Play fallout 1 and 2 then play FNV then play fallout three then wonder why the titles where switched around
what I mean is fallout 1 and 2 had a sense of humour and the main villan was humanity
in fallout 3 the main villan is basiclly the environment you live in
I know NV had it's good points, (like jury-rigging) but it also had fucktons of glitches and loading times. If you're patient, that probably won't bother you too much.
I liked FO3, because it was very close to my vision of postapocaliptic world. NV with it's crowded Wasteland is a little too alive, too "Clint Eastwood"-ish for my taste.
Ultratwinkie said:
JesterRaiin said:
If i may...
Is it only me, or Bethesda's concept for NV seems like "let's build big town with neons, and forget the rest - Wasteland, Fallout's unique atmosphere, scenarios with multiple endings and approaches - all are unimportant" ?
Fanta Grape said:
Fallout 3 is better because you can kill Moira Brown.
--In short, I prefer New Vegas over Fallout 3. More interaction wins and I played it before Fallout 3 so I?m comfortable with it. The text below is just my thoughts and, more possibly, my ramblings. Read the text below at your own risk knowing that I wrote it for the sake it--
I am not sure if I am experiencing some sort of 'First-come-first-best' syndrome, but I personally preferred New Vegas and I am currently trying to complete Fallout 3 core game (Yes, it?s a shame that I just got Fallout 3 just recently)
I honestly preferred it largely because it was more of a western feel, where a man is his own law and most things are done by the gun, or a decent amount of speech skill. Also the sheer amount of items and player interactivity overshadows its predecessor even if it is just more weapons, Aim down sight, additional crafting and etc.
However, RPG?s usually, in my mind set, grab its audience?s attention through story, not just interaction, and story is something to be desired within Fallout: New Vegas and it is something Fallout 3 manages to keep as a trophy. To elaborate, Fallout: New Vegas has a bland story populated with not very memorable characters all of which makes very little impression on me as a user and the majority of the in-game characters feels more like a nod of acknowledgement to its Fallout 1 and 2 older siblings. While Fallout 3?s attention to detail to story and the cut scenes they create, such as my recent exploit in re-enforcing and discovering Galaxy News Radio Station, were very well made and worth applauding. Every step I took during that one encounter felt like a real hot zone and the cut through the mutant controlled ruined building with the ?Lyon?s Pride? backing me up felt like a real tactical manoeuvre.
Old Game Blues
The thing with Fallout 3 is that it felt like Bethesda taking a loved series and turning it into whatever the hell they wanted. The original Fallout games were about humanity rebuilding civilisation (Fallout 1 more) after they destroyed it because they got greedy and couldn't get along. The Fallout games delved into human nature and how we would react to living in a life where civilisation was gone and now a new one was going to be born out of the ashes of the old world.
Background
Fallout 1 and 2 both included these aspects (Fallout 1 more). In Fallout 1 the Master was aware that people had caused their own downfall and that as humans we could not properly take care of ourselves, therefore he saw Super Mutants, which he could create, as the next step in human evolution. He wanted to create an army of mutants that would unify the human race and make all of their goals the same so we could live together and be more equal. However, there were many flaws such as people who had been living in the wasteland were not fit for transformation and became dumb and brutish, whereas more "cleaner" humans became intelligent and strong beings. More importantly all female Super Mutants are sterile, which means that eventually the Super Mutant race will no longer be able to continue and they will die out.
Basically, Fallout 1 dealt with getting rid of human?s problems by getting rid of humans themselves.
Civilisation vs. Survival
Now let?s skip to Fallout 3, what was that about? Some whiny kid who?s Dad goes missing and now he wants to go find him. Then said dad wants to purify the water (which should've mostly cleared by now anyway) to give all the people of the East Coast fresh water, because apparently they don't know how to make wells or filter water like those of the West Coast.
Fallout 3 just didn't have the political or societal messages of the original Fallouts and instead sacrificed that for stupid quests that you only take part in to see what cool loot you will receive, plus Fallout 1 and 2 already dealt with FEV, are we still going on about that? Fallout 3 was filled with stupidity and nonsensical things, such as the Experimental MIRV and Mothership Zeta. Bethesda did away with rebuilding civilisation and decided they would focus more on petty survivors trying hard to create communities where they can survive the harshness of the apocalypse, 200 years after it has happened, made even more pathetic by the existence of the NCR in the West who by that time had made a large republic of more than 300,000 people with a fully working government and military. And not to mention Caesar?s Legion who managed to conquer 86 tribes in an even shorter amount of time, using brute military force and diplomacy.
