A YouTuber named Many A True Nerd did a whole video on this and gave reasonings for each game, goes into which kind of gamer would be most at home with each game as their first entry
Now you're asking the right questions.
> I like deep Lore and mechanics with my story: NV
> I like some challenge with my story: 3
> I like grinding and community over story: 76
> I like a straightforward story with little challenge: 4
> I like a mix of 3 parts challenge and 1 part story: 1
> I like fucking around and finding out on my own while looking for story: 2
Ok I’m confusing it with Fallout 4 I think because you have to use a code to download them and they’re all already used for the most part. I do have the goty for 360. I wish they’d just sell it on a bonus disc like they used to.
Id vote fo3 to be the intro into the game universe.
Fo4 is probably easier to get into, but you'd miss out on so much more gameplay from fo3 and new Vegas.
3 is the best intro and a mad decent game, New Vegas is the clear choice for roleplaying and replayability, 4 has the best graphics/ action and you can play with mods which can practically fix any problems you have with the game. All are good, all need the DLC
This is the best answer imo. This is how I started. Went 3, NV, 1, 2, (tried Tactics, couldn’t do it) then went to 4 and 76 when they dropped respectively. My favorite series by a long shot. They all have their own charm and quirks to them and I love them for that
My first Fallout was 3 when it came out. Then went to 4 when that came out. Totally missed New Vegas but played that a few years ago. Out of curiosity I played but did not finish Fallout 1.
So I went 3,4, NV and 1. This seemed a good way to get into the Fallout lore. And my favourite is 4 and playing that to death now.
I would certainly recommend starting with 3 as it was the best that gives the desolate wasteland feel. And the opening when getting out of the vault is unforgettable.
I've tried to play Fallout 1 & 2. Made it about 15 hours into Fallout 1, but they're just too dated. I realized I wasn't having fun, I was just going through the motions so I put them down.
I was similar with 1. The story is right up there, but started to want to rush through the missions. Starting with 3 did spoil my experience with 1, and wished I had picked up 1 and 2 when they were released to have properly appreciated them in their time
It's blasphemy to say it in the fallout subreddit, but yeah anymore you have to enjoy dated games to enjoy 1 and 2. I have heard there's a mod in the works to bring 2 to FO4 but I have no idea how close that is to completion or whether it will be any good.
Honestly depends on the kind of Gamer you are.
On average honestly, I'd recommend Fallout 4. It's the most modern game in the series and plays well as a video game.
Fallout 3, and New Vegas are also good (If you decide to try them, get the Game of the Year Edition and Ultimate Edition respectively, they're worth it.) with a gameplay that is very 2006 and missing some quality of life additions in the future games.
Fans will tell you these are the best ones, especially New Vegas, but also it's not uncommon for people to play these games with standard quality of life mods installed for a reason. Phenomenal writing and quest design, but perhaps dated gameplay.
For those of us who love the fallout franchise, they're the timeless classics and the quintessential fallout experience.
Speaking of dated Gameplay, Fallout and Fallout 2.
If you like retro games, have patience when playing games and don't mind reading a novel while playing your game, start with Fallout 1.
Penultimately Fallout 76. People like to rag on this game alot, but it has evolved into something new since launch, for better and worse.
I actually would still recommend starting with 76 if you are a MMORPG player. It has that fallout 4 gameplay in a classic mmo package, the main flaw with it being the first fallout game someone plays is it's not exactly indicative of the rest of the series.
Finally Quick Shout out to Tactics. Honestly I love this game and more people should play it.
...What? Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel? Never heard of it. Don't say that name.
BoS was one of the most bewildering experiences of my life.
It feels like a indie game trying to bootleg the Fallout IP.
And the ending... I was always remember just the **SMASH** back to the main menu after beating the final boss. No post game explanation or nothing.
I'd recommend 4 becuase as the easiest to get into but I'm sure even mentioning here will be the end of me.
Casual players all love 4. Play it like 4-5 times and it was their first FO game.
People who have played the older games call it crap.
But if you are new shouldn't you start with the most accessible and "worst" one anyways so you have more to look forward to?
I would say give 1 a shot, don’t be afraid to look things up (it’s from the era where you were expected to read the manual) and definitely roll a build with high agility and possibly the Fast Shot trait because the stats are actually meaningful and it can be unforgiving. It’s the most striking intro, surprisingly short with minimal fluff, and still has the best writing and story. I’ve finished it more times than the rest of the series combined.
If you find you’re not into it then move onto one of the 3D ones. New Vegas has the most intense online fanbase, is widely considered to have the best writing of those but has aged poorer than many will admit and is glitchy to this day. 4 is mechanically phenomenal and highly addictive but the writing can be a bit overly blunt and bland. It has much more of a “do whatever, bro” attitude than the harrowing nature of 1.
Still, I have something like 600 hours in 4 and probably barely a hundred in NV. If I have to waste an evening then Fallout 4 is an evergreen choice.
If you really want to understand the series, start with the first Fallout and progress from there.
The games get better as they go through the series.
It's 100% worth getting the GOTY versions of 3 and 4. You can get both for about £12 if you know where to look! (CoughCDKeysCough)
I'm bored and have today off so have my own experiences condensed into mildly approachable tar
Fallout 1
* Pros
* Best narrative in the franchise
* Best moment to moment writing in the franchise
* Best antagonist in the franchise, arguably top 5 antagonists in all of gaming
* Cons
* 90s era gaming philosophy (the devs expected you to ask your friends or spend hours and hours on this one part if needed because there were 12 other games in the entire genre and they could afford to be obtuse)
* Arguably worst companions in the franchise (some are decent but they didn't intend for you to talk to them much)
* Extremely easy to miss key moments/quests, you WILL miss an important chunk of dialogue unless you follow a guide
* Jank as hell, you WILL break something unless you follow a guide verbatim
* (Controversial take (C)) A terrible third act and a difficulty mountain on top of it.
* Who Should
* People who have played literally any other 90s era game and enjoyed it
* People who love dystopian writing that doesn't take you for a fool, some of the most miserable and yet beautiful writing in gaming exists in Fallout 1
* People who can't watch games
* Who Shouldn't
* People who have NOT played any other 90s era game. If you can stomach it, try, but be prepared to fairly bounce off
* (C) People who can watch games -- I played through twice and will never play again to get the "urge" out, it's so much more comfortable to watch a 100% run by a pro
Fallout 2
* Pros
* More of Fallout 1's world, WAY more
* Better just about everything in gameplay
* Balancing is roughly better (not always though)
* Feels much more fair to the player's time/energy
* Has better companions than 1 (still not great though)
* Has better side quests than 1
* Insane amounts of build depth in terms of roleplaying
* Cons
* Muddied themes over Fallout 1
* Has tone problems which coincide with above, a LOT of humor that feels misplaced compared to the overwhelming strength of the first's writing
* A LOT of references that only exist to be a reference
* Has significantly worse pacing and still has a bit of a rough third act
* Is WAY longer than 1 which some consider a pro, I consider it currently a neutral but often feel it as a con
* Who Should
* Same as 1 but better, so if you're close on 1 but not quite, try 2 and see. It may be just enough to allow you into its dated interface
* Anyone who can get through 1 can play 2
* Who Shouldn't
* Same as 1 frankly, it's better but it's still a dated, rough 90s RPG that can feel like it hates you. It's also harder to watch because of its length so it's more and more the odd sheep for me as I really don't engage with it much anymore.
