Why do people pretend that Fallout 1 and 2 are better than New Vegas?

Fallout 1, 2 and NV are all as good as each other.

When they required even a mere semblance of skill in comparison to the cancerous skill check that is, Fallout 1 and 2s combat system.

I swear, you isometric cucks are insufferable. If the game isn't riddled with bloated and clunky mechanics that only existed out of the technological limitations that existed at the time then it's "not as complex!" and "c-c-casual!".

I swear, I saw some faggot trying to argue Planescape Torment having better combat than the Witcher 3 recently. You fucks are cancer.

Why do obsidian shills think anything released by obsidian is a gift from god when they all tend to be trash games with content missing?

Because every board on Cred Forums suffers from entertainment hipsterism. You can't talk about mainstream music on Cred Forums, you can't talk about hollywood blockbusters on Cred Forums, and you can't talk about popular games on Cred Forums.

Whoa there buddy, I was on the New Vegas side with you here but your opinions stink!

turn-based is fine, but early Fallouts' combat system (more specifically, how it relates to stats) is really, really bad.

One game is an RPG and has classic RPG combat

The other is a bastard child of fps and rpg with anything remotely good from either taken out

Cuz I like fighting enemies in real time not turn based and I like the quirky characters

It's just a matter of preference.
Fo1 and 2 are RPG.
FNV and 3 are ARPG.
Fallout 4 is a FPS.

you can talk about Cred Forums approved mainstream music (e.g. Radiohead, Kanye) on Cred Forums. Cred Forums and Cred Forums are correct, but then again those are two of the worst boards on this fucking site.

I've seen the Obsidicucks attack fallout 4 and fallout 3, but I've never seen them attack 1 and 2. I thought they praised the original two...

Jesus, they're going feral.

>One game is an RPG and has classic RPG combat

I didn't know RPG games had a definitive combat system. Do you mean "One game is an RPG that has the typical shit tier combat found in old school RPG games" by any chance?

Fallout New Vegas's combat shits on Fallout 1 and 2 and New Vegas's combat is terrible. That's just how significantly worse the combat in Fallout 1 and 2 is.

>no enemy AI
>no cover mechanics
>no need to use VATS to shoot a charging deathclaw in the leg to slow their movement, none of that strategic depth because the enemies are all static
>Nope, just stand still, click a button and let your the game roll a dice based on your skill stats

Because old Fallout games are different that New Vegas
Some people may also like things you don't like.

>using VATS
get out

Why do people pretend new vegas is good?
Fallout 3 and 4 are way better

You seem to not like turn-based combat

I don't like combat systems that require zero skill or strategy.

fallout 3?

geez, whats that?

something like fallout online or fallout online2?

You must not like RPGs then!

This may be a revolutionary concept to you but RPGs weren't made to test combat skills. Turn based is perfectly fine and requires skill in other areas.

Yet you like NV, lol

All enemies have AI fucking dumbass, how do you think enemies in fallout 1+2 choose what action to make?

1 and 2 were okay, I guess. New Vegas was horrible, though. 3 was amazing, but Fallout 4 surpasses every Fallout put together

Let me guess,y ou're the type of person who cries about missing in Morrowind, aren't you?

I don't like NVs combat system, it's terrible. It's just objectively less terrible than Fallout 1 and 2s combat system

It's almost as if it's a turn based combat system!

This is literally it.
Literally /thread.
I can't even fathom how people can play any of the 3D fallout games. Sure, New Vegas is miles above 3, but both are shit compared to 1 and 2. The transition to 3D makes no fucking sense. The VATS is literally, LITERALLY useless. In the original, that was the only way to aim and be precise, but since you have FPS elements now, you can literally just aim at the head yourself without using VATs. Who the fuck thought this was a good idea? How can people like this retarded gameplay? Alright, people who don't know of 1 and 2 and who are plebs, but how can anyone play 1 and 2 and afterwards think that the gameplay in New Vegas (or 3 for that matter, because gameplay-wise they're almost exactly the same) is even remotely good? It just doesn't work. It's bad. The writing in New Vegas is good, but it pales when compared to 1 and 2, because in New Vegas you have to voice every line, and the times when it was made is different (there's some touchy subjects in the game, but it's nothing compared to 1 and 2).
2 and 1 are superior, objectively. I started with Fallout 3 and thought it was the best shit ever. That was 5 years ago. I've beaten 1 and 2 last year, so no nostalgia goggles.