Fallout: New Vegas thankfully went back to civilisation with the NCR and Caesar's Legion, a force dedicated to fixing the mistakes of the old world by taking one of the most successful empires in history and getting rid of the negatives of it, mainly the senate and democracy, the story was focused on the political turmoil of the Mojave and the affect it had on the people.
Would an empire led by one man's ideals work in the long run? Most likely not.
Would the NCR, who can barely hold onto Hoover Dam and Vegas be able to continue to spread? Not at all if they continue to be lead by inept commanders such as Oliver and Moore, and while their president is a former war hero who forces people to fight for his ideals.
Can Mr. House control all of Vegas by himself, or will he eventually turn into the real life Howard Hughes and become obsessed with himself and become cut off from the real? Of course, because it has already happened, and more than likely he will gradually lose his grip on Vegas.
Independent New Vegas? People free to do what they want? Yeah, not a chance, eventually this will fall apart and things such as riots will break out and many people will suffer.
Compare that to Fallout 3?s endings; The bright, happy ending where the purifier is activated but the Lone Wanderer has to make their heroic sacrifice (while a radiation immune companion stands nearby), or the evil ending where the FEV is inserted and...a couple of people get sick (yeah, see that?s why post-ending gameplay isn?t such a good idea).
The world
People complain about how New Vegas was worse because it didn?t feel ?post-apocalyptic? enough, well there?s an obvious answer to that: Fallout isn?t mainly about exploring land devastated by nuclear war, it?s about exploring a devastated world and experiencing how humanity now has to rebuild said world they destroyed. Fallout 3 did give the sense of a destroyed world, but it is set 200 years after the apocalypse, should it really still be this crap looking and why haven?t large societies sprung up yet? The New California Republic managed to create a successful community with other settlements and a shorter time and now they have thousands of members. New Vegas perfectly captures the idea of rebuilding civilisation by presenting us with two major locations; New Vegas and Hoover Dam. Both of these cause the NCR and Caesar?s Legion to begin a war for total control, and Mr. House now has to defend his beloved city using deceit and manipulation.
Choice
New Vegas also felt much more like a role-playing game. In Fallout 3 you were forced to be someone who grew up in a Vault, you were told who your mother and father were, where you were born, you had to be friends with Amata, Butch is your bully, you can?t join the Tunnel Snakes, all of the characters have a set personality as to how they like or hate you, your age is pre-determined and you?re forced to love your dad and find him (seriously no matter how much you verbally abuse him you have to keep helping him, why can?t I shoot him?). Finally you?re forced to join the BoS and you can?t even join the Enclave, yeah sure you can put their FEV into the purifier but it doesn?t really change much. Also there just wasn?t enough choice in how you finish the main quest; you get two choices that barely differ from each other.
In New Vegas, however, you play a person who works for the Mojave Express, delivering a package and then unfortunately get shot in the head. That?s it, that?s all we know, that, and some guy called Ulysses apparently has some history with us and is now looking for the Courier.
Companions
Another issue with Fallout 3 were the companions when compared to NV. The followers in F3 were very 2D and barely had any back story or personality at all;
*Jericho is just some raider who wants to go clean then he wants to go dirty again.
*Clover is a slave.
* Charon is practically a slave with a shotgun.
*Dogmeat is a dog.
*Sergeant RL-3 is a robot who doesn?t like communists.
*Fawkes is a super mutant who is more intelligent than the others because he was able to access the data files on the terminal with its small keys with his large fingers. Wait, why would a terminal in a holding cell have so much information and why is there a terminal in a holding cell in the first place?
*Butch and the Tunnel Snakes are supposed to be some kind of Italian-American greasers, but without the class, purpose and charm of The Kings in New Vegas.
*Star Paladin Cross is extremely boring. ?I knew your father? is basically her entire story and personality.
Now compare them to the companions in New Vegas;
*Rose of Sharon Cassidy (Cass) is a booze drinking caravaneer and daughter of Cassidy from Fallout 2. She is a talkative, despondent, confused, smart and gun savvy and is very thick headed to the point that the only way to actually get her to be a companion is with speech checks. She is independent and doesn?t take shit from no one and can give some really good opinions on the NCR and Caesar?s Legion, admitting to the faults of the NCR and advantages of the Legion.