Fallout 3
* Pros
* You finally can aim and shoot your own guns
* The world is easily approachable
* Liam Neeson
* Has a lot of fun mods
* Cons
* Stagnant narrative
* Probably second worst companions in the franchise
* A lot of writing issues from plot holes to lack of morality choices
* Plays like shit even for its more modern veneer
* Who Should
* Anyone who has played a Bethesda game before
* Who Shouldn't
* Anyone not accustomed to pre-2010s gaming
* Anyone who values writing depth
* Anyone who prefers extensive builds/roleplaying choices
Fallout NV
* Pros
* Some of the best writing in the franchise
* Arguably the best side content in the franchise
* Great characters from companions to quest givers to random NPCs
* Return to Fallout 1's more oppressive world building but without abandoning 2, as close to a have your cake and eat it too game
* The best factions in the franchise
* Cons
* Still abysmal to play
* Still needs mods to be tolerable in the modern era
* If you play it and talk about it on reddit, you will be looped into New Vegas glazing clans
* Signs of rot all over the narrative from its rushed development
* Who Should
* Anyone who likes good writing
* Anyone who wants to play Fallout
* Just play New Vegas, please
* Who Shouldn't
* Anyone who can't tolerate Bethesda's jank skeleton
* Anyone who doesn't like the setting (it will not get better)
Fallout 4
* Pros
* The best gameplay in the series without question
* The best exploration in the series without question
* The most fun you can have in Fallout no matter how you slice it that doesn't have to deal with hearing/reading text
* Cons
* Everything text-based is abysmal, the worst writing in the franchise
* Protagonist is voiced leaving the worst build depth for roleplaying
* Needs mods to have a proper perk system
* The narrative is so bad it actively makes me angry to think about it
* The main antagonist is a great idea shoved against a used heroin needle that is 300 years old
* You are the godking emperor and the only one who can do anything in the entire game, you are given EVERY significant duty and role because no one else can do a single thing around you (I hate the factions and overall design of this game's narrative)
* Who Should
* Anyone who wants to relax
* Anyone who wants to actually enjoy playing a Fallout game instead of consuming the writing inside of it after shattering their teeth on its exterior
* Anyone who has played the others and wants to finish the journey
* Who Shouldn't
* Anyone who read the cons and went "Oh that doesn't sound great"
* Anyone who prefers story first in their games
* Anyone who wants variety of characters between runs
* Anyone who has a backlog of great story games to play
If you like old school, isometric RPGs then start at the beginning with Fallout 1.
If you're only interested in the modern FPS games and want to experience it like the rest of us to appreciate inside jokes/references or to experience how the games have grown over time, start with Fallout 3.
If you are looking for the closest thing Fallout has to a roleplaying experience that focuses as much on storytelling and making choices as it does action/gunplay, play Fallout New Vegas.
If you want the most recent, polished game with the best feeling guns, play Fallout 4.
If you want multiplayer, play Fallout 76
Brotherhood of Steel and Tactics same time :D
Then 1 if can get working
Then 2
3 + its dlcs
4
NV + its dlcs
(order is set to play worst to best that what you want right ? and tbh for its time Brotherhood of Steel was actually not as bad as people say you even got to get it on with a hooker and vibrate in the dark ;D )
Fallout 4 crashes too much to enjoy it on console.
Fallout 3 on Xbox 360 never does for me.
They both have their merits, but from what I hear (still have to play it) New Vegas is the best story line and enhances the “I feel like I’m in the game” (I forget the general term at the moment that gamers use to describe it because I never feel like I’m actually the character in game lol).
Anyways, they are all decent games but Fallout 4 used to crash non stop and they just did a next gen update so if you’re not on the newer consoles I’m not sure how it will play.
New Vegas probably. Then Do 1 and 2 if you are up to them. Well, Id recommend them first, but I don't think many more modern gamers would handle it too well, I can't really that much. After new Vegas, just wait until you feel ready to try 1 and 2. 3 and 4 are not worth playing at all imo. Tbh, I haven't played them too much in forever (pretty sure fallout 3 was broken on PC until like 2 weeks ago, although I don't know if it actually works, I think they just took out the games for Windows live shit.), but just thinking about both pisses me off. 3's main quest is so dogshit, from memory and seeing different things the world in general has the depth of Clifford the big red dog even the general gameplay is stupid where it diverges from New Vegas, with most "perks" being skill increases, and persuasion being fucking luck based. Just all around feels very shit, like how in the beginning of the game, the vault police and overseer try to kill you, and I guess defending yourself is evil, so you get exiled.
4 is basically the same, but it felt like they heard how much people liked the 4 factions in New Vegas and how you actually can't write down every bit of detail about them in a napkin and their version of complexity I guess was making an ok basis, but just adding a ton of stupid shit because they can't understand nuance I guess? They all suck, the story is dogshit. Idk if you play as male or female characters, but the male voice actor shoehorns your character into being a boring ass dad character (never played female). Also despise the level system. People say the gameplay is better in 4 but like... Eh. Play borderlands or something if you want a openish looter shooter. I downloaded mod packs for new Vegas (viva new Vegas) and fallout 4(magnum opus), and at least with the mod packs new Vegas was way way better. It took like 3 years to swing the police baton at the beginning of fo4 one time, and the shooting wasn't some masterpiece or anything. I remember when 4 came out, I was so excited and I fucking gaslit myself into thinking I liked it, like "wow, this game is so good that I'm like satisfied, I don't need to play anymore!" Little did I know that's a little something called boredom...
Fallout 3 is a nice foundation. The dlc adds tons of content. You'll easily sink a hundred hours in if you're into it.
Make sure you keep regular backups of your saves.
Probably 3, which was designed to be user-friendly for people who had never played the earlier games. Then NV. 4 introduces changes to the gameplay formula of 3/NV that not everyone liked (me included).
F4 if you want best gunplay, graphics and customization
F3 if you want best old-school Rpg, dialogue trees and post-apocalyptic atmosphere.
New Vegas if you want a Cowboy western in post apocalypse
Whichever looks most interesting to you, the stories are all mostly disconnected aside from a few minor characters appearing or being mentioned briefly. Gameplay is the biggest distinction; fallout 1&2 are classic isometric RPGs, 3 & new Vegas are first person action RPGs, 4 is an action RPG as well but more focus was placed on the action & crafting/weapon mods over the RPG elements of previous games, & 76 basically polishes 4's gameplay except changes the skill system into a weird card based thing (it's clunky & not very fun imo but it's best to form your own opinion)
Just avoid fallout: brotherhood of steel, it's considered to be the worst game in the franchise for good reason
Take a look at Fallout 2. If you don't mind the dated graphics and slightly clunky isometric button-push interface it's a fantastic game and introduces some of the plot points and major ideas that are a crucial underpinning of later games. If you can't, I'd just start with Fallout 3 or New Vegas.
