I would rather the character handle their own attempts; I don't play RPGs for a 2nd life. In RPGs I prefer to direct their actions within the limits of their ability and what I extrapolate [from their background and/or the story] to be their current attitude and motivations.

That's how I see it as well; further I was drawn to the FO series by its gameplay, writing, and mutability... none of that came through in FO3 IMO. I like FO3 for the excellent landscape scenery, and the GECK... and that's about it.

I think VATS misses the point of what it loosely copies from FO1. VATS as it is [IMO] is basically a sanctioned cheat mode.

OPINION actually, I haven't played either of them, but it does annoy me when people try to pass off their opinions as fact.

I haven't played Fallout 1, 2 or Tactics, but I do have them on my computer. As soon as I finish my current playthrough on New Vegas I am going to make an attempt.

When you play the originals, just remember this simple rule. If the weapon can fire in burst mode, then never let a companion have it. Ever. They will murder you with it. Especially Ian.

This even means Marcus, in F2...he gets laser rifles and plasma rifles, super-sledges and power-fists...no miniguns, flamers, or rocket launchers, unless you're trying to commit suicide.

i see what your saying. but system shock 2, deus ex and fallout NV are heavy on the rpg/stat affecting gameplay. like in deus ex when you start your very innaccurate and strategy determines the outcome of encounters more than skill, then if you upgrade you become 100% accurate and its a good mix of strategy and skill. i think games like these have it perfect. morrowind was a good mix too.

but im not fond of classic rpgs turn based combat anyway except for final fantasy. but it is todays rpgs that are ruining it with the dumbing down (skyrim, deus ex:HR, bioshock, final fantasy 13 etc) but fallout new vegas gameplay is More complex than the old fallouts, and combat is real time. you could always play the whole game with vats? urgh that would be boring. but yeah i feel for you for classic rpgs disappearing. im not bothered myself i just want more games that are real time combat but still stat heavy, only fallout new vegas has pleased me in the last 5 years.

Actually that is possible....you just have to luck out on the spread roll. during the tutorial I've hit Gecko's running away from me from pretty far away. with the broken varmint rifle sunny gives you...

As for VATS I use it alot at mid to close ranges because it forces the use of character skill. However I think it still too "short ranged" in it's calculations to anything longer range.

For me its because Fallout and Fallout 2 are far better RPGs and Fallout 3 doesn't even come close to being a good RPG. The writing in them are also better Fallout 3.

There are "improvements" in that New Vegas and Fallout 3 are modern games with modern graphics but I don't give a crap about graphics. RPG and writing are important to me. I like that Fallout and Fallout 2 don't hold my hand and guide me to where things are. I like that there is a true wasteland feel because locations are many game days aparts.

and also i am gonna be truthful- i got the old fallouts a while back and started to play F1. i gave up. maybe its ignorance, but i couldnt take it. i had recently completed new vegas, where i could shoot em up in real time or vats, i could explore a full world rather than explore a grid map with random encounters and set locations, i could aim down the sights and mod my weapons, i can work on the challenges in the pip boy for extra xp and a few perks, and new vegas has all the complexity F1 has and more, so im not missing out on anything (except story) also the player walked painfully slow.

but yeah if i played it years ago i would have loved it because i enjoyed broken sword, that point & click game, and F1 has way more complexity than that game. but i was actually enjoying F1 but the fact new vegas gameplay was more complex and real time, and how slow the player walked really put me off.

this was the only thing i noticed that fallout 1 had over new vegas. they should of removed hand holding in that hardcoe mode, but at least fast travel dehydrated you etc. to me new vegas is one of the greatest games ever made, alongside deus ex and system shock 2.

also in new vegas there is some areas that dont appear on your compass, so exploration at your own will does pay off sometimes.

Removing quest markers would have been a good for hardcoe mode. Imagine how short Fallout and Fallout 2 would have been if there were quest markers. Leave Vault 13/Arroyo and "oh look there's the water chip/GECK"

Why is everyone more lucky than me in New Vegas?

yep all these developers trying to appeal to dummies or casuals, which is understandable with production costs higher now. thats why new vegas shines even more to me, cos its not dumbed down, except objective markers.
but yeah if devs insist on dumbing down id wish they would put in extra effort to have options to play it hardcoe. like new vegas. i dont like objective markers that much at all, but for open world games i think they are needed in some cases, but i think they should be only used for main quest and only show up when your near, or something like that.

i remember in morrowind searching for ages to find an obscure body on top of a mountain somewhere. took forever to find it. but i still prefer to play without objective Ms in games. but like i said, for open world it is needed in some cases.