I never knew Primm was a real city until I watched Ray Donovan

>requires skill in other areas.

Today I learned on Cred Forums - Clicking on an enemy than watching your character auto attack them to death =/= skill

Why is FO1&2 combat terrible, tell me.

Says somebody who has never played the game.

So tell me, how do you allocate your actions points when facing enemies that are much higher than you, especially when there's a lot of them?

Because moving your mouse over an enemies weak points and clicking is harder? Especially when combined with fallout 3/nv/4 shit AI and VATS...

You know you can say the same thing about FPSes, right?

>go to /vg/ to talk about classic Fallout
>there are two threads, a "Fallout General" and a "Classic Fallout General"
>figure the Fallout general is for 3, 4, and New Vegas
>classic is for 1 + 2, maybe the BoS games
>Fallout General is just Fallout 4
>Classic Fallout is just New Vegas

New Vegas combat is serviceable. Beats a lot of FPS-RPG hybrids out there.

>all of this nostalgia faggotry
>the obligatory "hurr, I played the game last year, believe me!" comment at the end to justify this amount of barf

There's literally no reason to use VATS in Fallout 1 and 2 either because the game is ridiculously easy and requires literally no skill in its combat system. Fucking insufferable fanboy

Because even their buggy unfinished messes are better than a lot of polished AAA games.

No they aren't.

hey Obsidian shill, none of the 3d fallouts require an ounce of skill.

>allocating action points

Top kek, like I said. The game is nothing but an overglorified skill check. The combat literally plays by itself.

There's a reason isometric trash died out. It was dated trash used in a 2D era and only existed out of technical limitations yet you hipster faggots unironically think it was the preferred choice of the developers.

Yes, requiring to actually aim with your mouse and use the terrain to your advantage (i.e cover) does require more user input than clicking on your enemy with your gun equipped and letting the game play by itself.

You literally can't.

Then that's 0.5 ounces more skill required than what is found in Fallout 1 and 2 :^)

wow, so hard to move my mouse over the enemy and click repeatedly. Or even worse just go into VATS and let the game play by itself

I'm literally playing the game as we speak, and considering I am only 18, nostalgia isn't a factor. 1 and 2 are better, hands down you Obsidiot.

>no reason to use VATS in Fallout 1 and 2
Try beating the game without VATS, it's a lot harder. With VATS you aim at crucial points like the head or the legs etc, it was an essential part of the game and everyone who played it used it, because without it you can just hit the enemy generally and, at very best, you'd get a critical, but that was rare.
>implying I'm lying about playing 1 and 2 last year
I am 20 years old who was a nintenbabby so I missed on a lot of other stuff, am catching up now, Fallout 1 and 2 are one of those games, I've beaten 3 and New Vegas before those two.
>no skill in its combat system
The best proof that it requires skill - try going blind into Fallout 2, and then New Vegas. In New Vegas, you can't fuck up with whatever build you pick. You can specialize in one weapon and still use effeciently a different weapon type because guess what, the combat is in real time with pseudoturn-based shit (because of VATS still remaining in the game, even though it's absolutely useless as I said above), so it doesn't matter. In 2, you stick with what you are specialized for. Plus you can easily make a shitty character if you don't analyse the game. One of the reasons a lot of people dropped 1 and 2 is because they couldn't make a character. 1 and 2 are RPGs in the truest sense of that word. They're also CRPGs, meaning they're pleb filter. New Vegas is watered down bastard child which is god-tier compared to other modern games, but shitty overall.

>enemy moves
>you miss your shot because your aim sucks dick

Git gud faggot

Why can't Obsidian shills ever not chimp out?

>OP getting wrecked in the thread
>starts raging and insulting people
What a sad sight.

>enemy moves
>move mouse with him

Are you disabled? Is that it? Is that why you think generic FPS gameplay against AI is hard?

>it's a lot harder
It really isn't if you get Fast Shot and use Burst weapons with good Luck and Better Criticals.
>They're also CRPGs, meaning they're pleb filter.
did you actually just typed this shit out unironically

Character building you fucking dumbass. I literally said I wasn't talking about combat. People with an IQ this low should be gassed.

>Try beating the game without VATS,

Literally did and no it's not. There's no need to using vats, your enemies don't move. VATS makes up for shitty aim in the 3D fallouts whereas the same benefit doesn't exist in 2Dshit because there's literally zero depth/movement or skill during the combat. The enemy stands and you click on it.