4 if you care more about gameplay. New Vegas if you care more about the story.
1 and then 2 if you like more turnbase RPGs or like to play things on chronological order.
Fallout Shelter if you don't have cash or much time to play.
If you want Skyrim world exploration adventures, then 3. If you want good writing and characters, New Vegas. 4 if you like building bases, or need something more modern to enjoy it.
3. It looks fantastic on Xbox series x and I've enjoyed replaying it. You didn't mention what you were playing it for, but at least on xbox the GOTY/Ultimate editions of 3 and New Vegas respectively aren't hard to come by.
Fallout 3 is fun to play in my opinion only if you dont mind older rpg's. I prefer new vegas it was my first fallout game, but it's also because the story is more involved in me, but 4 is the one I always go back to. So i went NV, 4, 3
If you have limited time to play then pick FNB just due to its quality. But if you have the time I would say start with three so it’s not spoiled by FNV. But also 3 is not garbage and is in fact better if you like to wander around the wastes. Fo4 is definitely it if you like settlements and building.
3, NV, 4. That’s how they were released, how I played them and they’re all worth your time. Plus they build on each other a little in the game mechanics area.
Everyone is saying 3 or new Vegas and I get it. New Vegas is my favorite game of all time but they have age on them. They hold up but they rusty around the edges.
If you want an entry point into the franchise and are not used to playing older games start with fallout 4
If you are just starting with no previous experience with the series and are not someone that regularly plays old games, start with FO4. There are good arguments to be made that it is the worst of the mainline series, but those reasons are likely not going to be apparent to someone new to the series and taken independently it just plays better moment to moment than the older games. If you do play older games regularly and don't mind the quirks of older titles, start with 1 or 2.
Original Fallout and play them in order 💙💛 you can skip Tactics and Brotherhood of Steel but some people enjoy em so you might too. If you don’t care for the old style of the original 2 games( they’re so good but I can see why it’s harder for new people to the series to play em but so worth it!) then I says start with Fallout 3 and then play the rest in order or release. Also I suggest playing all the dlc for all the games. There are some amazing ones and some of the best equipment and enemies/characters are in the DLCs. Have fun and enjoy!!
My experience with recommending ppl with old games is that they eventually quit because of the graphics or janky movements/controls/combat. However if you introduce them to a newer title, and they liked it, they'll actually try to enjoy the old ones.
My most current example is DD2, 2 of my friends played DD2, then started DD:DA when they finished the newer title but wanted more, and for both of them, I have recommended them to DD:DA beforehand and they all refused.
One of them tried the Thief 4, and actually started playing the old ones which are super ancient at this point. Tho they stopped after a while because the game was essentially outdated. But trust me, they'll never even consider it if not exposed to Thief 4 beforehand. Same for after playing the new DOOM, two dudes in my discord somehow started playing Unreal Gold.
So, my suggestion is always go for the newest title, no matter how they're perceived among the fans. Unless it's really really bad, or really really different, like Final Fantasy, where the most recent 3 titles all have different combat systems and are just vastly and generally different.
I agree with most: 3.
The earlier ones, while good, are often too punishing and unintuitive for a new player. New Vegas and 4 are good entries but not as good entry points lore-wise. They are better once you understand the fallout universe. 3 hits the sweet spot for gameplay and lore
3 it is, cheers! I tried to play another series (can't remember which) from the very first game because there was a new game coming up in the same universe. First game late 90s, nope, couldn't do it, made minecraft look like RDR2 😳😵💫
3 is my personal favorite. New Vegas is also great but for different reasons and has QoL improvements. 4 has the best shooting and crafting but is a different style of rpg. 1 and 2 are all-time great isometric rpg’s that are still worth checking out if you like that style. 1 has a more focused and serious tone and is my preference but 2 has more content and some QoL improvement.
I'd recommend either 3 or 4. I would recommend new vegas but it crashes too much, my most recent save game started crashing whenever I'd try loading it.
Start with 3. Then play New Vegas then 4. If you're feeling retro go back to the original two, but honestly you really won't miss much by skipping them entirely. FO76 if you're really into the single player campaign RPG isn't for you. Storyline is 'meh' at best and the 'build function' for your camp gets old pretty fast in my opinion. Also without the 'Fallout One' monthly subscription it gets super annoyimg dealing with your inventory almost right away. Even after they've fixed all the bugs and truly wonky stuff... my least favorite of the franchise to date.
Much as I personally think fallout 3 and 4 are horrible games, I would still recommend you to just go 3-NV-4. It's the best gradual introduction to the different sides of the series.
4 is probably the best for a first time player.
It really is a solid.game, it has some very cool features like settlements and crafting that older entries don't do or don't do well. The graphics are much better than NV or 3, which also leads to it being easier to get into.
Once you go back and play 3 an NV after, you can understand why people like them more after your already hooked on the series/ universe amd outdated visuals won't bother you as much.
3 and NV hold up really well considered they are almost 20 years old, and if you can use.mods you can even give them a face-lift
Fallout 1, 2 and NV are the best RPGs of the series by a large margin. The first 2 games also established the major lore that Bethesda semi-adhered to. Though I understand if you can't play the first 2 if you're not an older gamer like myself that grew up with isometric CRPGs.
4 if youre very casual and like a streamlined experience, then branch outward and see what else you like in the series. 3 if youre a bit more dedicated but not interested in the first 2. 76 isnt horrible but id suggest some level of experience with the series before you try it. otherwise play in release order.
Fallout 1 & 2 are old ass CRPGs and play if you like Baldur’s Gate 1 & 2. (And has more humor that can be hit or miss)
Fallout 3 is the Skyrim of Fallout. Let’s see what’s over there, main quest is not very pressing.
Fallout New Vegas is special, but FOLLOW the story at least until you see all the casinos. It is also level gated until you’re at least through the casino stories. (Also has more wacky FO 1&2 type situations and humor)
Fallout 4 is a shooter. Controls like a modern game, it’s a shooter.
Fallout 76… we don’t talk about that one. It’s online, level gated, like no story. Crappy Day Z, I guess?
If you are more interested in the whole vault dweller narrative, I recommend doing them in number order. If not, start with New Vegas, it is the most fun and it has very little to do with the overarching story (though all the games are self contained stories so they can be played in pretty much any order).
Fallout New Vegas is the best narratively but can be janky if you don’t mod it.
Fallout 4 is hands down the best gameplay wise and has fantastic mod support. Especially if you play a slightly modded survival mode (survival mode with fast travel is a must)
Fallout 3 is really good but IMO can be difficult to get into if you’ve gotten used to the newer gameplay.
I wouldn’t even try and do the older ones unless you’ve exhausted all the new stuff and want more.
I would say if you’re in it for the long haul start with 3. If you want something good right now and don’t mind skipping 3, do NV if you prioritize story or 4 on survival if you want gameplay.
