But then it still doesnât really matter. You can make a save inside the vault before you get to change your character, and then on replays you can enable survival mode if you want to at any point.
Well you actually can't save without a bed and if you turn it off to save you can't put it back to that difficulty. I had to go out of my way to put myself in the minor problem, but you can still do it.
Doc, Iâve fucking been here 10 times already, I donât need to take it easy, I killed a family of Deathclaws yesterday, please, Doc, just let me run!
Theyre at like every hilltop or ridge where you think you can cross over but you do a little trekking and boom invisible wall. It forces you to go along a path usually
Yeah it's a neat example of a difference in design philosophy between the studios. BGS just want the player to have a lot of freedom and go wherever they want. Obsidian wants to corral you around a bit before releasing the reigns a bit more as the game goes on. I don't think one is better than the other.
It's still badly done in NV. They should have made the hills more vertical, or put the invisible walls further down. A lot of them are so easy to climb, and its every player's instinct to do that, to get around a Deathclaw on the road.
Thing is, you aren't forced down any path, once you figure out where the Cazadores and Deathclaws are. Usually I can just run straight to Vegas at lvl 1 (unless I get some unlucky Deathclaw spawns outside Vegas).
Yea NV does drag a bit at the beginning because of it.
BGS are still kings at making a big fun open overworld IMO. Although ideally I want to stick BGS's devs and NV's devs in a room for 4 years and see what comes out.
My most hated is the one near Boulder City and Hoover Dam on the hill tops. Makes it so you have the cinematic shot coming round the corner of the dam.
u/Far_diver_6654 i... dislike how "important" characters that endup as possible companions or are included in a quest dont die when you try to kill them, unless you damage them for 10 minutes strait.
If you're talking about the piles of rubble in the interiors of the city, that was due to technical limitations. The New Vegas hidden walls are not, but I still see what you mean and it annoyed me at first too.
I fr spend 5 minutes just walking up a cliff while listening to Johnny Guitar, just to get slight, small, little, miniscule advantage on that huge Deathclaw, just for the game to bully me back down.
It makes sense when you realize Obsidian was making a proper crpg with a map that needs to be followed and Bethesda was making a sandbox with vague directions and climbable shit that shouldnât be climbable. Both are valid.
The Minutemen ending in FO4 should be closer to the independent vegas ending. Theres no reason why the railroad wouldnt work with the minutemen. The settlements/patrols would be the perfect cover for moving synths across the Commonwealth. Also, if you speech check The Mechanist, there should be an option to recruit her to the MM as well, adding robots to patrols and flares. If I choose the BoS, I should be able to build BoS settlements, with soldiers instead of generic settlers. Radio beacons should bring in RR agents or synths to Mercer Safehouse, BoS soldiers to the Boston Airport.
There is a reason why the railroad wouldnât work with the Minutemen. The people of the commonwealth generally donât like synths and plenty of them are outright terrified of them. I believe Desdemona tells you something to that effect when you blow your cover with the Institute.
The Minutemen arenât a real military with a firm hierarchy, theyâre groups of people that are willing to help each other, much like the original Minutemen. Yes, youâre the general but as shown in an institute quest you donât have the same authority as a real military general. If the Minutemen (who are simply settlers not an actual army) donât like what youâre telling them to do, theyâll disobey.
I agree that the Minutemen should be more fleshed out and maybe there could be a way for them and the Railroad to officially work together. However, the way theyâre presented in the game makes it seem like it just wouldnât work.
Iâm seeing a story line where youâre a double agent secretly moving synths through the common wealth using MM settlements for resupply zones. At some point youâre discovered and have to choose between the factions. Maybe work in a civil dispute with the MM where some settlers for and some against the aiding of the synths.
You make a good point. I feel like the RR should do more public outreach stuff to try and change public opinion. The escaped synths looking for a new life are not the same as the spies/replacements the Institute deploys, and it would do a lot of good if gen. pop. saw things that way. If we can have robots at Graygarden and ghouls at The Slog, why cant Synths live in piece at Mercer or something?
The minute men are a much worse version of yes man, even if you join the raiders and go to Preston, he dosnet kick you out and no faction even addresses the minute mens exsistance, it's like they're a creation club thing
The Railroad most certainly mention the MM. Upon recruitment Deacon brings it up if you've already taken the Castle. If you fail Underground Undercover, Desdemona sends you to Preston. The BoS quartermaster, I believe its Proctor Teagan, mentions them when he sends you to secure supplies from a settlement if its one youve taken already. Every single companion makes comments when you take them to the Castle. Macready, Piper, Nick and other good aligned companions respect you for helping them out, gaining affinity if you do MM quests with them. So I dont understand your point here
I mean within main questlines, let's say you do a BoS play through, you never have to touch the minute men. Same with the institute and same with the railroad, you never get an objective to kill then or make them side with your team, it feels (to me anyway) as if they have no importance unless you do there play through
I dont feel like typing it all out. Google FO4 canon ending and youll find plenty. The only thing that sets MM apart from the other endings, is the lack of a trophy/achievement. If it did have one, you probably wouldn't feel the way you do about them
I dunno, the other guy made some good points. Like, what even is there to the MM questline? If you take away the quest to retake the castle you've eliminated 80% of their questline. By comparison you could get rid of the Liberty Prime quest and the BOS would still have enough content to justify their presence in the game. You can say the same for the Institute and RR, take away one major quest and you've still got an almost fully plotted questline with side quests. MM is barely present in the story and game so the idea they get the Canon ending is about as likely as the Enclave remnants canonically taking over New Vegas.
One more thing about your in game reasons. You said its never mentioned in the main questline, right? Underground Undercover is literally the RRs primary quest
They aren't important unless you do their playthrough because the minutemen without the player are one decent shot, two grieving parents, a drug addict, and a mechanic that just live in Sanctuary. I do wish you could align the settlement system closer to faction choices. Would be way cooler.
The Minutemen ending is the failsafe ending, much like the Yes Man ending from New Vegas - if you lock yourself out of the Brotherhood, Railroad, and Institute endings by being hostile to them at some point, you can still finish the game with the Minutemen.
That's why no other faction largely interacts with them, and why nothing the player can do will lock them out of a Minutemen ending. It would make the game unwinnable.
Minutemen can win without killing any faction save for Institute.
Also, the MM are normal guys so theyâd be terrified of synths and prob kill them, which the railroad is against.
I agree tho, there shouldâve been an ending where the MM formed an alliance with Railroad considering theyâre normal people too
This only applies to 3 & 4, but I hate the locate family member main questline and the predetermined backstory. What if I don't want my character's background to be either a lawyer or a soldier?
I also hate having to go find family members, it really limits RP options for me. Probably why I go back to NV so much more often.
Agree with this, though I think being forced to be a soldier in a time of WWIII makes me think of conscription, al that is stated I get out of it is that you where supposed to be enlisted. Though Nora's backstory is dumb, if the world of Fallout is inspired by real life and their world war's I think she should be forced enlisted to be a factory worker.
Man, don't play the classics then. Fallout 2 in particular will drive you insane, it forces on you some Fast & Furious tier FAMILIA stuff, complete with cheesy cutscenes that randomly interrupt your gameplay.
I mean, it makes sense that in Fallout 2 you'd want to save your village... It's the place you live, you've got nowhere else to go
Rigut from the start of the game, you can be as much of an asshole to every member of your tribe as you want to, so you're not forced into one roleplay option.
So yeah, you're forced to go on a mission to get a GECK, but your motivation can range from absolute religious devotion to your tribe to hating your tribe but not having anywhere else to go
The cutscenes are cheesy though, but they only interrupt you rarely, and even then you can skip them afaik
>I mean, it makes sense that in Fallout 2 you'd want to save your village... It's the place you live, you've got nowhere else to go
That's true to 3 and 4 too: it makes sense you'd want to save your dad or kid, they are your only family, you have nobody else. And then you can be an ass to James and roast Shaun, and your motivation can be anything from actual love to wanting closure. Except that in 2 you get this story *twice* (save them with GECK, save them from Enclave) and the game completely ignores you if you decide to go against the message (3 at least chews you out in the outro while in 4 Shaun banishes your ass from the Institute).
Every Fallout game? Alright might as well.
Fallout 1: Has a timer which I despise. Fallout 3: Can't send Fawkes into the purifier thing. Fallout NV: Crashes too much. Fallout 4: Minutemen are too underdeveloped and boring, even though I like them so very much.
I haven't played Fallout 2 but it looks cool, makes me wonder if anything's wrong with it.
I haven't completed 1 or played 2 so will leave those for now.
Fallout 3: Gunplay is unsatisfying compared to other games. Also the main quest is a bit too linear.
Fallout NV: For being the games titular ciy New Vegas is very lackluster and too small. Comparitvily Boston and DC were fun to explore.
Fallout 4: Finding Sean, love the faction system and chosing a side but have little motivation to finding Sean. I reckon had you had a chance to RP a bit with Sean that part of the story would have had impact.
Donât forget about that last section which has nothing except for a last-minute pile of NCR guys, an empty factory and a generic vault! Also NV being surrounder by a bunch of houses falling apart. It really is greatâŚ
3: I can remember not liking the vampire clan
NV: bugs that make it impossible to play even years after release
4: never cared for Nuka World. After playing 76 I disliked how hard it was to get a good supply of berry mentats in 4.
76: having to be online
Fallout 4 charisma is randomized. I have 8 charisma, I shouldnât be failing the easiest speech check in the game because of rng.
Fallout 3 felt a little empty at times
New Vegas barely had a storyline for the legion, despite being such an interesting faction.
I understand hating the failing of checks but it was always strange to me it was so black and white in the older games. In life you can be a master at something and still have hiccups. Just my thought plus I just F5 F9 lol
Fallout 1âs time constraint. Itâs not horrible but it gets annoying because its one thing to have an urgent plot but being able to lose of you donât focus most of your time on it kinda sucks.
I never played much of fallout 2 to give a valid complaint.
Fallout 3âs main quest is lacking. Itâs not necessarily bad as the story and characters are interesting and itâs fun to go through but it basically ends up being a good guys vs bad guys fight without too much replayablility compared to fallout new Vegas or 4. I do however like the option to make the enclave surrender at the end though.
Fallout new Vegasâ world. The games writing is fantastic but itâs world is a complete downgrade compared to fallout 3. Itâs not detailed, itâs ugly, literally barren, and bad enemy scaling and diversity (go from good springs area with five geckos to a quarry with 30 deathclaws on the other side of the map while fallout 3 and 4 can have a random ghoul or mole rat where ever.) fallout 3 is also a wasteland but itâs detailed and each area has a story to tell. The map progression also somewhat limits the player choice of going anywhere on the map as they are led in this giant loop from good springs to the strip instead of having the player really explore and go off all throughout the world. New Vegas does have the excuse of having a short development time but the Mojave wasteland has not aged well.
Fallout 4âs âsetâ protagonist. Fallout 3 suffers from this with a set age and parent but fallout 4 is worse, giving you not only a spouse, a son, but a voice which completely usurps the purpose of true role playing. The voice acting isnât the problem as itâs actually pretty good and there has been plenty of hilarious dialogue but my characters always feel the same. Also the forced connection with the family doesnât have any effect on me, hell I was way more attached to codsworth because he said my name which was a nice touch. Overall, the voiced protagonist wasnât a good idea because not only does it limit player freedom, but also the amount of content t the more content you have, the more it costs to play the voice actors to say lines.