That's not an oversimplification, that's literally all there is too it.

>I am 20 years old who was a nintenbabby

Timestamp your birth certificate.

>In New Vegas, you can't fuck up with whatever build you pick.

Hardcore mode New Vegas >>>> Anything in babbies first RPG Fallout 1 and 2

The reason people dropped fallout 1 and 2 is the same reason the developer went out of business and handed the rights over to Bethesda. Nobody likes isometric trash.

>ywn be this fucking asshurt over a video game

>the same reason the developer went out of business and handed the rights over to Bethesda
that's not what actually went on with the franchise, I think you are just trolling at this point though
>Nobody likes isometric trash.
I guess that's why Pillars/Original Sin/Shadowrun kickstarters were massively successful.

Your post proves you never played FO1/2

>1 and 2 are better

1 hour long game and "DUDE, REFERENCE, LMFAO" better than New Vegas?

Top kek, I don't see legions of Fallout fans begging for the new Fallout to be isometric, know why? Because it's fucking shit and nothing you say will ever change that simple fact.

Isometric is an irrelevant genre that nobody outside of the most cancerous hipsterfaggots miss.

>I guess that's why Pillars/Original Sin/Shadowrun kickstarters were massively successful.
>two literal who games and 1 mediocre game that nobody talks about anymore

Witcher 3 says hello.

>"DUDE, REFERENCE, LMFAO"
>I have never played a game but still parrot memes I hear on Cred Forums: the post
You act like the game is centered around cultural references when in reality there are just a couple of easter eggs.

>I don't see legions of Fallout fans begging for the new Fallout to be isometri
Legions of FO fans also think 4 was amazing.
Different game with a different scope. Both approaches have their audiences.

>obsidiots still this mad

Somebody has never been to NoMutantsAllowed.

Judging by your poor "arguments", at best you've played both 1 and 2 for around a hour or two. And the system in CRPGs is perfect, only problem I have is with games like Baldur's Gate 1 and 2 where it's hard to control a party of 6 characters because they hit walls and turn around while walking etc.
Out of curiosity, what are your favorite video games?

>There's no need to using your vats, your enemies don't move
Where's the reading comprehension? Let me cite myself:
>With VATS you aim at crucial points like the head or the legs etc, it was an essential part of the game and everyone who played it used it, because without it you can just hit the enemy generally and, at very best, you'd get a critical, but that was rare.
I never said that you need VATS because enemies move, it's because the fights are tougher if you don't aim at specific body parts.
>hereas the same benefit doesn't exist in 2Dshit because there's literally zero depth/movement or skill during the combat
Yes, zero movement, because it's a TURN-BASED strategy. But there is skill involved. Most primarily in the making of the character, that affects the combat.
>Timestamp your birth certificate
Was this supposed to be funny? I can't prove to you my identity anyways, but that's irrelevant if the arguments are good.
>Hardcore mode New Vegas >>>> Anything in babbies first RPG Fallout 1 and 2
Hardcore mode in New Vegas is hard, yes, but don't compare it to 1 and 2, it doesn't come close.

>gassed

That's a right reserved for kikes like yourself.

>enemy moves
>have to actually move the mouse to keep it on the target while accounting for the terrain/cover

As opposed to

>enemy never moves
>just click on him and watch as the auto attacks roll in with a random dice roll determining the outcome

You're not making a good case for Failout 1 and 2

>has literally no argument
>muh jews
I think Cred Forums is more your speed you underage little Obsidishit

>have to actually move the mouse to keep it on the target while accounting for the terrain/cover

Are you implying this is hard? I ask you again, are you disabled?

Why do you claim that they are not without a shred of evidence to your side?
You never played Fallout 2 I see.

>combat is the only aspect of any game
What about lore, world building, dialogue, character management, writing quality, game progression, etc. If you are so obsessed with combat just go play a fighting game.

cont. >babbies first RPG Fallout 1 and 2
1 and 2 are anything but babbies first RPG. Babbies first RPG is Fallout 3, Skyrim etc.
New Vegas is babbies first partially serious RPG. It's the first step towards not being a pleb and enjoying deeper more complex game. I understand your love for the game, but you have a long way to go. Hopefully you won't stay at this level forever.
>The reason people dropped fallout 1 and 2 is the same reason the developer went out of business and handed the rights over to Bethesda. Nobody likes isometric trash.
I doubt you have knowledge on the video game industry, because your claims aren't true.
I actually sometimes doubt your seriousness, this looks like a big bait to me, but who knows.

