Fallout - Where To Start?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 14 чер 2024
- Fallout is currently seeing a huge number of new players entering the wasteland for the very first time, but what's really the best way for them to get into this classic franchise? As it turns out, the answer's a bit complicated...
Fallout: New Vegas on Steam - store.steampowered.com/app/22...
Fallout 4 on Steam - store.steampowered.com/app/37...
Fallout 3 on Steam - store.steampowered.com/app/22...
Fallout 76 on Steam - store.steampowered.com/app/11...
Fallout 1 on Steam - store.steampowered.com/app/38...
Fallout 2 on Steam - store.steampowered.com/app/38...
Fallout Tactics on Steam - store.steampowered.com/app/38...
Follow us on Twitter / manyatruenerd
Support us on Patreon / manyatruenerd
Join our Discord - / discord
Find us on Reddit / manyatruenerd
Fanfare for Space, Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License
creativecommons.org/licenses/b... - Ігри
The reason why being a vault dweller in Fallout 1/3/4 as a player character was such a good design choice is because vault dwellers typically know little to nothing about the wasteland outside their vault, so players learn about the world organically through their experiences.
You don't know anything about the wasteland in 2, and in New Vegas you get to choose whether your character knows what's happening or not.
But in 2 there's a mystery aspect about your character that can make a new player wonder if they are missing something due to not having played a game before
I'm tired of always playing as a vault dweller (it's getting a bit repetitive IMO) but I agree that it's the most friendly background for new players who are unfamiliar with the setting.
@@moonlightingjam tbf in Fallout 4 it is hard to call you a Vault Dweller in full :P
@@Th1sUsernameIsNotTaken Pre-Worlder?
I can't believe Jon forgot about the essential entries that are Fallout Shelter and Fallout Pinball. And this man calls himself a fan!
I guess you're joking, shelter is like a time waste game and best playable as modded with 200 lunchboxes from start and pinball is best as an actual arcade machine 😊 but would be fun to see someone squeeze the lore out of it.😂😅😊
@@pridler85 I liked fallout shelter, even with out its gimmicks.
Fallout shelter is shit and you guys know it
@@pridler85fallout tactics also missing
@@mikes9753same category as BoS, sucked ass and shoudnt have been okayed by anyone.
First mission i lost half my fuckin party cuz youre outnumbered and outgunned but the elder bitches you out if anyone dies and calls you a disgraceful failure.
0/10, it actually made my non-existant cancer spread.
Can’t believe you forgot about the best fallout game of all time fallout pinball
Obviously it's fallout shelter
He also didn't mention Shelter....
@@varthaner4617There is no Fallout Shelter in Ba Sing Se.
@@sponge1234ify I still play Fallout Shelter. I have 105 hrs in it since 2020.
you joke but I love pinball and I love fallout, so this probably would be preferable to some other titles in the series to me
Jon. Jon never changes.
I haven't heard his voice since Fallout 3 Kill everything. So yes Jon does change.
"Fallout: New Vegas...IS GOOD"
Perfect, I tip my hat to you.
Jon is such a cool and open minded guy. Seriously, UA-cam needs more creators like you that can see multiple perspectives and recommend different games for different kinds of players.
Especially in the Fallout community where most fans will judge you if New Vegas and Fallout 2 aren't your favorites. Thanks!
I think a lot of the fans forget that they have thousands of hours in all the games combined, while a new player doesn't. New Vegas and Fallout 2 are my favourites, though I played FO1 and 2 at launch so there's that nostalgia angle, but I'd always recommend Fallout 4. Sure, Bethesda games have their bugs, but New Vegas just straight up won't run properly on some modern machines and unless the person you're recommending for is used to modding games they could be just screwed before they start. Fallout 3 is similar - neither actually run out the box on my PC.
Fallout 4 is easy to get going, start playing and figure out even without all the hours into the franchise that we have. It also looks decent, even by modern standards, so someone who didn't grow up with the older games and isn't into retro games won't be put of by how objectively ugly Fallout 3 and New Vegas are (to say nothing of the I guess culture shock of Fallout 1 and 2).
@@Sletchman Exactly. Tbh most fallout games are great. They just do things differently.
Any good game tutorializes as if it's the first game ever being played, because it very well might be.
*to someone
@@MayorofHopeville Very few games actually do that well though. Breath of the Wild is one of the modern games that does it pretty well, but that's it. A lot still rely on general "gaming knowledge" and familiarity with a standard keyboard/mouse set up for gaming or a controller.
If you want to play the all the games, a very, *very* important thing to keep in mind is: do *not* play Fallout 2 before playing Fallout. Not because of the story (even though there is a sequence there), but because in F2 you can tell your teammates (and NPCs) to move out of the way, and you'll go bananas if you get into Fallout with that experience and Ian gets stuck in every other doorway. It happens *a lot*. :p
I liked Fallout Tactics quite a bit, its poor reputation is because it's very much not your standard Fallout game but rather an, as the name says, tactics game and nobody expected that.
In any case, if you're not averse to oldschool gaming I'd recommend starting in chronological order, and if you prefer the 3D games F4 is the most welcoming to beginners, but starting with that will make it difficult to move on to F3 or NV, as they're quite different animals in many ways, not the least graphically.
As someone who nvr did beat the first after gettin into the 2nd as a kid; yeah no, theres all sorts of little details that ya take for granted in the 2nd one and then its like "Oh gods, how do i play without ?" xD
The 2nd is sm better tho, id still say to start there; but i just nvr found the first all that good of a game comparably, bcuz i started with the 2nd heh
Good thing there are mods for FO1... one of them lets you push companions out of the way. :)
Playing through FO2 for the first time right now and when I realized I could push people out of the way I was actually jumping up and down in my chair cheering
In a way I see the difference between Tactics and 1+2 like the difference between Baldur's Gate and Icewind Dale, where it's more about the group rather than a single character.
Best way to play FO1 is to play it with the conversion made in FO2 engine, so you get the better mechanical stuff from the second game
Ok I am honestly going to say as much as I like New Vegas I don't think people should start there. There are only two games that don't start in a Vault, New Vegas, and 2. Now I will say this as much as Fallout doesn't need to start in a vault, I think it's better when it does ESPECIALLY for new players. I think a big part of the narrative introduction is being someone irl who has no clue about Fallout and playing a character who has zero actual knowledge of the wasteland and across your adventure you learn it all at the same time. I would argue even 2 with starting in an isolated tribe still has that same vibe of going into the unknown. New Vegas doesn't and if you don't know Fallout it can be a bit jarring trying to play a character that presumably has been traveling the wasteland. 1,3, and 4 make those good starting point depending on whether you're more inclined towards combat or roleplay. THEN do New Vegas where you presumably know everything about the wasteland and can create a more unique character.
I started with 3, and then NV. I agree and truly believe that is the best path.
I would argue that 4 is a little bit below in that regard because in 1 and 3 your character doesn't know the place where the game takes place, the city and its surroundings (the map for us), while in 4 there is a disconect within the player and character who is supposed to have lived in Boston before the war.
@@nicudelpapa4056 Can you name an example of the character having knowledge that gives an advantage as compared to the player?
@@reliantncc1864 Not necessarily an advantage but the character sometimes mentions knowing or having been to certain places, but even if that wasn't the case we know for a fact that the character lived there.
Oh Jon, F76 hasn't had survival mechanics in awhile. All the old eat/drink or take damage necessities, have been turned into entirely optional buffs to increase weight carry or add various stat/damage buffs. The upcoming update is adding an additional area to the base map so vertibird travelling isn't necessary unless doing expeditions. But it is a very beginner friendly Fallout to just chill with friends in a Fallout-ish setting, kinda like a Fallout theme park.