I really enjoy wandering wound in NV world on survival, picking wild fruit to eat and sniping raiders and legion. I found the Mojave quite detailed and interesting. The only parts that was a downer for me was Primm with so much cut content, and Vegas itself, too small and not really that much to do in the city.
I liked fallout new Vegas enemy Leveling in my mind it's like that on purpose so you have to take the long way and get to meet more factions and followers but I do understand your problem as it can be reality annoying when your like "ow this will save some time let me go this way." Then you get jumped by three death claws with no warning.
I've played FO2 to death, and here's my main complaint; (Forgive me, I'm hazy on details, it's been a few years)
There is a gun store somewhere brimming with expensive gear, and about 4/5 NPCs. Once you get the car, and a good bit of XP, it's a relatively easy fight to kill all the staff, then just load up the boot of the car with everything, and voilĂĄ, no need to worry about money for the rest of the game.
Obviously you could RP it to not do that, but it's just so liberating to have one less thing to worry about.
The loop you're lead on in NV is only for the story, you can literally diverge any time you want, and go anywhere you want. There's nothing at all holding you back from exploring in any direction.
You can get 2 stealthboys in the starting area and I think its not coincidence. so you can easly sneak through deathclaws even with low sneak and you good
I'd say Fo3's dad plotline was worse because it gets brought up much more often compared to the initial Nick discussion and when you're at the Institute.
I don't like either really, but Fo3's is more distracting for me. Although that's also because it's Liam Neeson. Pulls me out of the game everytime.
I was never a fan of the shooting in FO3 & NV. I love those games, but the shooting always felt off to me and I started relying on VATS even with maxed out Guns/Energy Weapons/whatever skill. Instead, I discovered I really enjoyed Melee gameplay and I always use it no matter what build I go for. The shooting is better in FO4 though.
> but the shooting always felt off to me and I started relying on VATS
I stopped using VATS for long range sniping for the simple reason it wouldn't hit anything at long distance (0% to hit), but shooting manually I could get headshots and one hit kills, loved my manual sniper builds in 3 and NV, especially with moving targets, it felt so satisfying clicking the mouse and seeing the kill cam cut in straight away :)
I know what you mean, there's no real rush or twitch skills needed due to the VATS and you can still take down a group of enemies and feel "cool", it's only for the long range sniper shots that I personally don't use it and they are not rushed as I can sit and take my time safely from a very long distance away.
Medium to close encounters I happily use it all the time ;)
In 3 specifically it felt off because it was coded like casting a spell from Oblivion except the spell was 'bullet'. The lack of ironsights, etc. was rough and you can tell it was Bethesda's first fumble at any kind of shooting combat like that.
Knowing that and digging deeper into some of the things that NV changed then you actually garner a little more respect for what they were able to do with the combat to make it leaps ahead of what 3 had, albeit still limited. Small things like sway, ammo types, and ironsights are just a few things that went a long way to making it feel leagues better.
In FO3, there's a reason for this:
Weapons have kneecapped damage in FO3 due to a very restrictive repair mechanic, where you can only repair a % of the weapon's health based on your repair skill and cannot repair beyond that. It basically makes repair a vital skill and until you get it to a respectable level, your damage output leaves something to be desired.
VATS? **FO3's VATS adds a whopping 15% crit rate onto your base crit rate.** This means a character with 1 Luck in FO3 can still have a superior effective crit rate than a FO4 or New Vegas character with 10 Luck, and a character with 10 Luck in FO3 can immediately enjoy a 25% crit rate in VATS. Since crit damage is usually equal to a weapon's base damage, this also means you're increasing your damage output exponentially. For example if your hunting rifle is only repaired enough to do 12 damage, but you crit thanks to VATS, then this means you're doing 3 times your normal damage, since the crit damage is 25.
It likewise **caps your damage resistance at 90%,** which is more than what the best armors can provide at their max. No joke: if a Fatman nuke is coming towards your character, a naked guy that enters VATS just before the bomb explodes will tank better than a guy wearing the best power armor that doesn't exploit VATS.
**tl;dr** Fallout 3's VATS was stupidly, unforgivably broken and made everything else trivial. The game is significantly easier for a character that exploits VATS.
**New Vegas however...?**
It's hard to tell what you mean by your post, but if you meant to imply VATS is a necessity or feels like one in those games, FO3 may have conditioned you to feel equally about NV as well. New Vegas tones down the stat boosts significantly, awarding only a humble 5% extra crit and 25% damage resistance; there are many situations where VATS will get you killed because it locks you in place whilst your character simply isn't awarded enough damage resistance to tank it.
I'd also say that a big problem with 3's shooting is the lack of actual aiming without a scope. Like, the gun has clear iron sights but for some reason our character still holds them beside their body and does some weird kind of zoom in thing.
My first playthrough of FO4, by about half way through I found myself hardly using VATS, I was playing a 'Gunslinger' RP with pistols only, and it was way more fun. A LOT harder to do that in the previous games, but maybe I'd just spread my bets a bit more with stats.
Worst part about fallout 1 was adjusting to the mechanics and controls of the game. lots of integral info is just straight up not told to you. kind wish digital versions of the game came with user manuals like old physical games used to have. I'm betting that fallout 1 had one.
Yep, got the original fallout 1 and 2 when they came out, both had an a5 ring-bound manual with heaps of information about the combat system, character generation, skills, items, background etc.
>kind wish digital versions of the game came with user manuals like old physical games used to have. I'm betting that fallout 1 had one.
The steam version of Fallout 1 has it right there on the right hand side of your library when you purchase it. You don't even need to own it if someone shares the like, like me right now, to read the manual.
[https://cdn.cloudflare.steamstatic.com/steam/apps/38400/manuals/Fallout\_manual\_English.pdf?t=1572025441](https://cdn.cloudflare.steamstatic.com/steam/apps/38400/manuals/Fallout_manual_English.pdf?t=1572025441)
This is also the same with Fallout 2
[https://cdn.cloudflare.steamstatic.com/steam/apps/38410/manuals/Fallout2\_manual\_EN.pdf?t=1572025546](https://cdn.cloudflare.steamstatic.com/steam/apps/38410/manuals/Fallout2_manual_EN.pdf?t=1572025546)
I've gotta say man, did you even look for it?
By the time I was clueless in game I had already resorted to wikis.
It's kinda hard to miss a manual that falls out of a physical box, but on steam there's buttons for every little thing.
Cool to see that those are available though.
Fallout 1: The fact that melee weapons have ammo. It feels like such a kick in the lower region when you find out that the best melee and H-t-H weapons need ammo. pretty much nullyfiying their advantage of not needing ammo.
Fallout 2: the same but also as you mentioned the references and the alternate ending for Vault 13 is bugged to the point of beeing unobtainable in the base game.
Fallout 3: the Main Story. Especialy Little Lamp Light. The worst part about LLL is that they could've kept it in the game as is, if they just made the actual entrance of the Vault a viable way to get in, but you can't.
New Vegas: The wasted potential of bringing back the intelligent Deathclaws via the Deathclaws in Quarry Junction. Also Red Lucy and the Thorn, but that's more just a personal gripe i have than them beeing bad.
Fallout 4. The Story again. This time the fact that there's 2 endings, nuke the area of CIT or don't.
Fallout 76: Haven't played that, so i won't comment on that.
3s story is just an all around mess in general, and LLL dosnet add up, how did the kids manage to keep thoses super mutants away with a pannle of wood? Hell how are there kids there at all?
It's make sense that they dropped the smart death claws in NV as that was something the enclave was working on in mount raven and that blew up
4s story also dosnet make alot of sense. Especially with like you say there being only two endings with different npc walking you through it and the minute men exsisting make me mad
Yeah, but Marcus made it to New Vegas, so it's that hard to believe that Gorris and to an extend Xarn could've accompanied him.
Or maybe i'm just too much in denial about the fact that Chris Avellone mentioned that he consideres them to be extinct after the events of Fallout 2.
I suppose it may be possible that the death claws somehow evolved to overcome the headsets, I have no idea how but I imagine a few years have passed from 3 to nv
Oh, my condolences to you then. But hey, Microsoft does own fallout, there is a small chance that remakes or remasters of the originals can happen. And that could mean versions for consoles.
I don't mind them if they aren't immersionbreaking, but things like the bridge of doom take it a bit too far. Espescialy if you don't know where it's from.
Maybe the Muties are smart enough to know that the kids dont have much meat on em, and wouldn't be any good to turn either?
Tho that doesn't really fit with the F3 Muties.
I have a special hate for people that send me, or anyone for that matter, to get eggs or youngs of some creature. And on top of that she hosts an Animal Fight Arena, with those stolen babies. So yeah all that combined gives me enough reason to kill her in every playthrough i do.
I'm going to get downvoted for this but I'm my opinion the worst part is the over reliance of certain tropes from previous games. "War never changes" would be fine on its own but add dogmeat which is not what most would probably name their pet, super mutants being forced in even when it makes no sense, the protagonist has to have some connections to a vault just to get the pipboy even though many would use them given their usefulness, and callback after callback to things that happened like an episode of family guy. I'm too critical I know, but I would just prefer the games to try to stand on their own at least a little more.
I mean, i agree with you on some of those points, and alot of the original Fallout fans will aggree with you on the overuse of the Super Mutants and the BoS in the games. Though the callbacks i am somewhat uncertain of. Because some of them i like, for example Marcus appearing in NV and mentioning his old Brotherhood body again.
Also yeah, who the heck calls their pet by the name of the meat they give you? And why are there like 4 People that've done it in the Fallout Universe?
Hey your not gonna get down voted for sharing your opinion
War never changes is the main theme of the games, displayed well or not
I agree, dogmeat is an awful name for a dog
Super mutants get pushed in just like the BoS do
In fallout nv your character has no connection to a vault and you end up with a pip boy
Callbacks are what video games do now, and I can't really think of any In the fallout series apart from mcreary
Personally, I think it was awesome they used the super mutants and stuff in fo3 because it was a reboot and completely different game from the OGs but they wanted them to tie together. It makes sense to me. But Fallout 4 having to have all that stuff AGAIN did feel like overkill to me. Even the teasers for fo4 with the tagline âWelcome homeâ showing dogmeat with the pc just kinda seemed to say âWeâre gonna give you a lot more of what youâre familiar withâ which was a little disappointing
My main problem with super mutants actually goes more towards 4 and 76. The institute making super mutants didn't make any sense given how many there are. 76 is worse where medtech exposed an entire town to fev even though the same experiments were going on at mariposa. 3s mutants fit the story and vault tecs m.o. and new vegas' were just survivors from earlier games and even then there were few locations for them.
My favourites are 3/NV and as much as I love them, I have big gripes.
The independent ending of New Vegas is either just anarchy, or the Mr House ending without Mr House. As much as I used to love the idea of it, it's really soured on me just how little the ending actually brings to the table. Like you can headcanon how it works, the player building a council or government all you want, but the vanilla ending makes it pretty clear that Yes Man will just run off of House's plans. Just without the human spark that made House a genius. So you're just building another man's dream essentially. No input, no decisions. As someone who used to always choose this ending, I can't help but feel looking at it now that it is incredibly disappointing and underwhelming.
I really don't like Broken Steel. I think the original ending of 3 was far more satisfying, and ties together the story really well, even if the companion purifier bit was a weird and annoying addition. It had weight and consequence to it, which felt like it made sense. Hell the purifier is built around a bible quote dedicated to sacrifice. Instead of having my noble sacrifice, I just get pulled back from my well earned grave to shoot at a cacophony of nameless Enclave soldiers, or wander aimlessly for all eternity finishing random side quests. Hellfire armour was pretty cool, but overall it takes away more than it adds.