Cut him some slack, he's retaliating because New Vegas is his first, if not one of the only mildly, mildly serious games he's played. A lot of other people have been through his phase too.

>Judging by your poor "arguments", at best you've played both 1 and 2 for around a hour or two.
Fallout 2 was literally my first RPG ever, like 12 years ago or so.
>And the system in CRPGs is perfect
Like, this sentence is so idiotic I can't even wrap my head around it. They use different systems, and even the ones that use, say, DnD often implement it differently (compare BG and ToEE).
>what are your favorite video games
Why should it matter? Do you think I'm with "FO1 and 2 are complete garbage" guy here? They're not, they have some nice points. I still like 2, even though it's really, really idiotic in places. I don't like it because it's a "pleb filter", whatever that means.

>With VATS you aim at crucial points like the head or the legs etc
Literally the exact same mechanic is in New Vegas with even more of a purpose because the enmies actually move. Shooting the leg of an enemy is Fallout 1 and 2 is the most ironically invalid move you could make because the fuckers never move, they're static. Whereas shooting and crippling the leg of a charging Deathclaw is a huge strategic advantage.
> it's because the fights are tougher if you don't aim at specific body parts.
No they're not.
>Yes, zero movement, because it's a TURN-BASED strategy
You mean TURN-BASED casual shit, because there's zero strategy required in those casual pieces of shit.
>Was this supposed to be funny?
Evidence is never intended as humor. Back up your age or don't assume that anybody will believe your baseless claims.
>but that's irrelevant if the arguments are good.
This statement is also irrelevant because your arguments are not good.
>Hardcore mode in New Vegas is hard, yes, but don't compare it to 1 and 2, it doesn't come close.
Hahahahahahaha.

Isometric RPGs are the most casual games on the internet. There's literally ZERO(0) skill required to play them. The only skill is keeping your gear up to par, that's literally it.

Enjoy your Telltale tier casual walking simulators faggot

>he doesn't know about the restoration mods

You sound like you recently discovered RPGCodex and are taking the stuff written there a bit too seriously.

>enemies are static
DO you know what static means? Just accept that RPGs and FPS games use different areas of skill and we can all walk away happy.

VATS in 3/NV is inherently broken and is basically "push button to win the game"-

Stream that game, if you're so great!

>Are you implying this is hard? I ask you again, are you disabled?

Can you even read you literal retard? I never said New Vegas's combat was hard or even good. It's just objectively more difficult and better than Fallout 1 and 2s combat system which speaks more to how shit the combat was in those games than anything else.

>tfw you will never out yourself as a jew by getting triggered over a holocaust insult

Cred Forums don't even believe that the holocaust happened, your argument isn't even informed, Goldstein

All of which get shat on by New Vegas.

>Fallout 2 was literally my first RPG ever, like 12 years ago or so
Like you said to me - give me the certificate.
Basically, this shit is irrelevant, give me the arguments.
>Like, this sentence is so idiotic
>Like
Why are you writing like this? What are you, a 12 year old?
>They use different systems, and even the ones that use, say, DnD often implement it differently (compare BG and ToEE).
Alright? What are you even trying to say with this? You made a statement, but it looks like you thought it would negate my claim that CRPGs are perfect. Are you bothered by the fact that CRPGs have variations? That's true, but they share similar things at their core.
>Why should it matter?
I am just curious. Again, like above, you can't prove that those games which you name are your favorite, I just want to see your answer.
>Do you think I'm with "FO1 and 2 are complete garbage" guy here?
Not at all.
>even though it's really, really idiotic in places
It overdoes it with jokes at times, and it's less darker than 1, but other than that it's an amazing game.
>"pleb filter", whatever that means
Isn't it obvious by the name? It filters plebs because it's not an easy game to get into. You can really easily fuck up when building a character, the game is really non-linear etc.
I tried 2 for the first time around 6 years ago and I dropped it after an hour. Then I tried it again 3 years ago, and dropped it again. Finally, I tried it a year ago and it clicked completely.

because they, objectively, are

>moving your mouse is difficult
Wew, confirmed for disabled.I pity people who actually find FO3/NV/4 combat hard, you truly are the retards of the world.