I’m one of the few people who actually liked the survival mechanics in F76 and was sad when it went away. I had fun scavenging for food, cooking food, and selling it at my vendor, on top of making sure my food/hunger bar was doing ok.
Finished the show this afternoon, had an absolute blast with it. Glad to see it's introduced a lot of people to the franchise.
I love the show and can't wait for the next season! It's basically a fusion of F04 and New Vegas in feel, as I saw it. Interesting characters, an intriguing story, and good world-building.
I think if you’re playing for the first time because of the show 3/4 makes the most sense since you start in the vault, then Vegas should be after whichever you pick.
If it's someone very young that would be turned off by the graphics or gameplay of 3, then start with 4. But if you are a little older, I absolutely recommend 3, it has incredible humor and better world building/atmosphere. I go back and watch the Fallout 3 trailer sometimes and it still makes me chuckle. I think the pacing of 3 and humor is more similar to the show, 4 has slower pacing and the dialogue may put off fans of the show. I also think 3 has more brutality by far, and that is a good thing imo to get people engaged with the wasteland. I remember going to the elementary school near megaton as the 1st location I entered outside the vault, imagine my surprise at seeing all that. I ran away back to the vault, then found Megaton and having that duality absolutely gripped me. I HAD to know what was out there. 4 gives you a minigun and power armor early on and you kill a deathclaw, then Preston makes you a general on the spot. 3 gives you a 10mm pistol and a dream, it's a totally different ball game.
I believe Fallout 4 is the best starting point for a new player. The Sole Survivor cryogenically freezing themselves then having a "fish-out-of-water" experience in the wasteland is perfect for a first-time Fallout player.
I agree, its the most modern gameplay wise too. New Vegas might be "the best one" but for the average gamer Fallout 4 is going to be the most engaging.
It's also the closest to the TV show with all of the cryogenic stuff and the look of the show.
@@Marnie_C yeah, when i started fallout, i tried new vegas because everyone always talks about it, but i couldnt play it, and didnt get into it, ultil i played fallout 4 and then i could play new vegas and loved every second
I think FO4 is the most user friendly FO game. If you have a friend, like me, who is a wealth of knowledge and has played all the games then 76 is fun cuz it’s co-op.
@@TheRealChacorta I got a friend into Fallout because we both had Gamepass and we played 76 over a weekend. Playing with a friend can help ease someone in and now they've played nearly every Fallout game
It's incredible to watch John use all of his experience explaining Fallout to bring it to a new generation of players. You can see all of the arguments from his previous video essays combining. John's magnum opus.
Sanctuary is only /so/ safe, it's entirely possible for a deathclaw to spawn across the river by the high wires early game. It's usually just raiders up there, but sometimes you get a fun surprise.
Thats why I often make the Drive-in my main base of operations. All kinds of madness can spawn by the bridge, and with Automatons DLC you can find yourself a good kerfuffle (and loot) for robot parts!
I haven't seen that in a single play through lol. That's rough.
@@Th1sUsernameIsNotTaken I've only seen it twice in a couple thousand hours. First time was on the basic sanctuary - rocket - farm - wicked shipping run, thing was patrolling down the creek by the break in the fence. Second time I heard shooting while I was looting the trailer by the farm and it was fighting the raiders that live up by the power pylon. Dozens of other times, nothing.
I am a bit paranoid about deathclaws spawning around Sanctuary. There is the spot by the pylons between Sanctuary and Abernathy. Which can appear in the very early game. Also had one spawn a few times on the east end of Sanctuary Island. Which if popping to the small bunker and not expecting it, can give you a bit of a start.
I had a pet Deathclaw but if Sanctuary got attacked the settlers would shoot (i don't know if accidentally and it went hostile) the Deathclaw and kill it. Having a tame one was the one and only time I saw it stick its tongue out - it's long and forked like a snake's.
Start with Fallout 3, and then New Vegas. The two of them compliment eachother nicely.
Fun fact: Fallout Brotherhood of Steel was actually the first ever Fallout game I played and I still think it's an underrated gem that doesn't get the love it deserves. After all it's the only Fallout game where you can play as a ghoul (apart from tactics where you can have ghoul squad members but I don't really count that) so that alone is enough to recommend it. I do think it would be a decent place for someone new to the franchise to start too cause it's relatively simple and uncomplicated but still introduces you to the themes of Fallout. I understand why it's considered non-canon but I still wish it got more attention and love than it does.
BoS is awesome, massively underrated. Reviewers did it dirty
Nah it’s bad. You’re just nostalgia blind
Jon, I love you and I wish nothing but success for your channel, and it hadn’t occurred to me until now that the Fallout TV might be a way for you to get a bunch of new viewers. I hope you see a huge burst of activity because of the show!
Im one of the few (old) people who got to play them all as they were released and looking back I absolutely love that I got to experience that.
But IMO its best to play them in reverse starting with FO4 in you're new to the franchise.
Start with the worst so it only gets better. Smart.
The best place to start is “fallout new vegas: kill everything”
Exactly where I started. Couldn't have picked better
The first thing I ever saw of Jon's was "Fallout 3 Kill Everything: American History 101" so I think that's the best place to start.
FO3 KE is better, Even john as said so.
@@mica720x that wasn’t the question though
Indeed however you really need to be in the appropriate frame of mind for that. Fallout 3 Kill Everything is a bit lighter and a load funnier.
Tale of two wastelands for the last 8 years now and it’s my favorite set of games and mod ever
I'm buying a PC and TOTW is one of the main reasons lol
It was fantastic I loved it.
Great starting point, if someone else sets it up for you first! Vault start, early exploration, graduate to complicated multi faction plots later.
Holy crap, there's a duffle bag full of cash on the roof of Wicked Shipping? I did not know that!
and a really good snipe spot for the ghoul that's sleeping in the shed!
Fallout 4 has a lot of things to find.
And 2 in sanctuary. Well, one just outside. One on the roof with a tree leaning on it to reach it, the other at the foot of the minuteman statue across the bridge.
My friends and I are trying to indoctrinate another friend into playing fallout, and you just happen to come along. thank you MATN: Fallout jesus.
Perfect tool for the job.
He's got some YOLO runs, I tell you...
He’s more like John the Baptist, Triangle is the Fallout Jesus.
Fallout tactics is actually really fun, but like, unfinished. As in, it genuinely just feels like the game is not done yet. Some of my favorite examples: there are many random encounters where the NPCs just do not have gear. Some will be unarmed, or some will have guns but no ammo outside of what is loaded into it, and no money/junk/heals. The balancing is really awful and takes huge turns every once in a while. There is a bug that causes crashes or duplicate encounters if you run through the entire special encounters table, as if nobody ever tried to see what happens if you actually get them all. There is also a whole bunch of jank around the movement and scenery and what not but that one could be chalked up to the game's age rather than being unpolished
haha i forgot about the jank. and the duplicate encounter bug.
People absolutely underestimate how slow burn new vegas is at first. My first fallout game was fallout 4, I played it back when it came out in 2015, and from that point on loved it. I played a good bit of fallout 3 and had always heard people say new vegas was the best, but every time I tried it out, I was so bored that i stopped after a bit. It wasn't until one day, that I really wanted to play fallout, but didn't want to play through the opening sections of 4 again, and decided that there must have been some reason that people rated new vegas so highly that I just missed. I set a 3 hour timer and told myself I would play it for that entire time, and if I still didn't like it by the end of that timer I would put the game away. By the time the timer ran out and the alarm rang, I was so engrossed in the game that I forgot I had set it at all and got scared. You really gotta give it time to do its thing, and if you aren't already sold and fully committed to giving it that time, I think it might scare you off.
