Fallout 1, 2 vs Fallout 3, NV (Fallout: New Vegas)
New vs OldFor me, the new ones have sucked in all respects.
LVL difficulty in HB is an order of magnitude lower than in the second Foul, what is there to think, what kind of tactics to hell, what difficulties. The best weapon for such cases has always been the rifle, with your desire to kill quickly. So, I played without straining on hardcore, occasionally trouble was brought by the Deathclaws, provided there were 2+ of them, or a standard pack, in the same caves and quarry. A minigun with a pumped skill does an excellent job with most opponents. It's amazing what kind of water pistol you used to shoot at mobs, since that was the case.
It's boring with a rifle. Stealth-headshot-stealth-headshot ... a kind of "Bend everyone" button. I then passed the second or third time, I wanted it in the spirit of the second Fall, in one hand an avenger, in the other a grenade launcher. Horseradish. You can fry from a flamethrower forever, m79 is weak, its multi-charge version is also not very good, an automatic grenade launcher is not suitable due to the fact that the enemies are mostly melee. Machine guns do not damage. It's not that I want to bend) Well, there can't be a rotary machine gun weaker than a 44 caliber revolver. This is nonsense, even a 5-millimeter version will turn an unarmored target into mince in seconds. Independent branches should be of equal value, and not like here, a sniper with a local KSVK is generally imba, then hand-to-hand fighters who tear everything and everyone due to blows with paralysis and stealth, then "energy" and somewhere in the very tail of a heavy weapon,
Heavy weapons in f3 and nv are very different from their predecessors, I agree. :) A flaw is putting it mildly. We tried to make a certain balance between light and heavy, so that even with an unworked skill, you wouldn't endure everyone from a minigun / grenade launcher from a couple of shots, just for what? I don’t understand this either. Alas, the most sensible weapons in New Vegas are rifles, as I said. What can you do, not for the twentieth time f2 actually pass. It will be boring. We are waiting for the next part.
I hate the second fallout. I tried to play twice, the last time literally a month ago, I could not resist, I deleted it. Foul 2 - Ancient fossil mammoth shit. I foresee the minuses from those who will bake from my words. : 3
Dreadnought.
It does not get hot, because I started it myself recently, almost vomited,
although at one time I passed it with great pleasure.
Simply objectively the best Fall, that's all, better than the first one.
the possibilities are corny more.
The first Fallout turned out to be good, but somehow dull. But this is her thing, yes. Post-apocalypse, devastation and so on. At first I did not master the translation of 1C, then I went through with the translation of Fargus and was satisfied.
And the second turned out to be wine.
Tactics was not canon. I did not master it somewhere on the sixth mission. It gets bored quickly. But still a good offshoot, the second part could earn fame, but somehow it didn't work out. Didn't come out. But there was a lot to tell about the New Brotherhood of Steel ...
In the third question, @% whether the entire SPECIAL system is sad. It turned out Oblivion with guns. But he was pleased with the creation. Still, it's a shame Van Buren didn't come out.
And New Vegas turned out great. Replay Value, Caesar's Legion, NCR, etc. EPIC WIN. Passed about 10 times.
Hope for a fourth Fallout.
D.Artist, I wasn't hinting at you. As it was noticed in this thread - the schoolchildren were told that foul 2 is cool, so they, in an outburst of love passion for him, covered by the desire to pretend to be an oldfag, are praised everywhere (10 out of 10 :)). And more often this is the generation of those who grew up on Code, DMK and so beloved GoV here. What to hide, I myself started a foul for the first time back in 2005, the difference is already 8 years from the moment it was released, but even then I did not like it, there was already a decent choice at that time. Now the opinion has not changed either, I do not know why. And at that time (early 00s) there was not much choice, you won’t play doom and quake forever, and then there’s such a breakthrough, of course. It's a pity, I do not belong to the category of people who were lucky enough to play fallouts in the years of their release, otherwise I closed up the highest rating without hesitation. All the same, they could have become childhood games ... like f2, but with a new engine and new features. Few would appreciate a masterpiece of this kind. So what did anyone expect? We got quite a bearable and interesting game, I really liked the subsequent parts. :)
Xs, I was always wildly jarred by the transformation of Fall into shooters, especially on such an
unfinished engine ... As a shooter, the game is good, but I wanted (still want) turn-based
tactics in isometric, I really hope for Wasteland 2.
The most important thing in the game is the graphics. Where does the bulk of finance go? On the schedule. Look at the first two fallouts: they are not even three tees. They cannot be compared with what the bezde did. It’s impossible to play them at all. IMHO even the old prefixes gave the best graphics. Now, if to make the first falls on the edge of the enzhine it would probably be normal.
It's not so much the graphics that are to blame as the turn-based combat system and a bunch of meaningless dialogues that not everyone likes. The trouble with old games. And shooters with RPG elements are an interesting combination, but, unfortunately, the same Borderlands did not reach the level of the last parts of Foul. Made without a soul and absolutely uninteresting :)
Yes, it’s impossible to play them at all.
From the point of view of the grapher - certainly.
It's not so much the graphics that are to blame as the turn-based combat system and a bunch of meaningless dialogues that not everyone likes.
So I would say right away: I hate turn-based battles, I don't like reading, etc. etc. Would have looked more adequate.
What, excuse me? Cool conclusions. :) Did you suck it out of your finger or something else?
Fallout - 9 out of 10, perfectly conveys the atmosphere of a world that survived a nuclear war, better than in subsequent parts.
Fallout 2 - 10 out of 10, my favorite game in the series, it's not so serious it has a lot of humor and possibilities.
Fallout Tactics - I haven’t tried it and I can’t evaluate it (except by the amount of nonsense, like machines running on gasoline (and this is in the world that died due to the fuel crisis) and the presence of a huge amount of weapons in our world).
Fallout 3 - 7 out of 10, if in the first part it was possible to understand despondency and devastation, then in this game, no. Two hundred years have passed why people live in a city made of shit and sticks if there are almost undamaged buildings (about the city on the destroyed bridge and the settlement of children needless to say, this is nonsense) built in an appendage around the atomic bomb, + a constant mochilovo that quickly gets boring.
Fallout NV - 9 out of 10, already better, there was more banter and the game began to resemble Fallout 2, it still had some inconsistencies and problems, but nevertheless I liked it more than the previous one.
This is purely my attitude, I do not want to offend anyone with this.