Should I skip Fallout 1 and 2?

[CorinthianMerchant]

I'm considering buying the Fallout games. 3 and New Vegas looks awesome, 1 and 2, not so much.

Should I skip the first two games?

[Melvin]

Yea. Atleast I did.

[Obliviator27]

The first two are drastically different from the third.
If you want the experience the third one advertises, go ahead and skip 1 and 2. They don't provide any additional story.

[failedALIAS]

BUT!!! They're pretty awesome, you just need some patience and wit. It turns out to be a very rewarding experience!

[Gaviao]

^^^^^^
above failedALIAS
^^^^^^
he is right

[bloogleford]

I'm considering buying the Fallout games. 3 and New Vegas looks awesome, 1 and 2, not so much.

Should I skip the first two games?

Depends on (honestly) your age, and whether you can put up with oldschool graphics and mechanics to get at the story and involved gameplay. If the answer is no than just go on to 3.

If you're willing to put up with the clunky old interface and isometric view, the first two games are phenomenal, and are in some ways a bit deeper than FO3 or New vegas.

Not trying to sound snotty, but I really do think appreciation of older games is often an age thing, If you've been around to play stuff like this in it's day, going back to the "old way" won't bother you..if you are a newer gamer your standards expect something more slick generally.

[Sexbad]

Fallout 3 is pretty fucking terrible, so you're best off playing the original two and, from the improvements I've heard, New Vegas.

[failedALIAS]

Fallout 3 is pretty fucking terrible, so you're best off playing the original two and, from the improvements I've heard, New Vegas.

The aiming is pretty cruddy. (Among other things)
But I still used to find it addictive, and fun.

[bloogleford]

I actually thought 3 was as faithful as you could expect to the series for a mainstream game.

I expected it to be way worse, at least they retained a bit of the flavor humor wise, and even though the VATS implementation wasn't great..I thought it was passable enough to be fun.

The time when the first two games came out was very different, you could get away with more, and the demographic who played those games was MUCH more savvy than the wider group that FO3 was made for.

I thought New vegas had some better story elements, nicer terrain, so really fantastic bits..the town with the Crucifixions was scary (Nipton I think?) but the world feels much more "closed" once you explore it a bit, and you are way too quickly pushed onto the main quest arc.

I think the first two games were much better in terms of story and pacing, and truly memorable events -.but my rose tinted glasses see almost all old games that way, haven only played a few modern games ( meaning 2000 and on lol) with good story arc and such. Deus Ex and Thief 3 come to mind.

[CorinthianMerchant]

I think I'll play Fallout 3 and New Vegas, then play 1 and 2 because there are many games I'm thinking of buying, and they aren't my top priority.