It’s not surprising fo4 fans don’t like it.
Different games. People who like happy meals generally don’t like gourmet salmon.
All depends on the player. If you just want to shoot guns and look at flashy colours, fo4 is for you. If you want to think and use your brain a bit, older games are for you
"I think there are blimps in it. If you want the backstory of why there are blimps in Fallout, I think that was in this one" -MATN, 2024.
That bit killed me. I've played Tactics and for a semi-canon game it's pretty decent though in another playstyle altogether, a simple progressive mission of the day Fallout-y game with some lore about the detached Midwestern Chapter of the Brotherhood of Steen sprinkled here and there. Though I will say that the best idea was Vault-Tec's plan of having Vault 0 be the center of a hub controlling the opening of every other vault in America after the bombs dropped and them having a robot army to pacify the wastes of any mutant that was left standing.
My biggest gripe with New Vegas was that the world didnt feel like you could go anywhere like you could in Fo3. NV definitely felt like it was forcing you to go south, then east, then north. I didnt feel free to explore
Very true. It feels like it doesn't like an adventurous player.
While Fallout 3 absolutely loves you for exploring. The whole game was built around that idea.
I had the same problem with it. Invisible walls and invincible creatures everywhere. I didn't have much fun with it the first time I played it. It was only after modding that I started to really enjoy it. Especially the Real Time Settler mod. I want to just do my own thing. Over the years I've gravitated more towards sandbox games where I can build the world I want to play in.
That's what fascinated me about FNV. No hand holding, no linear path, if you feel like it here are some end game creatures for you to fight right at the very beginning.
Even if you could go exploring in New Vegas, it's just not really worth it imo. There are very few interesting locations and most of them are part of side quests that ask you to go there anyway. Everything else is very empty and generic. Compare it to FO3 where most "dungeons" are out of the way and you have no real reason to go there other than "I want to see what's on that side of the map." Say what you want about Bethesda, but they know how to design good levels.
Fallout 3s lack of set enemies in set locations for general wandering was great! Much better than set hard enemies in certain spots just to force you down one route
I started with Fallout 2. Then I played the first game... and then I found the glory that is New Vegas. I've always been happy with my absorption of the Fallout Universe.
I went much the same way tho i also played 3 after it came out, but NV was a true return to form in many ways and i loved it. I also think Fallout 2 is a vastly better game than Fallout 1; and i dont think idve got into the series as easily as a kid in the 00s if id started with 1 and not 2.
Even with the fact id played Arcanum: Of Steamworks and Magicka (tho gods is that far more complex in many ways so i nvr actually got that far into it back then), so i had some idea how to play these kinds of games
The originals are great…I was born in 1984 so I have no issues with the graphics, in fact they feel quite nostalgic to me I used to play A LOT of games with the top down style.
I even recently put fallout 1 & 2 on my PsVIta. Amazing.
@@iBMcFly I grew up playing on the ZX Spectrum. There's no way I want to play any of those games again.
@@Safetytrousers cope harder scrub.
I'm a Fallout Tactics player going way back. I may've played it before I even played Fallout 2. It's a team style game similar to the original Baldur's Gate, where you assemble a squad of specialists. A sinper, a demolition expert, medic, etc. I liked the real-world weapons with the addition of plasma and laser rifles. The best part was multiple drivable cars. Tanks, humvees, etc. In just the same way that the Highwayman in Fallot 2 makes trudging across vast distances bearable, this was a fun addition. And, Tactics crashed more times than I can remember. Not a first Fallout game by any means. But, worth a look.
Definitely. One of my fav Fallout memories is driving the APC around the outside of an enemy base like a party wagon w/ a squad of m1 garand-toting snipers inside. Basically finished everyone before even stepping foot inside.
My first experience with Fallout was when my friends brought New Vegas and 3 over to my house. I tried New Vegas first because they both agreed it’s the “best one” (an opinion I now share) and I completely ignored the Goodsprings bit, traveled off the road and ran into a group of Cazadors who promptly killed me. I then switched to 3 which was much more structured and I loved the post-apocalyptic dread of the setting, but my friends had to leave before I could really get things going. Then, years later, I bought 4 and really liked it in spite of its shortcomings, and years later still, Epic Games released all Fallouts but 4 and 76 for free and got to really fall in love with the franchise (I’ve even detailed my experience with 3 in the comments section of your videos while you were doing the Tale of Two Wastelands series). And while I have yet to play the first two Fallout games even though I have them (limited space on my pc), I can safely say one can’t go wrong with either 3 or New Vegas, depending on one’s tastes. 3 has the best atmosphere for those fascinated in post-apocalypse settings, and New Vegas is incredibly fun (outside of Dead Money, that dlc is so annoying).
Very nice of you Jon! There’s been so many more people talking about fallout thanks to the show!
My first was Fallout 3 and i loved it, but somehow ive struggled to really get into New Vegas, need to give it another chance. 4 is my favourite though, have over 2400 hours into it.
I started with 3 as well.
Finished New Vegas around 2018-2019 and I struggle to see how it is vastly better then other games in the series.
@@gucciguy3408it tends to have better “roleplay” attributes. Like that conversation with Centurion Silus. There is nothing like it in the others.
I struggled with 3 for some reason, not exactly sure why. New Vegas gripped me immediately and was where I started to really "get" the series.
I started with Fallout 3 also. What clicked with me with New Vegas was when I learned I could kill any npc. In 3 there were quite a bit of essential npcs specially if you hadn't finished their quest. I remember doing a quest for someone and quickly starting to dislike them. After I returned to hand in a 3rd quest, they started talking about things I strongly disagreed with (I think they were making light of a group of people being massacred). Before I was able to get the experience, I had pulled out my shotgun and killed the npc. The whole base turned on me but I felt like I finally understood RPGs, I didn't have to just do quests for people I didn't like, I could do what I wanted.
While I won't jump into the circlejerk about 3 vs. NV (so this isn't a quality assessment), they are designed in very different ways, so it's not surprising that the amount of people who really like both seems to be similar to or maybe even less than the amount of people who prefer one or the other. New Vegas walks you fairly naturally through a pretty structured world, where you will inevitably begin to learn a lot about what's going on just passively by talking to NPCs and moving towards the destinations on your main quest. It opens up in the second act (it has pretty long acts too) much more, as the game stops holding your hand and lets your side quests and main quest fairly naturally intertwine. New Vegas is fundamentally about choice. In Goodsprings alone you have at least 3 major choices (leave, protect the town, or destroy the town), and that's just to tell players that story impacting choices exist at all. But this isn't a purely good or bad thing design-wise. You can make choices without fully understanding the consequences, and while a lot of people love this and treat it as a huge twist, for other players it can ruin a playthrough if they realize too late the story is going in a direction they don't like and they don't have a save to go back to.
