If there could be only one fallout in next 5 years

Post » Wed Dec 07, 2011 8:51 pm

Perhaps to the casual glance.

* I agree with a lot post #18.


What do you mean by that? I've played through the first games several times, FO2 with the restoration patch installed. And yeah, theoretically you had more tactical depth in combat.
Practically though, running up to point blank and unloading your P90 burst (or using the.223 pistol for high DT enemies like Wanamingos or Floaters) was by far the most efficient method.
And I don't even start on mentioning how broken the balance was, when you got hold of the Bozar/Pulse Rifle/Gauss Rifle/Vindicator.
I also spare you from ranting how ridiculously OP'ed the APAs were with their 18ish DT together with DR-ratings from 70-80%.
For me, the fascination of the first games was not coming from the combat system, but from the awesome setting, and the crazy people you encountered.
User avatar
Lyd
 
Posts: 3335
Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 2:56 pm

Post » Wed Dec 07, 2011 12:28 pm

For the love of Fallout why is that piece of crap Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel added to the poll? If it has to be in the poll change it to "The Burned Game."
User avatar
laila hassan
 
Posts: 3476
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2006 2:53 pm

Post » Wed Dec 07, 2011 9:53 pm

What do you mean by that?
Combat incorporates the skills and stats, and perks. Position mattered and there were even dedicated movement APs for that. Friendly fire was also a factor both for the PC and the opponents. Positioning one's PC advantageously could result in enemies shooting their allies by mistake, or even hitting bystanders that might then attack them and shift the balance during the fight. When fighting with allies you usually want to support them (especially the dogs); Positioning for active medical treatment to ailing PCs (that are without stimpacks or cannot use them themselves) will go a long way towards keeping them all alive. It's possible to complete the military base in FO1 with Dogmeat surviving.

Then there is the mechanics and that NPCs are equally held to the rules, can run out of ammo, can stumble, damage or drop their weapon. APs can be used to interact with the environment... Close doors on range weapon opponents; APs can be used not only to retrieve ammo & equipment from fallen opponents (or friends), but even to unload the guns in an unconscious opponent's inventory ~and them not know it; They'll usually try to shoot you and be out, and have had the rest of their ammo stolen. You can plant dynamite on them. You can drop live C4 and retreat behind cover, away from one or more small or big gun wielding opponents and they might chase you... If you've paid attention, then you can know how fast (how far) they can move per turn and have most of them end reasonably close to the explosives when they detonate. In Fallout 2 you can even "push" your NPCs during your turn if they have APs left. The game also allows for stealth kills if you can end combat on your turn (before anyone else gets theirs).

Aimed shots allow you to cripple the legs (making melee fighters unable to give chase); Deathclaws that could tear you apart can't keep up with damage to their legs. Aim for the arm of a guy with a rifle instead of the eye and you are more likely to hit and possibly make it impossible for them to use the rifle. Several targets offer a chance at instant kill (not just eyes). Limb crippling can happen even from a <50 CR hit roll, while groin attacks usually ignore armor. Eye shots do the best critical damage, but they come at a -60 to strike, and unless you are at point blank, you might easily miss with a well rounded character ~which could get the PC killed because the target is also at point blank range. :shrug:

Another thing... APs can be converted to Armorclass 1:1 (by simply not spending them). This reflects defensive potential in the PC; It means they end the round aware and not distracted by their attack actions (or running). It means you can choose to parry and react with partial or even total defense, and If you are not alone, your NPCs might till get shots off at your attacker.

*In FO2, a good HTH fighter can get the HTH Evasion perk that converts unspent APs to AC 1:2 so long as they are fighting unarmed.

Makes for a very hard to hit opponent in the boxing rings too :evil:; By using only ? of your APs per turn, you get the other ? as extra AC. (or double that ~with HTH:E)
User avatar
Maria Garcia
 
Posts: 3358
Joined: Sat Jul 01, 2006 6:59 am

Post » Wed Dec 07, 2011 4:01 pm




Don't get this point. There is much more variety in FNVs landscape and its locations. FO3's topography and surroundings outside the ruins are totally repetitive.




