@ Hardcore Fallout 1&2 Fan

Discussion in 'Fallout: New Vegas Discussion' started by Falloutsurvivor, Oct 21, 2010.

  1. Humpsalot2

    Humpsalot2 First time out of the vault

    38
    Oct 17, 2010
    it could be im just sick of the JRPG standard "ive lost my memory". Think that is a lazy way to start a game. Sometimes it ends up cool like in KOTOR 2, you playing the bad guy seemed to be the plan at the start for that story, instead of hmmmm lets say we have a character that lost his memory and go from there lazy bs.

    Ya the being chased by robots does sound cool for VB. gotta go, class.
     
  2. TwinkieGorilla

    TwinkieGorilla This ghoul has seen it all

    Oct 19, 2007
    Eh, maybe you should stop playing generic JRPGs then? :|
     
  3. sydney_roo

    sydney_roo Still Mildly Glowing

    282
    Nov 24, 2008
    Owned.
     
  4. The Dutch Ghost

    The Dutch Ghost Grouchy old man of NMA Moderator

    Jan 11, 2004
    Yet it spoke more to my imagination than "We need you to go out to save the community."
     
  5. BarackSays

    BarackSays It Wandered In From the Wastes

    134
    Jul 18, 2008
    Fair enough
     
  6. Deon

    Deon It Wandered In From the Wastes

    148
    Aug 24, 2009
    Yeah, the whole "chosen one" scheme which united F1 and F2 is gone forever...
     
  7. Ausdoerrt

    Ausdoerrt I should set a custom tit

    Oct 28, 2008
    I like the NV plot. Sure, it's personal and "narcissistic", but hey that was an interesting way to throw the player into the world. A very plausible one too. The nicest thing about it is that it take away that "you're special" feel that was prominent in FO3. You're really just a part of the world and none of it revolves around you.
     
  8. Little Robot

    Little Robot sup Orderite

    Sep 29, 2010
    Although I do agree that it takes away some of that "you're special" feeling, I was feeling as if the world revolved around me when I [spoiler:2ec3c53d8f]talked to Mr. House, and then was summoned to the leader of NCR and the leader of Caesar's Legion.[/spoiler:2ec3c53d8f]
     
  9. Falloutsurvivor

    Falloutsurvivor First time out of the vault

    70
    Feb 9, 2010
    I loved Fallout 1 and 2..... kind of liked fallout 3 only for the exploration........ but Fallout New Vegas blown me away.
     
  10. sea

    sea Vault Senior Citizen

    Oct 5, 2009
    [spoiler:934e954715]Sure you aren't confusing the games? KotOR's plot twist is "the player character the bad guy", while the sequel's is "the character knows stuff, but the player doesn't".[/spoiler:934e954715]
     
  11. Anarchosyn

    Anarchosyn Still Mildly Glowing

    207
    Sep 26, 2008
    Per this, I was curious if Fallout NV forces certain skills down your throat like Fallout 3 (a game which almost seems to demand you have repair and a high level combat skill, etc). Is NV more free form in the builds you can make work or still kind of regressive in this respect?

    From another forum:

    Agree?
     
  12. sea

    sea Vault Senior Citizen

    Oct 5, 2009
    Yeah, you still need to have at least one decent combat skill,unless you rely on stealth. The main story doesn't seem to require you to kill anyone, but you'd have to work pretty hard to sneak past everybody. That said, if you don't mind running from enemies, you can get through most situations in the game without too much bloodshed. There's definitely side-quests which require fighting, though, like taking out Legion outposts for the NCR, rescuing hostages, that sort of thing, but as far as I can tell it's not needed. The biggest problem I have is that while the quests themselves give you lots of options most of the time, the number of random enemies makes building a character who doesn't have any combat ability just impractical.

    The simple fact is that as an open-world game, with so much more to explore, and a lot more time to spend, there is a lot more combat - rather than specific encounters you have control over, instead you're going to be finding a lot of enemy mobs out in the desert to fight. That's just the nature of the design, and I don't think you'll change that fact without moving away from the FPS elements altogether. At the very least, the violence is given a lot more context and backing, enemies spawn more slowly (so you can actually clear out the baddies from an area and expect them to stay away), and you are fighting far more wildlife than human enemies.
     
  13. Anarchosyn

    Anarchosyn Still Mildly Glowing

    207
    Sep 26, 2008
    Thanks for the reply.

    You know, when I take off my rose tinted glasses, I guess it was pretty difficult to play a pacifist in Fallout 1 and 2 as well (especially 2 where you were definitely forced into battle on more than one occasion).
     
  14. sea

    sea Vault Senior Citizen

    Oct 5, 2009
    Fallout 2 is pretty much impossible to play as a pacifist, considering how much combat there is in the endgame and the final boss. If you want to do it, you still need to get your companions to do everything for you, and it requires a lot of luck on top of that. Fallout 1 is a lot easier to get through that way, but then, you can also beat Fallout 1 in about five or ten minutes if you know what you're doing. Short of abusing the start combat/end combat bug to avoid taking damage, or relying entirely on Stealth Boys it's extremely hard to finish the game without killing anything at all.