Fallout 3 is one of the first 3D RPGs to truly be an open world game. After the linear tutorial you can just wander off pretty much anywhere. The main quest is generally more of just a lifeline for players to jump back to if they get bored of wandering. It's also a game where the vast majority of factions are tiny and inconsequential, which certainly lends to the vibe of the world being desolate and inhospitable. They generally have side quests but likewise they aren't really playing a part in a huge twisting and complex narrative, but rather exist to flesh out the world. The major factions are pretty black and white (Brotherhood are the good guys, Enclave are the bad guys) which helps a player have a more casually fun experience without having to grapple with factions that have very complex social, economic and moral issues like New Vegas. There's very few factions in New Vegas anyone is going to fully align with, and the ones that people do are going to vary person to person. Personally I think the NCR is fine and should not be aggressively opposed, but I think the Followers of the Apocalypse are the best faction to back. And admittedly it can be a tedious process to have your expectations built up and broken down over and over, which New Vegas likes to do. You initially hear a bunch of random people's perspectives that vary wildly, then you actually meet the faction and begin to sympathize with it, but as you learn more and more, more dirt gets dug up making you eventually have to confront whether or not you accept them warts and all, or distance yourself. Fallout 3 doesn't do this. Your character can navigate the wasteland as you please, but once you get to the end, it's pretty much a binary choice.
I'm playing Fallout 3 right now and it's so great! I played it back in 08 but i was young i dont remember it. I dont know why people crap on it so much. I love these 360-era games. So nostalgic and perfect for Steam deck.
Mostly because the story's really dumb and doesn't make any sense, but also because it's needlessly antagonistic to the lore.
It is such a good game and I love how they made genuine effort to bring mechanics and the feeling of Fallout to 3D.
@@macedindu829 F3 was the first Fallout game I played. It didn't matter what any previous lore was.
As would have been the case with the vast majority of people. F1 600,00, F3 12.4 million.
And I loved it.
@@Safetytrousers Maybe you did, but it wouldn't be a very good introduction to FO, as it totally requires you to relearn everything if you wan't to have any idea what the series is about. And, like I said, it's kinda dumb and nonsensical.
@@macedindu829 F3 was a fantastic introduction to Fallout for me. As I said it didn't matter about previous games because I had not played them, as with the vast majority of F3 players.
The controls seemed intuitive and nothing about it was difficult to learn for me.
Fallout Tactics was my first Fallout game and I ABSOLUTELY loved it. 💯
You were able to commamd a whole squad consisting of regular people, ghouls, super mutants and even death claws and robots with different perks, strengths and weaknesses.
The gameplay was fun and more refined that the one in F1 and F2 (two quick slots for each character). You can choose wether you want to play it as turn based game or even in real time (which i personally prefered).
There were vehicles which you could capture and travel with on the big map and even in missions, at one point there is also a tank you can capture and fire with.
The story was unique and interesting, you don't have to play the original ones since you are not directly connected to the old Brotherhood of Steel.
The game has 4 unique endings that are based on your final and previous choices.
Definitely a good starting point even in 2024 I'd say. ❤
Two weeks in a row, I just want Fallout Sim Settlements 2 to continue
Same
I like this guy.
Same
I really miss it.
the new update probably gonna break it anyway in couple days
My entry was Fallout tactics in 2001. I enjoy tactical games and this was petty sweet at the time but hard AF.
Not really a good intro to fallout though. Don't get me wrong it's a good game but it's definitely the odd one out in the franchise. Even 76 is more like other fallouts than tactics
Fallout Tactics was a cocking good time back then if you liked Fallout action more than any other part of 1&2.
I have fond memories of playing Tactics. Riding around the wasteland in my humvee. Carrying out raids and clearing out areas building by building like a swat team. Wearing the awesome Midwest Brotherhood armor while welding a automatic shot gun with EMP shells and desperately fighting robots.
Honestly a modern game like that wouldn't go unappreciated. Although I guess you could just play the Wasteland series instead.
It got actually a fulfilling amount of lore, dialogue and endings. 2 true canon ending candidates of either destroy the Calculator or Good rep brain donor. Because yeahh... the other endings make the MW BoS superfluous douchbags, we got the Enclave and possible Maxsons BoS for that 😂
I’ve played fallout tactics and hold it in high regard because it’s an rpg squad tactics game. (Similar to the original XCom combat with fallout gameplay if that makes sense) It’s a linear story and the main story options are “do you genocide or accept these people into your BoS chapter.” It’s difficult and the maps can be really REALLY large. I won’t lie, it took me save scumming to finish the game so it may feel like slog to you, but it’s really fun if you enjoy this kind of game mode.
I would compare it to the description given about FO 2, with those strange interactions with an old style gameplay and really isn’t made to be picked up for a short fun time.
A few people will love this and want to see the main premise of this game. Most will put it down in the first 15-30 minutes. The worst part: none of this is cannon. You’ll feel like a badass at the end regardless the direction you go, but realize none of this exists outside of this game.
@ManyATrueNerd I’d like to cash in my points from the Bunker (2 part) series and say you should give it a try again if you can. Not for a UA-cam series, but for a personal experience. The story fits the fallout universe and is overall fun/funny. The part I feel like you have push through will be a truck escort mission where yes you get to drive the truck, but you’re going to be driving the truck 5 meter, getting out and trying to check for traps (mines), getting in, and repeating. It’s fun overall (there’s even a point you get a tank), but that mission gives me nightmares… even with some enemies just hiding in corners with rocket launchers.
Funnily enough, I watched Jon long before my first fallout, so he's what started me on one of my favorite game series.
Thanks Jon!
I got into Fallout by talking to one of my co-workers. I described Oblivion and he said that sounded just like a game he was playing with guns: Fallout 3. So I gave it a try and liked it just as much as Oblivion. It was only later that I realized that the same company made both games at around the same time.
FO2 was my first FO game and as such remains my favorite, despite my love for FO: NV. Of course, as these games are the spiritual successor to the Wasteland series, I'd say if you really want a deeper dive into what makes/made FO what it is, play any of the Wasteland games, particularly Wateland 2 or 3, as the original Wasteland is extremely hard for newcomers to get into, even if you might have played a tactical post apocalyptic sci-fi RPG in the past.
I'd say to checkout the original Wasteland. Fallout was born from the lack of them being able to buy back the name from EA for a potential sequel they wanted to do. All the little references and nods in the Fallout games came from Wasteland. Then again, that one would be even more difficult for people to get into especially if they aren't fans of turn based combat.
I loved Fallout Tactics as a teenager! It was like a simplified XCOM with Fallout 2's combat.
No idea if it holds up though...
Wonderful guide! Even if you aren't looking for your first game, I think this does a great job of comparing and contrasting the different games and what made them excellent.
I played Fallout 1 and 2 when they were first released. Isometric strategy games were common at the time, and I was playing Dungeons and Dragons too, so everything about the games felt familiar and interesting. I especially liked how flexible the game was with the narrative and making your choices really matter. They sure could be punishing, though; especially with the random encounters.
And yeah, Fallout 2 started with a clear focus and then suddenly dumped you into a huge world that you had to learn about from scratch. I guess that was part of the theme, though, since you were a descendent many generations removed from a shelter dweller and were part of a simple tribe living largely in isolation. The intro in the village makes it quite clear that you are being sent off on a special journey and nobody even knows what it might be like out there. Dumping you in the wider world and having you figure out what's going on in general was largely the point. It's only by understanding the wider world that you can put together the pieces and figure out where to go, bringing you to the larger, more interesting plot.
I remember when Fallout 3 came out and fans of the series were up in arms that it was first-person, real-time, and had the VATS system. I really enjoyed everything they did in Fallout 3, but it was certainly a departure from the earlier games. It's a shame it has become relatively inaccessible, because in it's day it worked wonderfully; I never encountered a single bug or glitch. There were lots of interesting story lines, you still had quite a few (but not nearly as much) ways to approach the world. It did an excellent job even from the start of showing you that your choices actually mattered and would effect the entire world around you. It really felt alive and responsive and is one of the few games where I actually felt like a hero because of what I could accomplish and how the rest of the world acknowledged that.
