My feeling after replaying Fo1&2

R

rockitten

It Wandered In From the Wastes
I am playing FO1 and 2 to ease my FO inch ATM, and I noticed one thing:

1. This series have a "tradition" of not shipping the PC with the best girl in the game:

In FO1, seems you have a sweetheart/good friend back at vault 13. Yet, all you can have is casual sex with Tandi or that caravan chick, but nothing more.
In FO2, the "best girl" in game is that nurse in Vault city, you can date her, you can give her sperm (literally), but the only chick you can marry is a slut.
In FO3, no matter how much affection between you 2, Amanda and Sarah are not for you. The only one you can have is a crazy slave bitch.
In FNV, Cass and Veronica are off-limited, one have you "friend-zoned", the other one is a gay. Even if you PC is a chick, you can't turn Veronica on. Damn, you fight to death for NCR to please Cass, and guess what? She get the wrong tent..........

The only exception is FO4, everyone is kissing everyone. But that game is a complete fuck-up. so it doesn't count.

2. Since FO1, companions are fxxking roadblocks. I have lost count how many times I have to load a earlier save just because I got "house arrest" inside the toilet by my stupid companions.

3. Since FO1, the inventory management UI sucks, always.

4. I missed the multiple followers so much. Let's me be frank. I always playing FO1/2/TTW or Skyrim with multiply follower mod. Why? Because it makes sense. If wasteland is such a dangerous place, why would you explore it ALONE (dog doesn't count)? If anyone ever try camping outdoor, you will be surprised how much work is needed to set-up a camp. Not to mention the the dinner and night watch. Courier went alone, that's why he got shot in the head.

In my head canon, my "core" team would be made up of at least Cass, Veronica, Arcade and Boone plus Rex, ED-E and one or 2 Brahmin. Boone or ED-E, one will scout ahead, one will be the rear guard. The Brahmin are the heavy-lifters and Cass and Rex would be the "Shepard". Then Veronica, Arcade and my PC would be the tech team: hacker, lockpick/spy and medic.

Of coz, who knows if your mate can be trusted, or may be your PC is an antisocial asshole. On the other hand, if you are visiting a small settlement with a "huge" "armed to teeth" team (my skyrim/TTW play through usually ended up with 50+ followers) or a group of mutant, you really should get the "terrifying present" perk as a result. Imagine if you visit Big Town with 20 fully armed guys and chicks (plus a ghoul and mutant), you would almost certain to scare the shit out of the whole little town. And then, that useless security boy would either soiled his pant (mostly likely) or shot first ask later.

5. If FO3 and FNV is a movie, FO1&2 is like a novel. FO3/4/FNV, is hard to make because they have to present EVERYTHING to the player many character in FO3/4/NV are supposed to be "stunning beautiful" but failed (however, as the mod in nexus proved, it is more likely Beth's fault). In FO1&2, just one line description "she is attractive" and that's all you need. So easy.

6. FO1 and 2 still make better maps than FO3/4. Yes, navigating your PC in FO1 and 2 is a pain on the ass. However, at least the settlements and places make sense.

Time to sleep , more to come (may be) tomorrow.
 
1. I might be wrong, but i think it is a bit hard to pull off both serious committed relationship on one hand, and being able to do casual sex with others, on the other hand. The Witcher tried this and it didn't work for me. You could choose to be committed to one girl between two love interest, and you write them love letters, tel her you feel something you never felt before etc... While at the same time casually fucking with everything that move. Tell me about consistency...

2. Fixed with FIXT. Fortunaly. Couldn't stand having to reload for that.

3. I love Fo1-Fo2 inventory much better than in other titles. Mouse based, you actually see the items, you don't have fifty menues and it isn't in the pip-boy. Some Fonline servers improved it, but i love the system on itself.

4. Same. I tend to play with high charisma or a mod that remove party limit. Part of the fun of RPG and adventure game is, imo, actually recruiting your party of adventurers and live those adventures together. I prefer having your party slowy increase, rather than be limited to only one or two character, or having your whole party from the get go. But it is mostly a preference. Not saying all games should be like that.

5. Not sure i get your point or agree with it.

6. I think the opposite. Navigating in Fo1-Fo2-FoT is fucking efficient. You click on where you want to go, you wait a few seconds and you are there. I don't like moving in 3D, in which you have to move step by step (pushing buttons for all the duration of your movement, instead of just once), while taking into account the direction of your character movement (so you keep moving toward where you want to go), and the orientation of your camera (on third person mode, so you still can see your character, where he goes and if there is danger around). The classic games spare you all those troubles.
 
naossano said:
1. I might be wrong, but i think it is a bit hard to pull off both serious committed relationship on one hand, and being able to do casual sex with others, on the other hand. The Witcher tried this and it didn't work for me. You could choose to be committed to one girl between two love interest, and you write them love letters, tel her you feel something you never felt before etc... While at the same time casually fucking with everything that move. Tell me about consistency...