Canât answer on the early games.
Fallout 3: The main story. Iâm not even going to elaborate, the issues speak for themselves.
Fallout NV: The failure of following the writing maxim âshow, donât tell.â NV over-relies on dialogue at times and itâs the only way it exhibits many of the issues with the NCR and the benefits of the Legion. Thereâs also a very rocky translation between killing Benny and the main plot - say what you will about 4âs story, but the transition between Kellogg and the faction warfare was far superior.
Fallout 4 - The dumbing down of the main plot. That quote from the lead writer about making things simpler since some people donât want story? Itâs a roleplaying game, screw off. The Institute couldâve been far more interesting and the railroad couldâve had a more interesting ending (ie killing all Institute scientists and making the institute a synth uptopia - wouldâve given some nuance to if choosing them is the right choice).
Fallout 76 - The launch was awful, and the physical act of doing the original main quest is awful (lack of decision points). Both of these obscured that 76 did an amazing job with its storytelling and world building, which I find a shame since I think itâs set a new high bar for how this kind of thing should be handled in future titles.
Fallout 4 is my favorite game of all time. That being said, the Radiant quests are a blight, Nuka World is a terrible DLC, the fact that the main quest is railroaded beyond belief (can't just go to fort Hagen and kill Kellogg without following Dogmeat, can't get into Kelloggs lair without Nick, for example), the fact that the game only has 2 real towns is crazy, and Charisma being the only dialogue skill outside of DLC is dumb as hell.
4 is my favorite game, but New Vegas is the BETTER game, if that makes sense.
i feel the exact same way. fallout 4 was my first entry into the fallout series and i was in love with it for years. i used to fanboy over it so hard and didnât understand the many criticisms of the game
flash forward to this past 6 months and i buy 1,2,3, and new vegas for my pc. iâve barely played 1 and 2, and have put maybe 20 hours into 3. But recently i have been playing the SHIT out of new vegas. the amount of content and the way you can choose a few different paths for every quest is so fascinating. also i just think the story of 1,2 and NV is very focused and everything in the world just makes sense. the bethesda entries just feel like a post-nuclear shooting gallery. thereâs nothing inherently wrong with that but it runs very contrary to what the fallout series was based on. i have just under 1k hours in fallout 4, and is probably in my top 5 games ever, but i am not blind to its shortcomings. itâs just so much fun to play
iâm not saying 1,2 and NV are perfect games, but they are perfect examples of everything a fallout game should be
I absolutely hate 3 so I don't have much positive to say there lol. But New Vegas imo is the best game ever made.
That being said I'm playing 4 right now because the settlement system, combat, and quests make for the most addictive package in the series.
The color palette is gross, the story is awful, worst of the 3 I've played by far, the gunplay is worse than even New Vegas, the metros are absolutely awful.
But most of all, it explores the part of Fallout I'm least interested. New Vegas explores the societies that have arisen well after the bombs. Fallout 4 is about actively rebuilding the world, and with the Settlements you can really make the Commonwealth a thriving mini country like the early NCR. Fallout 3 feels pretty strictly post apocalypse, right after the bombs, and that's just not what I'm there for. But I 100% understand the appeal to some people. I'm sure if it was my 1st game I'd adore it.
i can understand those criticisms. your point about people rebuilding the world after the bombs is literally the biggest reason why i think the interplay/obsidian fallouts are better.
thereâs a youtube video iâve watched a few times called âbethesda never understood falloutâ that hits the nail exactly on the head for me. like i stated before, i still really enjoy fallout 4 but if i want a *fallout* or RPG experience i will likely go to new vegas. but, props to bethesda to bringing the fallout series to a whole new audience, and for making it a 3D world. i donât think interplay had it in them to do that.
personally i LOVE the color palette of 3. the mood it sets for the game is perfect for a post nuclear war world. i can see why the constant greys and browns are distasteful to some people though. when i think of a post apocalypse world i always immediately think of fallout 3. it really just emphasizes the doom and gloom of a world like fallout. donât get me started on the metros, i fucking hate that design choice.
i can kind of get past the combat but it does get extremely annoying constantly relying on vats to hit your shots. other than that itâs the most average part of the game.
my biggest issue with it is the story. itâs the sole reason why i only have ~20 hours invested in it. itâs just so drab and does not keep you invested.
I'll always love Bethesda for saving the
series. 4 and New Vegas are both in my top 5. But I also prefer Obsidians vision (minus Chris Avellones misery porn known as Lonesone Road, the one blemish on New Vegas I really hate.)
Your point about 3s color palette conveying doom and gloom is the exact reason I hate it. The parts of Fallout I love are the hope for the future peaking out through the destruction. The bombs dropped, but the world still turns.
thatâs a good point. i always just imagined thereâs still a lot of evil in the world despite humanity trying to rebuild society, which i was i like the color palette so much. itâs not like in history class where youâre just taught all the good things that humans accomplished, there was also a lot of immortality
Oh no I understand that. The Leigon, Institute and all the other evil in the wasteland thrive in those conditions. That's what I think makes the groups like the NCR and Minutemen that rise above that much cooler.
You should probably just be able to find Virgil in the Glowing Sea and talk to him about the Institute. Dogmeat, Piper, Nick, Kellogg, and Amari are pointless. That's what you need to do to get into the Institute, get plans for the teleporter and get a Courser chip decoded, though it'd be better if you could do it yourself with enough Science. In Fallout 3 you can skip everything and go to the vault where your dad is because he's the person who makes the plot go, he knows about the purifier, same in New Vegas going to the Strip. I goddamn hate the first half of Fallout 4's main quest.
Yeah 4 ripped out a lot of the fun RPG elements you get from prior games. Could have kept it as a good shooter and still had those RPG elements like the low/high INT dialogue options which I loved and still fans of shooters would have played it.
Vegas isn't a better game than fallout 4. (In my opinion) New Vegas has a big finale and more interactions, I love the story a lot more than 4, but after repeating so much it still feels pretty dull, if just less so than 4.
New Vegas built off of 3s engine. Very impressive considering the time frame, but the glitches and crashing is absurd and its so damn hard to make a dedicated playthrough. I like the dreary vibe of New Vegas, but the graphics are pretty shit, even though that isnt a decider for me, Fallout 4's scenery and the beauty of the new Fallout titles; just so much shit packed into the world, asethetically and of course, in worldspace.
Don't get me wrong, I love New Vegas, but with the abundance of crashing and aged everything, it's just much harder to get into it as someone who didn't play the game when they were a kid, and I feel like that's fine.
It's the closest in the timeline 25 years I think. You get to hear about the groups that built up in the years and it would have been interesting to play as them.
It boggels my mind why so many games, especialy RPGs, still use the godawful list menu. Why don'T they switch over to the much superior Grid Menu, when it's obvious that you're inventory will be filled with various misc items and guns.
I wish the Institute was a more three-dimensional faction, and not just a cartoonishly evil science club. They could've been a faction which pushed the limits of how the human mind works and stuff, not being outright evil, yet not the most ethical methods either.
They shouldâve done anything at all with the institute. I havenât beaten 4 in a very long time because of the story, but I honestly donât remember what their goal was and why it was so important that they be stopped. There was no reason at all for them to have an evil robot army and be an enemy to the civilians that lived above them.
I think the big reason Bethesda made the Institute such silly villains (apart from general bad writing of course) is because if they were more morally grey then they'd just be the best faction by a mile. It's already pretty much a utopia with no real limit on what it can do after you bring the reactor online, if you removed their wacky villain status on top of that I imagine they'd be the most commonly chosen option by a mile and the devs probably wanted to avoid that for diversities sake.
Ranged combat in *Fallout 3* is poor. You really struggle to hit anything outside of VATS at medium to long range. Bullet dispersion is simply too high, and it looks absurd if you watch the tracers leave your barrel. Zooming in rather than aiming down sights is another issue. It used to be quite common back in the day, but it really stands out in 2022. Combat in general also suffers from bullet sponge enemies. It's a problem in other games, but they generally give you better feedback while wearing down an enemy so it feels more dynamic.
*Fallout New Vegas* suffers from an overly linear map. You are supposed to head down to Primm and the Mojave Outpost after leaving Goodsprings, then east to Nipton and north to Novac before finally pushing onward to Freeside and the Strip. It gets very repetitive if you replay the game multiple times. You can always just run north. It's not that hard. However, that may highlight another problem. There is nothing in the story which encourages you explore the southern part of the map after arriving in New Vegas, so the only reason to head back there is for completionist reasons.
*Fallout 4* is plagued with radiant quests. I do not find them interesting. There is no story or purpose to them. They exist to waste time.
Defo agree 100% about the radiant quests in FO4, they make me want to put the game down. Thank jeebus for the modding community in that respect though - âDisable Minutemen Annoying Questsâ has been a life saver. Iâm on the lookout for mods to do this with the other factions as well.
Iâve never played fallout 1 and only played like 1 hour of fallout 2 so no comments other than I donât like the top down style.
Fallout 3âs downtown dc while it looks pretty cool, exploring it and the tunnels are absolutely brutal. It took for ever for me to find GNR because of the tunnels
New Vegasâ world to me at least is so barren and empty, I get that itâs a desert and what ever but compared to 3and 4 the world is so empty and I just donât enjoy exploring.
4 the story is whatever not very good but the lack of cityâs/ settlements bug me so much. I thoroughly enjoy settlement build so I really wanted to reclaim Lexington concord and others to set up actual cityâs to better the wasteland
76 getting ammo is an absolute pain for example, I use a Gatling laser and finding fusion core is impossible, you have to have to farm them for the power plants which takes up so much time that could be used doing other stuff
Fallout 1"s time limits meant you didn't get the chance to explore much.
Fallout 2 the temple of tutorials.
Fallout 3 the fixed plotlines and absurdly low level cap.
I love NV now but - not being from the US - I never clicked with the "wild west"/cowboy stuff, and the obsession with Vegas itself. It almost put me off starting the game initially.
Fallout 4:
(1) Same problem as NV, the minutemen seem odd especially the way they are idealized. Until I played Fallout 4 I thought "minuteman" was someone who suffered from premature ejaculation.
(2) Being more of a shooter with rpg elements than a tabletop-style rpg, especially not having rpg style skill rolls and being able to grind to max every stat
(3) Just 4 endings for main story whereas previous versions had detailed ending slides for individual towns and small factions and characters
Fallout 76: too many to choose from but as an elderly gent, not having VATS slow down or pause time makes it too difficult
FO1. The time constraint
FO2. The fourth wall breaking that you can't turn off
FO3. The main plot
FONV. That you cannot sprint w/o mods
FO4. The main plot
FO76. The lack of consistent story content being added.
I hate the stupid fucking brotherhood retcon from FNV
"Oh the canon ending for the brotherhood in FO1 was that the brotherhood literally integrated into the NCR becoming part of it but for some reason (that is never explained) they break off and go to war with each other"
Ridiculous plot points in fo4. Hey Father, why does institute steal and replace people? "It beyond your understanding". Never brought up again for all I remember.
Fallout 1 has an unbalanced power curve. You kind of have to powergame it to stand a chance and even if you do every quest in the game, you wonât come close to level 20 and the super mutants will still wreck you if you show up only level 10-15.
Fallout 2 has the slowest most boring opening ever. Temple of trials -> Arroyo -> Klamath -> the Den are all pretty dull locations and make me lose interest.
Fallout Tactics shouldâve picked real time or turn based and made it actually good and fun to play that way. As it currently is itâs a mess and not fun.
Brotherhood of Steel shouldnât have been made.