I expected Fallout 4 to be quite similar to Fallout 3, but was really surprised how little it felt like your actions mattered. Sure, you could build a base, but to what end? You could clear out entire dungeons and get some experience and money, but very little else came of it, even on the world stage. Especially in the early game, the areas all kind of felt the same. Sure, the gun play was good and there were some interesting parts to the story, but even the opening hook of the story didn't catch me. It really did feel a lot like the modern open world adventure RPG - a little bit of everything that combined to be a whole not of nothing special. For people touching Fallout for the first time, I'd say it's the most approachable because it's so similar to what has become standard fare in modern games. But I think all the games before it were stronger in narrative and world building.
I tried Fallout: New Vegas when it first came out, but it was so buggy that I eventually gave up. I had key NPCs become stuck in the ground and unresponsive. I had the main story quest line break and not be able to continue. I had enemies somehow attacking me from underneath the terrain - completely invisible. It was a broken mess. I've heard it had improved later, but I didn't care at all for it at that point. It wasn't until seeing your videos going over it in detail that I came to appreciate what made it special.
Fallout 76 was an instant NO for me. I don't want an open-world MMO live service game that makes you grind so they can keep you paying a subscription fee and then tries to bilk you for more with microtransactions. From what I've seen, it really has no redeeming qualities. Maybe if you actually want a playground in the Fallout universe, but even then it seems to be a white washed and uninteresting version of that; Fallout 4 gave you far more options for actually building something and making a mark on the world.
Suggesting a first fallout game to play is super difficult as each one caters to a different type of gamer. Not every gamer is looking for the same thing. Personal I feel the best suggestions depends on games you've previously played:
- If you're into true RPGs like Baldur's Gate or you have experience with DnD I would suggest the first Fallout. The first game requires a specific expectation and is best suited for gamers who are familiar with classic table top gaming.
- If you're more into action games and really like FPS then Fallout 4 is a great start. Its easy for someone who expects pointing and shooting means the enemy dies. The character feels like an extension of the player.
- If you've played RPG hybrids like mass effect or the Elder Scroll games I'd suggest New Vegas. I completely agree that Fallout 3 is a mess to get working and that could be a turn off.
- If you like social games like Minecraft I would suggest 76 specially if you have friends who would play with you.
Understanding that each game is vastly different in feel and style despite being from the same series is important. New Vegas might be "the best one" but it might not be what you're looking for in a game. I agree that the RPG elements of New Vegas are amazing but I keep returning to Fallout 4 as I much more enjoy the gameplay.
- If you've played RPG hybrids like mass effect or the Elder Scroll games I'd suggest New Vegas. I completely agree that Fallout 3 is a mess to get working and that could be a turn off.
The mod (I believe it was) that merges these two games can fix this and creates a good experience for both games in that regard.
For the remainder I pretty much agree with what you said.
@@skorpion7132 Oh yeah Tale of Two Wastelands is good, I just think suggesting a mod for a new comer would be a bit daunting
I have had a far smoother experience with Fo3 than NV.
I just started a fallout 3 run and it worked flawlessly on steam
@@hengineer I wonder if they removed games for Windows as a requirement. I know when I last played it I had to do a bunch of stuff to disable
I think the reason I didn't get on with New Vegas after playing 3 and 4 was that I didn't play how the game wanted me to. I like to explore and go off in random directions, and the structured approach to New Vegas didn't mesh with my usual playstyle
Same here. Every time I tried to do things differently than suggested and wander around a bit, I was faced with creatures way over my pay grade!! LOL!
Most Fallout games go:
Intro -> Prologue then Tutorial -> First main quest mission -> Open World (and you can skip the first main quest mission in 3. In 4 you technically can but the map is really designed to at least get the Minutemen over with)
New Vegas goes:
Intro -> Prologue then mechanical tutorial -> Choice tutorial -> Primm -> Nipton -> Novac -> Several optional locations/go straight to the strip -> Second act starts and you can more or less go where you want from here as the map pushes you northward unless you wander into Legion territory to the east.
It takes a very long time for it to become open world, and this is a very deliberate choice. It perfectly holds your hand until you know literally everything you need to to navigate the rest of the map freely. Unfortunately very few 3D open world games are designed like this where there's only difficulty barriers and not locked off areas. So unless people are coming from non-3D open world games, and a specific subtype to be exact, it can be frustrating to bounce off difficult areas until eventually you just follow the main quest. It certainly was for me the first time but luckily I was young enough the first time playing that I was able to push past that hurdle and now as an adult I just follow the main story until Novac, then start the open world part. The start of the second act is also pretty subtle. You learn where Benny is, you learn about the chip's importance (but not all the details) and now you know your long-time goal is to get to New Vegas, but you also know you probably can't just b-line there because the game has taught you to go settlement to settlement for best results. It's the beginning of the rising action too because you have now likely seen the NCR and Legion fight (unless the game bugs out or the patrols just don't hit Legion roadblocks) and are inevitably going to run into more and more legion and NCR as you go, and slowly the true scale of the conflict becomes clear. Of course the 3 act structure tends to be drawn out in videogames but the first act of New Vegas can be very long, especially if you do side quests and talk to most NPCs. Likewise the second act starts off pretty slow burn, and a lot of players skip most of it anyways. Even though the game is designed to de-incentivize b-lining to the strip, a lot of players do, and means that most of the game will be the very long third act, which can feel like a 3 act structure of its own in that case. It's surprising New Vegas works at all to be honest. I feel like with worse writing or game design the entire 3 act structure could break down and turn it into just a blob of random conflicts.
New Vegas structured? I played it for 2 years just roaming. It was my first Fallout game.
but you can go off and explore, you just have to be smart about it because not everything will just fall over in two shots
@@Kaarl_Mills Problem isn't the touch enemies, it's the fact that they're placed in exact spots to stump you. I remember making it past the flying devils north of goodsprings on my second playthrough, running into vegas, and ending up surprised just how easy it was to glitch into a spot to be safe anytime danger showed up.
Jon is absolutely right. Watched in full, liked, and now commented to help in the algorithm. With Fallout taking over the mainstream now, anyone looking at the series for the first time needs to see this video, and - of course - discover this channel. I always liked Fallout (3 and NV in particular as those were my first), but Jon's series on the games have been a joy to watch. JSawyer Mod, Dust, Autumn Leaves, Frost, and all of the YOLO runs make me fall in love with the franchise and the channel.
I'm glad to hear you have more fallout stuff coming along. I just rewatched the yolo fallout 4 run.
Great idea for a video!
I wonder if it's time for Jon to revisit Appalachia to show off the changes made and stories added to 76...
I played every Fallout games since 1997 with OG Fallout (except FO:BOS - I never considered that as a Fallout game anyways, LOL)... and yes including Fallout Tactics, and I loved it! It's XCOM meets Fallout... and it has a tank! A freakin MadMax version of M4 Sherman, how can a WW2 tank nerd like me not love this game!?
If you live (or lived) where one of the games takes place, it's a lot of fun seeing places you've been to IRL in game.
When F4 came out, I absolutely loved it because it was for the story, modern visuals, and the massive amount of mods and expansion to play, build, and create. It has been the 1st Fallout I played. Then i was excited for 76. Played close to 100 hours on that and gave up due to a lack of content and updates. It's hard for me to go back to older Fallout games, only because of the visuals and gameplay. If those were more modern and not as hard to download and play, I would play both F3 and NV. That's been my only barrier that I can not get passed. Great video.
