Would you change the Fallout series?

[Imaus]

The 3d Fallout games have all struck some nerve somewhere or elsewhere. Fallout 3 was lambasted for being a shallow story that didn't suspend disbelief. New Vegas was half-cooked; almost funneling the player on purpose towards the NCR or House. Fallout 4 had most of the problems of 3; but this time you could pick four factions who were artificially thrown into this boxing match in Boston. And 76 was a Battle Royale cash-grab.

The 2d games weren't much better, to be fair. Tactics changed the entire setting. 2 was whacky and didn't drive its villains or world to their maximum potential. 1 had a lot of stuff that could had been expanded on. And the less said about BoS, the better; wasting Texas of all things.

And then there's the recurrent figures: the Omnipresent BoS, the cockroach-level-survivability of the Enclave and Mutants....

What would you change about the Fallout series, if anything?

 

[Malachi256]

New Vegas was a masterpiece. The only thing it "funneled" you towards was the end of the game - how you got there was more varied and interesting than any other RPG I've ever played. Just look up some of the videos on all the different possible outcomes you could pursue in the various side and main quests of that game - Obsidian earned their pay and then some.

Fallouts 3 and 4 have just been fractions of the greatness that is New Vegas. I didn't bother with 76.

So I wouldn't change anything. I've been the guy begging for Obsidian to get another whack at it.

 

[sherbz]

I wouldnt say New Vegas was a masterpiece. I think it was very good. And could have been exceptional were Obsidian given more time to cook it.

Fallout 3 killed it for me. It was an awful buggy and ugly mess which is hugely undeserving of the praise it got. Fallouts 1&2 were good and held much promise. But it was never really realised.

IMO Wasteland 2 is an excellent alternative to the Fallout Universe and really built well upon the foundations laid by the first 2 Fallout games. And i am really keen to see how Wasteland 3 plays out. I think its storytelling and combat systems worked out rather well.

 

[Imaus]

I wouldnt say New Vegas was a masterpiece. I think it was very good. And could have been exceptional were Obsidian given more time to cook it.

Fallout 3 killed it for me. It was an awful buggy and ugly mess which is hugely undeserving of the praise it got. Fallouts 1&2 were good and held much promise. But it was never really realised.

IMO Wasteland 2 is an excellent alternative to the Fallout Universe and really built well upon the foundations laid by the first 2 Fallout games. And i am really keen to see how Wasteland 3 plays out. I think its storytelling and combat systems worked out rather well.

I am very interested in W3. It's the alternative we need to poke Fallout around, along with other CRPGs more on Wasteland's side.

 

[Tinkerharrison]

New Vegas was great, the characters, the story, the side quests... it was damn near perfect.
So I was pretty excited, when I heard about Fallout 4 and as you all know, it was a disappointment. There was nothing interesting about, nothing that kept me playing and it became the first game I've never finished.
If they make a new Fallout, I hope they focus more on the writing...

 

[sherbz]

New Vegas was great, the characters, the story, the side quests... it was damn near perfect.
So I was pretty excited, when I heard about Fallout 4 and as you all know, it was a disappointment. There was nothing interesting about, nothing that kept me playing and it became the first game I've never finished.
If they make a new Fallout, I hope they focus more on the writing...

Try Wasteland 3. That has the writing of Fallout New Vegas but is a better RPG (IMO). Its a bit more involved in terms of skills and the like, but fortunately there is lots of help. And also stock characters you can choose if you are not sure. For context the franchise was created after Fallout 2 by the same devs when Bethesda got their dirty mitts on it and ruined it (Fallout 3 was awful). So Wasteland 2 and then later 3 is really the successor of the early Fallout games. New Vegas was good but not great. Obsidian made a success of it in spite of Bethesda not because of them. But they could have used more time and more investment. If you need help in creating a party hit me up and i can give you pointers.

 

[Imaus]

What a difference a year makes; I can't get myself to touch WL2 or WL3.

 

[sherbz]

IMO Wasteland 3 is a very good RPG. Its not spectacular. And theres a few bugs. But it has a sense of realism that most other RPGs fail to achieve. Its fully voiced as well, which is quite impressive considering its size. It also has a really good sound track. Some of the songs are genuinely quite beautiful. Like this one:

Its best achievement IMO is that it respects player agency. So it offers you big choices which have a big impact and yet it doesnt really favour one over the other, they are just different.

