Fallout New Vegas: Why all the hate?

[Jaeke]

FO:NV to FO3 was like DA2 to DA1.Sure New Vegas had new stuff but once you got it, there was nothing else. The Mojave was just a big damn sandbox to blow stuff up. Yeah there was factions but not really anything as rewarding as just killing them and taking their stuff. FO3 had a much more interesting landscape, a big desert with the occasional mountains is just boring. New Vegas's story was crap compared to FO3. FO3 you get to see the life of your character from birth the escape from the vault. Idk who the hell my courier was before he got shot from some random i guy i just kill later. The courier had no meaning or connection to me compared to my Vault Dweller. New stuff doesnt mean its better. Its just a classic case of sacrificing story for gameplay.

 

[Syphous]

I loved Fallout 3. I scoured every inch of the world three times. Now I love New Vegas. I'm in the middle of my third play-through.

New Vegas is better than Fallout 3, but not by leaps and bounds like some people seem to think it is. I think it's just a good sequel, building upon what already existed without changing the game completely.

I give both games an enthusiastic thumbs up, and recommend them both to anyone who asks if they're any good.

 

[Jaeke]

And to talk about atmosphere.... you're really gonna tell me that New Vegas is more interesting and colorful than D.C. ive been to D.C. and to go and walk to landmarks ive seen in real life in a post-apocolyptic setting was so much more thrilling than 3 little square areas with only about 2 buildings that were interesting. New Vegas city was pathetic. The strip was awful. Megaton, even The Pitt had more compelling areas/buildings.... Sunnyside(? forgot name) was just a couple of streets with the occasional thug that is the only thing worth the bullet i spend shooting his head off. all in all the atmosphere of New Vegas pales in comparison to D.C.

 

[Cobblerfiend]

right away: i did not read all the posts so be forgiving if im behind on this

i love FNV so much more than FO3 mostly because it forces me to specialize more, cant become a do all character late game

 

[Jaeke]

Really i think we should all look forward to Skyrim. An amazing Skyrim means a OMFG BOOM Fallout 4

 

[5t3v0]

I do hope that Bethesda will hire a great deal of Obsidian for Fallout 4 (I.e. The writing staff and the game designers and balancers... If the Programmers get a bit more practice they can come along too) Or Bethesda just Buys obsidian. They know how the story goes. They could probably ret-con Fallout 3 into canon properly too, which I wouldn't mind.

Oh, and before you guys think Im a Fallout 3 hater, I'm not. I just despise ignorance. After I found myself free-falling on the Fallout wiki, I found myself liking the original story arc than what Bethesda had one in Fallout 3. Fallout 3 was the only one that I had played, so I got myself a copy of Fallout 1 and 2 and played them for a while. Didn't finish it though, as I started playing something else for a while, but If I havent lost my save games, Im going to try and finish it.

 

[Wyatt118]

Hater's gonna Hate.

 

[Orange643]

Fallout 3 had so many plotholes it could have been written by George Lucas.

 

[doomboy29]

I liked FalloutNV because i could literally kill every single person i met. In Fallout 3? Nope. You have to deal with this essential npc bullshit. Also. Little Fucking Lamplight.

 

[AlternatePFG]

-snip-

I'm sorry but Fallout 3 just had a terrible story in general. Even if they did give you a good connection to the Lone Wanderer in that game, they completely failed at every point afterwards. The dialogue is just terrible, and the game is completely black and white, with no ambiguity that the Fallout games are known for. Factions from the previous games are just thrown in for absolutely no reason. Super Mutants are turned into generic orcs. There are a ton of plot holes and inconsistencies, and the game just railroads you into helping the Brotherhood, even if they would have absolutely no reason to help you if you're evil.

 

[Raddra]

I preferred the atmosphere and setting of Fallout 3, but I preferred the game balnce changes in F:NV.

So I guess I like them both the same.

 

[FalloutJack]

What hate? Jack only sees the good side in this.

 

[MercurySteam]

It was buggy at first (I mean really FUCKING buggy), but it turned out alright after it was able to get past most of its major bugs.

This seems to be the deciding point for many. Too bad it completely varies from person to person. For example, I never, EVER had a bug or a glitch in my 100 hour New Vegas playthrough.

Well I found that the instability of the game causing it too crash every so often was a bit retarded. Plus the lag due to the game engine only running at 59Hz (when it should have been going at 60Hz) was quite annoying. But I was able to get past that and enjoy it.

