i know many people will disagree with me on this and i ask that people do not leave negative comments, unless it is an answer to the topic itself.

Fallout 3 is my all-time favorite game ever. :fallout: i have played it for about a year now and decided that i should probably play the first two so i can get the whole story.
...that's when i found out that f1 and f2 weren't fps... :sadvaultboy: in fact, simply looking at pics of the games made me gag. i had extremely low expectations for fallout and f2. however, after looking at reviews giving it 8+ out of 10, i decided
i had to try it, despite my low expectations.

it was confusing, boring, repetative, difficult, and i got completely stuck because i couldn't find a stupid rope. :banghead: the 3rd person viewpoint was extremely annoying, and turn-based fighting was repetative and unfair.
needless to say, i felt like this: :brokencomputer:
but i'm not here to complain.

i just want to know if anyone else thinks that Bethesda or even a third-party group should remake fallout 1 and 2. a great job is being done with the remake of half life (called black-mesa) and i would love to see fallout 1&2 remade on a f3 engine.

So thoughts? opinions? Plz vote!
No spam or :swear: plz

No, there's no reason for it as the originals work on modern hardware, it would take a lot of time/effort/resources and given that a remake would be hard to sell a remake as an a grade title I cant see it earning its way.

Edit: And given that FO3's plot is awfuly similar to the first 2 games...

I wouldn't like that, the original fallouts are already classics. You should really give them another shot, even if you have to watch some gameplay videos on Youtube to help you out once in a while

The idea of difficulty back then was lack of instructions. Today its holding your hand with every step. Man I miss the games that came out in between.

Descent 3 anyone?

I was disappointed that Fallout 3 was an FPS :sadvaultboy:

I think the main reason for the difficulty level was the fact that games weren't so big back then. So the developers made games harder to squeeze out more playing time for their consumers otherwise they would walk through a game in 1/2 hour, maybe less. I don't believe this was the case for fallout in particular, although it was made in the classic gaming era. However I do remember that a long time ago, before fallout even, 8bit games (a few kb maybe 1mb in size) were gruesomely hard by todays standards, multiple deaths and starting over was a frequent occurrence. There were even a few games I just gave up on unless I had a trainer or something like that.

-----

Voted: no. There are already enough topics about remakes. A remake is not necessary and will be highly unlikely imo.

Uuuuggghhhhh. I remember some utterly unforgiving games back then. Only a few levels, but frustratingly difficult.

On the other hand, I remember the Star Wars games on the SNES. Good fun, loads of levels, but so hard at times you tore your hair out.



On topic: I vote no. A remake wouldn't be the same at all, plus the originals work on modern systems and are still selling pretty well.

They should not be remade, especially not on the F3 engine. 1 and 2 are classics and beautifully done with an absolutely wonderful story. The turn-based action system forced people to think tactically and less "Run and gun". They also didn't have that absolutely HORRID repair issue in the game.

classics are remade all the time.
more frequent in movies tho...

i personally do not like turn based combat because its not realistic i mean you are not gonna walk up to some raider and shoot, only to miss then say "oh shoot i missed... ok you're turn

i like things to be more realistic especially when trying to simulate the post-apocalyptic wasteland.

so its kinda like what they did with doom?

first two games EPIC CLASSICS but horrible graphix then the third was a more recent remake of the first? doom 3 was awesome imo.

but i cant compare doom to fallout. (i liked doom 1&2 cuz they were fps )

Also i should probably say i was raised on fps games name one and i have probably played and beaten it. :toughninja:

Graphics don't make a game good, Fallout was never meant to be realistic, and there are more games out there then First Person Shooters.