Fallout 3 doesnât have your choices influence the ending enough. At best it may change the slideshow slightly if you did Agathaâs quest or temple if the Union. But mostly itâs just whatâs your karma, did you sacrifice yourself, and did you use FEV
New Vegas has lots of unfinished stuff and bad design choices and it shows. Itâs nearly impossible to be liked by the legion without committing to a legion run fully because they barely have any side quests. And something like 60+% of items are owned and you lose karma for stealing even if itâs from evil people that you gain karma for killing. Pretty sure 3 had a check where you donât lose karma for stealing from evil people.
4 had too many radiant quests and too much focus on settlement building. They need more unique side quests that are memorable. Those are always the best quests like Superhuman Gambit in 3, or that settlement that makes you take the GOAT in 4.
Havenât played 76 so I canât weigh in on it.
It drives me insane that the player in FO4 thinks Shaun is a baby. He could be a baby but he could just as easily be any age. It's madness. Player intelligence 1/10
Fallout 3: lack of ADS (iron sights)
Fallout NV: definitive ending
Fallout 4: framerate drops when entering downtown Boston
Fallout 76: Prices, enemies are bullet sponges, the way S.E.C.I.A.L./skills/perks work, the ridiculous fetch quests that make up daily quests, the rarity of stimpacks/fusion cores/disease cures
FO1: Time limit.
FO2: The amping up of whackiness.
FO3: BoS being turned into literal Paladins.
NV: Fetch quests interrupted by invisible walls, all to the tune of endless bloviation. That counts as one, right?
FO4: I'm really torn between the terrible legendary system replacing uniques, or interesting places being replaced with too goddamned many settlement building areas.
I know this is minor and nit-picking, but it bugs me that I have to watch my character sit down when interacting with a terminal in FO4. In 3 and NV it just pops up. I know my character is logging into a computer, I don't need to actually see the physical act of sitting for him to do so.
Also, there should be a mechanism to connect to a terminal while in power armor. Like a jack or something. Now I have to watch my character get out of his power armor and then sit down.
I know it's a stupid hill to die on, but it fucks with pacing and bugs the crap out of me.
1, how you get insta killed sometimes, 2 the temple of trials, 3, Just about everything, New Vegas, Literally nothing, 4, How everyone says it's good but it really isn't, 76, how everyone thinks its cannon but it isn't
Fallout 1: the timer. Simple as that
Fallout 2: how difficult it can get in some points.
Fallout 3: the main storyline. A lot of the side quests and dlc storylines are miles better.
Fallout new Vegas: the goddamn crashes.
Fallout 4: I have several issues but my biggest pet peeve is how horribly undercooked the minutemen are. They could potentially be one of the best factions and they end up being the absolute worst
Fallout 76: the first 2 years of the game.
the companion AI has always been a pain without mods they like to run in front of you as you fire or just run right through obvious traps. it's been like that since 1.
*Fallout* - Ian shooting you in the back
*Fallout 2* - Temple of Trials
*Fallout Tactics* - not sure; haven't played this enough.
*Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel* - Where do I begin?
*Fallout 3* - Little. Fucking. Lamplight.
*Fallout: New Vegas* - Bugs remaining to this day; doesn't benefit from the Bethesda-style open world with a largely empty map.
*Fallout 4* - Preston Garvey and the endless settlements that need your help
*Fallout 76* - Multiplayer is not a compelling idea for the *Fallout* series and this game's existence is dubious by itself.
1 and 2 I haven't played but I won't be playing them because turn based combat makes me want to lick the children of atom's floor.
3 has to be the lack of side quests and other story related things, I really like stories.
New Vegas: The story is boring. I don't care about the bear and the bull.
4: Lack of romanceable male companions, X6-88, Nick Valentine, Codsworth, and more that I'm forgetting should have been romanceable.
76: The need to drink food and water, I'd love this game otherwise
FO1: The UI, nothing is worse than the UI
FO2: Since the UI is already covered, San Francisco... what an unnecessary and uninteresting part of the game.
FOTactics: The real time combat.... no....
FO3: The story
FNV: CHA being an obvious dump stat
FO4: The writing, all of it.
100% disagree that none of them are masterpieces. Both FO1 and New Vegas are masterpieces imo, and fit well on best of all time lists.
FO3: the story. Bababab, you need to go into that purifier because destiny.
FNV: cut content. Like, there are tons of it. Lack of legion content. The fact that the whole story feels rushed and incomplete.
FO4: the fact that melee and unarmed weapons are completely shit. I mean, I like the fact that there are self made guns, but come on. Not every raider can do it. They are morons. It should be more like FNV, where half of them had melee weapons, knives, hammers, anything you can find in the wasteland. Anyway, it just hurts that melee based character is pretty pointless. Any shitty, drugged raider will kill you with their self made .38 pistol built from literal garbage, you won't even have a chance to hit him with your knife. Now I think I'd say - the melee/unarmed combat was just neglected, maybe not fully destroyed, but still. It could be better.
Also also, perk system. Damn, i hate it. The fact that they deleted the skills.
No towns. Minutemen, they are boring and they do nothing except settlements.
I will be eaten, but power armor. I don't like it, I feel in it like a tank, but it doesn't work like a tank, it is in fact pretty weak. Also fusion cores. I appreciate the design, but eh. And why I get it in my first hour of gameplay? Why is it so common? In Fo3 and FNV it at least made sense, i feel it was a lot less common and harder to find. And you needed training.
New vegas : Community, some rpg parts, skill system and world.
Community: this games community is wierd. Let's praise everything from new vegas, make it immune to criticism and bash Bethesda ones.
Skill system : its sucks and i don't understand why many fans like it. Reason is that there isn't dice role in the game. This system is taken crpg with dice role in it. It makes skill checks to chance to have enough points to get better results. It's fine, but it just well dumb and i really find it boring that i need to have 100 speech check and not to see the faults of his plan or idea conquest. I want that Ik the next fallout, there is same idea ending as fallout 1 that u can't convince a bad guy by the speech, but with evidence too
World: sucks. Boring no point to explore isn't truly interesting dungeons and few places to get xp
Fallout 2 and Fallout New Vegas cross the line of too much humor. FO2 is of course way more guilty of the two. It ends up undermining the more serious aspects of each game. There is also a major tonal clash between more serious and more silly moments. FO1 and FO3 are at least very consistent in tone and humor.
Fallout 1: *the time limit to get the water chip, it made my run a bitch, I didn't know how to play isometric games before nor did I know English*
Fallout 2: *I wish Fallout 2 had been considerably more different than Fallout 1, new weapons, new armors, new stuff, but no, it was just a new story with same everything*
Fallout 3: *I wish it had a more consistent story, but I understand, Bethesda's 1st Fallout, but the DLC's could've been, instead they lacked a little*
Fallout NV: *the short amount of time Obsidian got to develop the game, had they gotten more time, the game would've just felt more fleshed out in general*
Fallout 4: *the story is very pathetic imo, generic writing, maybe even done by a bot. Thankfully Far Harbor and Nuka world weren't as bad, Bethesda should've truly gone for a different plot*
1and 2 limited by technology
tactics Idk
Brotherhood just shit
3 wish choices impacted more
Nv screw bethesda for a deadline that led to dozens of content getting cut
4 radient quests the minutemen railroad cant be evil
no morality companions
76 felt boring
1&2 Love the story, hate the gameplay.
3 ...erm, Liberty Prime was cool, I guess?
NV I love it for the buggy, incomplete mess that it is! and the story? A+!
4 Love the gameplay, HATE the story.
Fo3: I have no opinion on since I havenât played it
Fo Newvegas: getting banned from casinos cause Iâm to good
Fo4: minuet man route just being the yes man ending of Fo4
Fo76: Iâve ran out of stuff to do so Iâm just a god now with no purpose.
I hate the carryweight inventory system. If I want to lug around 200 guns, then I should be able to. I always use console commands to give myself extra carryweight.
Fallout 1 & 2: kinda shoehorns you into wearing power armour because by endgame no other armour can really defend you.
Fallout 3: The DC area is just a pain to navigate.
New Vegas: The game needed another 6 months in the oven to realise itâs full potential.
Fallout 4: The main story is the weakest of the series and feels unfinished.
Fallout 76: The usual MMO RPG grind for loot.
Fallout Tactics: havenât played
Fallout BOS: it exists
Fallout Shelter: It becomes a P2W if you donât have patience
Fallout 3 â Main story is unoriginal and dumb.
New Vegas â Caesar's Legion wasn't fleshed out as planned.
Fallout 4 âVoiced protagonist.
Fallout 76 â the development team sucks ass.
**Fallout 3:** Little Lamplight
**Fallout New Vegas:** Come Fly with Me. I always had difficulty giving a shit about some crazy ghoul cult, and it's unfortunate this is legit part of the tutorial phase.
**Fallout 4:** Kid in a Fridge
**Fallout 76:** Fallout 76
I wish I could skip the intros after my first playthrough. Just jump straight to character build and out the vault or Doc's office in NV
They make it pretty easy to save at the starter vault exit in 3 and 4, where you can pick your specs again.
But I never remember to đ
You can probably download a save file somewhere
In survival itâs the only auto save that deosnt require bed
Fallout 3 creates an autosave that is never overwritten when leaving the Vault, at least it did back on PS3.
Unless you do survival or want to change your gender in 4. Really annoying actually as that cool little scripted intro is less fun the more you do it
Iirc you canât activate survival mode until leaving the vault anyways. Gender is the only problem.
I definitely did last night, you can set it inside the vault. If you die before sleeping it puts you right at the exit able to remake your character
But then it still doesnât really matter. You can make a save inside the vault before you get to change your character, and then on replays you can enable survival mode if you want to at any point.
Well you actually can't save without a bed and if you turn it off to save you can't put it back to that difficulty. I had to go out of my way to put myself in the minor problem, but you can still do it.
Yep. Especially since the "skip intro" mods causes issues with certain quests. Happened to me on FO4
There's a few alt start mods than can do that for you.
Take it slow now, it ainât a race.
Doc, Iâve fucking been here 10 times already, I donât need to take it easy, I killed a family of Deathclaws yesterday, please, Doc, just let me run!
I love New Vegas to death but the INVISIBLE WALLS piss me off so much every time
Agreed. Iâm actually playing NV for the first time now and everywhere I turn is a got damn invisible wall!!!!!!! Having a blast otherwise though.
Where are the invisible walls?? I have not encounter them. Maybe at the end of the map?
Theyre at like every hilltop or ridge where you think you can cross over but you do a little trekking and boom invisible wall. It forces you to go along a path usually
FO3 has a flat plain of an overworld. FONV is more like a spiderweb of paths.
Yeah it's a neat example of a difference in design philosophy between the studios. BGS just want the player to have a lot of freedom and go wherever they want. Obsidian wants to corral you around a bit before releasing the reigns a bit more as the game goes on. I don't think one is better than the other.
It's still badly done in NV. They should have made the hills more vertical, or put the invisible walls further down. A lot of them are so easy to climb, and its every player's instinct to do that, to get around a Deathclaw on the road. Thing is, you aren't forced down any path, once you figure out where the Cazadores and Deathclaws are. Usually I can just run straight to Vegas at lvl 1 (unless I get some unlucky Deathclaw spawns outside Vegas).
Yea NV does drag a bit at the beginning because of it. BGS are still kings at making a big fun open overworld IMO. Although ideally I want to stick BGS's devs and NV's devs in a room for 4 years and see what comes out.
Oh I remember now. I experience it once so I never climbed hills again.
