Kotaku - Let's Rank The Fallout Games

Kotaku has once again ranked the Fallout Games from Best to Worst in a new article.

In the 17 years since the Fallout franchise was introduced to the world, all of the games have been met with praise—which means that ranking them isn't easy. That's especially true when you consider that the post-nuclear franchise underwent a genre change.

Still, here we are. The Pecking Order god is not satisfied with our Grand Theft Auto, Pokemon, Final Fantasy and Halo rankings. It wants more. So we'll feed the beast another feature, this one ranking the Fallout games, from best to 'worst.' Here's some things you should keep in mind before we get started:

1) We'll only be covering the main entries in the Fallout franchise; no spin-offs or DLC. Sorry, Tactics!

2) Remember, this is my personal opinion. You might disagree! You're welcome to comment with your own rankings, if not debate my personal order—although naturally I'll do my best to justify my choices.

Click to expand...

More information.

2 1 4 3 )

I can't say I agree with much in that article.

He ranks Fallout 1 last and states - "Of course, by nature of its age, it's the title that has aged the worst".

That statement doesn't even make sense. Is he really insinuating that FO1 has aged worse simply because it's older?

I'll never understand the love for FO2. To me, it's the least memorable FO game.

1
3
2
4
ft
fbos

1
4
2
3

Kotaku.
The place where staff praise cheating in games.
The place where staff was probably paid to spam daily a new article about that silly new MMO grinder.

I'm guessing he/she was drunk or high when they composed this article. It's the only thing that makes sense to me. 1 2 3 4.

And now for something (almost? more?) controversial than the Kotaku choice itself:
Fallout New Vegas
Fallout 3
Fallout
Fallout Tactics
Fallout 2

'none of the above'

joxer said:

The place where staff praise cheating in games.

Click to expand...

And outside from multiplayer games, cheating is bad exactly why?

Unfortunately, I didn't play Fallout when it came out and without that feeling of Nostalgia, it simply isn't the same to play it today (started it a few times, never finished), so, personally, I only have F3 und FNV to compare to each other and there FNV wins (for me).

Irian said:

Unfortunately, I didn't play Fallout when it came out and without that feeling of Nostalgia, it simply isn't the same to play it today (started it a few times, never finished), so, personally, I only have F3 und FNV to compare to each other and there FNV wins (for me).

Click to expand...

One of the site users that comments the Fallout rank makes an interesting point that I've failed to address when stating the same - FONV is my favourite and why I really don't like the originals (except out of respect for creating the Fallout setting):
"1) Fallout: New Vegas

Confession time. I didn't like CRPGs during the "your dice rolls are showing" era. I tried to get into Fallout 2 but just couldn't. I knew there was a rich and wonderful story there—-and I lived in Reno. I love New Reno as a concept, not least of which reasons being that like every other real-world city Fallout's portrayed, it manages to make the city look more inviting in game than in real life (nowhere is this more true than in Fallout 3, because Washington would be improved by super mutants and Talon mercs replacing Democrats and Republicans in the Capitol building.)

Which is exactly why I loved New Vegas. It answered the question "what if all the charm of the original games were put onto a modern engine?" It made Fallout 3 look as though it had been made by apes. J.E. Sawyer and friends showed the world why Emil Pagliarulo (the head writer) is the biggest liability at Bethesda Game Studios. Once they got a few patches out to squash the bugs and a few DLC packs out (Old World Blues is the best $10 I've ever spent on add-on content, bar none), it became my favorite game of all-time. Not just my favorite Fallout game. My favorite game, period."

Think I'm going to echo some others here, but:

Fallout 2
Fallout 1
FNV
Fallout 3

2 is an improved (though buggier) follow-up to 1. FNV is an improved (though buggier) follow-up to 3. Maybe there's some pattern to be found there involving Feargus-run projects… maybe not. But FNV is far superior to Fallout 3 on many levels; whereas, Fallout 2 and 1 are a tigher race for me, but Fallout 2 wins from the sheer, inspired lunacy of the characters and quests.

The author uses the inclusive "let's" and then proceeds to spell out a completely personal opinion.

Adding to my pet peeves list...

Fallout 3
Fallout New Vegas
Fallout
Fallout Tactics
Fallout 2

Level Design and Exploration always trump Story for this nut.

Opinions=assholes, and while I'm sure someone could argue that Married With Children is more cerebral than Schroedinger's Cat, the reality is that some thing are just intrinsically better than others. You can throw all the newest graphics at something, but it doesn't remove the wretched writing and plot logic.

The reality is, when graphics are removed and a game is analyzed for sheer originality, quest design, dialogue, plot, world building and level design, you can get a mathematical equation from it that can prove an opinion mathematically sound.

Based on that, Fallout 3 has only two things over the original Fallout (gameplay being entirely subjective) graphics and scope. All else pales in comparison to the original two games. In that case

F:NV
F 2
F 1
F 3
F T
F BOS

PERSONALLY, I see it more like this

F 2
F 1
F NV
F T
F 3
F BOS

But I'm not graphics obsessed and got into Wasteland 1 despite not having played in back in the late 80's (had just gotten my first PC, and was more into fantasy RPGs and sierra adventures)

fatknacker50 said:

1
4
2
3

Click to expand...

Ditto

1, 2, New Vegas, 3.

Another utterly mediocre and bizarre Patricia Hernandez Kotaku article, sigh.

For me 1 was much better than all the others because the premise was very fresh, the world very mysterious and strange, and they were able to pull out what they set out to do. The time limits added a lot to the sense of pressure and desperation.

I don't like the 3D ones much, I found them less inspired, though I thought that New Vegas had far better NPC building, factions and writing than Fallout 3. Fallout 3 hasn't aged really well, though if anything I do appreciate how Bethesda went all out to create as many eclectic environments as they could. Even if it didn't come out well, I think you have to give them credit for trying. Ultimately I thought the 3D ones felt somewhat generic and fell flat.

Fallout 2 had an expansive world but was obviously rushed and incomplete. I would still rank it slightly above New Vegas.