*Craig Boone
is a former NCR 1st Recon sniper who had a large run of horrible luck and now is unsure of what to do in his life. He took part in the Bitter Springs massacre which mentally tore him and to make matters worse he was forced to perform a mercy killing on his pregnant wife. Boone is made out to be a depressed, illiterate and angered person who needs someone to help him show what he should do with his life.
*Arcade Gannon is a member of the Followers of the Apocalypse and former member of the Enclave. He is a man who wants to make a difference in the Mojave but is unsure as to how he is going to achieve that. Although the Followers are shown to all be optimistic and altruistic there is a sense of ?ends justify the means? in certain quests related to them. Arcade?s name itself resembles ?Arcadia?, an unobtainable utopian land that is very fitting to Arcade?s goals of a peaceful Mojave, a goal that will never be achieved.
*ED-E is a former Enclave eyebot that represents a sort of relic of the old Enclave and how they are all now starting to blend into the new society, along with other members of the Enclave.
*Lily is a super mutant nightkin and shows just how schizophrenic and confused the stealth boys have made them. She is used as a test subject by Henry to try and finally find a cure to nightkin schizophrenia and hopefully bring peace to their muddled minds.
*Raul
is a man who has seen many things, most notably the Great War itself and its effects on the world. During his centuries of travels he has encountered settlements and cities of crime and prostitution and eventually these things led to his life of vigilantism. Like most vigilantes this led to more problems and Raul was brutally attacked and injured. After witnessing the death of his home, family and love interest, Raul continued to travel and tried to protect the weak, only to realise it was pointless due to his old age and begun to believe he was a lost cause and old people could never help the world.
*Rex is a cyberdog who has had his own adventures. He was originally from Denver and eventually was discovered by Caesars Legion who took him. However, after a battle he was lost and roamed around, finding the King at Freeside. Due to his old age Rex?s brain has begun to decay and now you must find a replacement brain that will allow him to live longer, and also fill his mind with various different memories and abilities.
*Veronica
is an outgoing, talkative, friendly, optimistic and sarcastic member of the BoS. However, she is very different than most BoS members; she does not believe in many of the BoS?s ways (such as the codex) and would prefer if they expanded and put their skills to better use, instead of acting so xenophobic all of the time. She believes that if the Brotherhood does not change then they will either destroy themselves, or someone will do it for them as long as they are led by leaders who do not see the errors of their ways. Although Veronica is shown to be a quite happy person when it comes to the serious issues of the BoS, she becomes much more serious and her tone changes quite significantly, as shown during her personal quest when she stands up to McNamara and becomes even more saddened and confused than she was before.
DLC Fallout 3
In Fallout 3 the DLCs were all spread out areas with no connection to each other and served mostly as just ways to introduce more loot.
*Operation Anchorage was the worst offender, it had absolutely no role-playing aspects in it and was just a run-and-gun experience through trenches, all of which was a simulation and not even significant to your own character. In the end all of it was, simply, for the loot. The whole reason you go into the simulation is to open the door to the armoury so you can get all of the sweet loot that is to be found, not for the story of the Anchorage Reclamation or for characters...loot. The loot isn?t the worst part though; it would?ve been nice to have some RPG elements, a good story and memorable characters, but no just loot.
*The Pitt allowed us to discover a very nicely designed area, but sadly there was only one interesting character (Ashur) and even then the final moral choice didn?t even seem like a choice at all. In the end you?re asked to either leave the baby with Ashur or give her to Wernher, the problem is that both of these men have the same goal of creating a cure, Ashur was just smarter about it; Wernher was stupid because now the industry would fail whereas Ashur would keep the industry going and find the cure, not to mention that they both have the same rewards and it really has barely any affect on the story. After making the decision afterwards it barely seems like anything has changed, just that there are less characters around, and it hardly felt ?grey? at all.
*Broken Steel was Bethesda admitting to a mistake and trying to fix it, only to open up more problems. The problem with F3s ending wasn?t that you couldn?t play past the ending, it was that the ending itself was just stupid, gave no closure and then there was the whole companion issue. The Enclave has been defeated so many times now yet they still have so many forces and even after that they still roam around with powerful weaponry and unlimited numbers. The problem with F3s ending was that it didn?t give enough closure; it didn?t tell us what happened to everyone after the events of the game and what happened in the future.