1 = NV > Tactics > 2 >>> 3 > 4

This, I had no problems with getting crit shots just by using true iron sights and crouching

This is why I can't take certain faggots on /cfog/ seriously.

You fucks genuinely think Fallout 1 and 2 are some "2deep4thecasuals" RPG when they were one of the most mainstream RPGs when they released.

There's nothing complex about them. Their combat systems require zero thought compared to Baldur's Gate 2 for example and are just outright shit. You really strike me as somebody who has only played Fallout 1 and 2 when it comes to the isometric genre.

And yes, New Vegas is more challenging and less casual than Fallout 1 and 2, saying that FO1/2 is more difficult than Hardcore mode is just an outright lie and you know it.

Because they are, NV is great, but Gamebryo ruins it

>implying I was triggered
Even if I was Jewish, do you consider someone replying to you "being triggered"

Didn't think you had an argument.

>Like you said to me - give me the certificate

I was the one who asked you for a certificate, dipshit. Not the guy you're replying to.

>Like you said to me - give me the certificate.
>Basically, this shit is irrelevant, give me the arguments.
what
>Why are you writing like this?
Why are you bothered by the way I'm writing?
>they share similar things at their core
It's the execution that matters, though.
>you can't prove that those games which you name are your favorite
again, just what
>It overdoes it with jokes at times
"""at times""", hah. More like almost constantly. But hey, could've been worse, google "Burrows".

Your entire argument is moving your mouse is hard. You are literally a potato, and VATS completely makes FO3/NV/4 a child's play game for disabled people like you who can't into FPS.

>yfw

>with even more purpose
How can you even think this? How is there a purpose to a system that targets the body parts for you, when you can LITERALLY target the body parts yourself?
>Shooting the leg of an enemy is Fallout 1 and 2 is the most ironically invalid move you could make because the fuckers never move, they're static
But they move - during their turns. If you cripple them, they can't fucking move and come near you to kill you. How can you not grasp this simple turn-based strategy concept?
>ironically invalid
What the fuck does this even mean? Is this even applicable to anything existing?
>No they're not.
Great refutation there.
>TURN-BASED casual shit
Great refutation there, again.
>Back up your age
I can't literally back up anything, neither can you, or anyone else here. The only thing that matter are arguments, I don't give a fuck if you're a 10 year old or a 60 year old, what you say counts, not your age. Someone young can be smart, and someone old stupid.
>This statement is also irrelevant because your arguments are not good
The statement itself gives value to other statements, not itself. Of course it's not an "argument" for the quality of the game, it's an argument for the quality of the conversation. Jesus Christ, are you 15?

I only visited their site once, and that's to see their top 75 RPG list. I'm not even into WRPGs a lot, I've beaten less than 50.

I don't get it. Since when am I jewish?

>Your entire argument is moving your mouse is hard

Quote me where I specifically said "moving your mouse is hard".

they are all 3 made by the same people

doesn't matter which one is better, they are the only good fallout games and the fanbase of all three should band together and form a former rebellion against the Bethesda.

>How is there a purpose to a system that targets the body parts for you
I actually think VATS is an alright idea, it's there for people who suck at FPS. Replaces player skill with character skill. FO3 implementation is way too OP though, 85% DR is just stupid.

You said something along the lines of "keeping your gun pointed at the enemy takes skill". In other words, moving your mouse is hard.

>it's there for people who suck at FPS
Alright, now we're talking because it's an actual good argument for this thing to even exist in an FPS game. And maybe the only thing. But sadly, it invalidates the arguments of this one persistant guy who keeps shitting on CRPGs and claims New Vegas is for hardcore people.
>Replaces player skill with character skill
There's not a lot of skill to either. As I said, you can specialize in small guns, but use the energy weapons just as easily because the game is an FPS at its core.
>FO3 implementation is way too OP though, 85% DR is just stupid.
FO3 has a lot of problems, the worst being the raping of the lore and the insultingly bad game world. New Vegas got that right at least.

Since you got so defensive over it, Dr. Shekelburg

>How can you even think this?
Not an argument. I stated why by giving a direct example.
>when you can LITERALLY target the body parts yourself?
Because if your aim is shit you can't target anything? Why use VATS in Fallout 1 or 2 when you can just auto attack them to death with zero thought/input? That's why the combat system is better. It's more flexible and allows for differing play styles dependent on player skill (i.e aim).
>What the fuck does this even mean?
It means you're a faggot
>Great refutation there.
You never presented an argument to refute, you made a baseless statement with zero explanation behind it.
>Great refutation there, again.
See above
>I can't literally back up anything,
Yes you can, by providing a timestamp next to your birth certificate
>neither can you
There's nothing for me to backup. I didn't pull a generic "hurr, it's totally not nostalgia because I actually played the game for the first time last week!" tier claim.

