«

[Blood-Pigggy]

Originally Posted by cazgotsaved

I wish GK:SotF was abandonware...I have it downlo....uh....purchased and installed on my desktop.....

I have to disagree with your assessment of Bioshock and Fallout 2 - Bioshock is (always arguably, of course) in my top 10 all-time favorite stories. It was the gameplay that got kind of old to me - 1/2 way through the game I had more ammo than I knew what to do with, and was only searching everything so I could find all the weapon upgrades. "Would you kindly" plot twist was *amazing* IMHO - but I'm not always the sharpest tool in the shed, I have...feelings about people in games, whether they're good or bad, if they'll betray you, etc - but I honestly didn't see that one coming.

Fallout 2 had an *excellent* story, and is considered by most fans (myself included) to be the best of the 3 Fallout games (please don't get me started on Bethesda's Oblivion version of Fallout - there's a lot of residual hatred there)
Fallout 1 ended too quickly, and it seemed rushed at the end. Maybe because of the time limit, but.....? Fallout 2 seemed very good, each locale had it's own story, and what you did in one place often affected the other. I thought that yes, the main NPC's did seem a little *too* stereo-typed, but hey, not bad for 96'/'97

KOTOR wasn't the best story ever, but neither were the movies. They have a very specific evil/good black/white feel to them, and the game brought out the Star Wars universe very well, especially the first one.

FF3 (for those of us state-side) came out in ... what? 1993? For '93 that game had an *amazing* storyline, and one that wasn't seen....EVER.....for us Americans. Maybe they'd been doing this thing in Japan for years, but it was the first exposure I had to the 'massive' RPG worlds that became Final Fantasy. and what other great RPG do YOU know of that let you play 2 players???? (BTW FF7 happens to be my 2nd favorite, but we all know it went downhill after that....boohoo....)

THIS POST IS FULL OF SPOILERS BE WARNED





Then KOTOR shouldn't be on the list.

BioShock's story went from mature elaborate storytelling to mere "HERE IT IS" crap in the later quarter. From a writer's standpoint, it was rushed and ugly. They must have thought that just butchering Andrew Ryan and having your character die a horrible death wouldn't be a good ending, so they added an utterly abysmal ending segment with some of the dullest and most irritating levels in the game. No way, no how.

Fallout 2 did NOT have an "excellent story", and your comment about the majority of fans finding FO2 the best is EXTREMELY incorrect, go to No Mutants Allowed and just look at all the polls asking which one was the best.

Nearly EVERY Fallout fan on NMA likes FO1 better, and that site has the oldest and largest majority of the fan base.
And NO, FO2 was terrible for 1997 in the regards of story. Keep in mind that text-based adventures had been pulling off superior stories with better characters than FO2. FO2 had too much self-referential humor, completely dropped FO1's ironic humor for a more juvenile repertoire of jokes, and felt too "green" for the post-apocalyptic setting, there were too many points in FO2 that I felt that the setting wasn't so bad after all. FO1 was a terrible terrible place that was tough violent and gritty and full of misguided ideals and scavengers. Not so in FO2.
FO2 is pretty much only saved by its gameplay and the fact that the writing wasn't bad at all, there were still as many choices (more). Hell FO2 was better conceptually, but at the end it doesn't satisfy like FO1.
Hell you even agreed on Sins of the Fathers which came out at the same time, impossible, retarded that you would say that FO2 did well for '97.

And pray tell how did Fallout look rushed near the end? In comparison to Fallout 2's shitastic ending? Oh look! You blew up the oil platform, the Enclave is dead and everyone lives happily ever after! Compare that to - You just saved the human race from a FEV mutated madman who thought that the key to human peace and unity was to round up all the humans in the world and turn them into mutants so that the issue of race and diversity would not exist - the Master did it all for what he thought was the "greater good" and when you convince him that his "superior" race was doomed because Super Mutants couldn't reproduce, he felt that since his actions were now in vain, that all the horrible things he had done were for nothing.

He feels GUILT. What did the president in FO2 feel? Nothing, all he felt was that they needed to make the world better for themselves. Typical tripe.

No way Fallout 2 is a good story. Not even the most seasoned fan would say that. I can list the ways FO2's story sucks.

1. Copied directly from FO1 with everything toned down (no time limit, Enclave has no motivation beyond "We're better! We're bad!")

2. The entire oil platform segment is rife with boring backstory that is totally unemotional and ineffective.

3. No extensive backstory on the Enclave and the president like the there was in FO1 between the Master and the mutants. IE, no connecting and relate able characters like Harold around to connect you to the villain personally.