There is one aspect in Fallout 4 that shouldn't be overlooked for a new player (and there will be *spoilers* so anyone reading on be informed): you start as someone from the current year. Yes, from another timeline and stuff, but your mental starting point is from someone who grew up with a (somewhat) healthy environment, a working civilization, regular TV, etc. ... which makes you have so much more in common compared to every other protagonist of the other Fallout games.
Like, you have a normal house and a family at the start, in a little suburb, your daily clothing and plans for what you do on the afternoon. And you witness the falling of the bombs. Barely make it to the shelter, where you get frozen in time. And when you awake (for the second time), you have a blank slate for what is going on and experience the changed world.
For someone new to the franchise, this should be one of the best experiences in terms of relatability. If we had cryo-tech, this could be happening to everyone. So for someone with no prior information, or very low information, about the Fallout universe, Fallout 4 can be a pretty good mental transporter into the world.
That's what makes it so horrible as an rpg. You don't have a choice about being a soldier/lawyer with a baby and a little place in the suburbs.
@30noir you do realize that being able to have a custom background is not a requirement for an rpg hell it's a relatively new thing for the genre
I don’t think new players should start with fallout 4. It’s much too focused on the crafting and settlement building aspect, while the main quest and writing is, in mine and many other’s opinions, the worst in the franchise. For a franchise that’s well known for world building, interesting dialogue and interesting characters, fallout 4 would give a new player a false impression on what the rest of the games will be like. If you enjoy fallout 4 for its best mechanics, like crafting and building, and can overlook the plot holes and boring characters, then you’ll probably be disappointed when you go back to 1-3 and new Vegas, considering they’re all plot and character focused, with practically no settlement building and gun customisation. Although, if you think the writing and characters in fallout 4 are good, then you’ll be blown away by the rest of the series. And probably any other game that has a story.
I also don’t think relatability with the main character in fallout 4 means it’s a good place to start, considering the rest of the games don’t have a main character with an structured background and set personality, they’re basically blank slates personality wise, and you’re to act with them to your liking, designed to let you project a certain role on to your character. Setting players who enter with fallout 4 a false representation of what the series as a whole is like.
@@destroy141 Sure it's new. FO4 is still a step backwards in this and many other aspects.
Excellent rundown! Thank you Jon, maybe I'll finally get around to actually playing these games
Fallout Tactics: Play it if you like games like X-Com. Team based, isometric, characters can level up, they can also die permanently as well.
One thing to note for Fallout 1, 2 and Tactics for anyone thinking of playing: They do NOT autosave at any point. Ever. Save often, because death can result in a loss of HOURS of gameplay.
FYI - Not sure what has happened, but I can't get FO3 to run on my PC now. Looking at the forum on Steam, it appears to be a known issue. Going to watch videos and research what's going on.
There's a guide to get it to work properly on Steam.
If you have the GOG version it should work on its own.
In my opinion, the best way to play Fallout 3 is with Tale of Two Wastelands. You basically play Fallout 3 but in the engine of New Vegas and it's incredibly stable and you get all the quality of life upgrades that NV brings. It does take a bit of time and effort to install, but there are plenty of guides out there to help you out.
Just install Tale of Two Wastelands. All the improvements New Vegas made and modded New Vegas is one of the most stable Bethesda engine games to date.
And as long as you follow the installation guide, it's very easy to install as well.
Most community support for 3 has also been drifting towards TTW as well, which I've heard multiple Fallout 3 fans complain about as TTW is a very large mod and one that not all people wanting to play 3 want to install or deal with.
The GOG version removed all the Games for Windows nonsense and it's the easiest one to get running, IMHO.
This is the man to listen to
I just restarted 3 and I don't need a guide. I'm having such a great time again (despite taking 2 hours to get it working on my PC... oh that strafe micro stutter, yeesh), but I'm happy to see a FO vid from you cause I think it's why I found your channel years ago.
Jon provides another Fallout Discussion video: [Everybody Liked That.]
I will say I installed Fallout New Vegas last weekend and as fun as it's been, it does have a habit of crashing about 2-3 times every session on average. I don't know how difficult it is to get Fallout 3 to run but if it's worse than NV then my god, that would do my nut in.
the way I would recommend them is based on what your friend would like.
If you like more modern fps games and simple stories, fallout 4.
If they like to look in every nook and cranny and into making their own dark comedy, fallout 3.
If they like a short game but extremely dense with dialogue and long term choices, fallout NV.
If they want a classic rpg and has a lot of time and level head, while appreciating really dark jokes and easter eggs, fallout 2.
if they want a challenge but a completable one with enough time and save resets, fallout 1 with guides.
If you hate them, fallout 1 without guides.
if you no longer want to be friends with them, fallout 76.
"if you hate them" lmaooo
if you like Xcom, Fallout Tactics.
Start with Fallout 4 (or 76 if you are into multiplayer). It's honestly the most modern and user friendly ones.
The others are indeed a bit deeper arguably better, but also a bit dated compared to modern phasing and UI.
The timeline jumps back and forth between games, so playing them from first to last don't really make you play them in "the right order" anyway.
76 is a great start if you have Gamepass and a couple friends to play with. I got a friend into the Fallout series as we both had Gamepass and we messed around for a couple hours. We did quests while I told them about Fallout and the lore and they soon picked up Fallout 4 and eventually New Vegas. The best way to make a new fan is to not scare them by dropping them into the hardest one.
Literally the 2 worst Fallout games
@@jdools4744 Hahahahahahhahaha, no. Have you seen Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel? It makes 76 seem good
@@jdools4744 Completely missing their point.
@@jdools4744 I don't disagree, but I wouldn't expect anyone to jump into Fallout 2 with the same attitude and expectations I had in 1998.
Honestly my first steps into the wasteland was in Fallout 4 and I had a blast and now I've gone back and played older fallout games and loved them all.
After playing as a kid, I had a long hiatus from gaming until around 2018 when I played Witcher 3 and loved it. Got recommended Fallout New Vegas right after and I have to say if someone's a casual, don't do that. I finished the game skipping through dialogue, never reading any logs, not knowing what I was doing and generally confused. I did Yes Man because this was the first quest on the list. I got back into the game last year after Fallout 3 and with a different mindset and I finally appreciated it for what it was.
The show is really good. Makes me wanna play through all of the games properly one by one all over again.
Did sim settlements finish and i didnt realize?
Intermission am guessing
I think he mentioned the Fallout TV series video took longer than expected, so it's probably just that he's had to push stuff back.
Agreed.
I also think F4 is the middle ground perfect to start
Why "Fallout Tactics: Brotherhood of Steel" is the best place to start of course!
As someone who genuinely did not enjoy New Vegas when I tried it after very strong recommendations, on top of what was said in the video, it needs to be pointed out that New Vegas is a Western - it has a tone, vibe, feel, and world view (callous at times, cynical, and questlines which seem to scream "there are no real good guys") which may not be enjoyable to a lot of people, including myself.
This is in contrast to 1, 2, 3, and 4 which have, no matter how small, a speck or glimmer of hope made present through the inherent Hero's Journey which is central to each of these four games.
Without spoiling, 1 and 2 have less obvious hope, but it is still present within many of the quests, especially in their very obvious iterations of the Hero's Journey. 3 and 4 have less obvious Hero's Journeys, but have a story more obviously about hope. These help create a dark world full of cynicism, narcissism, and evil, yet with a spark of hope made real through the hero (or snuffed out if you go down an evil route).
In 1, 2, 3, and (sort of) 4, you can fight evil and feel like you are heroic; in New Vegas, you feel like no one can really be a hero, but must make the best out of a bleak world (or just shoot everyone, which can also be fun).
