Why are Fallout 1&2 better than Fallout 3?

[Judgement101]

I'm sorry if this thread was already made, but why is Fallout 1 and 2 considered better than Fallout 3. 1 and 2 were only considered classics AFTER Fallout 3 was popular. Seriously how many of you knew the Fallout series exsisted before Fallout 3 was released. Fallout 3 also moved 4.7 Million copies which is more than Fallout 1 and 2 when they were released.

EDIT (PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING!!!): I am now aware that some of these facts are false and can people stop brining that up in every other post? I apologize for believing Wikipedia -_-

 

[Chamale]

I know a guy who played through Fallout 1 and 2 back in '06, before Fallout 3 had much attention. He was amazed at the depth and humour of these games, which Fallout 3 mostly but did not completely capture.

Fallout 1 & 2 had better writing, Fallout 3 had better gameplay. For old-style Fallout fans, Fallout 3's writing (and the more limited dialogue) felt terrible, while people new to the series loved the mood, writing, and gameplay.

 

[hazabaza1]

Oh, wow, you're gonna get flamed boy.
This website is very nostalgic, and most of these people did know about FO1+2 before 3 was announced. I'd heard a lot of love for those 2 before I heard about 3 as well.

I, personally cannot judge FO1+2 as I don't have the second, and I can't get the resolution patch to work for the first.

 

[ShakesZX]

It's all subjective and the societal norm of outcry at new things that are different.

I knew that Fallout 1&2 existed. And i think it's entirely impossible to compare the different titles. They're completely different styles, types of games, and were made by different developers.

Again, it's all subjective.

 

[Irridium]

Fallout 1 and 2 are considered better because the games' writing is far, far better than what Bethesda put out.
And the origional fallout games were more of cult hits. At least from what I've seen. I've always loved them. Well I've loved the second, but I'm going through the first one right now (thanks Good old Games!) and I'm finding it a lot better in terms of story. Gameplay is more of a preference, and I never cared for graphics.

Fallout 3 just drew more people to the franchise and had them notice it for the first time.

Honestly, Fallout 3 was a fine game, but it was a crappy Fallout game.

Butchered lore, crappy writing in comparison, unkillable children (I don't care who you are, when a road of nuclear cars explode, you die) and it merely gave the illusion of choice.

 

[Mr. Grey]

Give anyone anything and they'd find a reason to ***** and moan about it.

Fallout 3 was a great game, in its own right. However it didn't feel like the original Fallouts and people didn't like that, some didn't even give it a chance. They are right, it's not a true Fallout, but it is a very good game. Bethesda did right with it, they just couldn't possibly live up to the originals and they didn't really try to, we could all learn a lesson there.

Take for instance that in Fallout 3... you have to kill someone. In Fallout and Fallout 2, you could avoid that entirely, you could talk your way out of anything if you wanted to play that kind of a character. That's the difference between the two, you could do anything in the first two that Fallout 3 couldn't. Also the atmosphere was very different, it's very enjoyable, but different.

 

[Enzeru92]

I knew fallout 1 and 2 before the third one so you got that wrong completely wrong and honestly am not sure which is better since i havn't played first or the second one. Only the third one

 

[Judgement101]

It's all subjective and the societal norm of outcry at new things that are different.

I knew that Fallout 1&2 existed. And i think it's entirely impossible to compare the different titles. They're completely different styles, types of games, and were made by different developers.

Again, it's all subjective.

The developer thing is another issue, everyone says that Black Isle handled the series right but Bethesda seemed to make the Fallout world more lively than Black Isle did.

 

[TerranReaper]

The overall atmosphere of the first two Fallouts were better than Fallout 3 in my opinion.

 

[Judgement101]

I knew fallout 1 and 2 before the third one so you got that wrong completely wrong and honestly am not sure which is better since i havn't played first or the second one. Only the third one

I asked how many people knew they exsisted, I never said that no one knew they exsisted.

