Some fans remade the 1997 Fallout in Bethesda's 3d engine. I remember playing the original Fallout and it was more like reading Pick Your Own Adventure book, with occasional hex based battles, which offered little tactical choice. I'm not a huge RPG fan or a book worm, so I found it a bit boring. Then there was Fallout Tactics, it had little dialogue, but an expanded battle system, with vehicles, like tanks, and maps becoming actually 3d. It also had cool large robot bosses at later stages, and was generally a really difficult, even given its linear nature. Like XCOM Apocalypse it offered realtime mode as an additional challenge
Then Bathesda turned it all into a Morrowind game, but with reduced amount of text. I personally found it a bit better than the original 1997 Fallout, since RPGs naturally call for 1st person experience, but fans accused it of misunderstanding the original Fallout's narrative and retrofuturism in general. More recently Bathesda tried to diversify into MMORPGs with that online Fallout game, but without much QA it resulted into a buggy mess, although still less embarrassing than Blizzard's failure. Apparently now they have patched it into a playable state, early adopters were basically free beta testers 
Anyway, with fanbase dedication now you can have a near perfect Fallout experience
I swear, this post is made to trigger Fallout fans like me.
Fallout has turn-based combat because of X-COM. Tim Cain said so. I suspect combat was going to be more tactical, but things changed when they lost the GURPS License and had to improvise.
Tactics was nice, even CTB was nice, but its agreed that RT combat was a mistake and they should have focused on a deeper turn-based experience. Its also a very linear game and lacks environment destruction.
"RPGs naturally call for 1st person experience". Hundreds of isometric RPGs disagree. Please don't say this ever again.
Bethesda really fucked up with Fallout. They didn't get Fallout pretty much. They got a good grasp of the retro aesthetics tho, so it looks convincing but not really. Even their aesthetic is different from Trammel Isaac Ray's doorhickey aesthetic.
I think the biggest problem is that they turned a genre-defining game into something else. It would be like turning X-COM into a Rainbow Six clone. Because that's what the new Fallout games are: Fallout mods made for TES. Oblivion with guns.
Another problem is that Bethesda never realized Fallout is actually what we call post-post apocalyptic, not post-apoc. It was never about surviving in the wasteland and the aftermath of the war, but about the new world created after the bombs, new civilizations in the shadow of the old one. Bethesda's Fallout looks like the war happened two years ago, not two hundred. Everyone is still living out in bombed out ruins they don't even clean.
Fallout 3 was a boring, mediocre, soulless game, by the way. It had good graphical set-pieces and some interesting concepts, but that game reeked of unoriginality:
- Your characters is from a Vault, again.
- The Brotherhood of Steel packed to the other of the continent. Because of reasons. They're goodie-goodies now. They are also a bunch of incompetents, but no one ever tells them that in-game.
- There are Super Mutants. And these Super Mutants are all a bunch of stupid orcs who are pretty much irrelevant to the larger plot.
- The villains are the same villains of 2.
- The main plot is about going after your father in a boring, linear questline. Then an assine quest line involving a water purifier no one needs.
- A lot of reused old elements in general. Vaults, Water, GECK, Brotherhood of Steel, Super Mutants, Enclave.
Even the combat is boring. The game is only hard in the beginning. Armor is pure DR and there are no alternate ammo types. The combat itself is inferior to something like, say, the original Deus Ex.
When you compare 3 with FNV (by people who actually understand Fallout), you realize how mediocre 3 actually is.
Enviado de meu moto e5 play usando o Tapatalk
Show Posts