2. Fixed with FIXT. Fortunaly. Couldn't stand having to reload for that.

3. I love Fo1-Fo2 inventory much better than in other titles. Mouse based, you actually see the items, you don't have fifty menues and it isn't in the pip-boy. Some Fonline servers improved it, but i love the system on itself.

4. Same. I tend to play with high charisma or a mod that remove party limit. Part of the fun of RPG and adventure game is, imo, actually recruiting your party of adventurers and live those adventures together. I prefer having your party slowy increase, rather than be limited to only one or two character, or having your whole party from the get go. But it is mostly a preference. Not saying all games should be like that.

5. Not sure i get your point or agree with it.

6. I think the opposite. Navigating in Fo1-Fo2-FoT is fucking efficient. You click on where you want to go, you wait a few seconds and you are there. I don't like moving in 3D, in which you have to move step by step (pushing buttons for all the duration of your movement, instead of just once), while taking into account the direction of your character movement (so you keep moving toward where you want to go), and the orientation of your camera (on third person mode, so you still can see your character, where he goes and if there is danger around). The classic games spare you all those troubles.
Click to expand...

1. Fallout is not suppose to be a romance story, and I have a feeling that the original fallout team are deliberately make sure of that. However, as long as the story is not as railroaded as in FO4, the "romance conclusion" should be at the end or very end of the game/series. Before that, you are not committed (or have a choice not to)to anyone and are free to "explore every option" with consequences. Such as, you can "touching but not moving", bang anything that moves, but when the girl(s) met fact to face, good luck. Or, if your charisma is high enough (a reward for 10CH), with lots of caps and heroic reputation(s), you many managed to get away from it and ended-up with several wives.

Chicks, chicks never changes. They love bad boy just like bear love honey.

In FO2 and FNV, the development team made lots of pun about this. 10 half-siblings all from different fathers, sperm collections, trophy sex, or sex robots, ghoul whore, very loose girls and so on. After all, it's wasteland, life is short and no one cares.

IMHO, those who is pushing for LGBT "acceptance" should do the same to polygamy and open marriage. Yes, marriage is a pain on the ass, having more than one spouse is more likely to be so. But polygamy or not has noting to do with "disrespect" of women or not. In the fallout world, what if you wife got sterilized by radiation? What if you wife failed to make you a son or a normal baby? What if most men doesn't live long? In a world which old moral code is no more, I won't be surprised to see a come-back of "old ways" like polygamy.

Even in Quran, it specified that the husband has a obligation to get his wife(s) consent before he can marry the next one and you are suppose to provide a separate house for each wife and treat them equally (so they won't fight). In fact, in the middle ages, when European queen and princesses are nothing but royal vagina, the crusaders learnt a lots from their Muslims counterparts about how to respect and treat women properly and adopted into the code of chivalry.

5. My fault. I should stop at point 4 when fatigue kicked in.

Anyone here tried those games from ATARI era? I do. In those days, the box art are much better than the game, the game menu may include comics or even novel for background lore or back-stories. The game itself? Well, let's say use your imagination.

Playing classic Fallout(s) reminds me those games. It is like a interactive visual novel. Something you can sit down, relax, and enjoy it with a whiskey on rock. All details are within the lines, all chicks, old or young, sexy or not, have the same physical model. All you have is a one line description: "You see a stunningly beautiful chick, oh, she's a hot". Is she Megan fox hot, Jessica Alba hot or Kate Upton hot? Is all up to you. Help yourself, just imagine.

In "new fallout", you play it in first person view however, that's the problem. Your eyes and hands are occupied. Adrenaline runs high (at least, suppose to be), and everything is visually presented as is. If the game have to present a hot chick, she has to be hot enough to convince the majority.

We , the old school gamer, "trained" by" those "pixel" games and music from PC speaker, are quite good at imagining "head canons" while playing. So being "force fed" by the game is sometime just as put-off as voiced protagonist in FO4. It ruined part of the fun as "the hot chick for the developer(s) may not be my type of chick. And make matter worse, Bethesda gave us a potato face. They blame engine limitations, but all those body mode/face mods on Nexus proved it is more likely a Beth's laziness.

The new generation gamer, on the other hand, are more used to those visual excitements from 3D gaming. They see the game more like an inactive movie than an interactive novel. Many of them are literally kids and children. They will be (and most of them do) put-off by the "lack of graphic amusement" in old-school 3rd person lay-out, and they do not understand how to taste a good story.

You just can't appreciate classical fallout without playing with your brain running.

