User Score
9.1

Universal acclaim- based on 1669 Ratings

User score distribution:

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. May 10, 2016
    3
    When I see the scores here, it serves to remind me that people's standards were as low back then as they are today, ah ah.

    Similar flaws as in the first installment: opaque walls blocking your vision, zig-zag walking, pixel hunting, frustrating restrictions, clunky interface, anti-epic fights, large empty maps, grind, and so on. And a development team that was still clueless about
    When I see the scores here, it serves to remind me that people's standards were as low back then as they are today, ah ah.

    Similar flaws as in the first installment: opaque walls blocking your vision, zig-zag walking, pixel hunting, frustrating restrictions, clunky interface, anti-epic fights, large empty maps, grind, and so on. And a development team that was still clueless about ergonomics (one of the main factors in the success of the IE engine).
    Expand
  2. Jan 9, 2016
    4
    This is a game. Not a book and not a movie, you can have the best story and characters ever but if your gameplay is terrible then it's a terrible game. Simples.

    First off is user interface, which is absolutely horrible. Your view of the environment and NPCs/creatures/items is obstructed by the game world, so even though your character can see what is in front of them, you can't. Instead
    This is a game. Not a book and not a movie, you can have the best story and characters ever but if your gameplay is terrible then it's a terrible game. Simples.

    First off is user interface, which is absolutely horrible. Your view of the environment and NPCs/creatures/items is obstructed by the game world, so even though your character can see what is in front of them, you can't. Instead you are forced to run right up to things to get a small viewing area on what is blocked by the game world. This viewing area also happens to remove the ability to interact with things like doors.

    You are unable to give orders to your companions. For a game that is hailed as having amazing dialogue interaction with NPCs, apparently the act of asking your companion to go look around the corner for enemies is just too complicated. This combined with the turn based combat makes for an extremely clunky and frustrating experience akin to pulling teeth.

    Another example would be an incredibly weak, rotting door that's falling off its hinges but happens to be locked. Your character lacks the strength to smash it down, but you have a companion with high strength wielding a sledge hammer. Any rational individual might ask them to smash it down for them, but no not in this game.

    The stealth is a complete crap shoot with enemies wondering back and forth randomly for all eternity like some mental patient, this combined with the lack of visibility due to the game world blocking what your character would be able to see again makes for horrible gameplay experience.

    Combat is horrible, you can't move and shoot, can't take cover, flanking doesn't seem to do anything for melee, to-hit chances are abysmally low. Not to mention that many of the enemies are bullet sponges. You can shoot an enemy in the head with no reaction from the enemy. It's also turn based so you have to just stand there with your thumb up your arse while 5 enemies all queue up to punch you in the face.

    Movement is hex based so you often can't run in a straight line. I don't understand this obsession with the hex based systems. Why!?

    Companions will routinely block pathways.

    Simple things like being able to see how much health your companions have - can't do that unless you enter dialogue and then go into combat control. Terrible

    I can't use my first aid or doctor abilities more than 5-6 times per 24 hours... really? Are high speech characters arbitrarily limited to how many conversations they can have or a high guns character by how many enemies they can shoot? No? Then why the hell is mine then!?

    This "game" could have been so much better if the developers kept in mind that people actually have to play the damn thing, we're not reading a book here or watching a film so it would be nice if your user interface wasn't so horribly clunky and useless.
    Expand
  3. Aug 15, 2013
    3
    I guess I should have played this when it came out to appreciate it. I bought it just recently because I loved Fallout 3 and Fallout New Vegas. It's just too much of a chore to play. I also hate the gun play in the games of this era (FO Tactics, Jagged Alliance 1&2, etc) where your guys can't hit anything they are not standing next to. It suck immersion out of a game when your guys is 5I guess I should have played this when it came out to appreciate it. I bought it just recently because I loved Fallout 3 and Fallout New Vegas. It's just too much of a chore to play. I also hate the gun play in the games of this era (FO Tactics, Jagged Alliance 1&2, etc) where your guys can't hit anything they are not standing next to. It suck immersion out of a game when your guys is 5 meter away with a machinegun and doesn't hit once. Expand
  4. Sep 15, 2016
    1
    While the game has an interesting premise, Interplay, as evident by its later work has managed to screw up one of the best ideas in video game history. Thank God someone else bought the franchise.
  5. Mar 24, 2023
    2
    Twice the game made in half the time as compared to its predecessor and it really, really shows. The writing and overall design in world, quests, and moment to moment gameplay has suffered drastically. Instead of a tightly focused RPG that takes you on a journey through a thoughtfully constructed world by showing and telling only what it needs to, it's a mass of uncomplementing sideshowTwice the game made in half the time as compared to its predecessor and it really, really shows. The writing and overall design in world, quests, and moment to moment gameplay has suffered drastically. Instead of a tightly focused RPG that takes you on a journey through a thoughtfully constructed world by showing and telling only what it needs to, it's a mass of uncomplementing sideshow attractions that utterly lack the previous game's thick atmosphere and sharp wit. Expand
Metascore
86

Generally favorable reviews - based on 15 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 14 out of 15
  2. Negative: 0 out of 15
  1. Perhaps even more so than its predecessor, Fallout 2 contains dozens of subtle and more often not-so-subtle references to cult movies, television icons, and other aspects of popular culture.
  2. Fallout 2 is a worthy successor to Fallout, and one that deserves a place in every dedicated role-playing gamer's collection. Don't be without it!
  3. The warm, fuzzy, post-apocalyptic world has all the little details and exactly the right tone. The immersive story has kept me up until the wee hours of the morn on many occasions.