Let's set some points straight here, shall we?

1: OP used bad grammar throughout his post
2: Asking an absolutely ridiculous question like is fallout 1 on the Xbox 360
3: Telling us that FO3 is positive on the Xbox 360, positive for what? HIV?
4: Asking whether it's a "Hard game to play" without asking for anything specific and what he means by "Hard"

I have nothing against the OP and most likely he was simply trying to ask questions (to the best of his abilities) but these and other points instantly led me to believe that this was a troll thread when I first saw it, if he put his questions in a better and more serious context then I would have given him serious answers

I type fast due to lots of kids in the home and have to multitask alot.

Sometimes a question might not come out perfect but hey if you dont like it dont answer it.

Wow if a question bothers a person what happens when a real problem comes along.

Have a good day!



Thank you all for answering my question. I am going to positively buy this game off gog.

Thanks again.

In my second undergraduate year of university, my marks dropped about 25%. The wonderful grades that I, at the time, needed for validation as a meaningful human being all vanished amidst a sea of organic chemistry lab reports, calculus exams, and genetics papers. I'd like to think that it was a combination of burn-out, classes I had little interest or investment in, and a rather nasty ending to a friendship with a girl with whom I was secretly in love.

But actually, I blame Fallout 2. I bought it when the Mac OS X release first hit the streets; I'd heard about this "Fallout" game thing before, a game which was sort of like Baldur's Gate but with...guns? Mutants? A post-nuclear holocaust setting?! I opened the box outside of my genetics lecture room, cracked open the exhaustive manual, and got lost. For the next few months, I lived in the Wasteland. I hunted mutant gekkos, searched for a missing sister, and travelled to California to battle a mysterious cult. I loved each and every minute of it. I reloaded and replayed battles again and again not just to see how different tactics would work, but to savour the taste of victory.

Oh, Fallout 2.

This discussion reminds me of this article.

Interesting. I actually just finished Fallout 1 this morning for the first time. Plenty o' fun. I went right into Fallout 2 after that. Guess I got that post-nuclear apocalypse bug now. ;)

Seriously, who do you think you are?

The OP here obviously is someone new to the fallout franchise, eager to learn more about it. He is asking for more info in a perfectly polite and respectful manner.

And then you come with your spiteful comments... Tssss pathetic.

He's convinced that he's cool, probably because his mom told him he was.

I'm not saying he isn't, however, reread my points again please, my first reply was like that for a reason

Cool article. So there maybe is still some hope.

I don't remember having any of those issues with fallout. Granted, I played the demo about 6 billion times before playing the full game, which was my tutorial. I just found myself prepared to try and re-try encounters and even restart the game a couple of times once I had a better understanding of the game mechanics.

I know I'd still approach it the same way because earlier this year I played Ultima 1-3 which I have never tried before. I read the manual cover to cover, I persisted with the obscurity and difficulty until I finished it.

Although I didn't finish ultima 2. Screw that game! I managed to figure out how to navigate the world with its time gates. It was insane; a gate takes you to another place on the map, in another period of time where the map is completely different. The gates only appear intermittently and if you step back into the one you came from it might take you somwhere different again!

And the worst thing was the guy at the Hotel California. He was the only way to increase stats. How the friggin hell was I supposed to figure out that this randomn guy who says nothing special when you talk to him, I'm supposed to give exactly $100 for the chance of increasing a randomn skill or possibly doing nothing. The only clue was a villager in another town saying "Visit the hotel california" This obscure hint was for the absolutely vital task of increasing your skills, not to mention that you needed to kill 30 bad guys to get $100 and the bad guys were few and far between.

Now that was ridiculous. Fallout 1 and 2 were perfect.

Anyway, just to actually chime in about the difference's between Bethesda's Fallout 3 and Black Isle/Interplay's Fallout 1&2: while they play differently, they're all good games in their own right. You don't necessarily have to play 1&2 before 3 as they're not tied together other than the world they inhabit. I didn't, and I'm still having a blast with the originals now. Though you should play 2 after 1 as it does have some story progression.

What I always found amusing is how people called F3 some sort of FPS, which I suppose is partially true, but it sure doesn't really play like any other. I got to give Bethesda props in how they implemented the VATS system and being able to target particular body parts. Regular shooting is fine, but actual targeting is much more effective; so much so that you don't want to enter into 'unguided' firefights unless you don't have a choice.

Bethesda really did a fine job in bringing Fallout into a true three-dimensional world. I actually just ordered the F3 GotY edition for $20 since I've only ever played the base game. Should be fun to revisit as it's been a few years now since I've played it last. I'm pretty sure I'll also get New Vegas eventually once its GotY hits around $30-35. Not to mention, now that Skyrim's done I'd be surprised if they weren't working on a proper Fallout 4 now with their new engine.

Yeah, sorry for my diversion I just had to vent that frustration ...

I don't think people complain that fallout 3 is a bad game (well that shouldn't as it has quite a lot going for it) but that it just isn't fallout. They would probably have less complaints if they created it as a spin-off like Fallout:BOS or Fallout:Tactics. But yeah, I have both F3:GOTY and F:NV and enjoy them a lot.

In comparison New Vegas just shows what F3 could have been and unfortunately makes it look like a inferior game altogether.

First it's a direct continuation of the events on the west coast and second the sheer amount of content (NV has some 70+ quests vs F3 some 17).
F3 now looks like a wasteland hiking sim visiting DC's monuments.

Ah, yes, I forget people don't actually read this thing.

And then it comes full circle.