People dislike Fallout 2?

S

StemeMcPhie

First time out of the vault
I'm not talking about disliking it because of "bad gameplay" or "bad graphics." I've seen a few people say that they dislike many elements of Fallout 2. I've heard people say that the developers only had ~8 months and that even they dislike Fallout 2. I can't find any sources for any of this though...

I personally do like Fallout 2, but there are things about it that I dislike (e.g. the entirety of Arroyo). I'm thinking maybe I put the game of a bit of a pedestal and I'm hoping someone could bring me back to reality.

...

To get a little off topic, I think Van Buren would have been a near perfect Fallout game. If they only had eight months to make Fallout 2, imagine what they would have come up with in 6 years. The design documents have been so goddamn interesting. I'm don't really hate Bethesda, but I do hold them partially responsible for that game never seeing the light of day.
 
I personally didn't like it for how silly and over-the-top it was. The villains are cartoonishly evil, and I don't like the whole "Chosen One" theme, even though it was meant as satire. It was also much easier for me to play through the game than for almost any other Fallout.

It's still good, though certainly not better than Fallout or New Vegas in my book.
 
Some people feel snobby about the amount of jokes and some locations being unfit (some more than others, and some inspite being well used and fleshed out).

Fallout 2 sure could've used a bit more "direction" and fleshing out, but the truth is that despite it's unfortuante flaws and somewhat rushed nature, it is still in some respects even better than its predecessor.
 
The developers liked F2.
The 8 month wasn't that bad, as they generally used the exact same engine. the wonderful thing in the game was it was filled with cool ideas - sure sign the developer loves its project.
The problem was, with that many element it was destined to be buggy as heck, and only community-testing could make it patched up. But that did not exist at that time, not even the concept (that's why the Restoration Project was such a hugh thing).

Personally I disliked the Temple of Arroyo (bloody long), that you could get to the back-entrance first visit the Raider Camp, that I never understood how to do the slaver quest, that many element went nowhere (grave digger, or Lenny's father digged up), being evil was clearly inferior, stupid character barely had anything of its own (you could literally include the dumb-playthrough elements in your normal playthrough through drugs), the constantly breaking party-AI (Vic, Marcus), that some solutions were clearly just abusing the engine (Made Man All Four), that even checking some special perks could crash the game, the Big Caravan Quest, the whole design (or lack of it) of Marcus' town...

Ye, there were elements you had good reason to dislike. But F2 is still the sole freeroaming game I enjoy(ed).
 
I enjoy Fallout 2, but it's my least favourite of the 'Original' trilogy.

I felt New Vegas was an apology for it while also paying tribute.

But yeah, the whole intro kills it for me, I'm not a fan of Elder Scrolls intros so a Dungeon at the start is Hell.
 
Lots of people thought Fallout 2 far more camp and over the top. They made no references to hide the references, and had lots of silly moments(A Ghost, a Talking Spore Plant, Temple of Trials)

That being said Fallout 2 has such a reactive world and is just so well-designed that I can forgive it's faults, and I even probably prefer it to Fallout 1.
 
StemeMcPhie said:
I'm not talking about disliking it because of "bad gameplay" or "bad graphics." I've seen a few people say that they dislike many elements of Fallout 2. I've heard people say that the developers only had ~8 months and that even they dislike Fallout 2. I can't find any sources for any of this though...

I personally do like Fallout 2, but there are things about it that I dislike (e.g. the entirety of Arroyo). I'm thinking maybe I put the game of a bit of a pedestal and I'm hoping someone could bring me back to reality.

...

To get a little off topic, I think Van Buren would have been a near perfect Fallout game. If they only had eight months to make Fallout 2, imagine what they would have come up with in 6 years. The design documents have been so goddamn interesting. I'm don't really hate Bethesda, but I do hold them partially responsible for that game never seeing the light of day.
Click to expand...

Fallout 2, for the time they had, is frightenly deep and vast.

Truly a masterpiece of its time.

There are some issues however, some caused by the rush (cut content), and some simply what the developers wanted (references and such).

Ultimately Fallout 2, if developed today, would have had a wild wasteland trait, but they didn't have the time or idea back then.
 
Fallout 2 is a hot mess rife with tons of gameplay/narrative flaws, but with all the references and in-jokes they put into the game, along with the amount of choice/impact you can actively make within the game world: I feel like the developers at Black Isle were passionate about the game they were making, and to me, that's the hallmark of any good product.
 