 

[TheYellowCellPhone]

I'm sorry if this thread was already made, but why is Fallout 1 and 2 considered better than Fallout 3. 1 and 2 were only considered classics AFTER Fallout 3 was popular. Seriously how many of you knew the Fallout series exsisted before Fallout 3 was released. Fallout 3 also moved 4.7 Million copies which is more than Fallout 1 and 2 when they were released.

This is unrelated to your topic, but your avatar is adorable.

OT: I've never played Fallout 1 & 2, but a huge Bethesda friend praised it as their best games. He said the writing was very good and had a nice atmosphere to it. I've only played Fallout 3, so I'll take my friend's word for it.

 

[ProfessorLayton]

For the same reason everyone says Pokemon Yellow was the best Pokemon. I actually tried playing Fallout 1... and I didn't like it that much. But I loved Fallout 3. It's really the style of the games.

 

[EnzoHonda]

Better writing and the games actually felt "larger" if you can believe that. Plus, there wasn't anything you could compare them with at the time. X-COM? No. Diablo? No. Fallout 3 can be compared to most first-person games. It's still a great game, though, and worth of the Fallout name.

Plus, the general crappiness of the visuals meant you had to put a lot more imagination into the game. It's like how reading a book can be so much more rewarding and immersive than watching a movie. A lack of visual stimuli makes your brain work harder.

 

[Chicago Ted]

I bought and played Fallout 1 and 2 after Fallout 3 and I wasn't captured by them. I tried, I tried very hard to like them and to play them, but in the end, for me, I just couldn't. That style of an RPG game is just one I hate. Call me shallow and such but I need to have a game with better graphics and better gameplay that can't be made on just story and humor alone. Besides, I feel that if I wanted to have something soley for humor and story, a movie does just that as well.

 

[Nickisimo]

I'm actually re-playing FO1 on and off currently. It really is much better than FO3. That isn't to say that FO3 is bad and there's certainly a nostalgia factor for me in playing FO1, but FO3 felt like Oblivion way too much. FO3's shining moment for me was when you went into the Virtual Reality thing. That was creepy and extremely well done. Other than that I got bored with the trekking and killing. I saw it through to the end but didn't bother getting any DLC.

 

[Marmooset]

I knew fallout 1 and 2 before the third one so you got that wrong completely wrong and honestly am not sure which is better since i havn't played first or the second one. Only the third one

I asked how many people knew they exsisted, I never said that no one knew they exsisted.

1 and 2 were only considered classics AFTER Fallout 3 was popular. Seriously how many of you knew the Fallout series exsisted before Fallout 3 was released.

I think you're taking your own question out of context. The question (especially after the preceding statement) seems very rhetorical. It's just missing an "Aww-c'mon!"


"Who knew?" generally means no one could have known.

 

[DeadlyYellow]

Butchered lore, crappy writing in comparison, unkillable children (I don't care who you are, when a road of nuclear cars explode, you die) and it merely game the illusion of choice.

Going from the first, I was oddly disappointed to learn I could no longer punch people in the crotch.

But you are right. The writing was awful, and I really hated the Brotherhood. Fallout 3 is entertaining, even if it did lack the depth and grace of its predecessors.

 

[Tinneh]

I bought and played Fallout 1 and 2 after Fallout 3 and I wasn't captured by them. I tried, I tried very hard to like them and to play them, but in the end, for me, I just couldn't. That style of an RPG game is just one I hate. Call me shallow and such but I need to have a game with better graphics and better gameplay that can't be made on just story and humor alone. Besides, I feel that if I wanted to have something soley for humor and story, a movie does just that as well.

Look, mate, the first two Fallouts were made almost a decade ago, graphics weren't the best then.

I can't judge Fallout 1 or 2, but I'm actually just about to purchase them, so I'll tell you what I think later!

 

[TheTygerfire]

They aren't. End of story. The interface on the first two games is a bit too complicated for most people jump into, but I bet some people will chalk that up as "part of the challenge". The challenge should be the game itself, not controlling it.