Is Fallout Tactics worth it?

Post » Fri Nov 12, 2010 5:40 am

Hi all

I wanna get more into the Fallout franchise, I have Fallout 1 and Fallout 3.

I'm interested in buying the Fallout collection off Steam. Now I'm wondering if Fallout Tactics is worth it? Because I could save some money if I only buy Fallout 2.

Thanks in advance.
User avatar
NIloufar Emporio
 
Posts: 3366
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 6:18 pm

Post » Thu Nov 11, 2010 9:24 pm

Hi all

I wanna get more into the Fallout franchise, I have Fallout 1 and Fallout 3.

I'm interested in buying the Fallout collection off Steam. Now I'm wondering if Fallout Tactics is worth it? Because I could save some money if I only buy Fallout 2.

Thanks in advance.

Tactics Is worth it but it is different from the other fallouts because it is a tactics based game. You are given missions and you get a squad of up to 5 others with you. I liked it and I am a Fan of all the fallouts but the ps2 (brotherhood of steel).
User avatar
Bryanna Vacchiano
 
Posts: 3425
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 9:54 pm

Post » Fri Nov 12, 2010 2:22 am

Brotherhood of steel didn't happen.

Uhm, anyway. Tactics is worth it. Period.
User avatar
Ross Thomas
 
Posts: 3371
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 12:06 am

Post » Fri Nov 12, 2010 7:34 am

Hi all

I wanna get more into the Fallout franchise, I have Fallout 1 and Fallout 3.

I'm interested in buying the Fallout collection off Steam. Now I'm wondering if Fallout Tactics is worth it? Because I could save some money if I only buy Fallout 2.

Thanks in advance.


Tactics is a great buy, and definitely worth a look.
User avatar
BEl J
 
Posts: 3397
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 8:12 am

Post » Fri Nov 12, 2010 8:19 am

I'm going to disagree. I got bored whilst playing Tactics and never finished it. The storyline didn't do it for me and it was too different from the first two.
I wouldn't bother with it other than for completeness.
User avatar
kevin ball
 
Posts: 3399
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 10:02 pm

Post » Fri Nov 12, 2010 8:15 am

Your either gonna love it or hate it.
It has an atom thin plot line.
Go here do this kill this dude mission done.
But,it has all of the skills and perks and goodies you would expect and you can manage to get non-humans on you team.
I built a stealth crew of 1 heavy gunner and a bunch of deathclaws...messy messy fun.

Might have a few problems getting it to run on todays tech though...depending on where you get it.

-John
User avatar
Dean Ashcroft
 
Posts: 3566
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 1:20 am

Post » Fri Nov 12, 2010 2:42 am

The one thing that should be pointed out about "Tactics" is that though it is based in the Fallout Universe, much like Bethesda's Fallout 3, it is an interpretation of the Fallout Universe, with some changes to storyline and canon.

If you want only canon Fallout products then obviously you have to stick to:
Fallout 1
Fallout 2
Fallout 3: Van Buren(Only the demo has been released)
User avatar
Steve Smith
 
Posts: 3540
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2007 10:47 am

Post » Fri Nov 12, 2010 11:56 am

Fallout tactics is canon. Only thing people did not like about it was the furry deathclaws and Oil drums all over, seeing as oil ran out there should not be drums of it all over. The story is solid and makes sence. Value zero is were most of the USA government and important minds of the time went. It was a main land back up to the Oil Rig in fallout two.
Spoiler
The calculator failed, and did not do what it was to do. It did not wake up and use it's army to cleaness the land of mutations and hostile people
.

The game is worth it :D.
User avatar
Mrs shelly Sugarplum
 
Posts: 3440
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2006 2:16 am

Post » Thu Nov 11, 2010 9:58 pm

Fallout tactics is canon. Only thing people did not like about it was the furry deathclaws and Oil drums all over, seeing as oil ran out there should not be drums of it all over. The story is solid and makes sence. Value zero is were most of the USA government and important minds of the time went. It was a main land back up to the Oil Rig in fallout two.
Spoiler
The calculator failed, and did not do what it was to do. It did not wake up and use it's army to cleaness the land of mutations and hostile people
.

The game is worth it :D.


NORAD/Cheyenne Mountain no longer exists:

Excerpt from "The Vault" :

As the heart of the defense network, NORAD predictably found itself a primary target in the hypothetical war written by Chris Avellone in the Fallout Game Bible. According to both the game bible and design documents for Van Buren, the entire area was reduced to a severely radioactive crater.

