which one of these should i play through?

why would you not start at the beginning it takes at best 6 hours to play

>>375681931
maybe if you know what you are doing oh and i aint playing tactics

none

>>375682027
FO1 isn't very long unless you are some kind of bonehead.

i prefer fallout 2 because of the more expansive world but i'd reccomend starting at the beginning

>>375682027
>oh and i aint playing tactics
What a cuck.

>>375681778
Yes they're really good. If you like them I would also recommend games like Underrail, Age of Decadence, and Dead State.

>>375682836
everyone i have spoken too says its not good at all

>>375681778
None, just start with 3 since it's the second best in the series

>>375682983
It's a poor man's Jagged Alliance 2 but it's still fun.

2 will be even better if you buckle down and get through 1

>>375682027
no really fo1 isn't very long, i finished it in about 4 hours with all quests done so i said you could do it in 6 to give you some extra time for fucking up

>>375682983
its not terrible, i dont like the engine changes they did it feels more sluggish

File: 1489617492347.png (257KB, 1000x760px) Image search: [Google]

257KB, 1000x760px

>>375681778
Both ya dingus. Look up some tips on creating a character, beyond that the games aren't super difficult.

>>375681778
Aside from quality of life changes fallout 1 is pretty much better than fallout 2

Fallout 1 for story
Fallout 2 for world building and atmosphere
Or just fucking play both you ultra-pleb

File: 1489979052991.jpg (117KB, 1018x701px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 1018x701px

>>375681778

Neither, the combat hasn't aged well neither has some of the dialogue, however if you really wanna trooper through to get to some good bits of text dialogue then you do you. Go play Wasteland 2 instead.

You need to play fo1 first because 2 is an actually sequel to it. Then nv comes next and 3 and 4 are their own thing.