Running at 59 is exactly the same as running at 60. And that is all monitor anyways, check to see if your monitor is 59.94 HZ and is reporting correctly. Sometimes it will report as 59 instead of 60 like it should.

Well no, people found that every 60 frames the game would remove 1 and cause the graphical lag. That was Bethesda's explanation for it anyway.

EDIT: It was actually a refresh rate issue, not a problem with the framerate but it did cause graphical stuttering.

 

[BodomBeachChild]

I think it went in a better direction than FO3. The only downside to the game was the mass amounts of bugs and the choices towards the end kinda dicked you over. I had a plan to screw everyone over and take over myself, sorta. Then I found out if you play your cards a certain way the dealer just leaves the table and you're stuck console commanding your mistakes away.

You mean you wanted to do the yes man ending? Because I screwed everybody over and took over the place with his help. I didnt have to exacty play my cards a certain way, I got to choose exactly who I screwed over and who I didnt.

No, I wanted him gone, too. I wanted to out the NCR (even though I do have a soft spot for them), eliminate Legion, and destroy Yes Man. I wanted a TRUE independent Vegas but Yes Man is the closest thing you can get. If you end up getting the Hoover Dam mission for the NCR while still working for Yes Man and keeping neutral/on good terms with Legion the quest scripting goes south and NPCs at the Dam are stuck there, and Legion never attacks. You must simple use console commands or work with Yes Man.

 

[genericusername64]

Things New Vegas Did Right/Improved On
Gameplay
Main Story
Amount of Weapons
Number of Places to Explore
Referencing Old Games Correctly
Amount of content
Things New Vegas slipped up at
Twisting your arm to get the main quest finished
Things New vegas did that made me angry personally
Bug testing
The dlc content was cut from the game

I'll explain my reasoning on a few, first nobody can argue that new vegas was the better game, gameplay wise. Saying it had lots of stuff to do was an understatement, as it was full of content.It also expanded on the old games which as a longtime fan I thought was pretty cool.

However there are some minor qualms that I have with it. Such as there never being a good place to start exploring If you go north at the start of the game you die, so it forces you to go around the loop. Which is a bit of a failure on their part, because the designers have gone on record stating that they wanted you to explore the second you started the game, hence they cut out the heavy intro sequence ala fallout 3.

There are two things that really made me mad as a gamer, they bug tested horribly, and the final product is the most buggy game I've ever played. Also the dlc was cut from the final game, HDIK? Because of one thing, in the collectors edition you get a card deck, and guess whos in it? Ulysses, a character extremely important to the backstory of the courier. That means the developers thought they were going to release a full game and at the last minute bethesda cut the content, because they wanted to make money off of dlc.

tl;dr Its a better fallout game than fallout 3, but fallout 3 is a better videogame than new vegas

 

[Echo136]

Because although the game allegedly has a more Fallout 1 and 2 feel to it, it lacked the exploration of 3, and had terrible, obvious crippling bugs that should never have been allowed to pass into the game. I honestly wanted to return the game after it crashed on me for the third time, and this game has crashed on me well over 20 times now (on PS3 no less!)

 

[The_Fezz]

EVERY complaint I have with it based on my own stupidity (Choosing melee weapons and not stealth, not finding power armour until I've almost finished the game etc).

All of these problems stem from my desire to play Oblivion again, and forgetting that even if you forgoe firearms that doesn't mean the enemies will be equally thick.

That and it crashes on an hourly basis.

But still runs better than Fallout 3: GOTY.

 

[Echo136]

EDIT: Wow, O.K, oops, I meant to say "Ive never seen anyone who liked Fallout 3 better", not the other way around. I guess I need to re-read my posts before posting them. Fallout New Vegas is way better than Fallout 3.

Well let me be the first then. I almost wish I had never bought New Vegas, and just bought a second copy of FO3. Thats how much I hated that game by comparison. I only trudged through it a second time to get all the achievements

 

[Zeema]

I Preferred Fallout 3

but i do Enjoy New Vegas too me it was just a Expansion thou

and i hate the colour Orange

and this

'Patrolling the Mojave almost makes you wish for a nuclear winter'

 

[ChupathingyX]

Fallout 3 had: better atmosphere and player character, deeper immerision,larger map, less boring NPCs you couldn't speak to, a more useful town for being based in (Megaton)

Actually the maps are different shapes and can't really be accuractely compared,

F3 had a square shaped map whereas New Vegas had a more rectangular map that wasn't as perfectly shaped as F3's.

So no it didn't necessarily have a larger map size.