this post was submitted on 28 Jun 2023
18 points (100.0% liked)
Fallout
2418 readers
390 users here now
Welcome to c/Fallout, the unofficially official community to discuss the franchise.
Be sure to check out [email protected], moderated by a friend of ours :)
Rules:
- Don't be a dick (this includes bigotry/prejudice)
- Stay on topic
- Mildly NSFW content is allowed, but anything more is removed
PS: Don't use the fandom! please use fallout.wiki for everything instead.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It depends what you want out of the games.
Original Fallout (1&2 are both fantastic) are some of the greatest CRPGs ever made. Back when Western RPG meant trying to make computer games simulate Tabletop Roleplaying games (D&D). There are a TON of quest routes and decisions. You could make a slick evil character that manipulates their way through the entire game. That kind of thing. Hell. You don’t even have to finish the main quest in FO1 to beat the game. The turn based combat still holds up really well if you like that kind of thing. Action point systems are fun.
New Fallout (Bethesda and Obsidian). New Vegas. It has some of the OG Fallout creators on it (working for Obsidian). Play this if you’re more interested in sandboxy exploration while also having a bit deeper quest pathing than the Bethesdas games. But it does feel clunky from a shooter perspective. It’s the same game as 3 with much better writing and quests.
3 and 4 are more the Bethesda open world. Walk 10 feet, explore something interesting, walk 10 feet and explore something interesting. The actual ROLE playing aspect of playing a role is very shallow. 4 is probably a better choice if you’re not interested in role playing. The gun play and everything feels significantly better than New Vegas and 3. 3 was clunky even when it came out in most aspects. If you just want a solid sandbox game and don’t care about writing or story I’d say just play 4.
Oh and chronologically it doesn’t matter. They’re all basically their own contained story.
Pretty sure that Fallout 2 is more a direct follow up to 1 than the other games (isn't there a sidequest that directly explains how Fallout 1 starts?) But other than that, there's only a couple references in 4 about 3 and New Vegas to the originals.
A lot of the references match with what coast the game takes place on. Fallout New Vegas has references to the original Fallout games and Fallout 4 has Fallout 3 references.
They're preseneted a lot in the "Oh that's neat" way not an ostracizing way.
It is the most direct follow up and I think expects the player to know about Fallout 1, but it’s perfectly playable without having played the first. The opening cutscene gives a concise summary. A lot of the standard lore like the vaults being experiments all came from 2 instead of 1, and any info about experiments in the first game was retroactively inserted by 2.
But, in the modern day I’d say the biggest divide is between people willing to play CRPGs and those who aren’t, and if you’re willing to play a CRPG no reason to skip the first game for the second.