4. You HAD to kill Frank Horrigan, you HAD to destroy the Enclave. Remembering the bad ending to FO1? The horrible guilt you felt after thinking that maybe the Master's great plan was right, only to watch yourself get dipped in an FEV vat and your entire Vault violently and brutally attacked where the Super Mutants only stopped killing to capture a few of your "prime" brethren for more mutations?

PS - For all the people telling me that FF VI or FF IV or whatever the piece of junk's name is, remember me saying that Ultima IV had a better story than all of them? That game out in 1985, the release date of the game doesn't make up for poor writing, characters, or predictable plot twists.

[Kugerfang]

^ I can't say anything about his post. ^

One of the problems I have with games, is that they don't have enough endings.
Sure some of them have multiple endings but the choices are all the same: Good Side wins or Bad Side wins. It's always better to have something in between. Take Deus Ex for example, It had 3 endings, and none of them were necessarily evil.

[Quintopotere]

Monkey Island has a great story... Monkey II, too.
Well, I liked so much also Monkey III and IV...

[BranjoHello]

From all games in the list I played only GTA: SA so I won't judge other games, maybe GTA: SA doesn't have the best story but it has very interesting characters so it deserves some points for that since characters are important for the story.

This games have good story and are on my top 10 list:
1. Max Payne
2. Mafia
3. Heroes of Might & Magic 4
4. Warcraft III
5. Undying
6. Arcanum
7. The Secret of Monkey Island
8. Call of Cthulhu: Dark Corners of the Earth
9. Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas
10. Worms 4 ()

P.S. list will be edited if changes occure

[Sebatianos]

A game with a good story??? Come on! First of all, as Blood-Piggy mentioned, they obviously can't make a distinction between a story and a presentation. If the game drags you in it doesn't hve a story already.

Here's some games with a story (and not based on a book, movie...) I'd put into the list:
The Riddle of Master Lu
The Fate of Atlantis
Case of the Rose Tattoo
11th Hour
Spycraft

But they aren't on the list (an they aren't indows based either - all the games on the list are - or did I miss something).

I mean - even some freeware games (like Tribbly's games or The White Chamber) have more stories then GTA:SA and so on. This list has nothing to do with stories - just personal prefrences of the author!

[Eagle of Fire]

That list is flawed from the start. Read the very end of the last page... "Some of those stories were good, other upsetting... But every single one stuck with us in one way or another throughout the years."

It's a gaming site. It's just like a gaming magazine. They get paid to place some games on the spotlight even though they really think it's crap... So in a way, we're simply having a list of games which were at the same time not so bad and which were bestsellers. Not games who really have the "best" stories...

[Quintopotere]

Originally Posted by Eagle of Fire

That list is flawed from the start. Read the very end of the last page... "Some of those stories were good, other upsetting... But every single one stuck with us in one way or another throughout the years."

It's a gaming site. It's just like a gaming magazine. They get paid to place some games on the spotlight even though they really think it's crap... So in a way, we're simply having a list of games which were at the same time not so bad and which were bestsellers. Not games who really have the "best" stories...

That is... we know... but we like to discuss anyway! And get really angry, too!! :mad:

[12turtle12]

Originally Posted by Blood-Pigggy

Fallout 2 did NOT have an "excellent story", and your comment about the majority of fans finding FO2 the best is EXTREMELY incorrect, go to No Mutants Allowed and just look at all the polls asking which one was the best.

FO2 is pretty much only saved by its gameplay and the fact that the writing wasn't bad at all, there were still as many choices (more). Hell FO2 was better conceptually, but at the end it doesn't satisfy like FO1.


Hell you even agreed on Sins of the Fathers which came out at the same time, impossible, retarded that you would say that FO2 did well for '97.

No way Fallout 2 is a good story. Not even the most seasoned fan would say that. I can list the ways FO2's story sucks.

3. No extensive backstory on the Enclave and the president like the there was in FO1 between the Master and the mutants. IE, no connecting and relate able characters like Harold around to connect you to the villain personally.
.

I'll just start by saying I'm not going to argue the Ultima/FF idea *at all* - you like yours, I like mine :P

NMA is ... well, there's too much to write here. Short story is, NMA is a bunch of 13 year olds who still talk about Fallout like it's relevant, and it may be the biggest 'fallout fansite', but it's not the best. A LOT of their content was taken from DuckandCover.cx - which is in itself another story which you can find on Wikia - too much to write. NMA is just bogus, plain and simple. Most of their old and contributing members were ripped off of other fansites, and they just happen to be the fat Jabba the Hutt of the group.

I think we can agree on *most* of what you said about Fallout 1 and 2 - 1's story is better, 2 has much better gameplay, etc, but the story sucks? No, sir.

I said nothing about SotF - I said I had it illegally downl...um....legally purchased and sitting on my desktop in RAR format waiting to be played.