I was completely with you up until the last paragraph. New Vegas is not the only entry in the franchise that seems like “everyone is bad” and no one is particularly a “good guy” side that you’re working for (that’s at least how I read it). A core theme of Fallout seems to be is that no side is truly “good”. Prime examples being the NCR is corrupt and the BoS has been flip flopping between good and evil for a long time. Caesar’s Legion is an excellent antagonist faction
@@ocbwhyte1871 My point was that, in New Vegas, you could not be a real hero and, from the world view portrayed in the game, there could not be any real good guys. In every other Fallout, you could be a real hero, therefore, there can be real heroes and real good guys.
I don't hold the idea that there cannot be a truly good side is a core theme of Fallout; rather, it's a core theme of New Vegas.
In 1, 2, and 4, you are the good side (if you choose to be). In 3, you and the Lyon's Brotherhood are the good side. This is portrayed not only in choosing heroic actions, but in the existence of an evil which needs to be stopped as the ultimate goal.
@@nicholastamas6305 I’m not sure how the Courier isn’t a hero as compared to the other protagonists is mainly what I’m getting at
@@ocbwhyte1871 I don't consider him a hero because the main questline is about going after Benny either for revenge or because he's a super dedicated courier. After that, the game is about making power plays for, in the most generous interpretation, the peace and prosperity of the Mojave. This isn't really heroism to me, but making the most out of a rough existence.
In addition, there isn't an evil that needs to be stopped either like there is in 1, 2, and 3 (the Legion isn't really portrayed as a BBEG, despite them being a good candidate for it) nor is there a moral/philosophical dilemma which needs to be answered like in 4. Rather, the four main factions are there for the player to decide who gains power (Legion, House, NCR, or himself). It feels kind of like voting to me: you do the best you can, then feel a little gross afterward.
A good example to contrast New Vegas is in Fallout 1, where you team up with a group which is not really the good side, but isn't evil either, in order to do a great good in stopping a great evil force. This comes after a Hero's Journey to save your people and grow strong enough to face the threat. The key for me is that there is a great evil which is recognized as such that the character must be willing to sacrifice himself to stop. New Vegas does escalate the scope of the player's decisions as the mq progresses, but none of it is meant to be heroic/self-sacrificial.
If, however, New Vegas had portrayed the Legion as the BBEG that must be stopped at all costs, even if the warring factions had to put aside their differences temporarily to do so or simply have a victor before the Second Battle at Hoover Dam, then it could have a heroic element at the end of the game to tie everything together. But, as it is, I just don't see it that way without head-canon retconning.
@@nicholastamas6305 Fair take 👍 But if we’re going off of endings like you said how 1, 2, and 4 presumably by player choice are the hero good canon endings, then NV should fall into the same category. I disagree with you how it’s less about hope and good and more about power, Caesar’s Legion is the clear and present antagonist of NV and it baffles me how people can sympathize with them or the Enclave (I will say however, it is a very fun playthrough to be a Caesar’s Legion spy). But it’s an RPG and you should be able to choose who you side with
If we assume the canon ending of NV is based off of overall “good” for lives and not just power, than it’s easy to measure a Mojave governed by a mix of New Vegas and NCR type states compare to an authoritarian Legion regime
SPOILERS FOR THE FALLOUT SHOW
The canon ending of Fallout 4, as now confirmed by the Fallout show is that either the Minutemen or Brotherhood endings are canon (who knows, they could be mixed because it’s not confirmed)
Likewise now because of the show (presumably) the canon ending of NV is either a Mr House ending or a NCR ending (who knows, could be Yes Man, and for some reason NV looks like ruins in the show)
I get where you’re come from though
I love that the shoe was so good thats do many people are interested. I'm worried it will make fo5 an "everybody's game" even more than fo4
It's got me hoping 5 ends up being the connecting game between the 2 coasts.
As a person who fell in love with this franchise playing new Vegas on the Xbox-360, I really do not understand people’s problem with 4 that isn’t basically summed up by it being “not new Vegas.” They’re all good for their own unique reasons, maybe it’s a good thing.
@@AJBrown-qt2pb Gatekeeping and elitism. It comes down to them having played other games like NV in the past, and expecting al RPGs to have set numbers and a system you can game to be the best at it. Real TTRPGs have dice rolls, and yet the people you see angry at 4 are angry at dice rolls because "REAL RPGs don't have them!@@!@!!@!" somehow.
I hope this brings new eyes to the channel, you deserve it :)
Fallout Tactics was enjoyable for myself. It may not be everyone's cup of tea so to speak but it was the first Fallout game with a multiplayer function. That said the game does introduce the idea that the West Coast BoS did possess the technology to build and maintain blimps/zeplins and used them to chase down Super Mutants that were heading east across the Great Divide. From there it is showing the game from the BoS perspective and shows how they are changing and accepting more help. After a few missions, depending on how you play, you are able to recruit ghouls, super mutants, and even deathclaws. But it is basically the BoS recruiting (some times forcefully) from tribes, villages, and other settlements and negotiating their way to destroy the super mutants who are actively searching for a cure to their sterilization and then find a new threat.
I do like the vehicle combat presented and the variable turn-based combat and the squad based team. From memory, there are many different encounters that are fun and wild, it does give the option to bypass combat in certain encounters with skill checks or new options depending on how some previous missions were completed. I would be even so bold as to say I think MATN should give it a full play-through at some point.
I'd still argue New Vegas is a good start, because it helps connect the show with the games, setting wise, while still using action RPG rules.
Like Jon said yes for some not for others... Fallout 4 is undoubtedly the most user friendly that I personally would suggest the most casual of player would gravitate too first as it has the best modernised gameplay. From there I'd go-to NV. Then 3 then 1 then 2 and ignore that 70 something....funny I can't remember what it's called now 😂
@@insertgenericusernamehere2402fallout 4 is dookie balls
@@angelcelis9090 it's not my favourite, but it's far from "dookie balls"
FNV is shallow and a poor RPG.
Just antagonizing. 😂
@@insertgenericusernamehere2402 yeah, it really does end up at "what kind of game do you like?" to start off
Start with Brotherhood of Steel, cause the only way to go is up.
Fallout Tactics is a fun ride, even if it’s a bit simple story-wise
It’s pretty linear, but each mission has multiple ways to complete it, and I’d love to see a modern FPS version where you’re playing a squad of….well, any faction, but this case had you playing a Brotherhood of Steel fireteam.
I reloaded Fallout 2 recently because to my shame even though I've had it about 25 years or so I've never actually completed it. Always got distracted and beelined for Vault 13, not hard to find if you read the manual lore, or just went off exploring. I'd forgotten just how brutal those two were at low level, getting wiped by plants over here. Running away is absolutely your friend.
Modern games almost want you to win all the time, old ones couldn't care less if the tutorial killed you.
Only Jon could frame NV as "It gets better after you play for 50 hours" and "it's janky as fuck" as somehow a positive of the game, and not the negative it actually is.
I mean the janky as fuck thing is definitely a negative. I don’t really get what he means by the game being a slow burn even. If you like rpg stuff the beginning of the game is very engaging.
@@porkwhisperer3050 eh, i found it incredibly boring, and stopped playing it multiple times before finally forcing myself to finish it with a very sill roleplaying mindset to keep me amused.
@@porkwhisperer3050 The beginning is honestly boring as hell. you're forced down a set path if you don't want to somehow sneak past deathclaws or flying demon bugs.
The best place to start is the Sierra Madre.
There you can Begin Again.