Insofar as Fallout 2 was concerned, NORAD was listed merely as a footnote, buried in the network script of the Gecko Power Plant computer terminal. NORAD is listed as "offline."


Furthermore from the canceled location of "The Crater" from Fallout 3: Van Buren:

By 2253, a huge section of the mountains became a great radioactive smoking crater, giving birth to a large population of glowing ghouls. Coupled with attacks on Denver and the Rocky Mountain Arsenal, Boulder became the center of a triangle of hellish death.

User avatar
Mason Nevitt
 
Posts: 3346
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 8:49 pm

Post » Thu Nov 11, 2010 9:47 pm

First Off Van Buren is not canon. It was not made therefore it's not canon. Tactics was made and it shows NORAD/Cheyenne Mountain and Vault Zero.
No matter what the Devs were going to do for Van Buren they made Tactics first. So that shows the idea of making the area around Cheyenne mountain into a big radioactive crater was just that an Idea.
They went with Having the Calculator and Vault Zero insted.
User avatar
Sammygirl500
 
Posts: 3511
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 4:46 pm

Post » Fri Nov 12, 2010 6:40 am

"Tactics" was never a fully canon Fallout production. Though some elements of "Tactics" have been recognized, the events of the game are generally viewed as being more of a supplement, then an actual coherent aside to the Classic Fallout Trilogy(Fallout 1, Fallout 2 and Fallout 3: Van Buren).
User avatar
Tanya Parra
 
Posts: 3435
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2006 5:15 am

Post » Fri Nov 12, 2010 11:35 am

No matter what the Devs were going to do for Van Buren they made Tactics first.

No they didn't. Tactics was developed by Micro Forté, not Blackisle, which is why it isn't proper canon.
User avatar
Emily Rose
 
Posts: 3482
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 5:56 pm

Post » Fri Nov 12, 2010 7:55 am

No they didn't. Tactics was developed by Micro Fort?, not Blackisle, which is why it isn't proper canon.


Well who ever made it, it was still made before Van Buren. Van Buren was not made. If it was made with The Cratter I would agree with people that Tactics is flawed in it's story.
User avatar
lisa nuttall
 
Posts: 3277
Joined: Tue Jun 20, 2006 1:33 pm

Post » Thu Nov 11, 2010 11:14 pm

Well who ever made it, it was still made before Van Buren. Van Buren was not made. If it was made with The Cratter I would agree with people that Tactics is flawed in it's story.

I disagree - neither Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel or Fallout: Tactics are canon. One was developed by Interplay, the other by Micro Fort? (as previously stated). Only the Black Isle titles are fully canon, the others approach canon in some places but are too different to properly toe the line. I can't give specific examples because I've not finished either (I've not even started F:BoS).

Van Buren wasn't finished, but it was pretty close:
GB: At the time of the studios' closure, how much of Fallout 3 had been completed? How much more development time do you feel the title needed before it could have been considered "complete"?

John: The engine was about 95% done. You could create characters, use skills, perform both ranged and melee combat, save/load games, and travel across maps. We had a tutorial level done that would let you do all of the above. All areas but one had been designed. About 75% of the dialogs were done and at least 50% of the maps. We had character models and monster models.

http://www.gamebanshee.com/interviews/johndeiley1.php#null

The point I'm trying to get at is essentially that the material that was going to be in VB would have been canon and it followed the ideas and style laid out in the previous BIS titles. F:T and F:BoS didn't follow this particularly well, particularly F:BoS, presumably because they were not developed by the same studio.
User avatar
Symone Velez
 
Posts: 3434
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 12:39 am

Post » Thu Nov 11, 2010 9:34 pm

I disagree - neither Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel or Fallout: Tactics are canon. One was developed by Interplay, the other by Micro Forté (as previously stated). Only the Black Isle titles are fully canon, the others approach canon in some places but are too different to properly toe the line. I can't give specific examples because I've not finished either (I've not even started F:BoS).

Van Buren wasn't finished, but it was pretty close:

http://www.gamebanshee.com/interviews/johndeiley1.php#null

The point I'm trying to get at is essentially that the material that was going to be in VB would have been canon and it followed the ideas and style laid out in the previous BIS titles. F:T and F:BoS didn't follow this particularly well, particularly F:BoS, presumably because they were not developed by the same studio.