In FO3 nobody could hurt in the slightiest once you've reached a two-digit level.
What was so good about the enemies there? In fact with Broken Steel trying to address this, it became -oh the irony- completely broken, due to the introduction of bullet sponge enemies only the player could handle, while the rest of the wasteland couldn't.
Albino scorps killing everything and everyone xcept yourself was one major thing that really spoiled any desire of random roaming for me.
Just yesterday I almost got killed by a couple of Viper Gunslingers with Grenade Rifles @Lvl17 and with Boone and ED-E in company. Hell, there are still areas I'm not daring to go into right now.
It is so much more exciting and challenging in contrast to FO3, where you could go anywhere from the very first level(with Old olney, and -maybe- Grayditch as an exception).
The reputation system is awesome, because it forces you to think about how to deal with whom when.
Karma means absolutely nothing



I got hurt before the two digit level plenty of times. Different skill levels I guess. For enemies I found cazardors just an irritating enemy to fight against. The same goes for the mantis. I enjoyed fighting The Raiders and Talon Company in Fallout 3. Also I'm not a fan of damage threshold or different ammo types. And I found as I wondered the Mojave I seemed to be walking for longer distances without encountering an enemy. Wheras as with Fallout 3 enemies were everywhere.

And I didn't like the reputation system because I felt it just required too much effort to keep on everyone's good side with so many factions. It seemed to easy to get on a factions bad side and then you end up with three days to put it right. I prefer the karma method when its followed through to the end. Its more enjoyable for me to play as the Bad or Good guy of the entire wastes rather than siding with one or two factions. And I didn't find any location in New Vegas interesting other than The Strip. But in Fallout 3 you had Downtown D.C., Rivet City, Megaton, The Citadel, Andale, Evergreen Mills, GNR, Paradise Falls, Oasis, Underworld, Tenpenny Tower just to name a few places I loved visiting time and again.

I guess we just have different perceptions.
User avatar
phil walsh
 
Posts: 3317
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 8:46 pm

Post » Wed Dec 07, 2011 1:08 pm

I got hurt before the two digit level plenty of times. Different skill levels I guess. For enemies I found cazardors just an irritating enemy to fight against. The same goes for the mantis. I enjoyed fighting The Raiders and Talon Company in Fallout 3. Also I'm not a fan of damage threshold or different ammo types. And I found as I wondered the Mojave I seemed to be walking for longer distances without encountering an enemy. Wheras as with Fallout 3 enemies were everywhere.


So you got hurt several times before Level 10? Wow.
Yeah, this what I meant by "people are just looking for an action game with a post nuclear setting" in an earlier post.
You want lots of enemies, but they should be all on cannon fodder level.
The DT system that put an end to the possibility of clubbing club down an Enclave Soldier in Hellfire Armor with a rolling pin, is not being liked too. Different ammo types? Too much of a hassle.
*sigh*
A tip regarding the cazadors, use a Laser RCW, works wonders. Your complaints about the mantisses I don't understand at all, you can easily kill them with your 9mm Pistol

And I didn't like the reputation system because I felt it just required too much effort to keep on everyone's good side with so many factions. It seemed to easy to get on a factions bad side and then you end up with three days to put it right.


What kind of effort are you talking about? The only two factions you couldn't stay on good terms with at the same time easily were the NCR and the Legion.
What is so bad about your environment at least showing a little bit of responsiveness to your actions? I don't get it, srsly I don't get it.


And I didn't find any location in New Vegas interesting other than The Strip. But in Fallout 3 you had Downtown D.C., Rivet City, Megaton, The Citadel, Andale, Evergreen Mills, GNR, Paradise Falls, Oasis, Underworld, Tenpenny Tower just to name a few places I loved visiting time and again.

I guess we just have different perceptions.


