Your take doesnt have anything to do with whats true about the game. It is your own take on it.
was that the 50s setting was employed because the core books in the post-apocalyptic genre came out of that duck-and-cover era (e.g., Earth Abides (1949), Alas, Babylon (1959), A Canticle for Leibowitz (1960)). In other words, the era was fitted to the genre, rather than being the central point. (I suppose they could've used the 1980s as an alternative jumping off point, relying on the MADD/Reagan era, The Road Warrior, and The Postman . . . .)
And who said that the setting alone was the point?
Are you people capable of replying to anything without using fallacies?
I SAID that those few elements you mentioned are perfectly fine in a setting based on 50s pulp sci fi alternate history that Fallouts are. Especially when we consider that representation of those elements was not meant to be realistic.
Fallout isn't a pastiche of all the pulp elements of the 1950s;
Who said they were? Me? Is that just more fitting to strawman in because it seems like it supports your argument?
it's a pastiche of the post-apocalyptic genre married to 1950s retro-futurism.
Yes? how about cRPG and PnP genre? That doesnt count?
Nothing about New Reno or San Francisco fits with either of those characteristics.
They seemed post apocalyptic enough to me.
Again, I'm not concerned with whether they are "real" or not. After all, they could've dressed in Kabuki costumes or sombreros and bandilleros or Roman armor -- the question isn't what the internal excuse is, it's whether there is a thematic reason to pick that costume for them.
Yes, that what i was saying. Someone decided that 50s retro pulp allowed for a few small instances of a few NPCs being dressed up in weird ways. Thematically they probably "thought" that people would wnat to make it seem like "good ol days" and so dressed up the part.
"The whole setting is zany!" is not a very persuasive argument
EXCELLENT! THEN STOP MAKING IT!
-- why fedoras rather than sombreros, then? Why not cockscombs and wizard hats?
Because wizard hats are not 50s retro sci fi pulp thematic at all, maybe?
If a random d20 can yield the same level of decisions, you're not developing a theme, you're shoe-horning "wouldn't it be fun" ideas into a theme.
My main point which you strawmaned onto above was that those few examples are small and practically inconsequential additions over the CORE GAMEPLAY of the the game, which is completely in line with what first game was made of.
Its just that there is always some FOOLS who go blind and cannot see 95% of the game because theyve run into a few smaller examples of stuff they dont like.
Tried to play, but couldn't. The truth is, I don't have the time, patience, character to play real RPGs any more.
What real RPGs? And ofcourse, there is an easy solution for that. Just buy the latest bioware schlock and enjoy it.
All I can do is live in the past and you won't even let me do that in peace.
No, thats what you are doing to me.
I feel like you're arguing just to argue.
Thats because you are telepathic.
The main antagonist is named after the hero of In the Line of Fire.
Never heard of it.
The leaders of the villainous faction are characterized by Clinton and Quayle jokes. Quayle jokes?! As a kid who grew up in DC in the 80s, I appreciated them, but that would basically be like The Master dancing the Macarena in the final encounter.
Not US citizen so all that never mattered to me at al. plus, you say you liked it and then you go for argument from absurdity.
Yes, master dancing macarena is exactly the same counter example. Of course.
How is that not post apocalyptic material? It could be better of course but... wtf are you talking about?
The Scientologists have a two-map area with custom map art and multiple quests.
very small areas and small subquests.
The kung fu triads are an even more elaborate area.
What?
But main quest line areas and central characters are goofy in FO2.
Notice how you here go into talking about it all as if its a MAJORITY of main quest line - which is a fallacy, again.
You only need the chinese clan or hubologist to get fuel to the tanker, ITS A SIDE QUEST.
Whats really important about san fran is that the Brotherhood is there - which is the MAIN QUEST LINE.
Agreed. Fallout 2's setting fits much more with Wasteland.
No it doesnt. Becauee 95% or more of the game is core Fallout original gameplay and style, with only a few additions that were there because obviously the game was meant to be larger and bigger then the first one.
Anyway, I liked Fallout 2 a lot. Like
Infinitron,
Infinitron is a mass market shill whose leading his own small idiotic anti-fallout campaign for years now. Because in his logic "people like it too much and it isnt a perfect gaem" - which of course nobody ever claimed in a raterded manner he does.
I just don't think it matches up to Fallout.
As a personal reaction thats completely fine. You played F1 first, it set some expectations in you for a sequel, but these small additional elements in the sequel ruined that expectation for you.
I played F2 first so my encounter with Fallout as a game and setting are based on that.
The real truth is that there was two Fallout games. And they were both great. Both had smaller pieces of content that was not that good and numerous smaller details that could have been better.
Dont even get me started on the master and the finale of the first game, or some of its locations and design decisions.
It feels like an indie game and also a "first game" where a lifetime of repressed ideas came bubbling up, each one thoroughly loved but not critically assessed.
Nothing about F2 takes anything away from the first game.
FO2 was designed with much more thought to how to work the "game" parts of it, but the lore lacks vision, love, or care.
because it had 5% of content that you didnt like... yeah right.
i wouldnt be so sure about that.