    New Vegas doesn't seem too different in that respect, but it's a much, much larger game than those two, and so it becomes increasingly implausible to go through it without firing a single shot. Even if you took out the entire wasteland and just restricted it to towns and other important areas, it'd still be a good deal larger than Fallout 1, and probably still bigger than Fallout 2 in terms of the number of locations.
     
  15. TwinkieGorilla

    TwinkieGorilla This ghoul has seen it all

    Oct 19, 2007
    i have plenty to comment on...but it's getting late. tomorrow!
     
  16. Humpsalot2

    Humpsalot2 First time out of the vault

    38
    Oct 17, 2010
    The go out into the world and save us made me feel like a badass with carte blanche. I guess to be clear i should let you know that i feel like an asshole if i play FO3/nv as a screw everyone over bc there is no reason, or urgency to the situation. But in Fo1/2 there is that urgency and if that meant you had to get the job done by any means, and with that urgency/people depending on you i felt more free to take immoral shortcuts.
     
  17. Nalano

    Nalano Still Mildly Glowing

    240
    Jan 20, 2009
    There's no "I lost my memory" for any of the Fallouts - 1, 2, 3 or NV. 1 and 2, you were just starting out in the world. 3, you're born in the game. NV, you're a nobody, but in all of them you always know who you are.
     
  18. sea

    sea Vault Senior Citizen

    Oct 5, 2009
    Actually, in New Vegas you're shot in the head and have memory loss as a result of that, at least short term, otherwise it'd make no sense for you to not know the various factions, locations and so forth. Pretty much the only thing you know about yourself is based on the note left on your body detailing your courier job. Pretty much stock standard amnesia. By contrast, all the other games have treated you as an outsider, isolated from the rest of the world.

    Not so sure, really. There are a lot of choices in Fallout 1 and 2 that are very obviously "bad" and unnecessarily so, such as working with Gizmo when you have a much smarter alternative in Killian, or enlisting as a slaver in The Den. I never had to rationalise a good or evil deed based on my needs as a character, even with the fairly scarce resources in the first two games.
     
  19. Humpsalot2

    Humpsalot2 First time out of the vault

    38
    Oct 17, 2010
    Woah, hold on there before this becomes an entirely different argument. I did not say there were not evil choices to make just to be evil, or that you couldnt play evil just because that is how you wanted to play, that is a way different argument than I was making.

    The argument im presenting is more along the lines of this:

    For example:

    You see a merchant in ANY fallout game, he says "Hi"

    Say, in that situation for ALL fallout games you decide to blow his head off for his stuff.

    My argument is mainly this:

    In FO1- i feel i can rationalize this, to a greater extent than 3/NV, or a bunch of people will die from dehydration

    In FO2- Dude keeps coming into my head telling me to hurry the hell up or village will die, so i feel i can rationalize same action, to a greater extent than 3/NV, to save people/loved ones/get dude off my back

    In FO3- I feel if i make the choice to kill this merchant for his stuff that i am just being a greedy little bitch and have no other rationalization for it (again, not arguing that you should play this way or that way, that is the way these different games make me and others feel in the same situation). I especially felt bad bc i wanted 3 dogs headband and then realized he wasnt broadcasting his good message to the wastelands anymore, so i reloaded the game.

    In FONV: Dont have a memory or any goal except a self driven one, so basically same FO3 feeling comes from that. (this "self driven vs story driven" is a common debate about which is better amongst devs of all games of late)

    PS / sidenote, even though i choose to play the "good guy/hero/helper" to everyone in the game, i might still knife the leader of NCR for his armor. +20 ap is such a big jump, that is about the same difference between the ap you would have at 1 agi and the ap you would have at 8 agi. An easier choice to me than killing 3 dog for his +1 luck headpiece... but still me being a little greedy bitch bc i know i could beat the game/every mission without it, it will be a selfish move if i go through with it.
     
  20. sea

    sea Vault Senior Citizen

    Oct 5, 2009
    I understand what you're saying, but I still think the rationalisation given for doing bad things in Fallout and Fallout 2 is pretty poor. Resources aren't so scarce that shooting random people in the face is justified. "I brutally murdered this merchant for ammo so I could kill a bunch more people which probably wasn't necessary to complete my quest in the first place" isn't a very compelling argument in my eyes. Maybe it makes you feel a bit better, but it's pretty shaky to me. Ultimately you're showing a lack of respect for the lives of others.

    The fact that the games do a very poor job of ever motivating you as a player to save your people doesn't help - why should I care about all those faceless people in Vault 13? The game tells me I'm supposed to like them and it's my duty to save them, but it hasn't provided me a reason to do so beyond the fact that it's the plot. It's the same problem some films run into - in Star Wars Episode II, for instance, we're asked to identify with characters because of their roles in the story and not because they behave in emotionally engaging ways. Maybe as a writer you think it's "obvious" why players should care about Vault 13, but I know that as a player I was much more interested in exploring the wasteland than I was in saving those xenophobic, undeveloped NPCs in Vault 13.