Hey guys, I'm a big fan of Fallout 3, and also New Vegas. They're both great games but I've never played the first two

I know a few gameplay mechanics, and I've seen some screen shots. I know they have turn based combat, and it's viewed differently (forgot the name), but that doesn't bother me. I heard many times before that the first two games are a must buy, but I just wanted to ask a few questions.

Is the exploration huge? With a lot of locations to discover and say "Wow that's awesome!".

Is the writing in depth?

Are the main campaigns as short as Fallout 3/New Vegas?

Is there more gameplay time in the classics, or the newer Fallouts?

Thanks to whoever answers some of these questions, just wanted to know a few things before I get them, sooner or later lol.

Also, opinions on Fallout: Tactics are welcomed too, but I've heard whole different stories on this one.

Its one of those "buying and trying" to get the whole experience. It kind of hard to describe it.

Exploration wise, it is quite limited to outpost and clicking/wandering on the map to find/go the location.

In term of writing (as in conversation, quest, info), much more in depth (and humorous and interesting) than 3.

As for Main campaign, it can be as short as 10 minutes short (speed runners player) to many, many hours (normal players). Its usually long if ya take ya time. Noted though, in Fallout 1, ya given a time limit in a certain amount of days to finish the first part of the main quest. Afterward, ya given a reasonable amount of days to finish that game it self. In Fallout 2, many, many years before the game would hit "game over" if ya procrastinate the Main Quest that long.

There're a lot of video's on speedruns so it can be done. However I tried it once in Fallout 2 and to be honest the game kicked my butt, enclave troopers just sliced me in half and had me for breakfast. :laugh:

You'd probably have to use a lot of saves and have a lot of luck.

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

On topic,

Some people hate the classics and some love it. If you don't expect it to be like FO3 there is a chance you like it. It's a turn based isometric view game.

To be honest FONV has a lot more in common with the classics than FO3.

In my opinion the story, dialog, karma/reputation, character system, humor, towns, NPC's, quests, feeling of accomplishment are a lot better.

There is also a lot to explore in FO1&2, only different, it's not like walking through a huge world because the worldmap is based on lets say point & click mechanics but you'll get to explore settlements and special encounters.

The main campaign is relatively short but if you don't know what you're doing it takes a while to uncover it because you'll have to visit a lot of towns to do so and there are also a fair amount of side quests.

Game time, well it depends like I said if you're new to this and don't read any spoilers it can mount up to weeks of fun. Even for a veteran (no speedruns) it will take 1/2 day up to a few days at least. After the end you can still carry on if you want to.

Difference between game size of FO1 and FO2 is that FO2 is double in size.

Some people find Fallout 2 a bit goofier with all the pop culture references, although I like FO2 because of its size. But it's true FO1 was more serious in that respect and had a darker sense of humor.

Fallout 2 took me 20+ hours and there was still lots ot do afterwards.

They are great games, fantastically written and awesome to look at even nowadays, but the boring 'miss miss hit miss miss hit miss miss' turn based combat really put me off, it just wasn't for me.

It's a different type of exploration, given the Isometric Camera doesn't allow you to really wander the ruins (Which is why Fallout 3 will always remain special to me. It brought me into the Wasteland). But there are still some fun things to see and explore, and you'll generally be rewarded. Random Encounters are a lot more detailed and often hilarious.



Vast. Fallout and Fallout 2 by themselves would be vast novels in terms of the amount of dialogue and data you can collect. New Vegas gives you an idea of what to expect, writing wise.



Yes and no. It's possible to speed through both campaigns, but ultimately if you actually play the game as intended they're nice and long. The fact that a lot of the side quests are attached in relation to the Main Quest helps expand its length.



Eh. It really depends. Fallout New Vegas took me 40 hours to beat on my first play through, and I'd say the classics are a comparable amount of time.

The first 2 Fallouts are much closer to an actual pen-and-paper-and dice RPG, in my opinion.

As to your question as to how much gameplay you'll get:

I've lost count of how many times I've replayed Fallout 2. Has to be at least five. And every single time I did another playthrough, I found new stuff. Not "Whoa, I never saw that container there" new stuff. I mean I found out about whole new encounters, plot threads, quest lines, every single time. I'm certain there's still some content I've missed.

If you're patient and don't mind turn-based combat (I don't know why people abhor turn based combat, I love it personally) then you'll get tons out of FO1 and 2.