Go to bed grandpa, your nostalgia faggotry is fizzling up again

Also

>he actually went to RPGCodex

My fucking sides, it all makes sense now.

Go rev up those donations for the isometric kikestarter trash!

>it invalidates the arguments of this one persistant guy who keeps shitting on CRPGs and claims New Vegas is for hardcore people
That guy is really stupid or a troll, I would suggest not replying to him because he replies back and his posts are not very interesting to scroll through.
>you can specialize in small guns, but use the energy weapons just as easily
Yeah, but not in VATS since it calculates chance to hit based on your skill. And really, a guns char will not be as effective with EWs as an EW char. Still more capable than in 1 or 2.

>You said something along the lines

Stop reading, quote me. Don't give me something you implied and don't give me some paraphrase.

Directly quote where I said moving the mouse is difficult.

>Since you got so defensive over it, Dr. Shekelburg
You seem to be confused. I wasn't offended or triggered or whatever, but when you are arguing with someone you can't pass off a criticism with simple ad hominem, that's arguing like a first grader.

...

>enemy moves
>have to actually move the mouse to keep it on the target while accounting for the terrain/cover
Here you whiny bitch. You are implying keeping the crosshair trained on an enemy is hardcore.

>and claims New Vegas is for hardcore people.

Quote exactly where I said that.

I just said that New Vegas is more difficult than Fallout 1 and 2 which literally doesn't say anything because those casual-shit games are not even remotely challenging and require zero skill or player input due to them being overglorified stat checks

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
By the way I'm not even the supposedly Jewish guy you replied to in the first place, I'm just trying to stop you from using fallacies in arguments in the future.

I don't see "this is difficult and challenging" anywhere in there. Mind highlighting it for me?

>you are implying

Stopped reading, quote where I said New Vegas's combat was difficult and(or) hard. Don't imply, quote.

...

They require a different kind of skill; instead of just following the enemy with your mouse you have to actually understand how skills work and which ones to use in order to make an effective build.

wew, why are NV fans so autistic?

>That guy is really stupid or a troll, I would suggest not replying to him because he replies back and his posts are not very interesting to scroll through.
Good idea actually, I don't know why I was doing it.
>Yeah, but not in VATS since it calculates chance to hit based on your skill
Just don't use the VATS when using that weapon. If you're near the enemy, for example on a distance of 5-6 steps, just aim and fire then, you can't miss no matter how bad of a player you are. Hell, you can add scopes to stuff, rendering VATS even more useless.
1 and 2 are pure-blooded RPGs, the character creation there is really important and you really are limited to what you specialize in.
The crux of the problem is that New Vegas is, like one guy perfectly said it in this thread, a bastard child. It tries to be both an FPS and an RPG, but it fails on both grounds. It fails on the RPG ground because it's not a full-blooded RPG, and if it isn't, that makes for a weird "RPG" system which is out of place. Sure, there's lots of dialogue, but because of the limitations (everything had to be voice acted, so this limited the amount of topics etc, and everything had to be put in front of you in detail because of 3D, this limited the imagination), it just doesn't work. At best, it's two steps above Diablo 2, which is a "RPG" too, but just because it has some stats and some other RPG traits. It fails in the FPS department because of its overall structure (also gamebryo is absolute shit).

>Fallout 1 and 2 are better than New Vegas?

Nobody thinks this. There's a reason the amount of people playing Fallout 1 and 2 are in the hundreds relative to New Vegas that stands in the 10s of thousands.

Fallout 1 and 2 were great at the time but are retardedly dated by todays standards and are completely hampered by the disgusting combat system in the same vein as Planescape Torment

> with your mouse you have to actually understand how skills work and which ones to use in order to make an effective build.

Literally have to do that in New Vegas if you play on anything above Normal.

This was the post you replied to
In it it says NV is not hard. You responded with a rebuttal, therefore you implied it yourself in the first place that New Vegas is hard/

Fallout 2 may have had a lot of cut content but 1 is barebones as fuck. I still think 2 is the better game and the politics between different towns was sweet. Without 2 there would be no New Vegas and it triggers me when people rate F2 as the worst out of the three when NV borrows so much from it.

