
Fallout 1.5: Resurrection - kbart
http://resurrection.cz/en/info/
======
eponeponepon
The first two games came out at the worst time for me - A-levels precluded me
from spending any time at all with them (that's probably for the best, though
- a few years later, Morrowind and the absence of parental oversight killed my
degree stone dead :) ).

Fallout 3, NV and 4 have all in turn nudged me to try the originals again, but
they're _just_ old-fashioned enough that I struggle to get into them, every
time. These days I think I've resigned myself to only getting to play them
properly in the event of a long stay in hospital.

~~~
mstade
You really should try. They're clunky and old, but they are great stories with
engaging narratives, interesting characters, and ambiance aplenty. Which is
really what Fallout used to be about – great story telling – before Bethesda
started ruining the franchise with cookie cutter narratives, simpleton
characters, and being distinctly non-canon. (I appreciate artistic freedom as
much as the next guy, but at some point you've created a different world and
just slapped Fallout stickers onto it.)

What's odd to me is that the Fallout 4 Nuka-World DLC is much more engaging
than the main story. Is this typical of games these days? Do a crappy "main"
game but "fix it" with DLCs? Or is it just Bethesda and possibly even just
Fallout?

~~~
mstade
Another thing the old games has that Bethesda forgot about: replay value. I
_still_ play FO1 and FO2 every now and then, and _still_ find things and side
quests I never knew existed. And they are _interesting_ – not just randomly
generated "there are ghouls that are bothering me over there, plx 2 go and
kill them kthnxbye" grinding crap. I've just finished Fallout 4 and can't for
the life of me be bothered to play it again. I had fun, it's not a _bad_ game,
and I don't mind the price of admission, but just like Fallout 3 it'll end up
in a box somewhere and I'll never care for it again.

Not so with FO1 and FO2 (my favorite being FO2) – I dread the day I can't play
them anymore because they are too old.

Also, pro-tip:
[http://user.tninet.se/~jyg699a/fallout2.html](http://user.tninet.se/~jyg699a/fallout2.html)

That guide has _everything_ , it's awesome.

~~~
Brakenshire
Are there any modern games that fall into the same category, do you think?

~~~
jerf
Fallout is itself a spiritual successor to a game called Wasteland, which is
old enough to have been released on the Commodore 64. The people who made
Fallout couldn't get the rights to Wasteland so they made Fallout. Well, now
they have the rights, and you can pick up Wasteland 2 now:
[http://store.steampowered.com/app/240760/](http://store.steampowered.com/app/240760/)
Currently on sale 60% off, though I'll say I've seen it on sale quite a bit.
I'm sure it'll be on sale Christmas again.

~~~
coredog64
I cut my teeth on the original Wasteland (on an Apple 2) and am working my way
through WL2 (haven't yet got to CA).

Wasteland 2 is good but buggy. There were some balance issues with the
original and even though they went back and made a director's cut it's still
not great. I'm most annoyed by the way that certain factions are hostile
depending on where you are on the map (e.g. not based on actions).

~~~
thisone
You're just missing the Red Boots DLC. Makes everything perfect.

Warts and all I really enjoyed wasteland 2

------
KON_Air
I love how they decided to embrace the fact it is a "fan work" and diverge
from established 1&2 canon when the story calls for it (ya know unlike a
certain company who has the rights to the name and think cramming references
to older games will make Oblivion with guns a Fallout game). Not to mention
the passion and work to make such a thorough game/mod with a two decade old
engine.

~~~
wruza
Tbh, fnv was not that bad even though I started it with negative bias.

