two hours of each one.