Ok, that is a matter of tastes, I suppose.
I enjoyed the bigger variety from NV in landscapes more.
You had the Mojave desert, Red Rock Canyon, and Jacobstown with its forest and even snowy mountains, or Hoover Dam.
I enjoyed Freeside and its quests immensly, thought that Camp Searchlight had a fantastic atmosphere of horror, had great fun at the REPCONN testing grounds, thought that the Vaults in FNV were much better made, because they were challenging, etc.
User avatar
Symone Velez
 
Posts: 3434
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 12:39 am

Post » Wed Dec 07, 2011 7:56 am

Combat incorporates the skills and stats, and perks.


And this is not the case anymore?

Position mattered


Honestly, that is still the case in realtime. Really, it is....

and there were even dedicated movement APs for that.


Yep, you used them to get at point blank range, if you were smart


Friendly fire was also a factor both for the PC and the opponents.


Yeah, due to the stupid AI, yes.
*gives Jackhammer to Cassidy*
*sets Cassidy to burst only when it's safe*
*blam**blam*blam*
*Cassidy unloading a full burst right into your back*


Then there is the mechanics and that NPCs are equally held to the rules, can run out of ammo, can stumble, damage or drop their weapon.


All that is happening now, too. We even have degradation for both armor and wepaons, these features were non-existant in the first games


Aimed shots allow you to cripple the legs (making melee fighters unable to give chase); Deathclaws that could tear you apart can't keep up with damage to their legs. Aim for the arm of a guy with a rifle instead of the eye and you are more likely to hit and possibly make it impossible for them to use the rifle.



Be honest: How often did you make use out of that? You are talking a lot about theoretical choices, but in reality there was little to no need of using them.
By the time you met Deathclaws you were already way too advanced in terms of equipment and level for them to be any kind of threat.
Maybe when you encountered a whole bunch of them, while being alone. Thing is, I used to have Sulik, Vic and Cassidy with me...
And again, this applies also to FO3/FNV. They are lightning fast, you may want to aim for their legs to slow 'em down.


Another thing... APs can be converted to Armorclass 1:1 (by simply not spending them). This reflects defensive potential in the PC;


Yep, potentially. But why should I do that, when I could use those APs for a much more *protecting* P90 burst straight into the face of the enemy? ;)
If you sit still, yes, you're harder to hit, but you don't do any damage at all, too.


Ironically, I'm leading now the exactly opposite discussion with you than with NVS :yes: Talk about sitting between chairs.

I understand where you are coming from. You still want that mix of an RPG combined with a turn-based strategy game.
My stance is, that a real-time open-world setting is just better suited to enrich the RPG aspects of the experience.
Like I've said, sitting at a campfire and watching the sunrise is just too great for me to pass out on it.
The added element of exploration is to great for me pass out on it. The real time FPV also allows for more possible ways of approaching a situation.
I can sneak into Cottonwood Cove and free the hostages, I just go into it guns blazing, I can snipe them off from far out, etc.
So, all in all, I'm glad with things were going.
But as said before I see Fallout predominantly as RPG, not as a turn-based strategy combat game with RPG elements and story.
As someone who played a lot these games too, I also cannot really understand the big enthausiasm for the Fallout 1/2 combat system.
Compared to Jagged Alliance 2 it felt incredibly shallow, to a point where it made really hard for me to play through Fallout Tactics, which for me felt like a Fallout, stripped off the best parts.
User avatar
Erika Ellsworth
 
Posts: 3333
Joined: Sat Jan 06, 2007 5:52 am

Post » Wed Dec 07, 2011 6:02 pm

All that is happening now, too. We even have degradation for both armor and wepaons, these features were non-existant in the first games
'Could do without it too ~preferably.

Be honest: How often did you make use out of that? You are talking a lot about theoretical choices, but in reality there was little to no need of using them.
By the time you met Deathclaws you were already way too advanced in terms of equipment and level for them to be any kind of threat.
Maybe when you encountered a whole bunch of them, while being alone. Thing is, I used to have Sulik, Vic and Cassidy with me...
Every time.