~~~
Kiro
What exactly is the difference between NV and F3? Looks the same to me. How
can it be so much better?

~~~
FullMtlAlcoholc
Fallout NV had a superior narrative and more complex characters. The writing
was superb and often times hilarious. Quests were much more engaging and
thought-provoking and could be resolved in novel ways and didnt fall into the
WoW trap of go here, kill baddie, collect reward. The choices were also non
binary. Decisions in Fallout 3 often had you pick between a selfless saint or
a psychopathic, mustache-twirling dick, while NV offered shades of grey,
similar to the Witcher 3. Also like the Witcher 3, when you made decisions,
there were actual changes in the game world and the consequences were often
unexpected. And the DLC's foe NV were amazing, especially the sci-fi themed
one.

To be fair, Fallout 3 had a more immersive environment and atmosphere. It
captured the setting and feeling of a post apocalyptic world. You dont feel as
compelled to follow the game's questline... exploring the world was more
satisfying. Bethesda and Rockstar have a penchant for making games where you
can have so much fund just walking around.

I often times wish that a colloaborarive rpg between comapnies could be made.
Obsidian would do quest design, CD Project Red would do the writing, Bioware
would do the voice acting and character design, FromSoftware would do the
world-building map design and lore, Platinum games is responsible for
gameplay, Square Enix would provide the music, Naughty Dog handles graphics
and motion capture, Blizzard would do the QA, Bethesda would do the mod kit,
and Valve would be the publisher....

~~~
frost_knight
Have From Software do the combat engine as well.

~~~
FullMtlAlcoholc
I much prefer the sublime perfection that is Platinum Games. Bayonetta's
gameplay is damn near perfect. It strikes the perfect chord between
stylish/beautiful and challenging.

------
IgorPartola
I really wish I could have Fallout 1 & 2 for iOS. Turn based point and click
games seem like a perfect candidate for a touch interface. Instead we have
crap like the Doom clones which are horribly difficult to play and don't
really provide the authentic feel of those games.

~~~
Kurtz79
I think there are already quite a few ports of early Bioware/Black Isle RPGs
(Baldur's Gate I and II, Icewind Dale) on iOS.

Also the new Shadowrun games (isometric/turn based) are worth a look.

------
laurent123456
[https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:381dvf...](https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:381dvf2c6rEJ:resurrection.cz/en/info/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us)

------
kbart
If somebody here had played it, I'd love to hear opinions before risking to
lose few weeks of my life as it was with the original game.

~~~
SXX
If you played original games long ago I would recommend to first to play them
again with "Restoration Project" mods. It's very well-done projects and most
of additions are indistinguishable from original content.

These mods fix bugs and carefully re-add to the game bits that was cut off
before release, but later on exposed in Fallout Bible by Chris Avellone (and
some other sources probably).

------
FullMtlAlcoholc
After watching my current obsession, this post makes me want to make a Fallout
4 mod:

Fallout: Westworld

~~~
SippinLean
All I can think about when I watch Westworld is how the hosts are basically
synths.

------
LeonM
Oh god no, I already lost so much time this year with Outcast 1.1 and Black
Mesa (Half life 1 remake).

Please don't let this be good! ;-)

~~~
Zelmor
I remember Outcast being real good. How does it hold up these days? I am just
wearing nostalgia-goggles?

------
SXX
For anyone who want to get a bit more inside on original games development
might want to check this "Fallout Classic Revisited" talk from Timothy Cain:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xa5IzHhAdi4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xa5IzHhAdi4)

------
gravypod
I wish someone could port 1 and 2 into a good first person experience. Would
really make it accessible to many more people born after _that_ time.

~~~
pyrale
Fallout 1 and 2 are about storytelling. Most of their value comes from great
text and situations, so the interface should not really matter.

If you want to give it a shot but get annoyed by the fighting system, try it
as a social character, zero-fight gameplays are possible.

~~~
gravypod
It's not that, it's the texturing. I'm color blind and most of the game looks
like a blur. It's super hard for me to tell things apart without a 3d
component. It's worse since the game is painted with the fallout-blend or
gray, brown, and more gray.

I can do play the game just fine but I end up missing a lot because I can't
tell if from rocks.

~~~
g0ran
There is a tool that might help you, it's called Visolve ([http://www.ryobi-
sol.co.jp/visolve/en/visolve.html](http://www.ryobi-
sol.co.jp/visolve/en/visolve.html)).

I couldn't find anything similar for Linux distros, though.

~~~
gravypod
That would be fantastic if I could download something like this for my
thinkpad. I know what spectrum i need help with from doing the enchroma test.
I'm red green.

Edit: thinking about it more, the easiest way to get something like this would
be to just put an overlay on my monitor with the coating that the enchroma
uses. This would pretty much solve my issues.