I'd buy a 3D version remake

And Fallout 3 is realistic? I will agree it LOOKS more realistic, but running around with blinders on and not being able to pivot quickly isn't my idea of realism. I will also point out the weapon degradation speed is also very unrealistic and even detracting from the game. I'm not saying 1 and 2 are realistic, but we need to understand "realism" has only been achieved in graphics, here.
You're not a fan of tactics games, are you? That's quite literally what those games where: Tactics. Fire some rounds, duck behind a wall, and try to avoid return fire.
The lack of technology at the time forced them to use turn-based instead of real-time. If you want to see the real-time version Tactics and Baulders gate (Bother Interplay material) use real time action point systems. Tactics allows you to switch to turn based so you can better manage the equipment of your allies and their actions.
Also: the turn-base actually allows melee weapons and unarmed to be useful (unlike Fallout 3). In fact: it is possible to play Fallout 1 and 2 on non-stealth melee builds without getting your backside handed to you 6 ways from Sunday.

Yipe I'm up for having both remade, Great Stuff! Lets ave them remade. I don't really see why anyone would vote no (neither) you have the originals just play those and don't play the remakes, simple

Thank you!

Oh and it turns out that a group on moddb.com is remaking it anyway! WOOT!

Sure it may not b professionally made, but its free!

EXCELLENT! Let me know when thats ready? I'm not a big PC gamer but I'll definitely try those

There is just no reason to remake these games, not to mention it will never happen.

On the contrary a remake for fallout 1 is is currently a work in progress at moddb.com.
I believe it is called fallout 2161
It may not be made by professionals but its free!

If u don't like it, oh well don't bother going there.

It says on their website: Fallout 1 and Fallout 2 with a new Fallout 3 Engine. It seems to me this will be some kind of cross between the two games. So I'm highly skeptical that they can capture the true spirit of the classics, especially by using a FO3 engine and if they start messing with the character system which they'll have to do because this system is related to the turn based combat system, I'll just regard it as a spin-off. Although I'll take a look at it when released but this will never replace the true fallouts. Why does everything has to be a 3D-FPS??? Just play the first games.

Not everyone likes the first games
And some people who love the first games want to see it in a fo3 engine
and it doesn't have to be fps its just highly preferable imo
Turn based combat is also very unfair and as I said before it doesn't make any sence to walk up to a raider and shoot then say oh darn I missed ok you can shoot me now man I sure hope he misses!

Their problem not mine.


Hmm, that would be a tiny minority imho.


Nah..


No it isn't.

------------------

It's cool that modders remake them but like I said it wouldn't be the same no matter how hard they try.

Sounds like it will be worth every penny spent, but not every bit installed.

Yes and there are also people out there who like to huff draino. Just because they dislike those two doesn't mean they have a valid taste in games.
And some people love to snort Ajax. Not I.
Would playing 1 and 2 be easier if we just played a recording of a 12 year old shouting obscenities into a microphone? It'd have more of an FPS feel, then.

It also doesn't make sense to have a gun deal less damage as you continue to fire it. It also does not make sense to tare apart 2 baseball bats to repair 1 or any other weapon for that matter. It also does not make sense that you can block a thrusting attack with a slender object. But all these things are in a game.
Now, on to the defense of turn-based. Like I mentioned before: the game is a tactics game. You move, look for cover and use concealment to your advantage. If your goal is to walk up to people and just open fire then that is why you're not liking the game (You're playing it WRONG). The only two times you should be in melee range on Fallout 1 or 2 is A) They close into you because they have a melee weapon. 2) You are using a melee weapon and need to close in. If your weapon skill is so sub-par that you cannot hit someone 6 hexes away to save your life, then you need to remake your character.

I said in my opinion for a reason.
Also the point isn't that they are the same but that they are similar
Modders usually cannot perfectly recreate games like this especially when changing the perspective of the player they do what they can with what they have-GECK.
Also since its non-profit, they are again limited with what they can do.
I can't expect it to be perfect-no one can
If you hate the idea so much why are you still here? I asked for opinions not arguments.

Also, if u say people who don't like fo1 and 2 have a problem, I can say people who hate star trek have a problem, they can just as easily say that I have a problem.
I'm not gonna say you have a problem because people can have their opinions. Obviously SOME people here don't believe that.