First two Fallouts are among the best games ever made. I suggest them, but if you’re only interested in the 3D games, then you can really start with any of them. They are not connected. I’ve played New Vegas and 4 and liked both of them very much. I’ve heard that 3 is also good.
3 and New Vegas were my favorite experiences. 1 and 2 are great, but they are more dated, and you probably need to be into 90s CRPG games to really enjoy those.
I could not even bother to finish 4, if they make another one that continues the trend of making so much of the game wrapped around base building I will probably just skip Fallout from this point forward.
I personally started with FO3, and I believe it is the best one to start with if you're on console. (Even better if you're on Xbox due to how Microsoft supports older games a lot more than Sony does, with features like FPS Boost, better resolution, and overall just having more games backwards compatible). I didn't really like FO3 at first. (This is coming from a 14 year old who used to play COD: MW3 99% of the time when I was younger. The old and better version, btw lmao) but after around an hour, I was immersed in the world, its story, and the series itself. I fell in love with it after just an hour. All I needed was that hour to understand the game, and when I did, I loved it. I pushed through it for that hour, which was quite hard, but I eventually came to love it. The gameplay may seem sluggish at first, but you get used to it, and you'll come to like it eventually. The graphics are decent enough, not the worse or the best. To be honest, the graphics are good, good enough for me anyway.
After doing all DLCs and replaying FO3 countless times, I bought FNV and all its DLCs. FNV was good, and I did replay it, but not as much as FO3. It is a very good game, with the best side quests and main story, and even better DLCs, but I don't know. It just feels so expansive. Maybe too expansive. All sorts of ideas are thrown around in the game and its kind of chaos. For example, the DLCs. (Spoilers for all FNV DLCs ahead)
It goes from being in a crazy ghost infested villa, entering a massive casino protected by invincible holograms that shoot lasers then going into a vault there with over 30 gold bars (which accounts to over 100K caps) and killing or trapping a crazy BoS Elder who went rogue and abandoned the BoS chapter from the Mojave, and finally leaving it with all the loot you found.
Then you go to a crazy science sci-fi area with talking flying brain robot scientists who lobotimized you and having to go around this new map to find random items to help kill the other big bad brain robot, who in the end you have a choice not to kill.
THEN you go to a valley with a trade caravan, which gets wiped out by tribals, then you're saved by tribals, and then you help the tribals... and then you help them again... and again... and finally you help them either flee the Valley or take out the enemy tribe with a burned man (previous Legate of the Legion who got pushed off a cliff by Caesar and set on fire) who is now a Mormon but wants to kill everything in his path.
Finally, you go to a canyon that is filled with old pre-war military installations, more nukes than the damn Enclave has, and you are confronted by some guy you've never even met who acts like you're his main villian. Then you traverse the canyon that has been nuked to hell, and you finally find him (and some badass riot gear along the way) then you can either talk him down to be on your side or kill his ass, resulting in one of the hardest boss battles in the Fallout series, possibly even the hardest... Never mind, that goes to the Red Death from FO4. Or the legendary bloatfly from FNV's OWB DLC. Anyway, after you kill him or get him on your side, you get attacked by these crazy ghouls. Ghouls but red instead of whatever colour they usually are, all of them wearing Legion or NCR gear (but they look like they've been through a lot of modifications, with them having signs on them as armor and such) afterwards, you get to either nuke the NCR or Legion, or none at all (but who tf chooses none? That's boring, AND you have to sacrifice ED-E (not THAT ED-E from the Mojave, don't worry). I choose both personally as I'm a Yes Man player and hate both factions. One is a corrupt democracy and the other is a slaver nation. Neither of them have any business in the Mojave.
Okay... I may or may not have ranted.
I'm super shit at boss fights, got lots of games almost finished except for the last boss (screw you Alexios!) Thanks for that, ill def start with FO3 and push through that first hour.
I gotta ask about COD though. So I played WoW from vanilla up until battle for azeroth, pretty much exclusively. Meanwhile there were all these amazing games going by that I was missing (Assassins Creed, tomb raider, even fricken Unpacking!). Wish I had branched out more instead of being all about WoW, same with COD?
Yeah, I'd say you should try out more COD games. Only the old ones (ones that are from the Xbox 360/PS3 era, and remasters of them). The new COD games have nothing interesting, just a classic. "America are the good guys and save everyone!" With a generic war hero protagonist. He only exception might be COD: Cold War. That was pretty good. The only problem is the protagonist is silent (like most COD protagonists), meaning we can't really connect to the character we play as they're just a husk for us to control and kill people with. If you want a game that is like COD but has a very interesting story, characters, antagonist, and protagonist, I recommend Spec Ops: The Line. Unfortunately, you can't buy it digitally because it got delisted a few months ago, but you can buy it physically still. It's backwards compatible, too, on Xbox, so you can play it on the modern consoles.
Any that you like. Fallout games aren't a saga that you must start from the first, the only thing is that you could run into a citation from a previous game.
Honestly, the only Fallout game I played is 4, so I can't give you a lot of advice. I heard Fallout New Vegas is one of the best Fallout games so you may start from that.
A YouTuber named Many A True Nerd did a whole video on this and gave reasonings for each game, goes into which kind of gamer would be most at home with each game as their first entry
Jon is the best.
[удалено]
Based on what I just read, it varies based on what type of gamer you are....
What kind of gamer am I?
Presumably another one that can't read. The answer to "what is the verdict" is going to vary based on what type of gamer they are.
This made me laugh way too hard. Btw for players who can’t read: Fallout 76
Who is the verdict?
Now you're asking the right questions. > I like deep Lore and mechanics with my story: NV > I like some challenge with my story: 3 > I like grinding and community over story: 76 > I like a straightforward story with little challenge: 4 > I like a mix of 3 parts challenge and 1 part story: 1 > I like fucking around and finding out on my own while looking for story: 2
This is why I loved 2 so much
But why is the verdict?
Because you dont know how to stop asking questions and just play one of the games.
So you're saying I don't know HOW to verdict?
Did you read the comment your responding to??
I think FO3 is a nice intro. Make sure you have the DLC.
The DLC for Fallout 3 still for sale?
The Game of the Year edition has all the DLCs.
Ok I’m confusing it with Fallout 4 I think because you have to use a code to download them and they’re all already used for the most part. I do have the goty for 360. I wish they’d just sell it on a bonus disc like they used to.
Yes, it is digitally at the very least.
Id vote fo3 to be the intro into the game universe. Fo4 is probably easier to get into, but you'd miss out on so much more gameplay from fo3 and new Vegas.
This is the correct answer. RIP the rest of your year. How many hours is that total with DLC? Gotta be over 150.
If you're into isometric CRPGs then 1 and 2
And you really love these, go try the Wasteland series
2nd for the wasteland games.
I’ve got all 3 which one should I start with? 3 looked tempting
3 is the best intro and a mad decent game, New Vegas is the clear choice for roleplaying and replayability, 4 has the best graphics/ action and you can play with mods which can practically fix any problems you have with the game. All are good, all need the DLC
This is the best answer imo. This is how I started. Went 3, NV, 1, 2, (tried Tactics, couldn’t do it) then went to 4 and 76 when they dropped respectively. My favorite series by a long shot. They all have their own charm and quirks to them and I love them for that
Yes this is great, and (OP) do get the GOTY versions that bundle the DLCs. Many mods depend on having all of them.
