Fallout 1 & 2

My fandom for Fallout doesn't need to be repeated, but a few things:

Quote:

My only gripe about the first game is how it inevitibly penalizes you for NOT taking any points in energy weapons. You can rely on the sniper rifle for most of the game, but eventually you're going to have to invest in energy weapons so you can take advantage of the turbo plasma rifle. Man, did that thing make a mockery of the mutant base.

Mutants didn't wear armor, so the difference between small arms and energy weapons wasn't that great a divide if you had high perception to begin with. Energy weapons were most effective for making snap shots on Super Mutants and fighting deathclaws, but tagging energy weapons makes the early game seriously difficult, as it should be. Besides, nothing tops the .223 pistol, in my opinion.

Quote:

It's one of the few true science fiction RPG games out there.

It's more accurate to call Fallout a true post-apoc RPG, since the science fiction aspects are a bit suspect. Fallout's design was made from a retro sci-fi perspective, in that the world was designed using the future vision of a 1950's sci-fi writer. While a lot of the principles behind the world are scientific, Fallout is ultimately a human morality play set against the backdrop of a dead world as opposed to one which thrives on scientific knowlege.

It's also Skilled which removes a perk, not Gifted. Gifted is practically a must-have with all those extra stat points, and you're only going to level certain skills in a character build anyways, so the skill point loss is mostly secondary.

I generally chose Gifted and Finesse when I was making a sniper build, Gifted and Fast Shot when making a burst-weapon user (lots of fun with that one), or Gifted and Sex Appeal when playing female in Fallout 2.

I also loved the Science skill. Interacting with doodads in the world was almost like creating a sense of arcane power as the player character accomplishes tasks using forgotten knowlege. Most every skill has a social impact, as well, save First Aid, and a few others which really were completely worthless.


Something that makes Fallout and Fallout 2 an endless classic, which Troika continued to use in Arcanum and Vampire was the myriad of individual character-specific and community-specific endings that came about due to the player character's actions in-game. When I finally played a Fallout 2 game where Vault City and Gecko ended up being forced into a symbiotic relationship as opposed to Vault City riding roughshod over the Ghouls, it filled me with a sense of satisfaction that most games have failed to live up to.

It's also impossible to talk Horrigan out of a fight. You have to get Granite's squad and activate the turrets on Horrigan to go through the game without fighting a shot, but unlike the original Fallout, it isn't exactly a non-violent means to an end.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Science Fiction with castles and swords doesn't exactly keep it from being "true" science fiction. I mean, Dune had lasguns, but the advent of shield technology meant that hot lasgun on shield action meant split atoms and nuclear explosions. I haven't really played any Star Oceans, though, so I couldn't tell how ridiculous it is.

The Post-Apocalypse is considered by many to be a sub-genre of Science Fiction, but it doesn't necessarily have to be. Take the Postman, for instance. What part of the Postman was very science-fictiony? Does the inclusion of energy weapons also automatically make something a science fiction story?

In my opinion, true science fiction is that which uses the prevalence of science to play out its effects on humanity and society as a whole.

I'd rather not drop names, but to give an example, Star Wars isn't a "true" Science-Fiction because of the inclusion of the mythical Force. Babylon 5 wouldn't be "true" Science Fiction because ultimately it's a Space Opera. A character play that highlights the interaction between seperate races and political agendas. The focus is on how diversity affects people, not science or technology.

A Science Fiction setting can be used for any genre, which is why I think it's a bit asinine to throw around claims like "true Science Fiction." Was Blade Runner more Science Fiction or Film Noir? The same can be said about Fallout, but I would say that Fallout is much more post-apoc, since the focus is on how people interact in the post-apocalypse and not how they interact with technology or the lack thereof.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Quote:

RPG's makes me pine for something with big futuristic guns.

I guess we'll have to settle for Fallout's retro-futuristic.

Incidentally, there's a former Black Isle member who plans on releasing an X-COM style special forces tactical RPG over Steam. Not sure exactly how much roleplaying is involved, but you're basically the omniscient squad commander and you communicate through NPCs via communicators that your squad members hand them. Branching dialogue trees and all that business. (plus the boom boom)

Quote:

Again, I'm not really looking to split genre hairs here. As far as gameplay goes, I'm more interested in the trappings of science fiction as a gameplay mechanic than neatly pigeonholing a given game into a subgenre.

I wouldn't either. I'm just saying that when you get down to the nitty gritty, things change.

And I suppose a better non-science fictiony example for post apoc would have been all the Mad Max movies and Threads.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

It's more hard than fun if you aren't taking the game seriously. Playing through Fallout with an intelligence of 3 was hi-larious.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?