So because Fallout Tactics was made by another company it's not canon? So by the logic Fallout 3 by Bethesdsa is not canon because it's made by another company. Interplay let Fallout Tactics be made by another company they gave the ok. If some other company made the game an slapped Tactics on it to avoid a lawsuit with Black Isle/Interplay then I would agree that tactics is not canon. Brotherhood Of Steel is not Canon because it messes so greatly with Canon. Tactics does not mess with canon as much as people think it does.

If Van Buren was made With the Cratter, then yes It would not be canon. Sad Fact is, Van Buren was not made so it's not canon. It was close to being published but it was not.

Therefore Tactics is canon. It was made and Interplay gave the Okay for it to be made. Van Buren was not.
User avatar
Samantha hulme
 
Posts: 3373
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 4:22 pm

Post » Fri Nov 12, 2010 6:32 am

So because Fallout Tactics was made by another company it's not canon? So by the logic Fallout 3 by Bethesdsa is not canon because it's made by another company.

Nope! Fallout 3 is canon because gamesas owns the rights and the licence now, otherwise Interplay would have sued gamesas for calling it Fallout 3 instead of Capital Wasteland for example. You're right about Tactics that's why it's named that way and it refers to the gameplay also of course.
User avatar
Darlene DIllow
 
Posts: 3403
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 5:34 am

Post » Fri Nov 12, 2010 4:49 am

In answer to your previous post, Styles:
Nope! Fallout 3 is canon because gamesas owns the rights and the licence now, otherwise Interplay would have sued gamesas for calling it Fallout 3 instead of Capital Wasteland for example. You're right about Tactics that's why it's named that way and it refers to the gameplay also of course.

Joe Piler hit the nail on the head.

Sad Fact is, Van Buren was not made so it's not canon. It was close to being published but it was not.
Unless I've missed something, I didn't say VB was canon, just that it was inline with the style and precedent of other canon stuff. I was arguing that Tactics is at best semi-canon and F:BoS should be shunned entirely as the painted Jezebel it is.

Finally:
If Van Buren was made With the Cratter, then yes It would not be canon.

What is this "the Cratter" you're on about?
For that matter, what the hell is a "Cratter"?
Some sort of rake?
User avatar
Jon O
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 9:48 pm

Post » Fri Nov 12, 2010 12:41 pm

In answer to your previous post, Styles:



Unless I've missed something, I didn't say VB was canon, just that it was inline with the style and precedent of other canon stuff. I was arguing that Tactics is at best semi-canon and F:BoS should be shunned entirely as the painted Jezebel it is.

Finally:

What is this "the Cratter" you're on about?
For that matter, what the hell is a "Cratter"?
Some sort of rake?


Ok well first off. I know fallout 3 is canon I was being sarcastic. Just because fallout Tactics was not made by interplay it does not mean it's not canon. Interplay gave the ok for another company to make it. Just like Beth is letting obsidian make New Vegas.

I agree about F:BoS and it should be Shunned entirely.

I spelled Crater Wrong sorry for any confusion on that.

Van Buren was to have http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheyenne_Mountain home to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Aerospace_Defense_Command (Calculator and Vault Zero) to be nothing but one big Nuclear crater. Home to many thousands of glowing ghouls. It was to be very radioactive like the Glow from fallout one.

Some people say Tactics is not canon because it does not follow what the Devs were going to do to Cheyenne Mountain and the area around it for Van Buren aka Fallout 3.
Thing is the only things "wrong" with Fallout tactics are the Furry Deathclaws that talk and were at one time human. Oil drums all over in a time when oil ran dry. The biggest problem people have is that it is not what Van Buren was going to do to that part of the USA.

Van Buren was not made so it's not canon. Interplay that once owned the rights to fallout and gave the green light for Tactics to be made by another company. Again, just because another company made it does not make tactics none canon. Interplay Allowed it to be made. Bethesda is letting Obsidian make New Vegas and I am sure everyone on here is going to agree that New Vegas will be canon.

Tactics has a great story and is a squad based tactics game not really an RPG another thing people when it came out were not happy about. Vault Zero is the main lands back up to the Oil Rig in Fallout one. It's where most of the USA government went to take shelter during the great war. As well as Americas best and brightest minds.
It also had an army of robots to kill any mutations and chinese soldiers. Thing is the Vault system (Calculator) did not work right.

Play fallout tactics for the rest of the story.
User avatar
lacy lake
 
Posts: 3450
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2006 12:13 am


Return to Fallout Series Discussion