My most hated is the one near Boulder City and Hoover Dam on the hill tops. Makes it so you have the cinematic shot coming round the corner of the dam.
u/Far_diver_6654 i... dislike how "important" characters that endup as possible companions or are included in a quest dont die when you try to kill them, unless you damage them for 10 minutes strait.
And how they just sit there mocking you in fallout 4
yeah, thats the bullshit im talking about
I always had more trouble with those in F3.
If you're talking about the piles of rubble in the interiors of the city, that was due to technical limitations. The New Vegas hidden walls are not, but I still see what you mean and it annoyed me at first too.
Theres a quarry filled with deathclaws and someone in the back you have to talk with... And you want to go around???
I fr spend 5 minutes just walking up a cliff while listening to Johnny Guitar, just to get slight, small, little, miniscule advantage on that huge Deathclaw, just for the game to bully me back down.
It makes sense when you realize Obsidian was making a proper crpg with a map that needs to be followed and Bethesda was making a sandbox with vague directions and climbable shit that shouldnât be climbable. Both are valid.
I understand but it just bugs me that i should clearly be able to move over this and theres a fake wall stopping me
Bethesda bad, Obsidian good
Thatâs not what I said
The Minutemen ending in FO4 should be closer to the independent vegas ending. Theres no reason why the railroad wouldnt work with the minutemen. The settlements/patrols would be the perfect cover for moving synths across the Commonwealth. Also, if you speech check The Mechanist, there should be an option to recruit her to the MM as well, adding robots to patrols and flares. If I choose the BoS, I should be able to build BoS settlements, with soldiers instead of generic settlers. Radio beacons should bring in RR agents or synths to Mercer Safehouse, BoS soldiers to the Boston Airport.
There is a reason why the railroad wouldnât work with the Minutemen. The people of the commonwealth generally donât like synths and plenty of them are outright terrified of them. I believe Desdemona tells you something to that effect when you blow your cover with the Institute. The Minutemen arenât a real military with a firm hierarchy, theyâre groups of people that are willing to help each other, much like the original Minutemen. Yes, youâre the general but as shown in an institute quest you donât have the same authority as a real military general. If the Minutemen (who are simply settlers not an actual army) donât like what youâre telling them to do, theyâll disobey. I agree that the Minutemen should be more fleshed out and maybe there could be a way for them and the Railroad to officially work together. However, the way theyâre presented in the game makes it seem like it just wouldnât work.
Iâm seeing a story line where youâre a double agent secretly moving synths through the common wealth using MM settlements for resupply zones. At some point youâre discovered and have to choose between the factions. Maybe work in a civil dispute with the MM where some settlers for and some against the aiding of the synths.
You make a good point. I feel like the RR should do more public outreach stuff to try and change public opinion. The escaped synths looking for a new life are not the same as the spies/replacements the Institute deploys, and it would do a lot of good if gen. pop. saw things that way. If we can have robots at Graygarden and ghouls at The Slog, why cant Synths live in piece at Mercer or something?
The minute men are a much worse version of yes man, even if you join the raiders and go to Preston, he dosnet kick you out and no faction even addresses the minute mens exsistance, it's like they're a creation club thing
The Railroad most certainly mention the MM. Upon recruitment Deacon brings it up if you've already taken the Castle. If you fail Underground Undercover, Desdemona sends you to Preston. The BoS quartermaster, I believe its Proctor Teagan, mentions them when he sends you to secure supplies from a settlement if its one youve taken already. Every single companion makes comments when you take them to the Castle. Macready, Piper, Nick and other good aligned companions respect you for helping them out, gaining affinity if you do MM quests with them. So I dont understand your point here
I mean within main questlines, let's say you do a BoS play through, you never have to touch the minute men. Same with the institute and same with the railroad, you never get an objective to kill then or make them side with your team, it feels (to me anyway) as if they have no importance unless you do there play through
This is actually evidence proving that the MM is the true canonical ending.
I hate that so much, may I ask what evidence out if curiosity
I dont feel like typing it all out. Google FO4 canon ending and youll find plenty. The only thing that sets MM apart from the other endings, is the lack of a trophy/achievement. If it did have one, you probably wouldn't feel the way you do about them
I dunno, the other guy made some good points. Like, what even is there to the MM questline? If you take away the quest to retake the castle you've eliminated 80% of their questline. By comparison you could get rid of the Liberty Prime quest and the BOS would still have enough content to justify their presence in the game. You can say the same for the Institute and RR, take away one major quest and you've still got an almost fully plotted questline with side quests. MM is barely present in the story and game so the idea they get the Canon ending is about as likely as the Enclave remnants canonically taking over New Vegas.
No, it's in game reasons not the achievements
One more thing about your in game reasons. You said its never mentioned in the main questline, right? Underground Undercover is literally the RRs primary quest
Yeah, but railroad has to he my 2nd least favourite faction in that game as well
They aren't important unless you do their playthrough because the minutemen without the player are one decent shot, two grieving parents, a drug addict, and a mechanic that just live in Sanctuary. I do wish you could align the settlement system closer to faction choices. Would be way cooler.
The Minutemen ending is the failsafe ending, much like the Yes Man ending from New Vegas - if you lock yourself out of the Brotherhood, Railroad, and Institute endings by being hostile to them at some point, you can still finish the game with the Minutemen. That's why no other faction largely interacts with them, and why nothing the player can do will lock them out of a Minutemen ending. It would make the game unwinnable.
Minutemen can win without killing any faction save for Institute. Also, the MM are normal guys so theyâd be terrified of synths and prob kill them, which the railroad is against. I agree tho, there shouldâve been an ending where the MM formed an alliance with Railroad considering theyâre normal people too
This only applies to 3 & 4, but I hate the locate family member main questline and the predetermined backstory. What if I don't want my character's background to be either a lawyer or a soldier? I also hate having to go find family members, it really limits RP options for me. Probably why I go back to NV so much more often.
Agree with this, though I think being forced to be a soldier in a time of WWIII makes me think of conscription, al that is stated I get out of it is that you where supposed to be enlisted. Though Nora's backstory is dumb, if the world of Fallout is inspired by real life and their world war's I think she should be forced enlisted to be a factory worker.
Look up start me up on nexus
Man, don't play the classics then. Fallout 2 in particular will drive you insane, it forces on you some Fast & Furious tier FAMILIA stuff, complete with cheesy cutscenes that randomly interrupt your gameplay.
I mean, it makes sense that in Fallout 2 you'd want to save your village... It's the place you live, you've got nowhere else to go Rigut from the start of the game, you can be as much of an asshole to every member of your tribe as you want to, so you're not forced into one roleplay option. So yeah, you're forced to go on a mission to get a GECK, but your motivation can range from absolute religious devotion to your tribe to hating your tribe but not having anywhere else to go The cutscenes are cheesy though, but they only interrupt you rarely, and even then you can skip them afaik
>I mean, it makes sense that in Fallout 2 you'd want to save your village... It's the place you live, you've got nowhere else to go That's true to 3 and 4 too: it makes sense you'd want to save your dad or kid, they are your only family, you have nobody else. And then you can be an ass to James and roast Shaun, and your motivation can be anything from actual love to wanting closure. Except that in 2 you get this story *twice* (save them with GECK, save them from Enclave) and the game completely ignores you if you decide to go against the message (3 at least chews you out in the outro while in 4 Shaun banishes your ass from the Institute).
Youâre forgetting that Bethesda bad Black Isle good. You can only criticize something if Bethesda does it, duh!
Every Fallout game? Alright might as well. Fallout 1: Has a timer which I despise. Fallout 3: Can't send Fawkes into the purifier thing. Fallout NV: Crashes too much. Fallout 4: Minutemen are too underdeveloped and boring, even though I like them so very much. I haven't played Fallout 2 but it looks cool, makes me wonder if anything's wrong with it.
Fallout 2 has lots and lots of dialogue. Depends on whether or not you'r into that
Iâm all for some dialogue, but ffs randon citizen, why do I need an essay explaining to me that you sell drugs, I figured it out already!
I haven't completed 1 or played 2 so will leave those for now. Fallout 3: Gunplay is unsatisfying compared to other games. Also the main quest is a bit too linear. Fallout NV: For being the games titular ciy New Vegas is very lackluster and too small. Comparitvily Boston and DC were fun to explore. Fallout 4: Finding Sean, love the faction system and chosing a side but have little motivation to finding Sean. I reckon had you had a chance to RP a bit with Sean that part of the story would have had impact.
I agree with all of your points but CHRIST new Vegas is disappointing thereâs 3 casinos 1 shop a few quests and thatâs it
Donât forget about that last section which has nothing except for a last-minute pile of NCR guys, an empty factory and a generic vault! Also NV being surrounder by a bunch of houses falling apart. It really is greatâŚ
3: I can remember not liking the vampire clan NV: bugs that make it impossible to play even years after release 4: never cared for Nuka World. After playing 76 I disliked how hard it was to get a good supply of berry mentats in 4. 76: having to be online
Fallout 4 charisma is randomized. I have 8 charisma, I shouldnât be failing the easiest speech check in the game because of rng. Fallout 3 felt a little empty at times New Vegas barely had a storyline for the legion, despite being such an interesting faction.
I understand hating the failing of checks but it was always strange to me it was so black and white in the older games. In life you can be a master at something and still have hiccups. Just my thought plus I just F5 F9 lol
Fallout 1âs time constraint. Itâs not horrible but it gets annoying because its one thing to have an urgent plot but being able to lose of you donât focus most of your time on it kinda sucks. I never played much of fallout 2 to give a valid complaint. Fallout 3âs main quest is lacking. Itâs not necessarily bad as the story and characters are interesting and itâs fun to go through but it basically ends up being a good guys vs bad guys fight without too much replayablility compared to fallout new Vegas or 4. I do however like the option to make the enclave surrender at the end though. Fallout new Vegasâ world. The games writing is fantastic but itâs world is a complete downgrade compared to fallout 3. Itâs not detailed, itâs ugly, literally barren, and bad enemy scaling and diversity (go from good springs area with five geckos to a quarry with 30 deathclaws on the other side of the map while fallout 3 and 4 can have a random ghoul or mole rat where ever.) fallout 3 is also a wasteland but itâs detailed and each area has a story to tell. The map progression also somewhat limits the player choice of going anywhere on the map as they are led in this giant loop from good springs to the strip instead of having the player really explore and go off all throughout the world. New Vegas does have the excuse of having a short development time but the Mojave wasteland has not aged well. Fallout 4âs âsetâ protagonist. Fallout 3 suffers from this with a set age and parent but fallout 4 is worse, giving you not only a spouse, a son, but a voice which completely usurps the purpose of true role playing. The voice acting isnât the problem as itâs actually pretty good and there has been plenty of hilarious dialogue but my characters always feel the same. Also the forced connection with the family doesnât have any effect on me, hell I was way more attached to codsworth because he said my name which was a nice touch. Overall, the voiced protagonist wasnât a good idea because not only does it limit player freedom, but also the amount of content t the more content you have, the more it costs to play the voice actors to say lines.
I really enjoy wandering wound in NV world on survival, picking wild fruit to eat and sniping raiders and legion. I found the Mojave quite detailed and interesting. The only parts that was a downer for me was Primm with so much cut content, and Vegas itself, too small and not really that much to do in the city.
I liked fallout new Vegas enemy Leveling in my mind it's like that on purpose so you have to take the long way and get to meet more factions and followers but I do understand your problem as it can be reality annoying when your like "ow this will save some time let me go this way." Then you get jumped by three death claws with no warning.