The only part I fully agree with you on is everything you said about the oil platform section of Fallout 2 - uninspired about sums it up.

[Blood-Pigggy]

Originally Posted by cazgotsaved

I'll just start by saying I'm not going to argue the Ultima/FF idea *at all* - you like yours, I like mine :P

NMA is ... well, there's too much to write here. Short story is, NMA is a bunch of 13 year olds who still talk about Fallout like it's relevant, and it may be the biggest 'fallout fansite', but it's not the best. A LOT of their content was taken from DuckandCover.cx - which is in itself another story which you can find on Wikia - too much to write. NMA is just bogus, plain and simple. Most of their old and contributing members were ripped off of other fansites, and they just happen to be the fat Jabba the Hutt of the group.

I think we can agree on *most* of what you said about Fallout 1 and 2 - 1's story is better, 2 has much better gameplay, etc, but the story sucks? No, sir.

I said nothing about SotF - I said I had it illegally downl...um....legally purchased and sitting on my desktop in RAR format waiting to be played.

The only part I fully agree with you on is everything you said about the oil platform section of Fallout 2 - uninspired about sums it up.

First off, Duck and Cover is exactly what you said NMA was, you're mixing it up. NMA is the oldest fansite, the largest, and their information is not "ripped" from Duck And Cover because most of their relevant Fallout info has been around for countless years.

D&C also has a much younger community, the majority of its members hardly seem to be able to spell properly. You must be one of those cornheads who think that Bethesda is doing right with Fallout 3 and finds it fit to brainlessly side with the idiotic gaming media and jab at the NMA community every time you get the chance, I've heard your little "13 year old, Jabba The Hut" or whatever accusations before, on places filled with atrocious knuckleheads and idiots like GameFaqs or Gamespot.

One publication even went as far as to use the word "nerdcore". What the hell does that even mean? I'm astounded at how everyone is filled with complete nonsense about NMA like all they ever do is rage about FO3. They don't, you'll only see that in the news sections and in the news comments, and even then they're completely clearheaded about it.
You're typifying the ill-informed gaming gurdle, don't buy into that dumb crap.

Fallout 2's story DOES suck, it is the epitome of everything that is mediocre and generic, it infuriated me, they could have at least done something different than what they did in FO1. The dialog was still up to par (thanks to the Black Isle writers) but everything about the plot fell flat.
Also I never said that Fallout 1 had worse gameplay, it has even better gameplay. In FO2 raising your tagged skills to %100 mean nothing towards bettering your character in that regard, and raising them above %200 is just wasting skill points as at that point you're going to hit\unlock\sneak\etc. everything that the skill can possibly effect without any effort.

There are even more useless perks than in FO1, there's a considerable amount of unfinished content in FO2 (moreso than FO1), the majority of the quests are broken and completely nonsensical compared to those in FO1.
FO2 is a great game, but it's inferior in atmosphere, gameplay, story and anything else imaginable except maybe the level of content. The NPCs are largely a bunch of pathetic bumbling morons. In FO1 Dogmeat, Ian, Tycho, hell - even Katja were all balanced and extremely useful, despite the inability to really modify their equipment.

Yet in FO2 you get idiots like Marcus who sucks up bullets and then proceeds to shoot them into your back with his atrocious Big Guns skill, even if it is his primary weapon setup. Vic is a bugged retard with low AP, the wife/husband you can get are of course, worthless and Cassidy is the only NPC who seems remotely useful. Even Sulik has an inability to prevent his retarded self from using burst on any SMG until his bullets run dry, even if you're fighting a small rat and he has a god damn H&K.

It was hardly as polished, and it seemed like a mess. A mess, that while fun to play, was not in the same arena as the original.

[12turtle12]

if you are a member of NMA, what is your username? (PM me if you don't feel comfortable in this public setting) - and we'll continue our flame war there as I am a member of quite a few Fallout-related sites.

This *is* getting a bit out of hand....

edit - "FO2 is pretty much only saved by its gameplay and the fact that the writing wasn't bad at all, there were still as many choices (more). Hell FO2 was better conceptually, but at the end it doesn't satisfy like FO1."
- I guess I misunderstood. My apologies.

"everyone is filled with complete nonsense about NMA like all they ever do is rage about FO3. They don't, you'll only see that in the news sections and in the news comments, and even then they're completely clearheaded about it."
-They don't just rage about FO3? .... ..... ....... ok. Site is over-moderated, removing objectionable comments in news sections to The Vats. Clearheaded? Rage? ... BP, listen to yourself, buddy.....anyway, see you @ NMA if you want.

and NMA is *only* older if you don't count Jay's original source @ turngray.com/fallout (now defunct)

edit # 163234 - heck, just read the wikia article and link around if need be