Fallout 3 or New Vegas? (yes, this question again)

[JarinArenos]

I played both when they came out, and played both to exhaustion, so here goes...

Fallout 3 had some of the most interesting world design that I've seen before or since. I loved exploring every nook and cranny of the game. I loved Megaton. Also, the radio was pretty dang good, compared to FNV, and Three Dog was way more fun than "Mr. New Vegas" ever could be. That being said, the writing pretty much sucked across the board.

Fallout New Vegas had amazing story, characters I actually gave a crap about, and made great strides in game mechanics. Granted, most of the mechanical improvements were just building stock versions of the most popular FO3 mods, but honestly... I wish more games would do that. On the other hand, the Mojave is boring as hell in real life (I lived in the area for a couple years), and the game's version... isn't that much better. It certainly had its moments, but I truly missed the Capital Wasteland at times. Likewise, the forced directionality (is that a word? Eh, whatever) at the beginning kinda annoys me as well. I'm the sort that likes to take a hard left off of the plot-trail as soon as possible in any open-world game, and FNV just really didn't let you do that. Try taking a hard left off of the rails here and you get eaten by deathclaw 5 minutes into the game.

So yeah, FO3 wins on world design and pacing. FNV wins... pretty much everything else.

 

[Doom-Slayer]

Fallout 3 has the better world and atmosphere, Fallout NV has basically more stuff and better quests. NV also has hardcore mode which I love.

Overall the problem I have with NV is the world feels absolutely tiny compared to Fo3 and Im pretty sure it is actually smaller. Its a bit disappointing going from Fo3 to NV in that way, but it makes up for it a bit with new items and better quests and things to do.

 

[Fox12]

Fallout 3 was far more interesting to explore. You could go anywhere you wanted from the outset, and the map was huge. There were hidden stories and details in every nook and cranny of the world. In New Vegas the map was specifically made to shepherd you in a very particular direction. Your too weak to explore north because of the monsters, and even if you make it to the city you can't enter it until you make a certain amount of money. The sense of freedom is completely lost. The developers close off a massive chunk of the map early on, and it drives me nuts. Fallout 3 also had one of the best tutorials I've ever seen. I felt attached to the world and characters, and even enjoyed the tutorial sections I would normally hate. New Vegas, by contrast, had one of the worst and most cliche openings I've ever seen. It took a long time, at least an hour, before anything even vaguely interesting happened. New Vegas was also much glitchier.

Fallout 3 also felt like a real post apocalypse. Everything is dilapidated, and people struggle just to survive. There were some really tense moments in that game, sometimes bordering on survival horror. I'll never forget wndering through the ruins of DC, almost dead, no ammo, trying to avoid the horrors of the capital. New Vegas, on the other hand, felt much livelier. Society wasn't just rebuilding, it was already fully formed with self sufficient constitutional governments, organized modern militaries, and taxation. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it is the main reason for the divided fanbase. NV fans prefer the livelier world that stays closer to the originals. F3 fans prefer an actual post apocalyptic game.

In some ways New Vegas is better. The companions are a million times better in New Vegas, and the main plot is much better written. Veronica and Boone were amazing. However, if forced to choose, I would argue that Fallout 3 wins by a narrow margin.

 

[Syzygy23]

Good news, now you can have both at the same time! No longer do we have to choose between which game was the better one:

http://taleoftwowastelands.com/

 

[SeeIn2D]

I prefer Fallout 3. I will be honest that New Vegas is a more refined game. It's much more polished with a better story line. But Fallout 3 had a sort of charm about it that New Vegas was lacking. New Vegas for me felt a bit sterilized for a game that was based in a post apocalyptic Las Vegas. There's also a huge difference in the maps and quest lines. NV felt much more linear. Like they made the main quest line and I'm obligated to complete that before I get into anything secondary. The map as well feels small with a good portion of it being impassable mountains. 3 had a big square of a map and told me "Here you go! There's all kinds of shit here! Go murder your enemies and have a blast. Also we made this quest line so if you ever get around to it, it's pretty fun!".

I also feel like some of the craziness of 3 was overlooked in NV. The Experimental MIRV for instance was a mini nuke launcher in 3 that launched 8 mini nuclear bombs at the same time. It did some stupid amount of damage obviously, like 13,000 or something. There are some crazy weapons in NV but nothing like that. It all feels kind of sterile.