Different tone.
Also, I think I've heard complaints that it was more post-post-apocalyptic than post-apocalyptic?
 
00:49 said:
Different tone.
Also, I think I've heard complaints that it was more post-post-apocalyptic than post-apocalyptic?
Click to expand...

In the days long before FO3, this was a complaint I heard. I had forgotten all about it, untill now. A class-mate, we both hifived around when we both realized we were Fallout-players, but he scoffed hard at my enthusiasm for FO2. His main complaint was that it showed a society that had sortof cleaned up the rubble, and begun to rebuild, while FO1 was much more immediately post apocallyptic.
 
zegh8578 said:
In the days long before FO3, this was a complaint I heard. I had forgotten all about it, untill now. A class-mate, we both hifived around when we both realized we were Fallout-players, but he scoffed hard at my enthusiasm for FO2. His main complaint was that it showed a society that had sortof cleaned up the rubble, and begun to rebuild, while FO1 was much more immediately post apocallyptic.
Click to expand...

What did he think of Fallout 3?
 
Prone Squanderer said:
What did he think of Fallout 3?
Click to expand...

Like I said, this was long before. I have often wondered myself actually. It was at a a one-year animation course, in a remote "campus", it's a Scandinavian concept of "schools for fun", they grant legitimate courses, but focus on enjoyment, and count as for-profit private institutions

There was one more Fallout-player there, who was more on my "side of it", as he enjoyed both FO2 as well as Fallout Tactics, which the aforementioned guy did not even want to consider, almost as if it was absolutely blasphemous.
 
Fallout 2. 2 campy, too hokey, too dumb. But overall a worthy addition. Definitely my least favorite out of The good ones. (NEW VEGAS is best)
 
I tend to notice a lot of people focus on FO2's humor a lot, however allow me to point out that FO2 also had some seriously dark things going on in a lot of the quests or behind the scenes.

For example the orphan kid in New Reno that either runs away or never talks, You really can't do much other than feed the poor kid. This character was only placed there to show how children suffer in the FO world.

Without dragging it out I'm sure other could point out better references than I.
 
Einhanderc7 said:
I tend to notice a lot of people focus on FO2's humor a lot, however allow me to point out that FO2 also had some seriously dark things going on in a lot of the quests or behind the scenes.

For example the orphan kid in New Reno that either runs away or never talks, You really can't do much other than feed the poor kid. This character was only placed there to show how children suffer in the FO world.

Without dragging it out I'm sure other could point out better references than I.
Click to expand...
the kid who show where your car is ? i tough that was an escaped slave
 
Last edited:
Einhanderc7 said:
For example the orphan kid in New Reno that either runs away or never talks, You really can't do much other than feed the poor kid. This character was only placed there to show how children suffer in the FO world.
Click to expand...
You mean Cody?

I'm always amazed how much effort was put in to this extremely minor character.

Like, he will treat you differently based on whether you have Good or Evil Karma post-game, He will run away from Supermutant/Ghoul companions or characters in Power Armour, You even get unique dialogue options if you are a slaver(You can remark that you hope he gets sold in to slavery), there's also different dialogue depending on what type of food you give him, and you can even get him addicted to jet, or give him alcohol.

It's great just how much thought was put in by the devs in to all the different ways you can interact with a background character.
 
Einhanderc7 said:
I tend to notice a lot of people focus on FO2's humor a lot, however allow me to point out that FO2 also had some seriously dark things going on in a lot of the quests or behind the scenes.

For example the orphan kid in New Reno that either runs away or never talks, You really can't do much other than feed the poor kid. This character was only placed there to show how children suffer in the FO world.

Without dragging it out I'm sure other could point out better references than I.
Click to expand...

I think a lot of people can't look past the humour, which is fair, there's quite a lot of it.

It can be jarring when you go from 'dark sad tale' to 'whacky crazy adventure'.
 
I love Fallout 2 and I honestly go back and forth on which of the two originals I prefer because the original game had an overall more consistent tone, but the second game had far better locations and characters. I do understand the distaste for FO2's humor, but at least they weren't stupid enough to include an entire town populated by children or a settlement built around a 300 year old active nuke.
 
When it comes to the classics, I honestly play Fallout 2 way more.

Which is weird, as I find FO1's balance to be superior, FO2 messed up some of the human HP values and such. ;(

I guess its because it's larger and has more shit in it I guess?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top