Posted May 08, 2011
I wanted to hear peoples opinion on this one. I myself can't really decide between the two.
SonOfARaptor
New User
Registered: Jul 2010
From United States
MackieStingray
Threadkiller
Registered: Jan 2011
From United States
Posted May 08, 2011
In my opinion, Fallout 1 has the better overarching narrative and pretty much universally interesting NPCs. Its gameplay is more balanced for multiple types of player.
Fallout 2 has the better gameplay and better replay value, and its NPCs interact better even when they are varyingly either more or less compelling. However, it's more combat-intensive, requiring much more patience for non-combat characters.
Basically, I consider them tied, but feel if Fallout 1 had been written with the same experience and polish as Fallout 2, such as if it had been the second game released on the engine instead of the first, then it would be hands down the better game.
It wasn't, so it's merely awesome.
Fallout 2 has the better gameplay and better replay value, and its NPCs interact better even when they are varyingly either more or less compelling. However, it's more combat-intensive, requiring much more patience for non-combat characters.
Basically, I consider them tied, but feel if Fallout 1 had been written with the same experience and polish as Fallout 2, such as if it had been the second game released on the engine instead of the first, then it would be hands down the better game.
It wasn't, so it's merely awesome.
Waltorious
New User
Registered: Dec 2008
From United States
Posted May 08, 2011
They're both great. I liked Fallout 1 a little better though, because I felt it had a tighter story and atmosphere. It's also worth noting that Fallout 1 is shorter than Fallout 2... I never got to the highest levels and best perks before finishing Fallout 1, but I easily managed them in Fallout 2.
I would recommend playing the games in order. While you can play Fallout 2 without playing Fallout 1 first, there are definitely references to the events of the first game and it's more meaningful if you've already played Fallout 1.
I would recommend playing the games in order. While you can play Fallout 2 without playing Fallout 1 first, there are definitely references to the events of the first game and it's more meaningful if you've already played Fallout 1.
MackieStingray
Threadkiller
Registered: Jan 2011
From United States
Posted May 08, 2011
Besides, the changes to gameplay made in Fallout 2 may render some aspects of Fallout 1 a little sterile or even frustrating if played in the opposite order.
SonOfARaptor
New User
Registered: Jul 2010
From United States
Posted May 09, 2011
Fallout 2 has the better gameplay and better replay value, and its NPCs interact better even when they are varyingly either more or less compelling. However, it's more combat-intensive, requiring much more patience for non-combat characters.
Basically, I consider them tied, but feel if Fallout 1 had been written with the same experience and polish as Fallout 2, such as if it had been the second game released on the engine instead of the first, then it would be hands down the better game.
It wasn't, so it's merely awesome.
Post edited May 09, 2011 by SonOfARaptor
Jarmo
- censored -
Registered: Jan 2009
From Finland
Posted May 09, 2011
Besides the improvements to gameplay in FO2, the main difference is in the overall attitude.
FO2 is more tongue in cheek, (almost?) every location contains something humorous. Works for me, but can break the immersion. FO1 is the more consistent package.
FO2 is more tongue in cheek, (almost?) every location contains something humorous. Works for me, but can break the immersion. FO1 is the more consistent package.
SonOfARaptor
New User
Registered: Jul 2010
From United States
Posted May 09, 2011
Very true, but I still wish they had gone a bit father with the Wasteland like Fallout 2 did. Then again it was the first, so yeah.
Lexx.848
Apple thief
Registered: Sep 2008
From Germany
Posted May 12, 2011
Well, Fallout 1 has much more details / a much more detailed gameworld, which Fallout 2 couldn't deliver due to its big size and short development cycle. Overally, Fallout 2 has a lot more content than Fallout 1, but in some cases, it actually has less.
One good example being the encounters, which have been much more detailed and unique in the first game.
One good example being the encounters, which have been much more detailed and unique in the first game.
Post edited May 12, 2011 by Lexx
MackieStingray
Threadkiller
Registered: Jan 2011
From United States
Posted May 12, 2011
At first, I was trying to figure out how so. Then...
The used car salesman!
Good gravy that was awesome! And somehow, because nothing except the rifle itself actually was strictly incorrect to the setting, I never felt like it broke my willing suspension of disbelief!
Heck, I even found myself referring to the rifle as the BB Railgun.
The used car salesman!
Good gravy that was awesome! And somehow, because nothing except the rifle itself actually was strictly incorrect to the setting, I never felt like it broke my willing suspension of disbelief!
Heck, I even found myself referring to the rifle as the BB Railgun.
shantae.
Ret - 2 - Gog
Registered: Oct 2008
From Canada
Posted May 13, 2011
Both are great, but if I had to choose, I would say Fallout 2.
Travalanche
New User
Registered: May 2011
From United States
Posted May 14, 2011
Fallout 2 was better, the original was way too difficult in every way. Also the interface in 2 was much improved and in the original it took me forever to figure out what was going on. I preferred the originals story but it was just hell to finish it and it felt more like a chore to play than anything.
But the second one was amazing and I spent many hours playing it and beat it around 5 times.
But the second one was amazing and I spent many hours playing it and beat it around 5 times.
Sardonic13
Skull Knight
Registered: Oct 2008
From United States
Posted May 15, 2011
Fallout 2 has the better gameplay and better replay value, and its NPCs interact better even when they are varyingly either more or less compelling. However, it's more combat-intensive, requiring much more patience for non-combat characters.
Basically, I consider them tied, but feel if Fallout 1 had been written with the same experience and polish as Fallout 2, such as if it had been the second game released on the engine instead of the first, then it would be hands down the better game.
It wasn't, so it's merely awesome.
Concerning the story telling differences: Fallout 1 had a tighter, better written primary quest. Fallout 2's primary quest was lacking simply because it was essentially a carbon copy of Fallout 1: tech fetch quest becomes save humanity quest. Where Fallout 2 really out shined Fallout 1 was in the politics and interplay (no pun intended) between cities. In Fallout 1, most of the locations were essentially independent from each other. In Fallout 2, nearly all of the locations are interwoven into a tangled and nuanced power struggle and the player has the option to tip the scales in many and various ways.