 

[Chicken Pizza]

What would you change about the Fallout series, if anything?

I can't think of anything I would change... well, The Legion and NCR chasing you is kind of annoying, even more than Talon Company. 3-5 strong enemies suddenly popping up feels more like japanese developer torture than trying to make the game fun and playable.

Also the negro woman giving you stuff every time when you're just trying to get home in Megaton. There should be a speech option to say "look, I appreciate this, but I have more important things to do", or alternatively a quest for it.

 

[aieeegrunt]

I want Fallout 3 and New Vegas remade using the Fallout 4 system, seems like the best of both worlds

I mean just being able to actually shoot properly outside of VATS is worth it

 

[Imaus]

I want Fallout 3 and New Vegas remade using the Fallout 4 system, seems like the best of both worlds

I mean just being able to actually shoot properly outside of VATS is worth it

Does it? The Fallout 4 system is...restricted, at least compared to GECK, no? I would love a whole new engine.

 

[aieeegrunt]

Does it? The Fallout 4 system is...restricted, at least compared to GECK, no? I would love a whole new engine.

There is pretty much nothing else available that does what Gamebryo does

Think of the sheer number of objects in a typical Fallout/Elder Scrolls title, and now remember that the game is (more or less) succesfully tracking the position, orientation and status of all of them

Yes lol bugs but I mean how many fracking bits of trash alone are in Fallout 4? Literally all the litter in Boston. And if you huck a grenade it accuratly tries to portray all of them being flung about and stuff and tracks where they land and whatnot.

Fallout 4 has actual shooter mechanics now. That alone is a winner. The RPG elements have been made far more transparent and functional; there was no reason to keep all that points malarky except inertia from pen and paper RPG designs, which is like putting fracking sails on a modern supercarrier.

Hell ditching weapon degradation alone is a huge win.

I would love a Tale Of Three Wastelands; you start lit in Vault 101, have all those adventures. Next your wanderlust takes you to Vegas. And the final chapter is Boston.

 

[Imaus]

There is pretty much nothing else available that does what Gamebryo does

Think of the sheer number of objects in a typical Fallout/Elder Scrolls title, and now remember that the game is (more or less) succesfully tracking the position, orientation and status of all of them

Yes lol bugs but I mean how many fracking bits of trash alone are in Fallout 4? Literally all the litter in Boston. And if you huck a grenade it accuratly tries to portray all of them being flung about and stuff and tracks where they land and whatnot.

Fallout 4 has actual shooter mechanics now. That alone is a winner. The RPG elements have been made far more transparent and functional; there was no reason to keep all that points malarky except inertia from pen and paper RPG designs, which is like putting fracking sails on a modern supercarrier.

Hell ditching weapon degradation alone is a huge win.

I would love a Tale Of Three Wastelands; you start lit in Vault 101, have all those adventures. Next your wanderlust takes you to Vegas. And the final chapter is Boston.

It's not the bugs, it's how it's so hard coded and how stringent Beth is with mods.

The RPG elements have been made far more transparent and functional; there was no reason to keep all that points malarky except inertia from pen and paper RPG designs, which is like putting fracking sails on a modern supercarrier.

Strong disagree. That's what makes a RPG a RPG. Even Cyberpunk could juggle points and perks well enough. It was a cop out on beth's part for 4 and 76.

 

[Sarin]

I want Fallout 3 and New Vegas remade using the Fallout 4 system, seems like the best of both worlds

I mean just being able to actually shoot properly outside of VATS is worth it

I admit I haven't played F4/76 and probably never will, but I've gone through F3, NV and Tale of Two Wastelands (mod that joins them together so you can go through both stories with one character, keeping the gear) without ever using VATS.

What the Fallouts need IMO are better combat system that would use cover mechanics, allow commanding the companions and generally make different kind of approach than blowing up the enemy with biggest gun you have viable.

 

[Gelion]

For those people who can't stand the old graphics, there's a remastered version of Wasteland 1 available on GoG. I hope to try it myself once it goes on sale.