Arcanum Or Fallout 2?

YEAH!

yeah, what he said!

 

So Fallout 1 is better than Fallout 2?

 

WHAT?

Fallot 2 is better of fallout 1! that is for sure

 

An argument could be made that the original Fallout is better than Fallout 2. I wouldn't agree, but the argument *could* be made. Fallout 1 was less buggy, more original (natch), and despite (or perhaps because of) its short length it was probably *the* most replayable modern RPG before Arcanum. I also kind of like the plot in the original better (I never really bought into the Enclave's motives). But I think FO2 (in addition to being mucho longer) had a more developed and interesting setting, better characters, and a lot more cool things to do (like become a porn star or sell your companions into slavery).

 

ha

i didnt knew that u could be a porn star!
cool

 

And I guess you'll try to be. :lol:

 

Talking about Baldurs Gate right? BG 2 only needs a P II 233, 32 mb Ram...

Arcanum needs a P II 300, 64 mb of Ram.. (I have both boxes sitting in front of me).

Anyway for Fallout 2 vs Baldurs Gate 2 vs Arcanum... I'd say FO 2, BG 2, Arcanum.

But they all have their good/bad points. I think Arcanum might get moved up a notch once a few more patches are released.

I totally agree.. I loved the way you could talk your way out of so many situations in Fallout/2.

I never actually played the game through without fighting though, I should try that sometime...

But the real thing that Fallout 2 had that Arcanum doesn't was the funny random encounters. (My favorite was the Cafe of Broken Dreams)

I'd run around the wasteland for hours hoping for another one, while in Arcanum I just hope I can get to town without running into another batch of ailing wolves.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Random on 2001-10-02 01:34 ]</font>

 

While I was at work, I had a HUGE post I was writing on this thread...then I forgot to put in my password...hit submit...hit the back button...and all was lost :evil: uke:

To summarize what I had written, Fallout2 was far superior to Fallout1 if you were to play them side by side. Most of the reasons have already been pointed out. Arcanum simply plays a bit differently, for obvious reasons, but the last time I had spent this much time and energy on a game was when I was playing Fallout2...and that alone says alot of good about it. Still, I think Fallout2 was overall a more enjoyable game.

Favorite special encounter: Guardian of Forever. Turns out you were actually the one (the chosen one) that broke the water chip in the first place. Can't get any better than that.

 

Yeah that was pretty funny too... But at the Cafe you find Dogmeat again, come on, nothing can top that! :wink:

 

Try to think of Fallout 2 as being more like Austin Powers 2. It's very funny, but not as clever or well thought out as the first. Lots of things in Fallout 2 go against the grain of FO concepts, and it has lots more bugs, but it's bigger and has more to do.

As a critic, Fallout 1 is much better than Fallout 2, but as a gamer, Fallout 2 offers more entertainment hours. But also seeing as how I prefer game development as a fine art than a commercial art, I'd go for quality over quantity.

 

I am *seriously* curious about this.

Personally, I think the main mistake FO2 made was including a main plot at all. Largely I just liked to head out, adventure, and make a name for myself. It's not just "more of the same" from FO1, because there are actual communities and such to join and make your place in. Generally speaking, in the original game you were just an explorer who maybe solved a few problems for cash and information before moseying along. I prefer walking through the streets of New Reno and having everybody greet me by my mobster name, only to get jumped by the bouncers outside a rival family's casino.

 

But the Music!

Ok, aside from all the other arguments, the one thing I love is that Fallout 2 had the best intro I've ever seen in a game. The Louis Armstrong, the whole video...damn that was great. Or was that Fallout 1? Great, now I gotta replay them....

Sammy

Ack, spelt it Louie...*sigh*

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Retardical_Sam on 2001-10-09 06:56 ]</font>

 

Black Isle Studios didn't make Fallout: Tactics. They paid for it (to some extent), but Micro Forte actually made it - then Black Isle studios said "Sorry, out of money, we sunk it into some other really shitty games", and Micro Forte had to sack half its workers.

I actually thought Fallout: Tactics was a good game - it wasn't intended to be Fallout 3, it was intended to be a squad sized tactical game, with some minor roleplaying in the form of character development involved. As far as those specification goes, Fallout: Tactics succeeded brilliantly I think.

Sure, I want Fallout 3 as much as the next guy. Doesn't change the fact that FOT is a good game.

As to the whole Fallout 2 vs Arcanum - think about the necessity of having to wait for 20 million rats each take their slow arse turns, taking up 10 minutes of your valuable time, and not having to do that. Then think schematics, spells, and the replayability of Arcanum vs Fallout 2 - FO 2 didn't have spells or schematics, and let's face it, most of the quests in FO2 were pretty simplistic (but I did enjoy the Sierra Army Depot :smile. Personally, I think Arcanum comes out on top, because nothing is more annoying than having the front half of your car disappear, being trapped in the ring in San Francisco for all time, and dying from radiation with no chance to heal yourself.

Both are great games. Fallout 2 just doesn't have as much pure addiction power as Arcanum though.

 

Arcanum vs Fallout 2

Exact opposite for me... I played Fallout 2 with all my spare time till I finished it, then played it several more times trying to finish quests differently, get different NPCs, get different special perks, get more special encounters etc....

Arcanum doesn't have any of that. To me its an average RPG thats bogged down by slowdowns, balance problems, and a ton of bugs.

 

I havent played Fallout 2, but between Tactics and Arcanum, Tactics wins, but not by much, mainly because I find it INCREDIBLY addictive and I played the demo over and over again, playing so many different ways that I could, which was a hell of alot.

 

Knight Saber

Knight Saber, if you like Arcanum and Tactics, but haven't played FO 2 (or 1 for that matter), you're missing out. Go buy them and play one of the best RPG series ever made. (They're at budget prices now too.)

 

I will try to get them when I find them in some shops or somethin

 

I have encountered ONE bug and ONE cosmetic glich with the game.

(actualy 1.5 bugs, it DID crash once on me).

Fallout 2 had OODLES and OODLES of Scripting Errors and oversights.

The Scripts in Arcanum seem to be pretty darn stable, I have only manged to fuck them up once so far in three run throughs of the game, and even then it was beatable (even if it did mean searching a riverside for a friggin bridge, hehe).

I have also read confirmed accounts of there being one script bug that also crashs the game, but hey, one Show Stopper bug out of, how many THOUSANDS upon THOUSANDS of possible script interactions?

Pretty darn good I say :smile:

Of course those of you running less, err, 'stable' operating systems may differ, hehe.

The original release of Black and White was MUCH MUCH worse.

Hell

I haven't even bothered to patch Arcanum. Why? If it isn't broken, don't fix it!

I'll patch it just as soon as Turn Based Multiplayer is supported :smile:

 

I thought that Fallout2 was dog shit compared to Fallout1.

Is that not the general concencious or something?

Fallout 2 started off weak. Uh huh, ritual test in a shrine, how horribly original ::groans:: and just got weaker. Oh come on, goverment conspiricy? I literaly let out a "Oh man thats lame" when I first came across that one.

Fallout 1 just had so much more. . . . personality.

It started off with the Spiral Bound instruction manual. Great read on stoplights on the ride home. Love that one. The manual itself is very well made and horribly funny. The images the descriptions, everything.

The inclusion of the forumals used for calculating darn near everything in the game was also a serious plus to the Number Crunching Nuts like myself.

Fallout 2's manual was LITERALY a photocopy of the Fallout 1 manual in many places. Hell, the options screen that was show in the Fallout 2 manual was the screen from Fallout 1! Ok granted all but one of the options are the same (the different layout belies the truth though) but I still don't know what that one dang additional option in the options menu does!

Then there is the fact that there is just, well, not nearly so much back story to explore. There is no Brotherhood, and what I was REALLY hoping for in Fallout2 was a chance to join up with them and become a full fledged soldire (and no that piece of shit called Fallout Tactics does NOT count, it has ALOT LESS tactics then Fallout 1 or 2, yuck, damn game doesn't even tell you how many action points it'll take up to move to a certian square, yeeick!). No go on that one in Fallout 2 :sad:

 

Baulders Gate sucks if you ask me, and I am a AD&D Fanboy at that. (I was at level 45 before I realized that Unlocking Catnip == Knock. . . . >:| )

The new Never Winter Nights is also going to suck (is it out yet? I am going to up my insulting campaign when if it is). The original Never Winter Nights MMORPG rocked, also a GREAT example of how to do Turn Based Combat in a real time multiuser enviroment.