Yep, potentially. But why should I do that, when I could use those APs for a much more *protecting* P90 burst straight into the face of the enemy? ;)
If you sit still, yes, you're harder to hit, but you don't do any damage at all, too.
Because if you miss you've spent your APs and they can shoot back at an easier target. :shrug:

I understand where you are coming from. You still want that mix of an RPG combined with a turn-based strategy game.
That is Fallout as intended. :shrug:

My stance is, that a real-time open-world setting is just better suited to enrich the RPG aspects of the experience.
My stance is that its too much hassle, I'd much rather it be more like Witcher 1.


The real time FPV also allows for more possible ways of approaching a situation.
That's actually issue/peeve #1 for me. Can't stand it in a game from this series. (I do consider it a shame).

But as said before I see Fallout predominantly as RPG, not as a turn-based strategy combat game with RPG elements and story.
As someone who played a lot these games too, I also cannot really understand the big enthausiasm for the Fallout 1/2 combat system.
Compared to Jagged Alliance 2 it felt incredibly shallow, to a point where it made really hard for me to play through Fallout Tactics, which for me felt like a Fallout, stripped off the best parts.
I'd have greatly preferred (and appreciated) it had FO3 (or FO1) used a system more akin to FO:Tactics (TB mode).

** I'd have also liked it if they had reverted to some aspects of the development version of FO combat (back when there were fourteen aimed shot targets instead of eight. :drool:)
http://i271.photobucket.com/albums/jj125/Gizmojunk/FO1.jpg
User avatar
kennedy
 
Posts: 3299
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2006 1:53 am

Post » Wed Dec 07, 2011 11:27 pm

'Could do without it too ~preferably.


Too much of a hassle, I suppose

Because if you miss you've spent your APs and they can shoot back at an easier target. :shrug:


Ahh, and by sitting still and doing nothing you defeat them?

That is Fallout as intended. :shrug:


I'm pretty sure, the creators of Fallout intended to make a RPG, not a strategy game with *stuff*, even if this is like *you* see the series ;)

My stance is that its too much hassle, I'd much rather it be more like Witcher 1.


Different tastes, I suppose


That's actually issue/peeve #1 for me. Can't stand it in a game from this series. (I do consider it a shame).


Choices, the bane of gaming, eh?


I'd have greatly preferred (and appreciated) it had FO3 (or FO1) used a system more akin to FO:Tactics (TB mode).


Yeah, got that part :laugh:
User avatar
Nice one
 
Posts: 3473
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2007 5:30 am

Post » Wed Dec 07, 2011 2:46 pm

So you got hurt several times before Level 10? Wow.
Yeah, this what I meant by "people are just looking for an action game with a post nuclear setting" in an earlier post.
You want lots of enemies, but they should be all on cannon fodder level.
The DT system that put an end to the possibility of clubbing club down an Enclave Soldier in Hellfire Armor with a rolling pin, is not being liked too. Different ammo types? Too much of a hassle.
*sigh*
A tip regarding the cazadors, use a Laser RCW, works wonders. Your complaints about the mantisses I don't understand at all, you can easily kill them with your 9mm Pistol



What kind of effort are you talking about? The only two factions you couldn't stay on good terms with at the same time easily were the NCR and the Legion.
What is so bad about your environment at least showing a little bit of responsiveness to your actions? I don't get it, srsly I don't get it. thought that the Vaults in FNV were much better made, because they were challenging, etc.


My friend got hurt before level 10 aswell but we'd never played any game like Fallout 3 before. And we'd no clue what to do at the start. I didn't like the mantis because I'm not a fan of combat with that type of creature even though they were easy to kill. I prefer fighting Raiders, Talon Company, Super Mutants and Deathclaws.

What I meant by effort with factions is like there were so many to keep track of when it came to combat, quests and locations. Its like certain quests I wanna help a certain faction but I've already have damaged rep with them. The vaults were definitely more challlenging in Vegas but I had a great time in the vaults in Fallout 3, you know the one with the Gary clones and the other one with the Flashbacks. Also I really enjoyed Agatha's quest.
.
User avatar
Chris Ellis
 
Posts: 3447
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 10:00 am

Previous

Return to Fallout Series Discussion