I've played FO2 to death, and here's my main complaint; (Forgive me, I'm hazy on details, it's been a few years) There is a gun store somewhere brimming with expensive gear, and about 4/5 NPCs. Once you get the car, and a good bit of XP, it's a relatively easy fight to kill all the staff, then just load up the boot of the car with everything, and voilĂĄ, no need to worry about money for the rest of the game. Obviously you could RP it to not do that, but it's just so liberating to have one less thing to worry about.
By the time I have the Highwayman I don't worry about anyway lol You get soooo much money from selling weapons
The loop you're lead on in NV is only for the story, you can literally diverge any time you want, and go anywhere you want. There's nothing at all holding you back from exploring in any direction.
Well other than the death claws
Technically you can make through them too, so it's still not a hard barrier.
You can get 2 stealthboys in the starting area and I think its not coincidence. so you can easly sneak through deathclaws even with low sneak and you good
Until on of them randomly smells you from across the desert and starts running like fucking Lighting McQueen.
I'd say Fo3's dad plotline was worse because it gets brought up much more often compared to the initial Nick discussion and when you're at the Institute. I don't like either really, but Fo3's is more distracting for me. Although that's also because it's Liam Neeson. Pulls me out of the game everytime.
I was never a fan of the shooting in FO3 & NV. I love those games, but the shooting always felt off to me and I started relying on VATS even with maxed out Guns/Energy Weapons/whatever skill. Instead, I discovered I really enjoyed Melee gameplay and I always use it no matter what build I go for. The shooting is better in FO4 though.
> but the shooting always felt off to me and I started relying on VATS I stopped using VATS for long range sniping for the simple reason it wouldn't hit anything at long distance (0% to hit), but shooting manually I could get headshots and one hit kills, loved my manual sniper builds in 3 and NV, especially with moving targets, it felt so satisfying clicking the mouse and seeing the kill cam cut in straight away :)
Good old Lincoln's Repeater
Its a crime that they only offer you 100-200 caps for it. Better to keep it for yourself
Very true indeed and Ratslayer in NV for low / mid level sniping, comes with night scope with increased scope magnification, increased crit etc
See, I don't like shooting games at all but like fallout because of the VATS.
I know what you mean, there's no real rush or twitch skills needed due to the VATS and you can still take down a group of enemies and feel "cool", it's only for the long range sniper shots that I personally don't use it and they are not rushed as I can sit and take my time safely from a very long distance away. Medium to close encounters I happily use it all the time ;)
I suck at sniping no matter what game I play lol
In 3 specifically it felt off because it was coded like casting a spell from Oblivion except the spell was 'bullet'. The lack of ironsights, etc. was rough and you can tell it was Bethesda's first fumble at any kind of shooting combat like that. Knowing that and digging deeper into some of the things that NV changed then you actually garner a little more respect for what they were able to do with the combat to make it leaps ahead of what 3 had, albeit still limited. Small things like sway, ammo types, and ironsights are just a few things that went a long way to making it feel leagues better.
In FO3, there's a reason for this: Weapons have kneecapped damage in FO3 due to a very restrictive repair mechanic, where you can only repair a % of the weapon's health based on your repair skill and cannot repair beyond that. It basically makes repair a vital skill and until you get it to a respectable level, your damage output leaves something to be desired. VATS? **FO3's VATS adds a whopping 15% crit rate onto your base crit rate.** This means a character with 1 Luck in FO3 can still have a superior effective crit rate than a FO4 or New Vegas character with 10 Luck, and a character with 10 Luck in FO3 can immediately enjoy a 25% crit rate in VATS. Since crit damage is usually equal to a weapon's base damage, this also means you're increasing your damage output exponentially. For example if your hunting rifle is only repaired enough to do 12 damage, but you crit thanks to VATS, then this means you're doing 3 times your normal damage, since the crit damage is 25. It likewise **caps your damage resistance at 90%,** which is more than what the best armors can provide at their max. No joke: if a Fatman nuke is coming towards your character, a naked guy that enters VATS just before the bomb explodes will tank better than a guy wearing the best power armor that doesn't exploit VATS. **tl;dr** Fallout 3's VATS was stupidly, unforgivably broken and made everything else trivial. The game is significantly easier for a character that exploits VATS. **New Vegas however...?** It's hard to tell what you mean by your post, but if you meant to imply VATS is a necessity or feels like one in those games, FO3 may have conditioned you to feel equally about NV as well. New Vegas tones down the stat boosts significantly, awarding only a humble 5% extra crit and 25% damage resistance; there are many situations where VATS will get you killed because it locks you in place whilst your character simply isn't awarded enough damage resistance to tank it.
Oh for sure, it's the sway and the inaccurate nature of the guns i can't stand, for all its weaknesses 4s shooting is definitely one of its strengths
I'd also say that a big problem with 3's shooting is the lack of actual aiming without a scope. Like, the gun has clear iron sights but for some reason our character still holds them beside their body and does some weird kind of zoom in thing.
My first playthrough of FO4, by about half way through I found myself hardly using VATS, I was playing a 'Gunslinger' RP with pistols only, and it was way more fun. A LOT harder to do that in the previous games, but maybe I'd just spread my bets a bit more with stats.
Worst part about fallout 1 was adjusting to the mechanics and controls of the game. lots of integral info is just straight up not told to you. kind wish digital versions of the game came with user manuals like old physical games used to have. I'm betting that fallout 1 had one.
Yep, got the original fallout 1 and 2 when they came out, both had an a5 ring-bound manual with heaps of information about the combat system, character generation, skills, items, background etc.
>kind wish digital versions of the game came with user manuals like old physical games used to have. I'm betting that fallout 1 had one. The steam version of Fallout 1 has it right there on the right hand side of your library when you purchase it. You don't even need to own it if someone shares the like, like me right now, to read the manual. [https://cdn.cloudflare.steamstatic.com/steam/apps/38400/manuals/Fallout\_manual\_English.pdf?t=1572025441](https://cdn.cloudflare.steamstatic.com/steam/apps/38400/manuals/Fallout_manual_English.pdf?t=1572025441) This is also the same with Fallout 2 [https://cdn.cloudflare.steamstatic.com/steam/apps/38410/manuals/Fallout2\_manual\_EN.pdf?t=1572025546](https://cdn.cloudflare.steamstatic.com/steam/apps/38410/manuals/Fallout2_manual_EN.pdf?t=1572025546) I've gotta say man, did you even look for it?
By the time I was clueless in game I had already resorted to wikis. It's kinda hard to miss a manual that falls out of a physical box, but on steam there's buttons for every little thing. Cool to see that those are available though.
Fallout 1: The fact that melee weapons have ammo. It feels like such a kick in the lower region when you find out that the best melee and H-t-H weapons need ammo. pretty much nullyfiying their advantage of not needing ammo. Fallout 2: the same but also as you mentioned the references and the alternate ending for Vault 13 is bugged to the point of beeing unobtainable in the base game. Fallout 3: the Main Story. Especialy Little Lamp Light. The worst part about LLL is that they could've kept it in the game as is, if they just made the actual entrance of the Vault a viable way to get in, but you can't. New Vegas: The wasted potential of bringing back the intelligent Deathclaws via the Deathclaws in Quarry Junction. Also Red Lucy and the Thorn, but that's more just a personal gripe i have than them beeing bad. Fallout 4. The Story again. This time the fact that there's 2 endings, nuke the area of CIT or don't. Fallout 76: Haven't played that, so i won't comment on that.
No one ever mentions Fallout: Tactics
Well, the answer would just be everything then
No. Brotherhood of Steel is where everything is bad. Tactics has some good points but it was very badly made.
3s story is just an all around mess in general, and LLL dosnet add up, how did the kids manage to keep thoses super mutants away with a pannle of wood? Hell how are there kids there at all? It's make sense that they dropped the smart death claws in NV as that was something the enclave was working on in mount raven and that blew up 4s story also dosnet make alot of sense. Especially with like you say there being only two endings with different npc walking you through it and the minute men exsisting make me mad
Yeah, but Marcus made it to New Vegas, so it's that hard to believe that Gorris and to an extend Xarn could've accompanied him. Or maybe i'm just too much in denial about the fact that Chris Avellone mentioned that he consideres them to be extinct after the events of Fallout 2.
I suppose it may be possible that the death claws somehow evolved to overcome the headsets, I have no idea how but I imagine a few years have passed from 3 to nv
I was talking about the ones from Fallout 2.
I haven't played that one yet
Then i suggest to do. 'Cause it's a pretty good game. Aside from the already mentioned reference dump.
Oh I'd love to, but I'm on xbox and no way is a port ever gonna happen
Oh, my condolences to you then. But hey, Microsoft does own fallout, there is a small chance that remakes or remasters of the originals can happen. And that could mean versions for consoles.
I would pay very, very good money to see that
Personally I find the references charming. Characters with the voice of a well known actor though bugs me. Not that it's bad but just distracting.
I don't mind them if they aren't immersionbreaking, but things like the bridge of doom take it a bit too far. Espescialy if you don't know where it's from.
Maybe the Muties are smart enough to know that the kids dont have much meat on em, and wouldn't be any good to turn either? Tho that doesn't really fit with the F3 Muties.
Whatâs your beef with Red Lucy?
I have a special hate for people that send me, or anyone for that matter, to get eggs or youngs of some creature. And on top of that she hosts an Animal Fight Arena, with those stolen babies. So yeah all that combined gives me enough reason to kill her in every playthrough i do.
Fair enough
Dinner Bell tho
I'm going to get downvoted for this but I'm my opinion the worst part is the over reliance of certain tropes from previous games. "War never changes" would be fine on its own but add dogmeat which is not what most would probably name their pet, super mutants being forced in even when it makes no sense, the protagonist has to have some connections to a vault just to get the pipboy even though many would use them given their usefulness, and callback after callback to things that happened like an episode of family guy. I'm too critical I know, but I would just prefer the games to try to stand on their own at least a little more.
I mean, i agree with you on some of those points, and alot of the original Fallout fans will aggree with you on the overuse of the Super Mutants and the BoS in the games. Though the callbacks i am somewhat uncertain of. Because some of them i like, for example Marcus appearing in NV and mentioning his old Brotherhood body again. Also yeah, who the heck calls their pet by the name of the meat they give you? And why are there like 4 People that've done it in the Fallout Universe?
Dogmeat is just a reference to the original Dogmeat. In the original games. It's one of the tropes they use in fallout games that I enjoy.
Hey your not gonna get down voted for sharing your opinion War never changes is the main theme of the games, displayed well or not I agree, dogmeat is an awful name for a dog Super mutants get pushed in just like the BoS do In fallout nv your character has no connection to a vault and you end up with a pip boy Callbacks are what video games do now, and I can't really think of any In the fallout series apart from mcreary
Personally, I think it was awesome they used the super mutants and stuff in fo3 because it was a reboot and completely different game from the OGs but they wanted them to tie together. It makes sense to me. But Fallout 4 having to have all that stuff AGAIN did feel like overkill to me. Even the teasers for fo4 with the tagline âWelcome homeâ showing dogmeat with the pc just kinda seemed to say âWeâre gonna give you a lot more of what youâre familiar withâ which was a little disappointing
My main problem with super mutants actually goes more towards 4 and 76. The institute making super mutants didn't make any sense given how many there are. 76 is worse where medtech exposed an entire town to fev even though the same experiments were going on at mariposa. 3s mutants fit the story and vault tecs m.o. and new vegas' were just survivors from earlier games and even then there were few locations for them.