Lmaooooooo
Good one, Jon! You helped me understand why I had such a hard time enjoying NV on my first play through (I love the game now).
Thanks for understanding the appeal of FO4 for those new to the world. It's where i started, and every point you made was exactly why i liked it, or at least got me hooked and wanting to delve deeper.
Two non-Settlement Sim video weeks back to back? Jon what’s going on?
TV show is out, plus the new SimSettlement update is a tiny bit broken
Next-gen update is gonna fuck it really hard too
If you watched this video until the end, you'd hear him addressing exactly that.
@@kb52266 Maybe he should have put it at the start, but that would have required high perception or an int check to notice the internet has no attention span...
Farming TV show viewers, trying to grow the channel.
I will say those coming from the show into the gaming sphere I doubt any game but 4 would be a good start. Not that it’s the best, but that it’s actively the easiest starting point. If these are people who have never played a fallout like game then 4 is the best for that since its got the most user friendly mechanics, is the least difficult to set up and play, is the most stable, and has a simple and basic story that doesn’t require you to fully understand the lore or get super incredibly involved. All of these make it easier for a newer person to get into the games which is honestly what we all want. Yes NV would be a better story, but it’s complex and dated mechanics, it’s in depth and intensive narrative, and it’s instability all make it a more difficult game for people to start the series with.
Starting with the 4th or the 1st is good. They have easy mode if you're in trouble.
Fallouts 2 was my first fallout back in 2001
I Played New Vegas first when I was a kid, and I played it very wrong. I only did main story, I didn't pay attention to any dialogue, murder hobo'd everyone I could with Boone, and save scummed every fight even when I had almost no chance of winning. It actually put me off the series until I found this channel right around when FO4 came out, and I loved FO4. I plan on trying New Vegas again someday to actually learn the lore and play the politics game, and I expect it to be a much better experience.
"Every Fallout game, in fact, has had a big increase in its player count over the last week or so-"
"Every Fallout game"
"Every"
Oh.
Oh no.
Like, mostly neat.
But also: OH NO.
Having played ALL the Fallout games to completion (with the exception of that weird console one, and 76, which I have not and will not ever touch), I have to say that I found Fallout Tactics to be quite good and pleasing, despite the fact that it wasn't a full-on RPG and it was later deemed not to be canon. IIRC the premise is that the BOS sends airships with knights and paladins east to try to expand/explore the American Midwest and maybe find some macguffin prewar tech, and one (or all) of the airships crashes in a storm outside Chicago, and you are tasked with building up a Brotherhood chapter from wasteland recruits.
It is certainly a tactics game--in hindsight, I remember it being a sort of Fallout-meets-XCOM kind of deal, but with a lot of the Fallout 1&2 skills and stats awkwardly incorporated in. Also, the underlying game engine (and combat engine, specifically) was basically taken from Fallout 2, which had as a "feature" that as long as there was a single hostile on the map, you had to remain in combat mode as one by one, every single NPC on the map went through all of its action points, before a turn of combat would end. Which, frankly, broke some missions and, for many I imagine, made the game unplayable.
There's one mission in particular in the middle game--I think it was maybe Joliet?--that's basically a vehicle escort mission through a densely populated urban map that would go into turn mode every time some NPC on the map pissed off some other NPC, which happened a lot. Maddening.
But the game is very much worth playing, I think, to this day. Not a good one to start with, though....I would start with Fallout 1 and 2, myself. But I'm a completist, so there you are.
I've played every fallout games but brotherhood of steel tactics is okay can be hard if you don't get your build right.
As brilliant as Fallout: New Vegas is, for a "gateway" into the franchise, it has to be Fallout 4 that people should start with. Yes, its a bit flimsy in character design, backstory and whatnot, but that's what you want from a gateway game. Get them in the door, entice them with power and then go "you like this? then you will REALLY like this..."
As ever, thoroughly well researched and balanced view. Love the videos. Looking forward to more FO4:SimSet among others
F4 is the worst in the series
@@jdools4744 I beg to differ. NV is! See how that works... LOL
Let’s agree to disagree
@@strikes_again I was just messing with him. LOL We all have our own opinions.
@@jdools4744 Ngl, as someone who thinks NV is the best in the series, I'd say the worst in the series title goes to BoS. 4 at least holds up in gameplay, unlike that god awful trash.
FO3. No building to mess with. VATS, great soundtrack, good story
Yes, my wife is currently playing Fallout 3 (with some 300 mods enabled ~40GB install) for the first time and she's hooked! I'm starting a new Tale of Two Wastelands playthrough after I tinker with mods some more. The TV show did wonders for the fandom.
Id say starts with the game you see first, after that play them in order or release
Everyone should play fallout 1 first, so you can be so confused about how different and insane early computer games could be lol
Its bananas to me that NV gets so much love when its wasteland is filled with invisible walls, the bugs were (are?) worse and (imo) the story was weaker
nah bruh, objectively wrong take. the invisible walls are notably fewer and more organic than any other game and the storytelling is clever and subtle
with you on the bugginess tho, obvs
@@mikey-wl2jt objectively disagree, in my own experience. In FO3 there is very little you can't explore. Not the case in NV (and not talking about Vegas itself obviously). Either way, happy you had a good time with it.
Fallout 3's story is the worst part of that game, though. It's just Fallout lite, simplified to hell
Fallout tactics was the first Fallout game I've ever laid my hands on. It was a gratis game with a PC magazine probably around 2002. I was young and had no idea about what I'm doing, the deeper lore or anything, partly due to the fact that I barely understood English. Spiritually though, Fallout 3 was the one where I understood the whole deal of the Wasteland so that will always be the first Fallout game in my heart :)
Brotherhood of steel is the only game where you can play as a ghoul I guess, thats pretty neat.
You forgot about Fallout Shelter, which is a legit option for people who mostly enjoy mobile time wasters.
Which, annoyingly, is a lot of modern day casuals
Entry 470 of let’s make Jon fully play the original Command and conquer
471 of let’s make Jon play C&C
472 of C&C let’s GOOO
473 of let’s make Jon embrace TIBERIUM
474 C&C 95 jon
475 of 1230 of C&C you’ll be interested in Jon
I may be the only person ever who started getting into Fallout by playing a tabletop RPG set in the Fallout universe. My character was a wastelander whose tribe worshiped the figures in an old Hollywood wax museum and his primary goal in wandering the wastes was to find celebrity gossip mags, old movies, etc..,.
Honestly, I think 76 really isn’t that bad in terms of grind/tanky enemies if you know what you’re doing with your build and that you know the newer questlines will provide endgame viable armor without the need for much of a grind at all. It’s completely viable to hop in, play through the questlines and never once feel like you’re needing to go crazy with grinding or even really bothering with the multiplayer aspects.
Oh, and the worldbuilding/design is the best in the series without question, which is a positive that wasn’t mentioned. It’s probably the best game if you just want to explore and learn about what the world was like so soon after the bombs. The writing is also a decent bit better than 4 in spite of the constraints from multiplayer (and there are some consequences inside of interiors, but they’re still on the level of a side quest in earlier games rather than main questline levels of consequences).
Played Fallout 4 first. Jon's latest YOLO video got me into Survival mode.
How the game was meant to play👍
My first fallout was fallout 4 and I loved instantly
I think my favorite answer to this was an image I've seen being shared around:
If The Ghoul was your favorite character, start with New Vegas.
If Lucy was your favorite character, start with 3.
If Maximus was your favorite character, start with 4.
With regards to Fallout Tactics, Oxhorn did a full playthrough of Tactics several years back on his channel. Its canonicity is dubious at best and that makes it perfect