>you implied

Stopped reading, quote where I said New Vegas's combat was difficult and(or) hard. Don't imply, quote.

Prove I am Jewish, or even offended in the first place by your posts that does not involve guessing or inferences.

Take your own advice; if you read my post, I'm telling you that you are the one who implied, not me. My post makes no implications.

...

>how skills work
you put points in Small Guns and now you can shoot them more accurately, whoa

skill selection in FO1/2 is pretty simple, it's the stats that you can fuck up since some of them are not good

>Just don't use the VATS when using that weapon.
You're still going to do less damage, and well, I wouldn't want to shoot some enemies in really close range if I could help it.

And really there's no problem. New Vegas is an action-RPG where the method of combat resolution is a pseud-FPS minigame. It's more player-involved than originals, slightly less of a pure RPG, which is fine. The combat is a bit stiff, but it's better than most FPS-RPGs out there, and quests, worldbuilding and verisimilitude are unparalleled. It definitely works for me.

Gamebryo is a fine engine by its own, I really don't know how Beth managed to fuck it up this hard.

Quote where I used the word "difficult, hard or challenging" to describe New Vegas's combat.

In fact, I literally said " I never said New Vegas's combat was hard or even good. It's just objectively more difficult and better than Fallout 1 and 2s combat system which speaks more to how shit the combat was in those games than anything else." in this post

Ah okay, no argument. All I asked for was one post and then you could go back to you rlogical fallacies.

...

Not the same guy but you are retarded if you think there is only one type of "skill" and it is reactions that can only exist in real time action games. According to you even the most complex strategy game tales no skill.

>Not the same guy

Who are you even trying to fool?

>nobody else can possibly disagree with me abloo bloo

One post, all I'm asking for. It doesn't even need to be a good one.

It's best for the game to either go full turn-based RPG or full FPS, the mixture of those two specific genres does not work.
>and quests, worldbuilding and verisimilitude are unparalleled
I beg to differ, primarily because of the game engine itself. The non-NPC models maybe can get a pass, but the NPCs look so horrible I almost couldn't play the game, it was almost Oblivion-tier at times.
The quests, wordbuilding and versimilitude can't be achieved with 3D RPGs in my opinion, because to create a vast world you would need to program and implement all of that. But take Planescape: Torment as an example. Sure, the textual descriptions do look like a cop-out, but your imagination is the best resource. You have the graphics which show the overall structure of things (the map which you're looking at), but for details of things you are seeing on that map, you need to use your imagination while reading the written descriptions. Same goes for outside events, because they didn't implement every plane in the game. It's a lot more rewarding and a better experience.

Its even worse in fallout 4 with blitz and the new crit system

>It's best for the game to either go full turn-based RPG or full FPS
Best for whom?
>the mixture of those two specific genres does not work
Doesn't work, again, for whom? Because it surely works for me.
>The quests, wordbuilding and versimilitude can't be achieved with 3D RPGs in my opinion
Being unable to accept abstractions in a 3D environment honestly seems like a personal problem to me.

...

>It's best for the game to either go full turn-based RPG or full FPS
Or full FPS RPG you mean? Which is exactly what New Vegas is.
>but the NPCs look so horrible I almost couldn't play the game, it was almost Oblivion-tier at times.
Are you seriously going full graphicsfag over a 2009 game in defense of Fallout 1 and 2?
>The quests, wordbuilding and versimilitude can't be achieved with 3D RPGs in my opinion, because to create a vast world you would need to program and implement all of that
What?
>you need to use your imagination
You can't be serious?

Are you unironically defending the technical limitations that forced FO1 and FO2 to rely more on descriptions by implying that they were the developers choice?

This is nostalgiafaggotry even I can't take seriously.

>The quests, wordbuilding and versimilitude can't be achieved with 3D RPGs in my opinion

Sucks for you then. The majority disagrees.