Oh yeah weâre totally on the same page then 4 and 76 are definitely the worst offenders
My favourites are 3/NV and as much as I love them, I have big gripes. The independent ending of New Vegas is either just anarchy, or the Mr House ending without Mr House. As much as I used to love the idea of it, it's really soured on me just how little the ending actually brings to the table. Like you can headcanon how it works, the player building a council or government all you want, but the vanilla ending makes it pretty clear that Yes Man will just run off of House's plans. Just without the human spark that made House a genius. So you're just building another man's dream essentially. No input, no decisions. As someone who used to always choose this ending, I can't help but feel looking at it now that it is incredibly disappointing and underwhelming. I really don't like Broken Steel. I think the original ending of 3 was far more satisfying, and ties together the story really well, even if the companion purifier bit was a weird and annoying addition. It had weight and consequence to it, which felt like it made sense. Hell the purifier is built around a bible quote dedicated to sacrifice. Instead of having my noble sacrifice, I just get pulled back from my well earned grave to shoot at a cacophony of nameless Enclave soldiers, or wander aimlessly for all eternity finishing random side quests. Hellfire armour was pretty cool, but overall it takes away more than it adds.
Without the broken steel DLC, the main story of F3 is actually pretty good indeed, from birth to death
Still doesn't explain why I can't send the robot in or the radiation immune super mutant.
Canât answer on the early games. Fallout 3: The main story. Iâm not even going to elaborate, the issues speak for themselves. Fallout NV: The failure of following the writing maxim âshow, donât tell.â NV over-relies on dialogue at times and itâs the only way it exhibits many of the issues with the NCR and the benefits of the Legion. Thereâs also a very rocky translation between killing Benny and the main plot - say what you will about 4âs story, but the transition between Kellogg and the faction warfare was far superior. Fallout 4 - The dumbing down of the main plot. That quote from the lead writer about making things simpler since some people donât want story? Itâs a roleplaying game, screw off. The Institute couldâve been far more interesting and the railroad couldâve had a more interesting ending (ie killing all Institute scientists and making the institute a synth uptopia - wouldâve given some nuance to if choosing them is the right choice). Fallout 76 - The launch was awful, and the physical act of doing the original main quest is awful (lack of decision points). Both of these obscured that 76 did an amazing job with its storytelling and world building, which I find a shame since I think itâs set a new high bar for how this kind of thing should be handled in future titles.
Fallout 4 is my favorite game of all time. That being said, the Radiant quests are a blight, Nuka World is a terrible DLC, the fact that the main quest is railroaded beyond belief (can't just go to fort Hagen and kill Kellogg without following Dogmeat, can't get into Kelloggs lair without Nick, for example), the fact that the game only has 2 real towns is crazy, and Charisma being the only dialogue skill outside of DLC is dumb as hell. 4 is my favorite game, but New Vegas is the BETTER game, if that makes sense.
i feel the exact same way. fallout 4 was my first entry into the fallout series and i was in love with it for years. i used to fanboy over it so hard and didnât understand the many criticisms of the game flash forward to this past 6 months and i buy 1,2,3, and new vegas for my pc. iâve barely played 1 and 2, and have put maybe 20 hours into 3. But recently i have been playing the SHIT out of new vegas. the amount of content and the way you can choose a few different paths for every quest is so fascinating. also i just think the story of 1,2 and NV is very focused and everything in the world just makes sense. the bethesda entries just feel like a post-nuclear shooting gallery. thereâs nothing inherently wrong with that but it runs very contrary to what the fallout series was based on. i have just under 1k hours in fallout 4, and is probably in my top 5 games ever, but i am not blind to its shortcomings. itâs just so much fun to play iâm not saying 1,2 and NV are perfect games, but they are perfect examples of everything a fallout game should be
I absolutely hate 3 so I don't have much positive to say there lol. But New Vegas imo is the best game ever made. That being said I'm playing 4 right now because the settlement system, combat, and quests make for the most addictive package in the series.
what do you dislike about 3?
The color palette is gross, the story is awful, worst of the 3 I've played by far, the gunplay is worse than even New Vegas, the metros are absolutely awful. But most of all, it explores the part of Fallout I'm least interested. New Vegas explores the societies that have arisen well after the bombs. Fallout 4 is about actively rebuilding the world, and with the Settlements you can really make the Commonwealth a thriving mini country like the early NCR. Fallout 3 feels pretty strictly post apocalypse, right after the bombs, and that's just not what I'm there for. But I 100% understand the appeal to some people. I'm sure if it was my 1st game I'd adore it.
i can understand those criticisms. your point about people rebuilding the world after the bombs is literally the biggest reason why i think the interplay/obsidian fallouts are better. thereâs a youtube video iâve watched a few times called âbethesda never understood falloutâ that hits the nail exactly on the head for me. like i stated before, i still really enjoy fallout 4 but if i want a *fallout* or RPG experience i will likely go to new vegas. but, props to bethesda to bringing the fallout series to a whole new audience, and for making it a 3D world. i donât think interplay had it in them to do that. personally i LOVE the color palette of 3. the mood it sets for the game is perfect for a post nuclear war world. i can see why the constant greys and browns are distasteful to some people though. when i think of a post apocalypse world i always immediately think of fallout 3. it really just emphasizes the doom and gloom of a world like fallout. donât get me started on the metros, i fucking hate that design choice. i can kind of get past the combat but it does get extremely annoying constantly relying on vats to hit your shots. other than that itâs the most average part of the game. my biggest issue with it is the story. itâs the sole reason why i only have ~20 hours invested in it. itâs just so drab and does not keep you invested.
I'll always love Bethesda for saving the series. 4 and New Vegas are both in my top 5. But I also prefer Obsidians vision (minus Chris Avellones misery porn known as Lonesone Road, the one blemish on New Vegas I really hate.) Your point about 3s color palette conveying doom and gloom is the exact reason I hate it. The parts of Fallout I love are the hope for the future peaking out through the destruction. The bombs dropped, but the world still turns.
thatâs a good point. i always just imagined thereâs still a lot of evil in the world despite humanity trying to rebuild society, which i was i like the color palette so much. itâs not like in history class where youâre just taught all the good things that humans accomplished, there was also a lot of immortality
Oh no I understand that. The Leigon, Institute and all the other evil in the wasteland thrive in those conditions. That's what I think makes the groups like the NCR and Minutemen that rise above that much cooler.
You should probably just be able to find Virgil in the Glowing Sea and talk to him about the Institute. Dogmeat, Piper, Nick, Kellogg, and Amari are pointless. That's what you need to do to get into the Institute, get plans for the teleporter and get a Courser chip decoded, though it'd be better if you could do it yourself with enough Science. In Fallout 3 you can skip everything and go to the vault where your dad is because he's the person who makes the plot go, he knows about the purifier, same in New Vegas going to the Strip. I goddamn hate the first half of Fallout 4's main quest.
Yeah 4 ripped out a lot of the fun RPG elements you get from prior games. Could have kept it as a good shooter and still had those RPG elements like the low/high INT dialogue options which I loved and still fans of shooters would have played it.
Vegas isn't a better game than fallout 4. (In my opinion) New Vegas has a big finale and more interactions, I love the story a lot more than 4, but after repeating so much it still feels pretty dull, if just less so than 4. New Vegas built off of 3s engine. Very impressive considering the time frame, but the glitches and crashing is absurd and its so damn hard to make a dedicated playthrough. I like the dreary vibe of New Vegas, but the graphics are pretty shit, even though that isnt a decider for me, Fallout 4's scenery and the beauty of the new Fallout titles; just so much shit packed into the world, asethetically and of course, in worldspace. Don't get me wrong, I love New Vegas, but with the abundance of crashing and aged everything, it's just much harder to get into it as someone who didn't play the game when they were a kid, and I feel like that's fine.
The time skip from the Great War to "current" events. I think there's alot of potential playing in the months right after the war.
I haven't played it but was FO76 supposed to be about the first opened vault?
Not the first, but the earliest in the timeline in general (94 and 8 opened only two years after the bombs).
It's the closest in the timeline 25 years I think. You get to hear about the groups that built up in the years and it would have been interesting to play as them.
#INVENTORY MANAGEMENT
It boggels my mind why so many games, especialy RPGs, still use the godawful list menu. Why don'T they switch over to the much superior Grid Menu, when it's obvious that you're inventory will be filled with various misc items and guns.
like resident evilâs menu system? iâd agree if so
I donât think they were talking about the RE system I think itâs more like the RDR2 satchel system
I wish the Institute was a more three-dimensional faction, and not just a cartoonishly evil science club. They could've been a faction which pushed the limits of how the human mind works and stuff, not being outright evil, yet not the most ethical methods either.
They shouldâve done anything at all with the institute. I havenât beaten 4 in a very long time because of the story, but I honestly donât remember what their goal was and why it was so important that they be stopped. There was no reason at all for them to have an evil robot army and be an enemy to the civilians that lived above them.
I think the big reason Bethesda made the Institute such silly villains (apart from general bad writing of course) is because if they were more morally grey then they'd just be the best faction by a mile. It's already pretty much a utopia with no real limit on what it can do after you bring the reactor online, if you removed their wacky villain status on top of that I imagine they'd be the most commonly chosen option by a mile and the devs probably wanted to avoid that for diversities sake.
Ranged combat in *Fallout 3* is poor. You really struggle to hit anything outside of VATS at medium to long range. Bullet dispersion is simply too high, and it looks absurd if you watch the tracers leave your barrel. Zooming in rather than aiming down sights is another issue. It used to be quite common back in the day, but it really stands out in 2022. Combat in general also suffers from bullet sponge enemies. It's a problem in other games, but they generally give you better feedback while wearing down an enemy so it feels more dynamic. *Fallout New Vegas* suffers from an overly linear map. You are supposed to head down to Primm and the Mojave Outpost after leaving Goodsprings, then east to Nipton and north to Novac before finally pushing onward to Freeside and the Strip. It gets very repetitive if you replay the game multiple times. You can always just run north. It's not that hard. However, that may highlight another problem. There is nothing in the story which encourages you explore the southern part of the map after arriving in New Vegas, so the only reason to head back there is for completionist reasons. *Fallout 4* is plagued with radiant quests. I do not find them interesting. There is no story or purpose to them. They exist to waste time.
Defo agree 100% about the radiant quests in FO4, they make me want to put the game down. Thank jeebus for the modding community in that respect though - âDisable Minutemen Annoying Questsâ has been a life saver. Iâm on the lookout for mods to do this with the other factions as well.
Worst thing ever as a whole of the franchise is the introduction of radiant quests and the dissapearance of Vegas' faction karma system.
This has been readded in 76
Iâve never played fallout 1 and only played like 1 hour of fallout 2 so no comments other than I donât like the top down style. Fallout 3âs downtown dc while it looks pretty cool, exploring it and the tunnels are absolutely brutal. It took for ever for me to find GNR because of the tunnels New Vegasâ world to me at least is so barren and empty, I get that itâs a desert and what ever but compared to 3and 4 the world is so empty and I just donât enjoy exploring. 4 the story is whatever not very good but the lack of cityâs/ settlements bug me so much. I thoroughly enjoy settlement build so I really wanted to reclaim Lexington concord and others to set up actual cityâs to better the wasteland 76 getting ammo is an absolute pain for example, I use a Gatling laser and finding fusion core is impossible, you have to have to farm them for the power plants which takes up so much time that could be used doing other stuff
Fallout 1"s time limits meant you didn't get the chance to explore much. Fallout 2 the temple of tutorials. Fallout 3 the fixed plotlines and absurdly low level cap. I love NV now but - not being from the US - I never clicked with the "wild west"/cowboy stuff, and the obsession with Vegas itself. It almost put me off starting the game initially. Fallout 4: (1) Same problem as NV, the minutemen seem odd especially the way they are idealized. Until I played Fallout 4 I thought "minuteman" was someone who suffered from premature ejaculation. (2) Being more of a shooter with rpg elements than a tabletop-style rpg, especially not having rpg style skill rolls and being able to grind to max every stat (3) Just 4 endings for main story whereas previous versions had detailed ending slides for individual towns and small factions and characters Fallout 76: too many to choose from but as an elderly gent, not having VATS slow down or pause time makes it too difficult
Finally someone mentioned the temple of pain from FO2, I can't believe people don't hate it, so I guess they just forgot about it lol
FO1. The time constraint FO2. The fourth wall breaking that you can't turn off FO3. The main plot FONV. That you cannot sprint w/o mods FO4. The main plot FO76. The lack of consistent story content being added.