*Point Lookout was probably the best DLC, it gave us an interesting area to explore and had some good characters such as Desmond and the Velvet Curtain quest was very well designed. Unfortunately, that?s about it, but I wouldn?t call it a bad DLC, just not great.
*Dead Money adds an interesting new area to explore, the Sierra Madre. What I liked about Dead Money was how it was focused on the environment, story and characters. All of the new character were interesting and add unique quirks to them.
Dead Money also gives a very interesting twist at the end when you find out that the Sierra Madre treasure is a vault of gold, gold too heavy to even carry out meaning everything you did was for almost nothing. This reinforces the story of the DLC about greed and letting go. Dead Money also gives some good hints at the story of Ulysses and the Courier during the ending.
*Honest Hearts allows the player to explore Zion Valley, a new and very nice looking location home to two tribes of Utah. One of the most significant aspects of the DLC is finally being able to meet the legendary ?Burned Man?, Joshua Graham. Joshua was a very interesting character because he presented an interesting story of redemption through religion and making up for past deeds. The ending of Honest Hearts was very good as it presented a very grey moral choice option, both endings had both their pros and cons and neither was really better than the other, it all came down to personal preference. However, the rest of the DLC wasn?t that great except for the Desert Ranger armour, Randall Clark?s story and the .45 pistol (and its unique variant).
*Then there?s Old World Blues. Old World Blues is fantastic; it brings a new and interesting area to explore and is very connected to the Mojave. You encounter the Think Tank, a group of strange and idiosyncratic scientists who are responsible for various things. OWB features great writing, voice acting, a story that will allow you to encounter a cast of colourful characters and a very interesting end. There is plenty to explore and find in OWB and the whole 1950?s science-fiction theme was pulled off very well and the DLC really feels like some of the areas that were going to be in Fallout 2 and the cancelled Van Buren. OWB also gives a lot more information on the story of Elijah and Christine from Dead Money and finally we get to actually hear Ulysses? voice and his actions at Big MT. Also, how can you not love Muggy and the Toaster?
Bobble heads and snow globes
Now I?ll get extremely nitpicky...
In Fallout 3 the bobble heads are never really explained very well, they?re just there and they only serve as a way of overpowering your character very easily. Snow globes on the other hand provide decoration and caps, however, a reason is given as to why House even wants them; House loves snow globes because they represent how he enjoys the ability to control something (Vegas) in the palm of his hand and be able to turn it upside down and manipulate it to his will.
__________________________
Of course that is unfinished and not my final thoughts.
EDIT: If anyone intends to quote this, please snip it to cut down on space.
Funny. I just picked it up today and tried to get back into it.
I understand. It's just not as good. The Wastelands aren't as inventive and much more treacherous than is necessary for a video game.
I got on today trying to complete one quest. That quest was literally walking to a place. I played for two hours and never got there. And unlike what you may be thinking, that wasn't a good thing in this case. I ended up dying about 5 times because I tried walking through places that I wasn't a high enough level to face. And this is probably the second mission in the game.
All I had to do was to walk to Nipton.
I really just stopped. I hated all my weapons and saving ammo for guns that really have weird stats.
And probably the worst offense of all... it's boring. Nothing is happening. Walking across an unimaginative wasteland mountains is not my idea of fun.
Well, it's like the case with Morrowind and Oblivion, ain't it? Fallout 3 is the Morrowind, having a fantastic atmosphere and being the better game, but Fallout: NV does what Oblivion did for the TES franchise and brings about some very positive upgrades in terms of gameplay. That said, unlike Morrowind, Fallout 3 was not in such dire need of those changes, so it's a lot easier to go back and enjoy it as the better game
Good points up there. I won't get into much detail, but regarding the Dialog sysem; New Vegas was better in that it has way more options. It was worse in the fact that it actually showed you what you COULD do if your skill was this or this big. While conveniet this is a bit unrealistic and makes you want to re-start the game just to get the best way to do something. Another thing which bothered me in New Vegas is that In fallout 3 when you're trying to persuade someone they don't just tell you 'If you have 74 speech you will 100% fail, but if you have 75 you will 100% succed' They actually implement chance in that matter, more realistically.