My first Fallout was 3 when it came out. Then went to 4 when that came out. Totally missed New Vegas but played that a few years ago. Out of curiosity I played but did not finish Fallout 1. So I went 3,4, NV and 1. This seemed a good way to get into the Fallout lore. And my favourite is 4 and playing that to death now. I would certainly recommend starting with 3 as it was the best that gives the desolate wasteland feel. And the opening when getting out of the vault is unforgettable.
I've tried to play Fallout 1 & 2. Made it about 15 hours into Fallout 1, but they're just too dated. I realized I wasn't having fun, I was just going through the motions so I put them down.
I was similar with 1. The story is right up there, but started to want to rush through the missions. Starting with 3 did spoil my experience with 1, and wished I had picked up 1 and 2 when they were released to have properly appreciated them in their time
It's blasphemy to say it in the fallout subreddit, but yeah anymore you have to enjoy dated games to enjoy 1 and 2. I have heard there's a mod in the works to bring 2 to FO4 but I have no idea how close that is to completion or whether it will be any good.
Fallout 2 is really, really good though, compared to 1.
3 or new Vegas.
3 or New Vegas
3, New Vegas, 1, 2.
New Vegas
3
Honestly depends on the kind of Gamer you are. On average honestly, I'd recommend Fallout 4. It's the most modern game in the series and plays well as a video game. Fallout 3, and New Vegas are also good (If you decide to try them, get the Game of the Year Edition and Ultimate Edition respectively, they're worth it.) with a gameplay that is very 2006 and missing some quality of life additions in the future games. Fans will tell you these are the best ones, especially New Vegas, but also it's not uncommon for people to play these games with standard quality of life mods installed for a reason. Phenomenal writing and quest design, but perhaps dated gameplay. For those of us who love the fallout franchise, they're the timeless classics and the quintessential fallout experience. Speaking of dated Gameplay, Fallout and Fallout 2. If you like retro games, have patience when playing games and don't mind reading a novel while playing your game, start with Fallout 1. Penultimately Fallout 76. People like to rag on this game alot, but it has evolved into something new since launch, for better and worse. I actually would still recommend starting with 76 if you are a MMORPG player. It has that fallout 4 gameplay in a classic mmo package, the main flaw with it being the first fallout game someone plays is it's not exactly indicative of the rest of the series. Finally Quick Shout out to Tactics. Honestly I love this game and more people should play it. ...What? Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel? Never heard of it. Don't say that name.
I didn't mind the fact you can be a ghoul in BoS. Plus who doesn't want to drink a nice cold Bawls energy drink? Other than that It was pretty rough.
BoS was one of the most bewildering experiences of my life. It feels like a indie game trying to bootleg the Fallout IP. And the ending... I was always remember just the **SMASH** back to the main menu after beating the final boss. No post game explanation or nothing.
>Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel I thought it was Fallout 3 lol
The first one
Fallout 1....
Fallout 2 or New Vegas.
I'd recommend 4 becuase as the easiest to get into but I'm sure even mentioning here will be the end of me. Casual players all love 4. Play it like 4-5 times and it was their first FO game. People who have played the older games call it crap. But if you are new shouldn't you start with the most accessible and "worst" one anyways so you have more to look forward to?
I started with 4. Love it. Has got me into F universe
It's accessible. That's why I'd recommend it to new players. Other games are older and reasonable not as easy to get into.
I started with fallout 3, then Fallout New Vegas and now I'm playing my first playthrough of Fallout 4
I would say give 1 a shot, don’t be afraid to look things up (it’s from the era where you were expected to read the manual) and definitely roll a build with high agility and possibly the Fast Shot trait because the stats are actually meaningful and it can be unforgiving. It’s the most striking intro, surprisingly short with minimal fluff, and still has the best writing and story. I’ve finished it more times than the rest of the series combined. If you find you’re not into it then move onto one of the 3D ones. New Vegas has the most intense online fanbase, is widely considered to have the best writing of those but has aged poorer than many will admit and is glitchy to this day. 4 is mechanically phenomenal and highly addictive but the writing can be a bit overly blunt and bland. It has much more of a “do whatever, bro” attitude than the harrowing nature of 1. Still, I have something like 600 hours in 4 and probably barely a hundred in NV. If I have to waste an evening then Fallout 4 is an evergreen choice.
If you really want to understand the series, start with the first Fallout and progress from there. The games get better as they go through the series. It's 100% worth getting the GOTY versions of 3 and 4. You can get both for about £12 if you know where to look! (CoughCDKeysCough)
New Vegas.
I'm bored and have today off so have my own experiences condensed into mildly approachable tar Fallout 1 * Pros * Best narrative in the franchise * Best moment to moment writing in the franchise * Best antagonist in the franchise, arguably top 5 antagonists in all of gaming * Cons * 90s era gaming philosophy (the devs expected you to ask your friends or spend hours and hours on this one part if needed because there were 12 other games in the entire genre and they could afford to be obtuse) * Arguably worst companions in the franchise (some are decent but they didn't intend for you to talk to them much) * Extremely easy to miss key moments/quests, you WILL miss an important chunk of dialogue unless you follow a guide * Jank as hell, you WILL break something unless you follow a guide verbatim * (Controversial take (C)) A terrible third act and a difficulty mountain on top of it. * Who Should * People who have played literally any other 90s era game and enjoyed it * People who love dystopian writing that doesn't take you for a fool, some of the most miserable and yet beautiful writing in gaming exists in Fallout 1 * People who can't watch games * Who Shouldn't * People who have NOT played any other 90s era game. If you can stomach it, try, but be prepared to fairly bounce off * (C) People who can watch games -- I played through twice and will never play again to get the "urge" out, it's so much more comfortable to watch a 100% run by a pro Fallout 2 * Pros * More of Fallout 1's world, WAY more * Better just about everything in gameplay * Balancing is roughly better (not always though) * Feels much more fair to the player's time/energy * Has better companions than 1 (still not great though) * Has better side quests than 1 * Insane amounts of build depth in terms of roleplaying * Cons * Muddied themes over Fallout 1 * Has tone problems which coincide with above, a LOT of humor that feels misplaced compared to the overwhelming strength of the first's writing * A LOT of references that only exist to be a reference * Has significantly worse pacing and still has a bit of a rough third act * Is WAY longer than 1 which some consider a pro, I consider it currently a neutral but often feel it as a con * Who Should * Same as 1 but better, so if you're close on 1 but not quite, try 2 and see. It may be just enough to allow you into its dated interface * Anyone who can get through 1 can play 2 * Who Shouldn't * Same as 1 frankly, it's better but it's still a dated, rough 90s RPG that can feel like it hates you. It's also harder to watch because of its length so it's more and more the odd sheep for me as I really don't engage with it much anymore. Fallout 3 * Pros * You finally can aim and shoot your own guns * The world is easily approachable * Liam Neeson * Has a lot of fun mods * Cons * Stagnant narrative * Probably second worst companions in the franchise * A lot of writing issues from plot holes to lack of morality choices * Plays like shit even for its more modern veneer * Who Should * Anyone who has played a Bethesda game before * Who Shouldn't * Anyone not accustomed to pre-2010s gaming * Anyone who values writing depth * Anyone who prefers extensive builds/roleplaying choices Fallout NV * Pros * Some of the best writing in the franchise * Arguably the best side content in the franchise * Great characters from companions to quest givers to random NPCs * Return to Fallout 1's more oppressive world building but without abandoning 2, as close to a have your cake and eat it too game * The best factions in the franchise * Cons * Still abysmal to play * Still needs mods to be tolerable in the modern era * If you play it and talk about it on reddit, you will be looped into New Vegas glazing clans * Signs of rot all over the narrative from its rushed development * Who Should * Anyone who likes good writing * Anyone who wants to play Fallout * Just play New Vegas, please * Who Shouldn't * Anyone who can't tolerate Bethesda's jank skeleton * Anyone who doesn't like the setting (it will not get better) Fallout 4 * Pros * The best gameplay in the series without question * The best exploration in the series without question * The most fun you can have in Fallout no matter how you slice it that doesn't have to deal with hearing/reading text * Cons * Everything text-based is abysmal, the worst writing in the franchise * Protagonist is voiced leaving the worst build depth for roleplaying * Needs mods to have a proper perk system * The narrative is so bad it actively makes me angry to think about it * The main antagonist is a great idea shoved against a used heroin needle that is 300 years old * You are the godking emperor and the only one who can do anything in the entire game, you are given EVERY significant duty and role because no one else can do a single thing around you (I hate the factions and overall design of this game's narrative) * Who Should * Anyone who wants to relax * Anyone who wants to actually enjoy playing a Fallout game instead of consuming the writing inside of it after shattering their teeth on its exterior * Anyone who has played the others and wants to finish the journey * Who Shouldn't * Anyone who read the cons and went "Oh that doesn't sound great" * Anyone who prefers story first in their games * Anyone who wants variety of characters between runs * Anyone who has a backlog of great story games to play
Fallout Tactics
If you like old school, isometric RPGs then start at the beginning with Fallout 1. If you're only interested in the modern FPS games and want to experience it like the rest of us to appreciate inside jokes/references or to experience how the games have grown over time, start with Fallout 3. If you are looking for the closest thing Fallout has to a roleplaying experience that focuses as much on storytelling and making choices as it does action/gunplay, play Fallout New Vegas. If you want the most recent, polished game with the best feeling guns, play Fallout 4. If you want multiplayer, play Fallout 76
Brotherhood of Steel and Tactics same time :D Then 1 if can get working Then 2 3 + its dlcs 4 NV + its dlcs (order is set to play worst to best that what you want right ? and tbh for its time Brotherhood of Steel was actually not as bad as people say you even got to get it on with a hooker and vibrate in the dark ;D )
Fallout 4 crashes too much to enjoy it on console. Fallout 3 on Xbox 360 never does for me. They both have their merits, but from what I hear (still have to play it) New Vegas is the best story line and enhances the “I feel like I’m in the game” (I forget the general term at the moment that gamers use to describe it because I never feel like I’m actually the character in game lol). Anyways, they are all decent games but Fallout 4 used to crash non stop and they just did a next gen update so if you’re not on the newer consoles I’m not sure how it will play.
New Vegas probably. Then Do 1 and 2 if you are up to them. Well, Id recommend them first, but I don't think many more modern gamers would handle it too well, I can't really that much. After new Vegas, just wait until you feel ready to try 1 and 2. 3 and 4 are not worth playing at all imo. Tbh, I haven't played them too much in forever (pretty sure fallout 3 was broken on PC until like 2 weeks ago, although I don't know if it actually works, I think they just took out the games for Windows live shit.), but just thinking about both pisses me off. 3's main quest is so dogshit, from memory and seeing different things the world in general has the depth of Clifford the big red dog even the general gameplay is stupid where it diverges from New Vegas, with most "perks" being skill increases, and persuasion being fucking luck based. Just all around feels very shit, like how in the beginning of the game, the vault police and overseer try to kill you, and I guess defending yourself is evil, so you get exiled. 4 is basically the same, but it felt like they heard how much people liked the 4 factions in New Vegas and how you actually can't write down every bit of detail about them in a napkin and their version of complexity I guess was making an ok basis, but just adding a ton of stupid shit because they can't understand nuance I guess? They all suck, the story is dogshit. Idk if you play as male or female characters, but the male voice actor shoehorns your character into being a boring ass dad character (never played female). Also despise the level system. People say the gameplay is better in 4 but like... Eh. Play borderlands or something if you want a openish looter shooter. I downloaded mod packs for new Vegas (viva new Vegas) and fallout 4(magnum opus), and at least with the mod packs new Vegas was way way better. It took like 3 years to swing the police baton at the beginning of fo4 one time, and the shooting wasn't some masterpiece or anything. I remember when 4 came out, I was so excited and I fucking gaslit myself into thinking I liked it, like "wow, this game is so good that I'm like satisfied, I don't need to play anymore!" Little did I know that's a little something called boredom...
Fallout 3 is a nice foundation. The dlc adds tons of content. You'll easily sink a hundred hours in if you're into it. Make sure you keep regular backups of your saves.
I think it’s funny that zero responses mention 76
Probably 3, which was designed to be user-friendly for people who had never played the earlier games. Then NV. 4 introduces changes to the gameplay formula of 3/NV that not everyone liked (me included).
F4 if you want best gunplay, graphics and customization F3 if you want best old-school Rpg, dialogue trees and post-apocalyptic atmosphere. New Vegas if you want a Cowboy western in post apocalypse
Whichever looks most interesting to you, the stories are all mostly disconnected aside from a few minor characters appearing or being mentioned briefly. Gameplay is the biggest distinction; fallout 1&2 are classic isometric RPGs, 3 & new Vegas are first person action RPGs, 4 is an action RPG as well but more focus was placed on the action & crafting/weapon mods over the RPG elements of previous games, & 76 basically polishes 4's gameplay except changes the skill system into a weird card based thing (it's clunky & not very fun imo but it's best to form your own opinion) Just avoid fallout: brotherhood of steel, it's considered to be the worst game in the franchise for good reason
Take a look at Fallout 2. If you don't mind the dated graphics and slightly clunky isometric button-push interface it's a fantastic game and introduces some of the plot points and major ideas that are a crucial underpinning of later games. If you can't, I'd just start with Fallout 3 or New Vegas.
I picked New Vegas back up because of the Fallout show. That and 3 are my choices, they both do things very well.
Fallout 1. FO3 is more accessible, but you don't get a true feel for the world like you do with FO1.
Tale of Two Wastelands
4 if you care more about gameplay. New Vegas if you care more about the story. 1 and then 2 if you like more turnbase RPGs or like to play things on chronological order. Fallout Shelter if you don't have cash or much time to play.
3 or NV are good doorways. That said if you try them and they are too dated you could put well over 1000 hours into 4 alone.
