Poll: Fallout 3 or Fallout: New Vegas

[CrashBang]

I much much much prefer Fallout 3. I love almost every aspect of that game, most of all the Capital Wasteland. I can spend hours, days, even, just venturing round, exploring. I racked up well over 100 hours on that game and I really enjoyed the story as well; it wasn't complex or anything but it was just... fun!
New Vegas, on the other hand, didn't have the same vibe, the same atmosphere. The characters, despite being funnier, weren't as interesting to talk to and I didn't find the areas or quests as much fun overall. I did enjoy the game thoroughly, just not as much as Fallout 3

 

[AlternatePFG]

Fallout 3 is better in the atmosphere and exploration department. Not surprising, because that's one of the things that Bethesda does really well with their games.

New Vegas, was better in every other area for me at least. It actually was a Fallout game, factions from 1 and 2 weren't just shoehorned into the game like they were in 3 (There was no reason for the Enclave to be as numerous as they were in 3 and weren't the supermutants completely wiped out at the end of 1?) Bethesda should have really just went with the reboot approach, maybe that would've made me like 3 more. There are just some really silly plot elements.

Both of them were equally glitchy as hell for me. At one point Fallout 3 crashed every 30 minutes for me, had less CTD's on New Vegas, but there were definitely more quest bugs and such.

Edit: I still think 3 is a good and fun game, but it isn't a good Fallout game.

Well if your looking for some insight for the faction problem.....it states that the Remaining Enclave were moved to the east under colonel Augustus's father by order of John Henry Eden im not entirely sure how many there would have been but they had time to shore some numbers up.......and as for the super mutants there were FEV Vats in Vault 87, basically the same method as the master,But no Leadership and because the impure strains of dna they were all stupid Super Mutants......

Fair enough, but I still don't think that the fact that Enclave rebuilt itself and was somehow adequately armed to take over the Capital Wasteland was explained very well in the game itself. I would have very much preferred Bethesda to either create some new factions or just stick to one major enemy. I mean, for the first half of the game, the Super Mutants are the main concern but then the Enclave comes and then everyone just forgets about them.

 

[HapexIndustries]

I played all the Fallout games as they came out and consider myself something of a Fallout 2 fanboy. I preferred New Vegas to Fallout 3 for a number of reasons, but mostly for:

Hardcore mode
Multiple ammo types
Way better writing
It felt more like the original Fallouts.

 

[silver wolf009]

3. I have yet to finish New Vegas, I cannot force myself to do it, I simply cannot.

 

[Vicarious Vangaurd]

Iron sights and Hardcore made me like it a bit more, albeit I liked FO3's story more.

 

[lacktheknack]

At least I was able to FIX Fallout 3, but I'm afraid to buy New Vegas (for the same reason).

 

[Sir Boss]

While New Vegas had more features and a more interesting story, it lacked the heart and atmosphere of 3, so, i can't decide...

 

[EGtodd09]

new vegas had an empty story, throughout the game I knew multiple endings in a franchise just means in the next fallout, new vegas will be completely ignored. Bethesda should've taken a hint from Bioware and made it so your decisions actually mean something further down the line. Fallout 3 had a linear story, for the most part, and a much more iconic, emotion inflicting setting. Both games fail massively on the technical side, with, in my case, new vegas coming out on top as more stable, slightly better looking and features that should've been implemented in fallout 3. Also, Washington felt bigger, I don't know if it was, but it felt like there was more to see and do compared to new vegas, which felt really shallow. Sure, theres side quests here and there and lots of cool weapons and easter eggs in new vegas, but I had done every quest much faster than I did in fallout 3. Also, new vegas is not immersive at all. It starts out as total bullshit, you don't survive gunshots to the head, and when you do, you just infected from bugs crawling into your open wound and onto your brain so beginning new vegas I was laughing at how ridiculous the game was. Fallout 3 on the other hand is very immersive with the story beginning with your character being born and living a childhood in a dank bleak "vault". New vegas barely has anything to do with the vaults, which is the biggest part of the franchise. So incase you haven't noticed yet, fallout 3 is soooooooooooo much better than new vegas... in my opinion at least.

 

[Vern5]

I do prefer the capital wasteland just because it is more memorable and more open than New Vegas from the beginning. However, there are some things I can't go back to. For example, I can't function without Iron sights, weapon mods, the companion wheel, hardcore mode and all of those little additions. Wish there was a patch that added all of those features to Fallout 3.

 

[Joe Vugrin]

fallout 3 was way better (in my opinion), except the ending, (without the broken steel dlc) THAT WAS AWFUL

as for fall out new vegas
was that game serious?
i played maybe 4 hours into it (surprisingly without glitching, buggy-ness, or anything of that stuff)
and i was just boredddd with it,

 

[Rottweiler]

Honestly, I liked Fallout 3 better. The weapons were, IMO, better, and so was the overall feel of the game.

I think New Vegas would have been a more obvious choice for winner if they had just taken the good parts of Fallout 3 instead of deleting them- for example, they added dozens of minor food recipes, but took out nearly all the weapon crafting items.

On the weapons end, honestly Fallout 3 had (again, in my opinion) a much better approach and implementation of weapons. New Vegas omitted a number of options and replaced them with weapons that all more or less felt the same- shotgun, slightly better shotgun, slightly better shotgun, etc. I understand the whole western motif but it came across to me as less personalized.

Also, the takeaway of the Bobbleheads and taking out most of the Skill Books left me feeling like I had nowhere near as many Skills by the end of the game. In Fallout 3 I could end the game with most of my skills at 40-50 and at least 3-4 maxed out. I really couldn't do that in New Vegas.

