-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Now that Fallout 1 and 2 are on Xbox GamePass (PC), are they worth playing?
- Thread starter BFIB
- Start date
Fallout 1 and 2 are the best in the series, so yes. Although I can't speak to whether the Game Pass versions are moddable. There's a bunch of mods that come with the GOG version that allows you to choose a higher resolution, among other QOL bug fixes.
EDIT: Fallout Fixt is what you want. https://falloutmods.fandom.com/wiki/Fallout_Fixt
EDIT: Fallout Fixt is what you want. https://falloutmods.fandom.com/wiki/Fallout_Fixt
People here will tell you of course. And they are great games. But if you don't play old school rpgs or have an affinity for that style of game, then you will not enjoy them in the same way people are recommending them to you.
So if you like old school rpg's of course or are curious about that type of experience. If you don't, then probably not. It's not a sin to not like older gamers necessarily if that style of game doesn't attract you by itself.
If you are on the right mindset yes. These are old school RPGs, the best part is the story and setting. The combat is difficult and unforgiving. I quite enjoyed the 1st one, tho (haven't played the 2nd one).
I actually played Fallout 1 a little after 3 was released in order to prep myself for it. It was surprisingly playable despite looking like ass. It kinda played like XCOM with the combat so that was cool. I heard 2 is better because of the writing (what you expect from now Obsidian devs)
Pretty much yeah, these are unquestionably old school cRPGs, so just bare that in mind
I tried Fallout 1 for the first time like five years ago and it was unbearable, even though I have some level of tolerance for old PC game jank.
Totally worth it!
If you aren't that used to CRPGs then probably start with 2 as it's pretty modern with lots of fun stuff to do/explore. Fallout 1 is more focused and there isn't THAT much to do outside the main quest, still extremely good though.
Have patience and take your time, read descriptions. Use at least one weapon skill. Small arms is never wrong.
If for some reason you have trouble getting into it, try a trainer to set your SPECIALs to 10, so you can see most things and enjoy tourist mode.
If you aren't that used to CRPGs then probably start with 2 as it's pretty modern with lots of fun stuff to do/explore. Fallout 1 is more focused and there isn't THAT much to do outside the main quest, still extremely good though.
Have patience and take your time, read descriptions. Use at least one weapon skill. Small arms is never wrong.
If for some reason you have trouble getting into it, try a trainer to set your SPECIALs to 10, so you can see most things and enjoy tourist mode.
i love them both, if you enjoy old-school turn-based rpgs, they are inventive, funny, and challenging
last time i played them i needed fan patches (i think? maybe just for 1), don't know if there's been addressed or not
i'm one of those people who love 1 more than two. it's just super tight, like a good novella. avellone put in good work with 2 but he probably needed to be fenced in a bit
last time i played them i needed fan patches (i think? maybe just for 1), don't know if there's been addressed or not
i'm one of those people who love 1 more than two. it's just super tight, like a good novella. avellone put in good work with 2 but he probably needed to be fenced in a bit
FO1 is different from the rest. It's more consistent to the retro 50s' look more than any other entry, and is pretty short for an RPG. Last time I played I 100%ed in about 5 hours, though I've played several times. You can speedrun an honest, good ending in 10 mins.
Companions aren't too useful, there's no auto-save, and the skill balance is poor (small guns + speech beats everything). There are mods to help with this, it's a wonderful game when you know what you're doing, and it's interesting to see what Fallout looked like when it wasn't yet a franchise.
FO2 is WAY longer and WAY buggier, the restoration mod or something like it is essential. FO2 is a lot more like modern titles, especially New Vegas.
Companions aren't too useful, there's no auto-save, and the skill balance is poor (small guns + speech beats everything). There are mods to help with this, it's a wonderful game when you know what you're doing, and it's interesting to see what Fallout looked like when it wasn't yet a franchise.
FO2 is WAY longer and WAY buggier, the restoration mod or something like it is essential. FO2 is a lot more like modern titles, especially New Vegas.
I agree, Fallout 1 wasn't afraid to be a short RPG and doesn't outstay its welcome. 2 is good but so long that I'm ready for it to end by the time I meet Horrigan.
Last edited:
They are absolutely worth a play. I dont know if someone who enjoyed Fallout 3 and 4 more and expect it from the games would like it though. Even New Vegas to a point. However if you enjoyed Wasteland 3 absolutely get them
Wasteland 3 and 2 work on console just fine. It would be a lot of work though.