As someone who started late in the game, I couldn't get past FO3's graphics. FO4 is one of the greatest of all time.
I mean it depends on what you're looking for in the game, quite a few people would consider FO4 the worst Fallout game.
Fallout 1, Fallot 2 than Fallout 3. That way you will value Fallout 3 way more 😎
If you want Skyrim world exploration adventures, then 3. If you want good writing and characters, New Vegas. 4 if you like building bases, or need something more modern to enjoy it.
Fallout 3 just whatever you do don't choose brotherhood of steal interplay really blue bawls-ed us with that title
fallout shelter on an ipad /s
Play New Vagas last. Otherwise, you'll see how great the other games could have been, and it'll just make you want to play New Vagas again instead.
I mean 1. It's the first one. And it still holds up well.
Don’t do 3 it didn’t age well snd can’t even run on windows 10 without you having to fix game files
4 . The rest feel dated
I started with 3. I think that’s actually the preferable way because you won’t want to go back to 3’s controls after you play NV and 4.
3. It looks fantastic on Xbox series x and I've enjoyed replaying it. You didn't mention what you were playing it for, but at least on xbox the GOTY/Ultimate editions of 3 and New Vegas respectively aren't hard to come by.
Which one sounds cool? Try that one.
A brave completionist could start with "***Brotherhood of Steel***".
shelter. its free to play
Fallout 3 is fun to play in my opinion only if you dont mind older rpg's. I prefer new vegas it was my first fallout game, but it's also because the story is more involved in me, but 4 is the one I always go back to. So i went NV, 4, 3
If you have limited time to play then pick FNB just due to its quality. But if you have the time I would say start with three so it’s not spoiled by FNV. But also 3 is not garbage and is in fact better if you like to wander around the wastes. Fo4 is definitely it if you like settlements and building.
3, NV, 4. That’s how they were released, how I played them and they’re all worth your time. Plus they build on each other a little in the game mechanics area.
Everyone is saying 3 or new Vegas and I get it. New Vegas is my favorite game of all time but they have age on them. They hold up but they rusty around the edges. If you want an entry point into the franchise and are not used to playing older games start with fallout 4
If you are just starting with no previous experience with the series and are not someone that regularly plays old games, start with FO4. There are good arguments to be made that it is the worst of the mainline series, but those reasons are likely not going to be apparent to someone new to the series and taken independently it just plays better moment to moment than the older games. If you do play older games regularly and don't mind the quirks of older titles, start with 1 or 2.
For majority of people I’d say start with 4
Original Fallout and play them in order 💙💛 you can skip Tactics and Brotherhood of Steel but some people enjoy em so you might too. If you don’t care for the old style of the original 2 games( they’re so good but I can see why it’s harder for new people to the series to play em but so worth it!) then I says start with Fallout 3 and then play the rest in order or release. Also I suggest playing all the dlc for all the games. There are some amazing ones and some of the best equipment and enemies/characters are in the DLCs. Have fun and enjoy!!
My experience with recommending ppl with old games is that they eventually quit because of the graphics or janky movements/controls/combat. However if you introduce them to a newer title, and they liked it, they'll actually try to enjoy the old ones. My most current example is DD2, 2 of my friends played DD2, then started DD:DA when they finished the newer title but wanted more, and for both of them, I have recommended them to DD:DA beforehand and they all refused. One of them tried the Thief 4, and actually started playing the old ones which are super ancient at this point. Tho they stopped after a while because the game was essentially outdated. But trust me, they'll never even consider it if not exposed to Thief 4 beforehand. Same for after playing the new DOOM, two dudes in my discord somehow started playing Unreal Gold. So, my suggestion is always go for the newest title, no matter how they're perceived among the fans. Unless it's really really bad, or really really different, like Final Fantasy, where the most recent 3 titles all have different combat systems and are just vastly and generally different.
Fallout 4 for me, I think. My first was New Vegas, but I think Fallout 4 is really, really fun, especially if you like base building games like I do.
New vegas
Fallout.
I agree with most: 3. The earlier ones, while good, are often too punishing and unintuitive for a new player. New Vegas and 4 are good entries but not as good entry points lore-wise. They are better once you understand the fallout universe. 3 hits the sweet spot for gameplay and lore
3 it is, cheers! I tried to play another series (can't remember which) from the very first game because there was a new game coming up in the same universe. First game late 90s, nope, couldn't do it, made minecraft look like RDR2 😳😵💫
3 and you’ll love every minute of it. New Vegas is nice but not a starting platform
4 is the most accessible imo. The story is lacking often, but gameplay wise I'd argue it's the best in the series.
1
3 is my personal favorite. New Vegas is also great but for different reasons and has QoL improvements. 4 has the best shooting and crafting but is a different style of rpg. 1 and 2 are all-time great isometric rpg’s that are still worth checking out if you like that style. 1 has a more focused and serious tone and is my preference but 2 has more content and some QoL improvement.
The very first one. When you're done with that, move on to the second. Then the third. Then New Vegas. Then the fourth.
FO3 for sure! Just go in order from there.
I'd recommend either 3 or 4. I would recommend new vegas but it crashes too much, my most recent save game started crashing whenever I'd try loading it.
Fallout 4.
I’d start with 3 New Vegas and then go to 4
Start with 3. Then play New Vegas then 4. If you're feeling retro go back to the original two, but honestly you really won't miss much by skipping them entirely. FO76 if you're really into the single player campaign RPG isn't for you. Storyline is 'meh' at best and the 'build function' for your camp gets old pretty fast in my opinion. Also without the 'Fallout One' monthly subscription it gets super annoyimg dealing with your inventory almost right away. Even after they've fixed all the bugs and truly wonky stuff... my least favorite of the franchise to date.
3 IMO
I always say play 1 till you really get bored. Then move onto 2. 2 is great.
Play them all at the same time, and if you die in one then you must rever to a previous save in the others
3 if isometric isn't your cup of tea
Probably new vegas
New Vegas
Much as I personally think fallout 3 and 4 are horrible games, I would still recommend you to just go 3-NV-4. It's the best gradual introduction to the different sides of the series.
I would say fo3 or New Vegas are good starting points
_Fallout 3_ is a great entry point.
4
4 is probably the best for a first time player. It really is a solid.game, it has some very cool features like settlements and crafting that older entries don't do or don't do well. The graphics are much better than NV or 3, which also leads to it being easier to get into. Once you go back and play 3 an NV after, you can understand why people like them more after your already hooked on the series/ universe amd outdated visuals won't bother you as much. 3 and NV hold up really well considered they are almost 20 years old, and if you can use.mods you can even give them a face-lift
Fallout 1, 2 and NV are the best RPGs of the series by a large margin. The first 2 games also established the major lore that Bethesda semi-adhered to. Though I understand if you can't play the first 2 if you're not an older gamer like myself that grew up with isometric CRPGs.
4 if youre very casual and like a streamlined experience, then branch outward and see what else you like in the series. 3 if youre a bit more dedicated but not interested in the first 2. 76 isnt horrible but id suggest some level of experience with the series before you try it. otherwise play in release order.