>full FPS RPG
There's no "full" FPS RPG, it's a mixture of two genres, it can't be full. At least not in the case of turn-based. Mixing turn-based RPG with real-time first person shooting is ridiculous.
>graphicsfag
The graphics in 1 and 2 have aged well. It's not detailed, but it's good. New Vegas, on the other hand, looks like shit. No, mods don't count.
>Are you unironically defending the technical limitations that forced FO1 and FO2 to rely more on descriptions by implying that they were the developers choice?
Yes, I am defending the technical limitations. The worlds will never be as developed in video games as before if they are made in 3D, because of reasons above.
And everything I said is valid, it's the best when you mix imagination with imagery. But I bet you don't read.
That's what I hate about video games in general. They can be amazing, but a good chunk of them is accessible to some stupid kid (not saying that's you, just wanted to mention this), some good games even. A kid can like Link to the Past too, even though he can't comprehend the genius craft of the game etc, it's just a fun thing to him.

The majority is in the wrong then. What is this, elementary school? If the majority claim something, it doesn't mean that something is true.

Because there ins't an illusion of choice.
>Also better than 3

You cant talk about kanye or radiohead on Cred Forums without getting shit on though.

Was fallout 4 that far from the other 2?

Friendly reminder that Fallout 1 and Fallout 2 aren't technically isometric games.

>it's my opinion that
next post
>if the majority disagrees with me they're wrong

hmm.

But...they are.

Fallout 1 is chock full of quests you can't finish due to essential NPCs and items being cut

Kind of on topic; Is there any WRpg for PC that allows me to build a character similarly to FONV where it had SPECIAL and Skills? Preferably a turn based combat, but anything is fine to be honest

Uh. Fallout 1 and 2?

I was hoping for a more fantasy setting. I tried Fallout 2 but I felt it was a bit too slow for my taste. Any way to improve this? I really want to like it as much as New Vegas

It just is pretty slow. You did see the speed slider right?

Speeding up the combat with the slider really helped that for me. Fallout is just slow paced in general, but that should hep the worst part of the slowness imo.

Arcanum? Vampire Bloodlines?

>136 posts
>39 posters

This explains all the samefag shitposting in this thread.

Bloodlines is probably a good, faster, RPG suggestion.

fucking discussion.... GET OFF MY BOARD

>3.5 posts per poster
Huh really makes you think.

>be me
>be trying out "le classics"
>skip fallout 1 because i dont like time limits
>suffer through fallout 2's god awful tutorial
>in some ooga booga nigger tribe village completely out of place in fallout
>have to travel to a town literally called "reddit"
>guide tells me to make a bee lion straight to san fransisco
>eventually end up at an enclave base
>dude in wizard robes thinks i'm a new recruit despite the fact that i'm literally in a vault suit and holding a spear
>loot and pillage the enclave base of top end gear
>waltz out with thousands of dollars, power armor, a super sledge, multiple guns, grenades and almost 12 levels of xp
>travel across the map to reddit
>spend the next hour killing rats
>one shot everything, take no damage at all
>get bored and uninstall

i thought these games were supposed to be HURRRR SO HARDCORE? i'm shit at turn based games but i literally didnt have a single challenge

kys

Nope. They're not that hard. They're just slightly harder to jump into with contemporary RPG conditioning.

F1 was very easy, and becomes even easier, a joke, once you get the Power Armor

tfw turbo plasma rifle with ten AP and fast shot

>not 12 AP

don't ever disrespect me again

So, any chance of a Fallout: New Mexico or Arizona coming from Obsidian, or did they burn their bridges with New Vegas?

:^)

>not going max Unarmed Power Fist with Fast Shot Trait and Bonus HtH Attacks + Better Criticals + 3 Action Boy + Slayer build

Fallout went to the shitter.png

Avellone would probably disagree!

Oh and of course not to mention 10 Agility.

Fallout is probably going to be great again.png

What a faggot

I was not the only one who hated and liked Fallout 4 right? Control-wise it was really fun. On the other hand, I hated with a burning passion the removal of skills and complex quest lines

It's like BoS. Good for some drunk timekilling but it's not really a good Fallout game, as it's developers got everything wrong about it's Falloutish traits.. It's like playable junk food.

Still amazes me shit bait like this can draw 160 replies. People must like arguing with cretins.

they removed so many rpg mechanics from the previous games it might as well be an open world sandbox fps

Don't google where to get the best items.
Don't savescum so you can avoid the random encounters to get said items
Also I'm pretty sure if you don't kill the robed guy he alerts the base and they all become hostile.

I'm pretty sure if you use a guidebook to play games the first time you're not the intended target audience.

You should just stop playing and come back to it when you forget the spoilers.

>using a guide
>asks why its so easy