~~~
detaro
Maybe the color calibration features in the display stack could be used to
apply something like this globally to a system. They should allow quite
powerful color transformations.

------
MrBra
For someone who never played Fallout, what do you recommend playing first?

I've also read about "Restoration Project" mods and I am bit confused.

~~~
gknoy
I think you should play Fallout before Fallout 2. There might be some small
spoilers in F2 of how F1 ends, but ... probably not enough to worry about.
Mainly it's about the world-building and settings.

The gameplay in F2 is a little better than F1 -- more freedom, I think, and
less pressure to finish a major quest part within a time limit. However, F1
does an _amazing_ job introducing the setting, and making you feel like you
want to play in that world (IMO). There are some things in F1 that have no
analogue in F2 (that I recall), and vice-versa, which make them both awesome.

In Fallout 1, there are parts where you really care about radiation, for
reasons which would be spoilers, whereas in Fallout 2 I don't recall that ever
really feeling like something I was worried about. Fallout 2 has a whole quest
hub (New Reno) which was very memorable, whereas I don't recall as much about
F1 (granted, that was almost two decades ago. ;))

I recommend making a custom character; if you try to play a Sneaky or "Face"
type character, the game seemed much harder; then again, I always ended up
effectively going the sniper route, so I am admittedly a little biased.

~~~
pluma
I think the official patch for Fallout 1 actually removed the hard time limit
in the original release. There's still some pressure at some parts of the game
but players are no longer required to pass on exploration to rush to the end.

Some fans were unhappy with certain thematic changes in F2, e.g. the (at that
time) excessive increase in pop culture references and muddying of the 50s
retro sci-fi backstory.

For the uninitiated: There's a reason one of the original major Fallout
communities was derided as "glittering gems of hatred" at one point. Fallout 1
had a very emotional following and what happened after Fallout 2 was a series
of bad business decisions around a franchise with fans that just wanted
another game in the series.

Basically Interplay tried to open the franchise to the combat strategy
demographic with Fallout Tactics but had outsourced the entire game to a study
with no sensibilities for the established setting or even premise of the first
two games beyond "kinda like Mad Max with retro sci-fi".

Then they followed up by trying to do a console shmup with desperately
oversexualised marketing (press packages contained actual condoms). Again,
outsourced, and with no resemblence to the original two games at all.

In the meantime they killed off the actual in-development Fallout sequel
codenamed Van Buren, which was the closest the fans ever got to a successor to
Fallout 2.

Then they announced plans to create a Fallout based online game with another
external company, which luckily never went anywhere (fans referred to the
hypothetical Fallout Online as "FOOL" even before anyone took the idea
serious).

At some point all the mismanagement and continued failures caught up with
Interplay, long-time employees managed to sue for lost wages and a certain
company that gave the world cookie-cutter fantasy combat RPGs with two
dimensional characters bought the rights to Fallout 3, 4 and 5 (and possibly
more) and created what people born in the late 1990s or later think of as
Fallout today.

There were some other tearful events with ex-developers creating Fallout-like
RPGs (in gameplay, not in story) at other companies (just to namedrop a few:
Lionheart and Arcanum) but let's just say there were good reasons to be very
angry and disappointed even before Bethesda had any chance to screw anything
up.

~~~
gknoy
On the bright side, Steam has Wasteland 2. I haven't played more than a week
or so of it, but if you're looking for "isometric turn based combat RPG in a
post-apocalyptic wasteland", it nails it. It felt like a Fallout, probably
because Fallout took so much inspiration from the original Wasteland. The only
thing that made it Not-Fallout was the absence of Pip-Boy or Nuka-cola.

------
newswriter99
Tried playing the first one a year ago but with the turn-based system and
fast-travel being what it is, progress is slow. Which wouldn't be bad when you
want to spend your Sunday afternoon in a post-apocalyptic wasteland, but this
is not a game for someone who has a 9-to-5.

------
Hydraulix989
Hope it doesn't get a Cease and Desist.

