Why are Fallout 1&2 better than Fallout 3?

[Judgement101]

Because the games are different and- Here's the insane part: Different people like Different things. Hard to believe, I know.

Finally, a good awnser that isn't taking my words out of context! Thank you.

 

[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.

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.

I would agree that it seems a little more lively, but I think Black Isle gave everyone a better personality. I think it's just a matter of the technical limitations. 1&2 seem less lively because the sprites weren't able to be as animated as the characters in 3, but the writing was leagues ahead of 3 so everyone has a better personality, not just Survivor #3 or Soldier #4 like in 3

 

[Judgement101]

Their writing was good, fallout 3's is shit.
Their writing is ok, fallout 3's is broken.

Can someone please explain why the writing was better? For those of you who don't know, the main part of Fallout 1's story was finding a water purifying chip. How is that interesting?

 

[MeatSpace]

Fallout 2 was pretty much a rushed, rehash of fallout 1. I never understand how NMA can say that Fallout 3 is so bad it shouldn't be cannon, but consider fallout 2 complete with exploding cows, a fallen whale and flower pot and the time travel quest to be the peak of interactive story telling. Honestly FO1 is a great game without a doubt, but I don't really understand all the praise people tend to heap on 2.

 

[Judgement101]

Fallout 2 was pretty much a rushed, rehash of fallout 1. I never understand how NMA can say that Fallout 3 is so bad it shouldn't be cannon, but consider fallout 2 complete with exploding cows, a fallen whale and flower pot and the time travel quest to be the peak of interactive story telling. Honestly FO1 is a great game without a doubt, but I don't really understand all the praise people tend to heap on 2.

Wait! Time travel quest?! Well, I've lost all respect of Fallout 2 now.

 

[aakibar]

i see it as personal taste, now from what i understand fallout 1/2 was a perfect rpg where you did not havee to fight at all which is what it should be like. But fallout 3 is bent towards the people who like shooters rather then rpgs. what i like about 3 is that in attempted blended both well, not great but well enough to create a really nice game.

 

[Savagezion]

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.

I ain't even read the thread and I gotta correct this. Fallout one and 2 were HUGE in the PC gaming community in their time. Going multiplatform for FO3 made the console crowd aware of it and additionally helpoed it sell more copies. The hype of FO3 was structured on the huge folling of the original series. They knew people were craving a 3 and hyped the crap out of it.

This is just wrong information you got handed to you. So utterly wrong. Plus the classics were actual RPG's (READ: not genre "Role-Playing) Game" with alternate endings.

 

[Cbargs]

The writing, atmosphere, and RPG options are better. For example, You can play through the first Fallout without killing a single person. The greatest flexibility Fallout 3 can give you is how to kill your enemies.

The humor was almost completely gone, which was very, very disappointing (thank god for Moria Brown!).

 

[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.

I ain't even read the thread and I gotta correct this. Fallout one and 2 were HUGE in the PC gaming community in their time. Going multiplatform for FO3 made the console crowd aware of it and additionally helpoed it sell more copies. The hype of FO3 was structured on the huge folling of the original series. They knew people were craving a 3 and hyped the crap out of it.

This is just wrong information you got handed to you. So utterly wrong. Plus the classics were actual RPG's (not genre "role playing game" with alternate endings.

Main source being Wikipedia my information was probably from some lazy guy with no idea about stuff. I apologize that my information was wrong.

 

[MR.Spartacus]

It was a great game in ways but as far as writing goes it seemed like a poorly written fan-fic. Overall they just had more depth.

 

[Cbargs]

Fallout 2 was pretty much a rushed, rehash of fallout 1. I never understand how NMA can say that Fallout 3 is so bad it shouldn't be cannon, but consider fallout 2 complete with exploding cows, a fallen whale and flower pot and the time travel quest to be the peak of interactive story telling. Honestly FO1 is a great game without a doubt, but I don't really understand all the praise people tend to heap on 2.

Wait! Time travel quest?! Well, I've lost all respect of Fallout 2 now.

The time travel quest was a reference to Star Trek, and is not considered cannon by anybody, it is just a fun reference to a major influence for the developers.

 

[mjhhiv]

There are a multitude of reasons why I prefer Fallout 1 and 2 to 3, and vice-versa. For the purpose of the thread, I'll merely state that Fallout 3 does not approach the level of freedom that the first two allowed. Fallout 3 does an admirable job of allowing for choice, but in the first two, it felt -- to me, at least -- that there was an endless number of possibilities. It's not so much about how many statistical choices or endings there were (though I'm sure the first games had more of both), but how I felt while playing it. The first games, also, had more in the way of personality, which is why people have such a fondness for it, despite the antiquated mechanics. Fallout 3 feels hollow in comparison.

EDIT:

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.

I'm going to go ahead and admit that I didn't really read your original post. Looked at the thread title, read some responses, and posted. Now that I have read it, I can safely say that there are tons of problems with what you're saying -- and the reasons for what you're saying. I'm sure someone else has beat me to the explanation, so I'll sign off here.

 

[Judgement101]

Their writing was good, fallout 3's is shit.
Their writing is ok, fallout 3's is broken.

Can someone please explain why the writing was better? For those of you who don't know, the main part of Fallout 1's story was finding a water purifying chip. How is that interesting?

And Fallout 3's story was "find your father" what the fuck's your point (reductionism is fun!)? Fallout 1/2 had dialogue that was interesting and well writen. They had stories that while not original were full of humor, they brought us things like the master and the drill instructor, they had funny and interesting dialogue for non standard character types (idiot and max int/chr being the most obvious ones) and they had good voice acting. And you've obviously never played fallout 1 or you'd know the story was a bit more than just find the water chip (yes the main story not counting side quests)

Actually, I have played every fallout game (excluding Fallout Tactics: Brotherhood of Steel(it was an origional Xbox game, I did play the pc version). I guess I never really got into the story and just blindly thought that it was one task.

 

[Carlston]

1 and 2 were only classics after fallout 3 was popular?

Right...

Get back to us when you know what your talking about. Those games were good far the 3d change up.
I played Fallout the week it came out, and fallout 2, your talking 90's computer population to pc + ps3 + xbox...yeah you have no comparison to your spit out facts.

 

[Judgement101]

1 and 2 were only classics after fallout 3 was popular?

Right...

Get back to us when you know what your talking about. Those games were good far the 3d change up.
I played Fallout the week it came out, and fallout 2, your talking 90's computer population to pc + ps3 + xbox...yeah you have no comparison to your spit out facts.

For the second time, I already adressed that my facts got mixed up, read previous posts before you post.