-snip-
Dead Money also gives a very interesting twist at the end when you find out that the Sierra Madre treasure is a vault of gold, gold too heavy to even carry out meaning everything you did was for almost nothing. This reinforces the story of the DLC about greed and letting go.
-snip-
You should do a proper review with all that in that post, but I just wanted to point out this bit. You are completely right that you go throughout the entire DLC for the gold and only get to carry out 5 or 6 of them. In theory.
Unless you glitch your way out of the vault with all 37 through the forcefield with mines and other explosives
--In short, I prefer New Vegas over Fallout 3. More interaction wins and I played it before Fallout 3 so I?m comfortable with it. The text below is just my thoughts and, more possibly, my ramblings. Read the text below at your own risk knowing that I wrote it for the sake it--
Very good points. I can't agree more. For some people - like me - it really comes down to story, characters, events. And with tinkering and inventory out of the picture NV ideed lacks a little in these departments.
To each his own as they used to say...
You are completely right that you go throughout the entire DLC for the gold and only get to carry out 5 or 6 of them. In theory.
Unless you glitch your way out of the vault with all 37 through the forcefield with mines and other explosives
I can put up with freezes, people getting stuck in wallsa nd floors, quests becoming broken because I did something I shouldn't have or a texture not loading properly. There were no bugs in New Vegas that bothered me...except that one, I really wish it never existed. However, using my incredible sense of restraint I ignored that glitch and walked out of there with one gold bar that now sits right next to my bed, a constant reminder.
You should do a proper review with all that in that post, but I just wanted to point out this bit.
Personally I am a fan of New Vegas. For me, it just did what Fallout 3 did, and did it better, as well as added a lot of game play elements that I liked, especially Hardcore Mode. I also loved all of the DLC in New Vegas alot.
The only thing I feel 3 did better was making the main character. In 3 it is a character you mold from birth, you live through their life and you decide what things they have. With New Vegas, you have a premade character, the courier, a person who has a past and has done things. Then they mostly forget about this to make this character a blank slate as well and only bring up very little stuff about your past through flavor text. Hopefully Lonesome Road will change that.
If i may...
Is it only me, or Bethesda's concept for NV seems like "let's build big town with neons, and forget the rest - Wasteland, Fallout's unique atmosphere, scenarios with multiple endings and approaches - all are unimportant" ?
LOL! New Vegas has way more endings than Fallout 3.. There are about 4 major factions each with their own ending (and then under that the minor faction's endings, and then companion endings). Also it wasn't Bethesda that developed NV.
I liked FO3, because it was very close to my vision of postapocaliptic world. NV with it's crowded Wasteland is a little too alive, too "Clint Eastwood"-ish for my taste.
Wait a minute, so the world in NV is bad because it isn't what you wanted it to be?
You think Fallout: New Vegas was put in production for you? And it was made to cater to your needs and wants?
Plus, New Vegas wasn't trying to be post-apocalyptic, it was trying to be post-post-apocalyptic, and even J. E. Sawyer, Lead/Project designer, said that himself.
I like the plot to FO3 better, much better main story and characters. I liked the world of NV better, the side quests. The main plot was just...odd.
Sure, vengeance is a good motivator just somehow the idea of going after someone who has already beaten me in a fair fight seems...well..suicidal. If it were any other context than a game with a level 0 character it wouldn't make sense.
Wow. Just wow. I don't understand how it is possible for game industry to produce so many flawed products (in terms of writing, scenarios and such) while there are such talents available... And no. I'm not sarcastic.
Dr Jones said:
JesterRaiin said:
If i may...
Is it only me, or Bethesda's concept for NV seems like "let's build big town with neons, and forget the rest - Wasteland, Fallout's unique atmosphere, scenarios with multiple endings and approaches - all are unimportant" ?
Oh great !
There was this old movie with Statham... "Transporter" ? At some point his character was f*cked up by his employers. They almost killed him and destroyed his mansion. And he considered walking away. No retribution, no regrets. "It's all part of the job". That was my attitude in NV : i was almost killed ? Ok, "it's part of the job". It's part of being Wastelander.
So pardon me - NV may have more endings than FO3, but - FOR ME - there's no point to follow main storyline.
ChupathingyX said:
JesterRaiin said:
I liked FO3, because it was very close to my vision of postapocaliptic world. NV with it's crowded Wasteland is a little too alive, too "Clint Eastwood"-ish for my taste.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