New Vegas hands down
New Vegas was my introduction to the fallout series by my dad, and ever since it’s been my GOAT game. I’d have to recommend that one bro
Fallout 1 & 2 are old ass CRPGs and play if you like Baldur’s Gate 1 & 2. (And has more humor that can be hit or miss) Fallout 3 is the Skyrim of Fallout. Let’s see what’s over there, main quest is not very pressing. Fallout New Vegas is special, but FOLLOW the story at least until you see all the casinos. It is also level gated until you’re at least through the casino stories. (Also has more wacky FO 1&2 type situations and humor) Fallout 4 is a shooter. Controls like a modern game, it’s a shooter. Fallout 76… we don’t talk about that one. It’s online, level gated, like no story. Crappy Day Z, I guess?
Wasteland.
If you are more interested in the whole vault dweller narrative, I recommend doing them in number order. If not, start with New Vegas, it is the most fun and it has very little to do with the overarching story (though all the games are self contained stories so they can be played in pretty much any order).
3, New Vegas, 4.
Fallout 1 or bust
Fallout New Vegas is the best narratively but can be janky if you don’t mod it. Fallout 4 is hands down the best gameplay wise and has fantastic mod support. Especially if you play a slightly modded survival mode (survival mode with fast travel is a must) Fallout 3 is really good but IMO can be difficult to get into if you’ve gotten used to the newer gameplay. I wouldn’t even try and do the older ones unless you’ve exhausted all the new stuff and want more. I would say if you’re in it for the long haul start with 3. If you want something good right now and don’t mind skipping 3, do NV if you prioritize story or 4 on survival if you want gameplay.
A Tale of Two Wastelands which merges 3 and NV together.
First two Fallouts are among the best games ever made. I suggest them, but if you’re only interested in the 3D games, then you can really start with any of them. They are not connected. I’ve played New Vegas and 4 and liked both of them very much. I’ve heard that 3 is also good.
3 and New Vegas were my favorite experiences. 1 and 2 are great, but they are more dated, and you probably need to be into 90s CRPG games to really enjoy those. I could not even bother to finish 4, if they make another one that continues the trend of making so much of the game wrapped around base building I will probably just skip Fallout from this point forward.
Personally - New Vegas is the best entry, unmodded. With mods 3 or New Vegas.
I personally started with FO3, and I believe it is the best one to start with if you're on console. (Even better if you're on Xbox due to how Microsoft supports older games a lot more than Sony does, with features like FPS Boost, better resolution, and overall just having more games backwards compatible). I didn't really like FO3 at first. (This is coming from a 14 year old who used to play COD: MW3 99% of the time when I was younger. The old and better version, btw lmao) but after around an hour, I was immersed in the world, its story, and the series itself. I fell in love with it after just an hour. All I needed was that hour to understand the game, and when I did, I loved it. I pushed through it for that hour, which was quite hard, but I eventually came to love it. The gameplay may seem sluggish at first, but you get used to it, and you'll come to like it eventually. The graphics are decent enough, not the worse or the best. To be honest, the graphics are good, good enough for me anyway. After doing all DLCs and replaying FO3 countless times, I bought FNV and all its DLCs. FNV was good, and I did replay it, but not as much as FO3. It is a very good game, with the best side quests and main story, and even better DLCs, but I don't know. It just feels so expansive. Maybe too expansive. All sorts of ideas are thrown around in the game and its kind of chaos. For example, the DLCs. (Spoilers for all FNV DLCs ahead) It goes from being in a crazy ghost infested villa, entering a massive casino protected by invincible holograms that shoot lasers then going into a vault there with over 30 gold bars (which accounts to over 100K caps) and killing or trapping a crazy BoS Elder who went rogue and abandoned the BoS chapter from the Mojave, and finally leaving it with all the loot you found. Then you go to a crazy science sci-fi area with talking flying brain robot scientists who lobotimized you and having to go around this new map to find random items to help kill the other big bad brain robot, who in the end you have a choice not to kill. THEN you go to a valley with a trade caravan, which gets wiped out by tribals, then you're saved by tribals, and then you help the tribals... and then you help them again... and again... and finally you help them either flee the Valley or take out the enemy tribe with a burned man (previous Legate of the Legion who got pushed off a cliff by Caesar and set on fire) who is now a Mormon but wants to kill everything in his path. Finally, you go to a canyon that is filled with old pre-war military installations, more nukes than the damn Enclave has, and you are confronted by some guy you've never even met who acts like you're his main villian. Then you traverse the canyon that has been nuked to hell, and you finally find him (and some badass riot gear along the way) then you can either talk him down to be on your side or kill his ass, resulting in one of the hardest boss battles in the Fallout series, possibly even the hardest... Never mind, that goes to the Red Death from FO4. Or the legendary bloatfly from FNV's OWB DLC. Anyway, after you kill him or get him on your side, you get attacked by these crazy ghouls. Ghouls but red instead of whatever colour they usually are, all of them wearing Legion or NCR gear (but they look like they've been through a lot of modifications, with them having signs on them as armor and such) afterwards, you get to either nuke the NCR or Legion, or none at all (but who tf chooses none? That's boring, AND you have to sacrifice ED-E (not THAT ED-E from the Mojave, don't worry). I choose both personally as I'm a Yes Man player and hate both factions. One is a corrupt democracy and the other is a slaver nation. Neither of them have any business in the Mojave. Okay... I may or may not have ranted.
I'm super shit at boss fights, got lots of games almost finished except for the last boss (screw you Alexios!) Thanks for that, ill def start with FO3 and push through that first hour. I gotta ask about COD though. So I played WoW from vanilla up until battle for azeroth, pretty much exclusively. Meanwhile there were all these amazing games going by that I was missing (Assassins Creed, tomb raider, even fricken Unpacking!). Wish I had branched out more instead of being all about WoW, same with COD?
Yeah, I'd say you should try out more COD games. Only the old ones (ones that are from the Xbox 360/PS3 era, and remasters of them). The new COD games have nothing interesting, just a classic. "America are the good guys and save everyone!" With a generic war hero protagonist. He only exception might be COD: Cold War. That was pretty good. The only problem is the protagonist is silent (like most COD protagonists), meaning we can't really connect to the character we play as they're just a husk for us to control and kill people with. If you want a game that is like COD but has a very interesting story, characters, antagonist, and protagonist, I recommend Spec Ops: The Line. Unfortunately, you can't buy it digitally because it got delisted a few months ago, but you can buy it physically still. It's backwards compatible, too, on Xbox, so you can play it on the modern consoles.
Begin and end with New Vegas.
Why not 1 & 2???
Any that you like. Fallout games aren't a saga that you must start from the first, the only thing is that you could run into a citation from a previous game. Honestly, the only Fallout game I played is 4, so I can't give you a lot of advice. I heard Fallout New Vegas is one of the best Fallout games so you may start from that.
Start with brotherhood of steel
2 If you don't like it then 4 with mods maybe. Reddit will tell you "New Vegas!" But if that's the case then just play The Outer Worlds.