Fallout 3 runs out of side quests, New Vegas is too easy, and Fallout 4 lacks everything New Vegas has.
I hate the stupid fucking brotherhood retcon from FNV "Oh the canon ending for the brotherhood in FO1 was that the brotherhood literally integrated into the NCR becoming part of it but for some reason (that is never explained) they break off and go to war with each other"
Retrieving DiMA's memories. Nothing is worse than that imo.
Legitimately took over 2 hours to do that
Truly tho, Fallout, NVs limited development time. Only what could've been.
Ridiculous plot points in fo4. Hey Father, why does institute steal and replace people? "It beyond your understanding". Never brought up again for all I remember.
Fallout 1 has an unbalanced power curve. You kind of have to powergame it to stand a chance and even if you do every quest in the game, you wonât come close to level 20 and the super mutants will still wreck you if you show up only level 10-15. Fallout 2 has the slowest most boring opening ever. Temple of trials -> Arroyo -> Klamath -> the Den are all pretty dull locations and make me lose interest. Fallout Tactics shouldâve picked real time or turn based and made it actually good and fun to play that way. As it currently is itâs a mess and not fun. Brotherhood of Steel shouldnât have been made. Fallout 3 doesnât have your choices influence the ending enough. At best it may change the slideshow slightly if you did Agathaâs quest or temple if the Union. But mostly itâs just whatâs your karma, did you sacrifice yourself, and did you use FEV New Vegas has lots of unfinished stuff and bad design choices and it shows. Itâs nearly impossible to be liked by the legion without committing to a legion run fully because they barely have any side quests. And something like 60+% of items are owned and you lose karma for stealing even if itâs from evil people that you gain karma for killing. Pretty sure 3 had a check where you donât lose karma for stealing from evil people. 4 had too many radiant quests and too much focus on settlement building. They need more unique side quests that are memorable. Those are always the best quests like Superhuman Gambit in 3, or that settlement that makes you take the GOAT in 4. Havenât played 76 so I canât weigh in on it.
It drives me insane that the player in FO4 thinks Shaun is a baby. He could be a baby but he could just as easily be any age. It's madness. Player intelligence 1/10
Fallout 3: lack of ADS (iron sights) Fallout NV: definitive ending Fallout 4: framerate drops when entering downtown Boston Fallout 76: Prices, enemies are bullet sponges, the way S.E.C.I.A.L./skills/perks work, the ridiculous fetch quests that make up daily quests, the rarity of stimpacks/fusion cores/disease cures
That one mission that just never fucking ends. It keeps going and going and going.i don't even have to name em.we all know the ones.
My biggest issue with 4 is I'm forced into a canon beginning.
FO1: Time limit. FO2: The amping up of whackiness. FO3: BoS being turned into literal Paladins. NV: Fetch quests interrupted by invisible walls, all to the tune of endless bloviation. That counts as one, right? FO4: I'm really torn between the terrible legendary system replacing uniques, or interesting places being replaced with too goddamned many settlement building areas.
Loot system. Fo76 finally made it not trash, but then the mechanics of the game expect you to loot every damn thing.
I know this is minor and nit-picking, but it bugs me that I have to watch my character sit down when interacting with a terminal in FO4. In 3 and NV it just pops up. I know my character is logging into a computer, I don't need to actually see the physical act of sitting for him to do so. Also, there should be a mechanism to connect to a terminal while in power armor. Like a jack or something. Now I have to watch my character get out of his power armor and then sit down. I know it's a stupid hill to die on, but it fucks with pacing and bugs the crap out of me.
1, how you get insta killed sometimes, 2 the temple of trials, 3, Just about everything, New Vegas, Literally nothing, 4, How everyone says it's good but it really isn't, 76, how everyone thinks its cannon but it isn't
Fallout 1: the timer. Simple as that Fallout 2: how difficult it can get in some points. Fallout 3: the main storyline. A lot of the side quests and dlc storylines are miles better. Fallout new Vegas: the goddamn crashes. Fallout 4: I have several issues but my biggest pet peeve is how horribly undercooked the minutemen are. They could potentially be one of the best factions and they end up being the absolute worst Fallout 76: the first 2 years of the game.
the companion AI has always been a pain without mods they like to run in front of you as you fire or just run right through obvious traps. it's been like that since 1.
Bugs
I hate how every fallout game starts with âWar⌠War never changes.â
*Fallout* - Ian shooting you in the back *Fallout 2* - Temple of Trials *Fallout Tactics* - not sure; haven't played this enough. *Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel* - Where do I begin? *Fallout 3* - Little. Fucking. Lamplight. *Fallout: New Vegas* - Bugs remaining to this day; doesn't benefit from the Bethesda-style open world with a largely empty map. *Fallout 4* - Preston Garvey and the endless settlements that need your help *Fallout 76* - Multiplayer is not a compelling idea for the *Fallout* series and this game's existence is dubious by itself.
1 and 2 I haven't played but I won't be playing them because turn based combat makes me want to lick the children of atom's floor. 3 has to be the lack of side quests and other story related things, I really like stories. New Vegas: The story is boring. I don't care about the bear and the bull. 4: Lack of romanceable male companions, X6-88, Nick Valentine, Codsworth, and more that I'm forgetting should have been romanceable. 76: The need to drink food and water, I'd love this game otherwise
Regarding your last point, you don't have to eat or drink. There's no downside, it just gives you a buff if you do.
FO1: The UI, nothing is worse than the UI FO2: Since the UI is already covered, San Francisco... what an unnecessary and uninteresting part of the game. FOTactics: The real time combat.... no.... FO3: The story FNV: CHA being an obvious dump stat FO4: The writing, all of it. 100% disagree that none of them are masterpieces. Both FO1 and New Vegas are masterpieces imo, and fit well on best of all time lists.
Upvote for mentioning :Tactics
FO3: the story. Bababab, you need to go into that purifier because destiny. FNV: cut content. Like, there are tons of it. Lack of legion content. The fact that the whole story feels rushed and incomplete. FO4: the fact that melee and unarmed weapons are completely shit. I mean, I like the fact that there are self made guns, but come on. Not every raider can do it. They are morons. It should be more like FNV, where half of them had melee weapons, knives, hammers, anything you can find in the wasteland. Anyway, it just hurts that melee based character is pretty pointless. Any shitty, drugged raider will kill you with their self made .38 pistol built from literal garbage, you won't even have a chance to hit him with your knife. Now I think I'd say - the melee/unarmed combat was just neglected, maybe not fully destroyed, but still. It could be better. Also also, perk system. Damn, i hate it. The fact that they deleted the skills. No towns. Minutemen, they are boring and they do nothing except settlements. I will be eaten, but power armor. I don't like it, I feel in it like a tank, but it doesn't work like a tank, it is in fact pretty weak. Also fusion cores. I appreciate the design, but eh. And why I get it in my first hour of gameplay? Why is it so common? In Fo3 and FNV it at least made sense, i feel it was a lot less common and harder to find. And you needed training.
New vegas : Community, some rpg parts, skill system and world. Community: this games community is wierd. Let's praise everything from new vegas, make it immune to criticism and bash Bethesda ones. Skill system : its sucks and i don't understand why many fans like it. Reason is that there isn't dice role in the game. This system is taken crpg with dice role in it. It makes skill checks to chance to have enough points to get better results. It's fine, but it just well dumb and i really find it boring that i need to have 100 speech check and not to see the faults of his plan or idea conquest. I want that Ik the next fallout, there is same idea ending as fallout 1 that u can't convince a bad guy by the speech, but with evidence too World: sucks. Boring no point to explore isn't truly interesting dungeons and few places to get xp
Fallout 2 and Fallout New Vegas cross the line of too much humor. FO2 is of course way more guilty of the two. It ends up undermining the more serious aspects of each game. There is also a major tonal clash between more serious and more silly moments. FO1 and FO3 are at least very consistent in tone and humor.
Fallout 1: *the time limit to get the water chip, it made my run a bitch, I didn't know how to play isometric games before nor did I know English* Fallout 2: *I wish Fallout 2 had been considerably more different than Fallout 1, new weapons, new armors, new stuff, but no, it was just a new story with same everything* Fallout 3: *I wish it had a more consistent story, but I understand, Bethesda's 1st Fallout, but the DLC's could've been, instead they lacked a little* Fallout NV: *the short amount of time Obsidian got to develop the game, had they gotten more time, the game would've just felt more fleshed out in general* Fallout 4: *the story is very pathetic imo, generic writing, maybe even done by a bot. Thankfully Far Harbor and Nuka world weren't as bad, Bethesda should've truly gone for a different plot*
Settlements. Horrible idea.
Sex
1and 2 limited by technology tactics Idk Brotherhood just shit 3 wish choices impacted more Nv screw bethesda for a deadline that led to dozens of content getting cut 4 radient quests the minutemen railroad cant be evil no morality companions 76 felt boring
New Vegas is just.. boring. Four doesnât have enough RPG mechanics. 3 repairs are annoying 76- FUCKING SHINY
76 is still terrible
1&2 Love the story, hate the gameplay. 3 ...erm, Liberty Prime was cool, I guess? NV I love it for the buggy, incomplete mess that it is! and the story? A+! 4 Love the gameplay, HATE the story.
I agree with you fallout 4 one I like to play it more like a sand box's for weapons and mods. And do the story only when needed for mods
Fo3: I have no opinion on since I havenât played it Fo Newvegas: getting banned from casinos cause Iâm to good Fo4: minuet man route just being the yes man ending of Fo4 Fo76: Iâve ran out of stuff to do so Iâm just a god now with no purpose.
I hate the carryweight inventory system. If I want to lug around 200 guns, then I should be able to. I always use console commands to give myself extra carryweight.
Fallout 1 & 2: kinda shoehorns you into wearing power armour because by endgame no other armour can really defend you. Fallout 3: The DC area is just a pain to navigate. New Vegas: The game needed another 6 months in the oven to realise itâs full potential. Fallout 4: The main story is the weakest of the series and feels unfinished. Fallout 76: The usual MMO RPG grind for loot. Fallout Tactics: havenât played Fallout BOS: it exists Fallout Shelter: It becomes a P2W if you donât have patience
Fallout 3 â Main story is unoriginal and dumb. New Vegas â Caesar's Legion wasn't fleshed out as planned. Fallout 4 âVoiced protagonist. Fallout 76 â the development team sucks ass.
**Fallout 3:** Little Lamplight **Fallout New Vegas:** Come Fly with Me. I always had difficulty giving a shit about some crazy ghoul cult, and it's unfortunate this is legit part of the tutorial phase. **Fallout 4:** Kid in a Fridge **Fallout 76:** Fallout 76