Wasteland 3 and 2 work on console just fine. It would be a lot of work though.
Steam Pad, no. You will need something good at pointing. On Game Pass it'd be very difficult to play satisfyingly with a pad I'd imagine.
This is what I wanted to mention. In their pure form, they are good, but dated and a product of their time, so be prepared for that. Modded they are much better and hold up a lot more.
Yeah. It really depends on HOW MUCH tolerance you have for that stuff.
Also Fallout 2's opening is somehow more miserable than starting a new game of Fallout 4, albeit for different reasons. It's kinda funny how people keep modding the beginning out of every Fallout game except New Vegas.
Added a (PC) to the title, and absolutely! They're superb, and while dated, they do hold up. I'm a huge fan of both, though two is the one you really want to play. It does start off pretty slow, however.
Both are highly recommended, but give 'em a bit of time and get comfortable with them. I think you'll be happy you invested the time.
Both are highly recommended, but give 'em a bit of time and get comfortable with them. I think you'll be happy you invested the time.
I started with 1, played some of 2, then 3. I still think 1 is a fun time, and I hear 2 has many mods that improve it more than the already good game it was meant to be.
Will never forget that damn Deathclaw nest. Or pick pocketing the Brotherhood only to get blown to bits.
Will never forget that damn Deathclaw nest. Or pick pocketing the Brotherhood only to get blown to bits.
Temple of Trials is a bad tutorial area but still better (and faster) than Vault 111 and pre-war times in Fallout 4
And people just dont mod the start of new vegas cause they had the decency of making it quick. a few words with the doc and youre out to do whatever
And people just dont mod the start of new vegas cause they had the decency of making it quick. a few words with the doc and youre out to do whatever
Yes but with their respective unofficial patches, at least I haven't played them without the patches in ages. FIXT and Restoration Project. There's a lot of QoL and you can customise for more purist settings.
I found there was a barrier for years in terms of playability with these games but it faded, I eventually realised how easygoing they were once I acclimated to the character progression, combat and player freedom. It's good to be saving reflexively and have at least 3 ++ saves going casually - like before a quest, during and after completion. It's not a game "about saving" it's just old - you have to think of how you want choices and outcomes to stand going forward, a lot of the fun is in carving your own path relative to your playstyle and not repeating things due to error.
I found there was a barrier for years in terms of playability with these games but it faded, I eventually realised how easygoing they were once I acclimated to the character progression, combat and player freedom. It's good to be saving reflexively and have at least 3 ++ saves going casually - like before a quest, during and after completion. It's not a game "about saving" it's just old - you have to think of how you want choices and outcomes to stand going forward, a lot of the fun is in carving your own path relative to your playstyle and not repeating things due to error.
I play ascii roguelikes and I find Fallout 1 annoying to play...
Both games are soo good. I remember getting Fallout 1 with my first family pc and it came preinstalled with no manual and I spent so much time in the first cave outside the vault just killing stuff. Once I realised you could leave the cave didn't realise there was a finite amount of time to complete the main story.
They are insanely dated but I'll never forget an article about a professor/instructor of game design always introducing it to his students as a graded assignment to play through. I feel like he said it taught a lot of good and bad about game design but also showed how the underlying mechanics and gameplay can make a game so much more than it's looks. The way he talked about how the students eventually got sucked in to the world and what they learned from it made me appreciate it.
I'm paraphrasing hardcore and I wish I could find the article or blog I was talking about cause I found it insightful at the time.
I'm paraphrasing hardcore and I wish I could find the article or blog I was talking about cause I found it insightful at the time.
I played through the 1st game last year and overall enjoyed but there were plenty of frustrations to be had, like with the AI.
I tried so hard to keep that dog alive but in the end I was just watching him die over and over again :(
dogmeat is not supposed to survive for any longer than a few maps, its even an ingame joke in some random events and 2
Played them both last year for the first time. Had to used cheats because the difficulty/rng was awful (from a modern standpoint) but all in all I really enjoyed them. Fallout 1 felt like a predecessor of Fallout 3/4 while Fallout 2 felt like a predecessor of New Vegas.
I love you dude, but I feel like Fallout 3 and 4 seized on the worst impulses of Fallout 2.
Don't sleep on Fallout 1. Consider playing it with a guide.
The first one is my favorite Fallout game. They are old and need a certain level of tolerance for old games and I played them for the first time long after they were new. Personally I think none of the game since really captured the vibe laid out in the first game and it is a real shame.
Last edited:
