wAt$ uPP maH boy$$ 1ts m3 t0dd h0ward. jk. Whats up my name is Andrew, I came here since a friend recommended I come and try out your servers.
Why do I need to play the earlier games to be a true fan of the series, it was a top down turn based RPG, bought by Bethesda turned into an action RPG theres a big difference there. I prefer the 3rd, New vegas, and the coming 4th installment, I am getting the first 2 in an anthology pack tought so i might like them.
It doesn't matter if there's a major playstyle difference, they are still Fallout games. The original games were not top down, more or less isometric 2.5D perspective. I'm saying that you need to have played those in order to be a true fan of the series because they are the very first Fallout games, and you need to play them. The experience is radically different. You also can't say you prefer 3 and NV if you haven't played the older ones. Who knows, maybe you'll like the first two better. I knew that Fallout 2 was going to be my favorite game in the series when I was playing it, and I've played nearly all of em, including BoS Tactics. The story, lore, grim(mer) world, and completely different environment all contribute to the original feel of how Fallout was supposed to be played. The newer games don't promote much of the sense of hopelessness and devastation that I loved to death in the older ones. I prefer Fallout 1 and 2, and that's because I like the turn-based combat more and the immense story and lore behind everything, something that the newer Fallouts didn't really nail (especially 3), and for the nostalgia aspect.
It matters extremely if theres a play style difference, thats like saying if Cod turned into a strategy type game instead of an FPS, all of the fans would keep playing it. Also, the ones made by Interplay story wise are extremely similar to 3. You leave a vault on a mission which eventually leads you to get a specific item for your vault or people that will save them. Fallout 1 being a water chip, 2 Being a GECK, and 3 also being a geck to purify some water (see the connection to 1?) How is it a completely different environment by the way? theyre all the same environment based in different locations in the US Commonwealth, all post nuclear holocaust. Also, if youre saying each game has a separate lore then are they in separate universes? they all have the same lore. And how can you say that the storytelling was worse? It's storytelling is what made it get it's many game of the year awards in 2008, compared to the Fallout 1 story where you go from place to place trying to get that water chip which in the end leads you to a final enemy the Master, how more generic does it get (I guess this was pretty original back in 1997)
Fallout 3 had a lot of issues connecting and matching information to the previous lore and liked to bring up totally new things that otherwise did not exist throughout the series. Exactly. They're in different areas, with different groups, and different places. Fallout NV however, had a way higher sense of civilization and stability as compared to the rest of the games in the series. What I meant by the playstyle difference is that it is still a Fallout game. Also, I did not imply they have separate lore. Either my wording is incorrect or you read it wrong. I'm just trying to say that the story and characters were imo better. I mean, if you're going to be incredibly basic and straight forward, I guess it's generic. The water chip doesn't eventually lead you to the enemy, you just find it, and then the BoS requests your aids against the mutants and their master. You didn't even mention the several possible endings, the "adventure along the way", and the various groups you can interact with. That's not the entire story at all. In Fallout 1 and 2, you have to achieve these objectives, but the game puts you in a hero's position and makes you do far more than that. These are very basic things that the game tells you to do that you can do, and then proceed to do anything else in the story. In Fallout 3, you aren't directly told that you must go to the Jefferson Memorial and activate Project Purity. You're only told to look for your dad.
There need to match it with the previous games lore, as this was set in a new area that had not been shown in previous games, the only thing that needed to be matched was the brotherhoods and enclave backstory, and some minor factions, which guess what? they got right. Brotherhood of Steel came from their Western post to get new tech, divided themselves from the leaders and now they are a separate faction, The enclave were defeated by the NCR and BoS in the west and fled to to D.C. to re-establish the nations capital. When you start off Fallout 3, you leave a vault and end up in a town called Megaton (Comparable to Shady Sands in Fallout 1) and the town asks you to help them de-arm the bomb, seems like a heroes position to me, and a very nice quests that the game lets you do even before you go looking for dad. Looking for your dad leads you to the memorial, in fact thats what made it so great, it didn't tell you "go here and do this" *credits* and yes you can do a myriad of the games side-quests before even starting up on the main quest.
I hope you understand that their excuse of using a totally different area can't explain the various lore mistakes Bethesda made and the outlandish relativity to the previous titles. Your second statement is so vague that I'm just going to avoid expanding on it. Anyway, the power of the atom is only a side quest, I was implying the main quests when I said hero's position.
That area didn't have lore until it was made, there was no information on DC in Fallout 1 or 2. The only information available to Bethesda was FO1, 2, Van Buren (partially canon), and Tactics (possibly canon), and some smaller spin-off titles. Are they not allowed to change how some factions from the previous titles(meanwhile explaining how they changed)? For example, the BoS turned good all of a sudden when they arrived in DC, but they didnt, before they arrived in DC, the arrived in The Pitt(I can link you information on this too), the horrors Elder Lyons saw made him realize how bad the east coast had it and decided to help them instead of look for pre-war tech, and there are even outcasts who still rely on old brotherhood beliefs in hoarding technology so that humanity doesnt hurt themselves with it. The Enclave, the Poseidon oil rig wasnt their only base, Autumn Senior gathered many of the other bases forces and moved them to DC in a span of 30 years (Fo3 based 30 years after Fo2). Its all just being flexible, not lore breaking, a lore mistake would be that the NCR is in the east coast too, or that Super Mutants are good now. many of these so called "lore mistakes" are just people who dont accept that there is new information that is now canon-lore and they didnt want it to be. (example. super mutants in the east coast, explained by the fact that Vault-Tec had FEV to use on vaults, Vault-Tec being government owned, Enclave being government owned.)
