Posted September 16, 2015
lolplatypus: But honestly, if the devs clearly don't take their own game seriously, why should the consumer.
Enebias: Then I ask you: should every game be taken seriously? I'm thinking about Saints Row (the Third is the only one I've palyed until now, but I'm sure the others are good examples as well) or (pun not intended) Serious Sam, for example: I'm sure the devs never even considered to take their games seriously, yet they are far from bad.
However, if I am not completely mistaken, as far as RPGs were concerned fantasy was the dominant setting with barely any scifi, let alone post apo. I'm way out on a limb here, but I assume part of Fallout's success was taking that setting and doing it right. Bleak, dark, with just the right pinch of black humor.
To get to the point, you're completely correct, at the very least while judging the game in a vacuum. I'd argue however that in comparison to the tone and atmosphere created by the original Fallout the sequel shat the bed big time. Question is, does that make it a bad sequel? I'd say it does, but that might be up to interpretation. Fallout might just be a weird series like that, I'd also disagree with you on Fallout 3. At the risk of inducing a sizable amount of facepalms, I think it's one of the strongest games ever.
I'm actually not sure I agree on that one. You are quite right, it takes a while for the first pistol to pop up, but the enemies up to that point took that into account and were fairly forgiving, weren't they? Of course, if it's your first time through and you are planning to go into energy weapons, things are slightly complicated iirc.
Post edited September 16, 2015 by lolplatypus