Re: Fallout 2 - here we come

On 27/04/2024 15:28, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:

On Fri, 26 Apr 2024 20:09:08 +0100, JAB <noway@nochance.com> wrote:
 

Well with the TV show now on and Fallout:London supposed to be released
and then not but now maybe it will I thought I really should try FO:2
for once. I've been meaning for ages to get it into a state where it
doesn't make my eyes completely bleed and the widescreen HR patch gets
close enough to that. I've also installed the Restoration Project for
good measure as that's the one that seems to get mentioned as a must have.
>
Now to see whether it lives up to the hype!

 I have a real problem with trying to play the older Fallout RPGs. It's
mostly the viewpoint; it's trimetric top-down view feels so alien and
distance to me. I've really come to appreciate the down-in-the-first,
in-your-face first- or over-the-shoulder view used by most modern
CRPGs. One of the joys of these games (for me, at least) is immersing
myself in their worlds. I LOVE seeing the details of the architecture,
or the atmosphere of the wilds. The number of times I've pushed my
view up close to a wall trying to read the blurry text of some poster
is uncountable.
 The god's eye view of games older CRPGs like "Fallout" and "Baldurs
Gate" just doesn't allow me to wallow in all those details the way I'd
like to.
 

I do kinda agree that top down is less immersive at least visually and one thing that I really enjoyed about FO:3/NV was just wandering the wasteland and taking in the view. STALKER (not an RPG of course) also had that really allowing you to feel the environment.

But it's also the mechanics. Top-down games tend to be more strategic.
You usually have a whole party to manage, and when combat rolls
around, it's all about positioning your party members - square by
square - into the perfect spot. FPS/TPS CRPG combat is more immediate;
it's more twitch-based. It's not better (I'd in fact, argue, it's far
worse) but it has one major advantage: it's faster. Fights are over
and done with a lot faster. And since combat is often the least
interesting part of the games for me, that's a major benefit. I mostly
am in the game for the exploring.
 

Again I kinda agree although if you have RtWP then I think that's fine but I'm waiting to see if TB in FO:2 will be a major turn-off.

And don't even get me started on the grind of inventory management for
an entire party.
 

Inventory management kinda annoys me full stop. I'm supposed to be enjoying the story not acting as a logistics manager. I don't think it's helped by what seems to be a carry over from TT D&D that grabbing as much loot as possible and selling it was just something you did.
As an aside, one thing I really like about TT CoC is inventory management is minimal and a lot of it is based around would you be expected to have that on you. So investigating a house at night, yes you will have a torch and don't need to say it. The other one I like is money management is done through your credit rating so is based around could your character be expected to afford that.

So trying to play games like "Fallout 2" often seems like drudgery.
It's a chore. It's long combats and unsatisfying exploration that
doesn't leave me immersed in the gameworld. It's not that the games
are bad... it's just that my tastes have so radically changed over the
past twenty years that I can't enjoy the games the way I used to.
 

The make or break for me will be whether the story engages me or if I've just so used to the QoL enhancements that we now have it becomes problematic. My next task is to play with with resolution/settings as currently the graphics don't make my eyes bleed but I can hardly make anything out including the text!