Lets not go there. You'll make us purist very angry.

If they kept the exact same story, voice acting, etc and only updated the graphics (isometric mind you), I'd buy it.

Same game with better graphics would be fine, its not like colorizing a movie in terms of 'art' in this case.

I would not want it to be done on the Fallout 3 engine though, I loved unarmed/melee combat and its just too clunky for it.

Not really. If you want a good post-apocalypse styled shooter, STALKER is a good choice - everything about the combat that Fallout 3 does wrong, it does right. The thing that ruins the core shooting mechanics of Fallout 3 is the "blind rush" AI that has all enemies mindlessly charging you as soon as you're spotted and pursuing you to the ends of the earth. The poor implimentation the RPG mechanics hurts it a lot too, with enemies, particuarly the mutants, often taking several clips to kill. It's impossible to use any kind of tactics when facing ridiculously tough enemies like this so all the battles are reduced to running backwards while unloading clip after clip in the monster, and popping stimpaks.

That's not necessarily so, if they used the same map system as in Fallout 3 or the Elder Scrolls games, then yes, I'm sure it wouldn't be possible, but in Fallout 1 and two, the map wasn't open like in Fallout 3, so Bethesda wouldn't have to physically model all the map, just points of interest and the locations for random encounters, which would make it easier.

Still, I don't really think remaking the original games with Fallout 3's engine is necessary, they're already good games, and they are the kind of game that won't be ruined by their dated graphics, in my opinion, not to mention the graphics of the original Fallout games weren't the kind that were offensive to behold when they are dated, not like the 3D games from that era. I can't say I'd object to remaking the original games, as long as Bethesda didn't end up producing a product that left the original fans unsatisfied and failed to bring in a large new fan following, but I'd prefer it if Bethesda's resources were spent on new games.

I don't usually flame, but damn you sound like a nub. If that's how you play the game then no wonder you don't find it enjoyable. Next time you play the game try experimenting with different builds. A sniper mixed with melee for example eliminates what you're complaining about completely. And the same goes for a stealth class. As it's quite possible to retreat and re-stealth. Or try a demolitionist and lay mines before entering combat.. I don't know man use your IMAGINATION (if it's there) there are plenty of ways to play the game. You don't have to run in and shoot and then backpedal like a idiot (not like it's possible to backpedal from a super mutant wielding a minigun anyway). I have a stealth character at the moment, I started the game on very hard and I'm at level 14. It's quite possible to kill 70% of the creatures in this game with one or two shots from sneaking (if you have a good weapon) on very hard difficulty. So I don't know what the hell your doing wrong.

As for a remake of FO1/2 on the FO3 engine. I honestly don't see the point. The FO games were good at the time.. but the story.. meh. It was alright. but nothing that spectacular imo. Planescape was a lot better. I think the atmosphere and advlt content is what made those games. The dialogue was good too mind you, But I don't see the worth in remaking a game just for the dialogue. The only thing I would like to see remade is New reno. If a modder could remake new reno, and then you just use your character from the original FO3.. That would be cool imo.

If you thought the story of F1 and 2 were bad I shudder to think of what you think about F3s.

Clearly you must detest it and can almost not even make it through the main story line am I right?

Those are all nice tactics, but the fact remains that in a stand-up fight with practically any enemy, the AI is nonexistant and the combat is boring, repetitive and tedious. As an action shooter it's just objectively bad compared to other shooters on the market.

Deus Ex.

I have to disagree about the poor rpg mechanics. I find the game overall to be vastly superior to stalker. That game has poor rpg mechanics. That is an FPS game trying to be an RPG. Fallout is an RPG being an RPG. I found Stalker to be bland and a bit boring after awhile. Fallout grabs peoples attention for 100's of hours. It also sounds like you need to learn how to play Fallout.

Yeah your right. The MQ is quite bad. Right from the beginning (looking for "dad" and all that crap, really bad). But the side quests save the game some what in the story department. Also the scenery and dungeons for the MQ does make the MQ good in the gameplay department. The national Archives, for example and the Museum of Technology are some of the best dungeons I've played in a rpg for some time. But yeah, not going to deny it, Bethesda dropped the ball big time with the MQs story.

Planescape Torment=RPG for poseurs. A nice story doesn't make up for terrible combat, characters, character building, and atmosphere.

Don't call it Planescape for the love of god... Planescape is a DnD campaign setting. If anything, it should be called Torment.

And you aren't going to make a very impressive point saying stuff like "Good for it's time". RPGs were at their best in "It's time" so it's a completely BS point to make. The Fallout games were great for any time.

And for the record Ghostwise, Fallout 3, like Oblivion, is an action game disparately trying to be an RPG.

And I think you meant,"It sounds like you need to learn how to play Fallout 3". Fallout, as in the original good Fallout, has a vastly different(an superior) combat system to Fallout 3.

Ok first of all. I can call Planescape what ever I damn well like . When someone says Planescape, people know they're talking about Planescape torment.. So who gives a [censored] if someone says PLanescape/Torment or flipping P.torment or whatever.You're being fussy. As as for RPGs being at their best at that time. Well I agree and disagree. There were some good RPG developers back then, Black Isle made good games. And before Black Isle you had Origin with Ultima. But if you're trying to say no one has made any good RPGs in the last 5-7 years then you're talking bull. KOTOR/Morrowind/Vampire:bloodlines/The witcher/Gothic/ series and FALLOUT 3 and so on. There's been plenty of good RPGs after Black Isle that match the old RPGs in their own way. And to say that the original Fallout had a better combat system, yeah ok.. A turn based system with little to no strategy, and just simple click and shoot mechanics is very superior. Where were the spells and the abilities and party based gameplay that usually complement a turn based system?

I can't believe the praise Fallout 1/2 is given here, it kinda boggles my mind.

They always kinda svcked and choppy compared to Baldurs Gate.

Also Fallout 3 >>>>>>>>>> Fallout 2 >>> Fallout 1.

Do you know how much harder it is to create a 3D world than it is to create a 2d sprite world? Seriously Bethesda pwns anything and everything Black Isle ever did.

I agree 100% with this. That's why I'm getting Fallout 1 and 2, much more strategic gameplay in those titles. It just gets old firing 200 rounds from my chinese assault rifle into a Super Mutant Master, all while taking 3-4 stimpacks from my never-ending 400 stimpack supply. I prefer more strategic fighting, like seen in the game "Knights of the Old Republic" both 1, and 2.

Oh, absolutely. STALKER's RPG mechanics are nonexistant because it's a shooter, not an RPG. I was referring to Fallout 3's shooter mechanics being poor, and cited STALKER as a post-apoc game that has good shooting mechanics.

As for "learning how to play Fallout" I assume you mean Fallout 3. I don't know what you want from me - the game has bad shooting mechanics. It's also extremely easy even on the highest difficulty mode. This has nothing to do with me "needing to learn how to play the game," or not having an imagination.

System Shock 2? Deus Ex?

Ok maybe I was a bit harsh. I just think Fallout 3 is a great RPG in the vain of classic open ended RPG's. Stalker does try to be an RPG to some extent though. You got loot, quests, NPCs to talk to and give you quests, etc etc. It IS all a matter of opinion though and to each his own.