6. One thing I don't like about classic Fallout map is the fixed view point. Sometimes, many task like lock-picking a specific door, pick up something (I am talking about you, you fxxking hunter rifle in vault 15). or looting your kill would be a piece of cake if it is in first person view or at least, be able to change the view angle. I worked so hard to one-shot a mutant, his body is right in front of me, but I can loot his rocker launcher because his body is totally blocked by a tree. As he will kill my whole team in one shot, I can't load an earlier save and let him move aside before I kill him. So I have to let go. Luckily, he doesn't carry a quest essential item, but what if he does? That sucks. And if I am correct, they still haven't "fix" it in Wasteland 2.

The path finding is another pain on the ass. Many time, your action is "aborted" because some NPC walk pass your route. Or your companion get themselves killed foolishly by walking through force barriers/toxic poo when a shorter, safer routs in fight in front of them.

Sometimes, I wonder if Fallout extreme (optional turn base or FPS) really comes true, what's the game will looks like. One of the charm of turn base "shooting" game like fallout or XCOM is that, you can play real tactics: Your scout spotted a huge group of armed to teeth mutants ahead, so your team set up a kill zone, lay mines on the path, your fastest member draw them into your trap. Then your sniper blow up the mines and kaboom~! One shot, all mutants killed.

It feels rewarding isn't it? Now try that in FNV.

You can't do it without mods, and even if you do, the UI is so pain on the ass, you would rather just rush in and spray bullets.

The map in classic Fallout and FOT, would looks empty, huge corridor in first person. On the other hand, a map like FO3/NV and 4, with so many interactive objects and narrow path, will be extremely difficult if not impossible for a fixed view point 3rd person as in classic Fallout. If I have a choice, I would rather have a map like classic fallout, or those in Assassin Creed series. A map which is mostly not interactive, not so much to loot, but make sense.

Seriously Bethesda, what's the point of having an "interactive" ham-radio when it does nothing in the game? Who cares those bent tin cans when I can become the richest man in the DC wasteland within a few hours? Why there is so much to loot 200 years after the war and within a stone throw of a "suffering" settlement? And go fxxk your "story-telling skeletons" as well. Take them out and you have enough resources for a bigger map, better settlement and save your time on a better story.
 
Last edited:
It has been an eternity since I last encountered a body I wasn't to loot in isometric game. On the other hand , in fallout 3, I lost count of the number of times I clicked on the door to leave the building, instead of the container, on the toilet water instead of the item nearby, on a companion instead of the body laying on the floor. And it I also happened with the witcher 2 and other rpg that tried to mix inventory management, looting, and 3d environment. Controls are WAY more clumsy, imo.

There might a difference of proportions, but I recall, when I was a kid. In the 90s, that 3d was already the norm for the masses and isometric a niche. I wouldn't say it was a generation thing, but rather than isometric always had been a niche.
 
I am all for romance in these games.

Ironically, Fallout 2 had a romance I felt was actually really strong but it ends organically.

I mean, of course, you and Mrs. Bishop.



I also agree about the polygamy thing.

Edit:

No seriously, it's about how you have a sexual relationship which turns into friendship and encourage her to leave her husband and find life in Vault City again. A place which is beyond the reach of his assassins.

Especially if you kill him.
 
Last edited:
naossano said:
3. I love Fo1-Fo2 inventory much better than in other titles. Mouse based, you actually see the items, you don't have fifty menues and it isn't in the pip-boy. Some Fonline servers improved it, but i love the system on itself.

6. I think the opposite. Navigating in Fo1-Fo2-FoT is fucking efficient. You click on where you want to go, you wait a few seconds and you are there. I don't like moving in 3D, in which you have to move step by step (pushing buttons for all the duration of your movement, instead of just once), while taking into account the direction of your character movement (so you keep moving toward where you want to go), and the orientation of your camera (on third person mode, so you still can see your character, where he goes and if there is danger around). The classic games spare you all those troubles.
Click to expand...
Agreed [highly] on both points.

Fallout's menu UI was intentionally made to appear as re-purposed salvage from in-world objects.
 
rockitten said:
If FO3 and FNV is a movie, FO1&2 is like a novel. FO3/4/FNV, is hard to make because they have to present EVERYTHING to the player many character in FO3/4/NV are supposed to be "stunning beautiful" but failed (however, as the mod in nexus proved, it is more likely Beth's fault). In FO1&2, just one line description "she is attractive" and that's all you need. So easy.
Click to expand...

Some things are best left to the imagination so each player can picture them as being the most idealized version of an attractive man/woman. All too often characters that are supposed to be attractive or mentioned to be in later games, and I'm just like "What? They look like any other NPC or just not that drop dead gorgeous "

Supposedly Veronica is extremely attractive in the Fallout Universe to where multiple people and factions comment on it, for instance. Maybe it's just the engine but I just wasn't seeing it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top