Thats why one of the reasons I like the Originals. I have to use my brain. I need to plan things in advance, including how I make my character. There are no quest markers holding my hand. I can really specialize my character. He can be an awesome sniper but svck at other things like Doctor or Heavy weapons. Were in the New Vegas and Fallout 3 my characters become uber gods and masters of all things so fast. The problem isn't as bad in New Vegas as it is in Fallout 3, but its there.

yeah i forgot about that, there should be a limit to skills- 6 skills that you can put skillpoints into after 70, once you have took 6 skills over 70 all the rest cap at 70. that would be great aswell because the problem with some rpgs is having to decide at the beggining, with this system you could decide when your ready and know the importance of each skill. that would be great.

but dont forget you can only have about 1/3 of the perks, and not all attributes either.

There should not be a hard limiter. They just need to ditch this 'skill caps out at 100' bunk and go back to the old system. Can crank a skill all the way to 200, even 300 if you REALLY want, but the law of diminishing returns seriously starts to kick in hard. After I discovered the reason to do so, in F2 I almost always tried to get a 127 Science skill, even through it was a pain to do. Could bring that kind of thing back.

what do you mean hard limiter?

A hard limiter is something where for example, there are 8 skills you use regularly. You boost 4 of them to 100. Now, suddenly, you can't raise any of the others to 100. That's a hard limiter on your skills. An artificial and inflexible barrier.

oh damn. i always come up with ideas and it turns out they have already been done

It's been done in other things, and it generally doesn't work out well.

The old system we Dinosaurs are so fond of is the one I mentioned where you could go WAY up in skills, but diminishing returns kicked in. After a certain point, it started to cost you 2 skills points to get 1 point raised...then it cost you 3 points...and then 4. Sure, pushing yourself to a 150 Small Guns made you a great sniper, but you were so specialized that there was precious little else you did even remotely competantly until pretty high level. Because of that I usually ran with one combat skill at about 115 (small guns for Gauss weapons, or Energy Weapons for the Turbo Plasma Rifle), science up to 127 to complete an awesome quest, lockpicking to around 90-100 (with a set of improved lockpicks, and a mkII electronic lockpick) to get me into places and things, and then nothing else tended to get above 75 or so.

And that was at high level, near end-game after I'd been roaming the wastes a bit to kill hubologists and enclave patrols in the name of guns and money. Had to equip an entire party for the end battle, after all, and power armor and gauss weapons were neither common nor cheap. (Lenny, Cassidy, Sulik, and Vic all needed power armor and either a gauss pistol or gauss rifle, though sometimes I'd cheap out and just give Sulik a super-sledge. Marcus just got a Turbo Plasma Rifle and a Super Power Fist...much cheaper to equip him.)

I like Fallout 1 more then 3 just because it is just a better game, the writing, the gameplay, the world, the REAL RPG mechanics, it just towers over Bethesda's attempt at Fallout, which has nothing in common with the original Fallout's, except that its post apocalyptic, and they even manged to screw that up.

I just don't like First Person RPG's, they just never work like a real RPG.

They simply have better RPG gameplay and writing. New Vegas competes and fares well on the writing side and has even attempts at bringing some of the gameplay to somewhat similiar level, but it's still a shooter in disguise.


Not necessarily FPP alone, but first person realtime with simple shooter gameplay with a hint of statistical differences offered. Had the gameplay been more akin to Morrowind (for a harsh example), I would've liked it much better. And all the best games are definitely not FPP/RPG hybrids. If anything there are too many FPP games in the market for any of them to make any real difference.

no not at all, most are first person shooters with weak rpg elements. deus ex and system shock 2 are heavy enough on the rpg side. morrowind and new vegas too. i love my rpg in shooters. i want stats to effect EVERYTHING from hacking to health and running speed, but not vats type gameplay where your stats and luck are the only outcome of a fire fight. i want skill in there too, even in morrowind skill is involved, moving out the way of projectiles, running away, aiming etc. this is why castlevania SOTN is one of my fave rpgs too, because there is some skill involved whilst having enough stat depth (ok its not true rpg with NPCs ect but its the most complex 2d side scroller).

THIS!

+1

That's the difference between us. I'd prefer my character to be the one doing the tasks on my command according to his abilities (of my choosing throughout the game).

Morrowind, in a way, was kind of a nasty middle ground since you had to have both: good FPS skills, and a skilled character in order to be succesful. That's really not optimal, but the formula could be altered to work better.

dinosaur

im glad you agree, now change that batman pic!