Play both of them, but if you have to choose one I'd just go with the original Fallout. I like to be sequential in a game series if at all possible.

I'd go with the original. Really, though, there's very little difference in terms of technology (graphics, interface, etc), and gameplay changes from the original to #2 are subtle. I don't see Fallout 2 really holding up any better or worse than the original, but maybe a few years of separation has erased some things from my memory.

I personally liked Fallout 2 better. Bigger world, more freedom, a more intriguing plot, better characters, more hidden easter egges. Basically everything fallout was, just bigger and more fleshed out.

There's some slight interface improvements in Fallout 2 (most notably the inventory management), and there's no pesky time limit, but otherwise it's about the same as 1, except bigger, and overly full of pop-culture references and sex.

That's hardly the same as being overpowered though. You can get freak critical hits with any weapon. If you had been able to do that consistently, it'd been another thing.

I agree about hand-to-hand combat being a whole lot more fun in the sequel though, so that's one thing to add in its favour.

IMO Fallout 1 was the real Fallout game. Fallout 2 took a step in the wrong direction. First of all, it starts out, and goes on for a long while, in an excruciatingly boring and tedious fashion, before it becomes interesting. Second, this is no longer the post-nuclear world we know and love. There's no bottle caps used as currency. They actually use dollars now, and they have ... large cities. This is no longer Fallout.

Also, Fallout 2 has zero graphics enhancements over Fallout 1, at least any that could be actually noticed. Same resolution, same drab 8-bit color palette. The storyline is a lot lamer/wackier too. Instead of the civilized guy with "13" logo on his back, looking for a new waterchip for your vault, you're some pansy spear-yielding tribesman from a village you don't give a crap about.

The reason I didn't give a crap about the village and hoped they all died is because in Fallout 1 you go outside the vault into the world immediately, while in Fallout 2 you're stuck with boring and useless quests in your own village for a while. Also, there are "psychic visions" in Fallout2. But of course, because you're a Mayan villager or somesh*t ! It really didn't work for me.

Whichever one lets you do this.

Btw Fallout 1 works 100% fine under XP as long as you select "Windows 95 compatibility mode" in the shortcut properties. You may have to create a shortcut to setup.exe and check that box for it too before installing.

Original Fallout.

That's my vote.

Nothing beats Dog. You don't need any other groupies. If they die, they weren't strong enough for the Wastes. But if Dog dies, and you don't, then... you go back and reload a save. Makes me all teary-eyed just thinking about it.

Whatever the turnout of this thread is I too shall follow it since I never played either. At least once I finish Silent Storm.

Fallout 1 as a whole fills me with more nostalgia, because of the immersive storyline (the intro! the finale! everything in between!), but Fallout 2 had some kick-ass moments too.

Graphics are the same, game mechanics have been improved in some ways. BUT Fallout 2 was EXTREMELY buggy: 90% into the game (that's easily 25h or so, I don't remember) I got stuck due to a bug that prevented me from leaving an underground base. I always used 5 savegames which I overwrote in a cycle, but I had none on the outside. Très frustrating, needless to say I never restarted.

I have to ask though: why play Arcanum first, and THEN Fallout? You sir, are insane.

I bought Fallout 1, 2 and Tactics in one package. That was a long time ago though.
Fletcher's article on The Escapist was great, if only because he made me remember the finale.

This bitchin'?

I played it last year, completely patched. I always check fansites for unofficial patches too. Unfortunately, I still got stuck near the end.

In any case, I'd go for Fallout 1. Fallout 2 may be a bit more fun at times due to the tweaked gameplay, but Fallout 1 was emotionally more powerful due to the brilliant storyline.

Put me down for Fallout, though I really think that F2 is hardly a worse game. Yes, there is some infantile humor in the package. The Fallout games are pulp parodies, folks. It was to be expected, and really didn't bother me, since even the crudest jokes were treated with a bit of style and restraint (compare this to Vampire: Bloodlines' all-out cleavagefest, which was really only ridiculous).
Anyway, Fallout was in many ways more contained than the sequel. Less areas, less quests, less freedom, yes, but there's still a damn huge world to explore, and the smaller scope just helps keeping the plot together.

That said, we all know you'll break down and play them both