Fallout 2, from a FONV/FO3 Players point of view : Fallout Series Discussion

» Fri May 13, 2011 11:04 am

I loved Fallout 3, and FNV even more, I think more for their gaming mechanics.
But for those of you, like me, that have tried to play FO2, is it playable? Or will I be wasting my money.

Many Regards, Deagonx

» Fri May 13, 2011 12:15 pm

*braces for impending Fallout*

(pun intended)

» Sat May 14, 2011 2:50 am

Check out a gameplay video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sAlgwr0Pg5M
And I'm one of the older fans so I can't take it from a Gambryo perspective really but yeah the game is playable, just get Killaps patch first cause the game got some issues.

» Sat May 14, 2011 3:11 am

If you can set aside the fact its a top down view, its a great game. It is playable. Play it :stare: ...lol

» Fri May 13, 2011 10:42 am

I suggest getting fallout 1 first, I liked to so much better than fallout 2.

» Fri May 13, 2011 4:27 pm

Fallout 3 introduced me to the series, and I love the originals. I think you liking New Vegas more than Fallout 3 would improve your chances of enjoying, too.

» Sat May 14, 2011 1:10 am

Alright, well I'll borrow it from my friend who bought the trilogy just to try it out. Thanks.

» Sat May 14, 2011 1:54 am

If you can set aside the fact its a top down view, its a great game. It is playable. Play it :stare: ...lol

ROFL thats great. But all fallout games are good, ALLL. :bowdown: :fallout:

» Fri May 13, 2011 4:03 pm

ROFL thats great. But all fallout games are good, ALLL. :bowdown: :fallout:

Except the game that shall not be named, but that isnt really a Fallout game.

» Fri May 13, 2011 6:02 pm

Except the game that shall not be named, but that isnt really a Fallout game.

No spinn-offs are Fallout games, except Tactics. I guess you can count NV as a spin-off too, whatever.

OP, yes it's a playable game, though fans of real-time combat will have a hard time, since it's turn based.

» Fri May 13, 2011 12:33 pm

What about Wasteland? Even though it's not DIRECTLY in the series, should it be considered?

» Fri May 13, 2011 10:01 pm

No, Fallout was the spiritual sucessor to that game though.

Anyways, I started with FO3 (And loved it... at first.) and then played the originals, so i'd say it is a fun game to play.

» Sat May 14, 2011 3:09 am

I started with FO3, and FO2 is my favorite in the seiries.

» Fri May 13, 2011 5:01 pm

I started with FO3, and FO2 is my favorite in the seiries.

I could almost agree there. The story line is definitely the best, to me. The turn based action of the first two games is a rough transition from starting on Gamebryo. I enjoy VATS.

» Fri May 13, 2011 10:21 pm

I loved Fallout 3, and FNV even more, I think more for their gaming mechanics.
But for those of you, like me, that have tried to play FO2, is it playable? Or will I be wasting my money.

Many Regards, Deagonx

I don't think it is playable honestly, from a perspective of the Fallout 3/New Vegas fan.

1) Bird's eye view is not as fun.
2) turn based movement and combat is not as fun.
3) the map not moving with your character is just bad game design.

» Fri May 13, 2011 3:32 pm

I don't think it is playable honestly, from a perspective of the Fallout 3/New Vegas fan.

1) Bird's eye view is not as fun.
2) turn based movement and combat is not as fun.
3) the map not moving with your character is just bad game design.

By that logic,

Baldurs gate and the first NW was bad too

» Fri May 13, 2011 10:38 am

No spinn-offs are Fallout games, except Tactics. I guess you can count NV as a spin-off too, whatever.

I am not sure about what you are saying. Are you saying spin-offs are fallout games but Tactics or are you saying Tactics is a fallout game but other spin-off are not. Also are you saying New Vegas is not canon because its a spin-off? I am confused.

All fallout games but one are canon fallout games. FO1, FO2, Tactics, FO3 and New Vegas are all Canon.

Sad news FO3 is also a spin-off for it does not continue the story of FO2. Just because it has 3 next to it does not make it a sequel.

» Fri May 13, 2011 1:24 pm

I am not sure about what you are saying. Are you saying spin-offs are fallout games but Tactics or are you saying Tactics is a fallout game but other spin-off are not. Also are you saying New Vegas is not canon because its a spin-off? I am confused.

All fallout games but one are canon fallout games. FO1, FO2, Tactics, FO3 and New Vegas are all Canon.

Sad news FO3 is also a spin-off for it does not continue the story of FO2. Just because it has 3 next to it does not make it a sequel.

This,

Fallout 3 follow another plot, the game itself doesn follow the events of Fallout 2,

NV on the other hand, have various things about the FO1 and FO2, plots, yet is considered a spin off

EG: GTA4, yes, it have the number 4, but it doesnt follow GTA3, the game is a continuity reboot

» Fri May 13, 2011 9:12 pm

I don't think New Vegas is really a "spin off". It's basically Fallout 4 with a contract making it Fallout 3.5.

Tactics was a pseudo-rpg with one waydialogue but character customization and you controlled a party. Think old school Final Fantasy but less cliche. It's a black sheep not because it's a non-traditional RPG but because it's aesthetics really ruined the 50's SCIENCE! theme.

The game that shall not be named upon pain of death however, has no redeeming qualities and must be destroyed from public thought.

» Fri May 13, 2011 11:06 pm

I don't think it is playable honestly, from a perspective of the Fallout 3/New Vegas fan.

1) Bird's eye view is not as fun.
2) turn based movement and combat is not as fun.
3) the map not moving with your character is just bad game design.

I'm a New Vegas fan, too

1) Yes, it is for me. Even better
2) For me, it is. It's better, even.
3) Good for your wrists, I think. I can't understand how someone can complain about that.

The game that shall not be named upon pain of death however, has no redeeming qualities and must be destroyed from public thought.

It had Tony Jay. :shrug:

» Fri May 13, 2011 4:31 pm

It had Tony Jay. :shrug:

Best. Voice. Ever.

May he rest in peace.

» Fri May 13, 2011 11:50 pm

SILENCE, NONE OF YOU SHALL DARE SPEAK OF THAT OF WHOM HAD GREATEST VOICE OF ALL MAN!

» Sat May 14, 2011 1:47 am

SILENCE, NONE OF YOU SHALL DARE SPEAK OF THAT OF WHOM HAD GREATEST VOICE OF ALL MAN!

And why is that? Maybe I'm talking about the Lieutenant in Fallout? :stare:

» Fri May 13, 2011 11:25 am

And why is that? Maybe I'm talking about the Lieutenant in Fallout? :stare:

Because his voice and name were too great for any of us to know..

» Fri May 13, 2011 11:28 am

Because his voice and name were too great for any of us to know..

So we can't speak about him because he was too good, and we can't speak about Fallout:BoS because it was too bad?

Can we only speak about mediocre things?