 

[Rusman]

Loved Fallout 3 a lot, probably one of my top 10 favourite games.
I've tried so damn hard to like New Vegas but it just doesn't want to be liked. Ended finally giving up on it and trading it in the other day. Hate it with a burning passion.

 

[Zaverexus]

I love Fallout 3, probably one of my favorite games ever

 

[BstrdChris]

new vegas had an empty story, throughout the game I knew multiple endings in a franchise just means in the next fallout, new vegas will be completely ignored. Bethesda should've taken a hint from Bioware and made it so your decisions actually mean something further down the line. Fallout 3 had a linear story, for the most part, and a much more iconic, emotion inflicting setting. Both games fail massively on the technical side, with, in my case, new vegas coming out on top as more stable, slightly better looking and features that should've been implemented in fallout 3. Also, Washington felt bigger, I don't know if it was, but it felt like there was more to see and do compared to new vegas, which felt really shallow. Sure, theres side quests here and there and lots of cool weapons and easter eggs in new vegas, but I had done every quest much faster than I did in fallout 3. Also, new vegas is not immersive at all. It starts out as total bullshit, you don't survive gunshots to the head, and when you do, you just infected from bugs crawling into your open wound and onto your brain so beginning new vegas I was laughing at how ridiculous the game was. Fallout 3 on the other hand is very immersive with the story beginning with your character being born and living a childhood in a dank bleak "vault". New vegas barely has anything to do with the vaults, which is the biggest part of the franchise. So incase you haven't noticed yet, fallout 3 is soooooooooooo much better than new vegas... in my opinion at least.

i just thought i'd mention that people survive gunshots to the head QUITE OFTEN, even DIRECT hits. and as far at the "bugs crawling in", the game DOES mention Victor digging you up immediately after Benny and the Kahns leave so he can get you to the doctor. i doubt they stuck around for hours, drinking beers and playing Caravan after they buried you.

 

[Azrael the Cat]

I suspect there will be some serious deviation between those who played FO1 and 2 (will mostly vote for NV) and those who didn't (were introduced to the series by FO3, so the simplification of factions, e.g. Brotherhood of Steel becoming 'desert paladins' rather than a closeminded cult-like group that disdains outsiders, wouldn't have jarred so badly).

 

[brodie21]

i liked both, but because i live near dc it was interesting to see what it would look like blown up.

 

[Azrael the Cat]

new vegas had an empty story, throughout the game I knew multiple endings in a franchise just means in the next fallout, new vegas will be completely ignored. Bethesda should've taken a hint from Bioware and made it so your decisions actually mean something further down the line. Fallout 3 had a linear story, for the most part, and a much more iconic, emotion inflicting setting. Both games fail massively on the technical side, with, in my case, new vegas coming out on top as more stable, slightly better looking and features that should've been implemented in fallout 3. Also, Washington felt bigger, I don't know if it was, but it felt like there was more to see and do compared to new vegas, which felt really shallow. Sure, theres side quests here and there and lots of cool weapons and easter eggs in new vegas, but I had done every quest much faster than I did in fallout 3. Also, new vegas is not immersive at all. It starts out as total bullshit, you don't survive gunshots to the head, and when you do, you just infected from bugs crawling into your open wound and onto your brain so beginning new vegas I was laughing at how ridiculous the game was. Fallout 3 on the other hand is very immersive with the story beginning with your character being born and living a childhood in a dank bleak "vault". New vegas barely has anything to do with the vaults, which is the biggest part of the franchise. So incase you haven't noticed yet, fallout 3 is soooooooooooo much better than new vegas... in my opinion at least.

i just thought i'd mention that people survive gunshots to the head QUITE OFTEN, even DIRECT hits. and as far at the "bugs crawling in", the game DOES mention Victor digging you up immediately after Benny and the Kahns leave so he can get you to the doctor. i doubt they stuck around for hours, drinking beers and playing Caravan after they buried you.

And how on earth are the Vaults the biggest part of the franchise? You start in one in FO1, but leave it almost instantly and don't venture into many others (less than NV) in the rest of the game. The character in FO2 has nothing to do with any vault, coming from a tribal village established by the FO1 character after being exiled at the end of the first game - again, there's less vaults in FO2 than NV. The Mad Max references and retrofuturism are central to the franchise, as are the 'choosing the least evil amongst a bad lot' factional choices, and the intertown/intratown politics, but the Vaults? It's Fallout, not Vaultboy.

Heck, I would have thought that having separate dialogue for low-intelligence characters ('Me hit ray-dee-ooh thingy but no play music') was far more central to the FO1-2 than the vaults.

 

[Aeriath]

This was quite a tough question for me, but in the end I think I have enjoyed New Vegas more.

Fallout 3 had a great atmosphere and I'd take the Capital Wasteland (and Thhhhreeeeeeee-Daaaaaawg!) over the Mojave (I'm Mister New Vegas, here to remind you about Big Iron, because it's all I ever play, hyuk) any day. However, New Vegas brings a lot to the story and gameplay which are more important for me in the longevity of the game. Another thing I am prefering about New Vegas so far is the DLC. Dead Money was well worth the £7.50 I paid for it, very atmospheric, changed the gameplay up a little, had great characters and I also felt the survival horror aspects worked well, at least until I'd stockpiled enough ammo, food and explosives to mow through the ghost people like so many radroaches...

 

[Mr Sparkle]

fallout 3 had far better environments to explore and fight in like in centrall dc the super mutant forts or raider bases were realy creative and fun to play. New Vegas was too flat and open for me it made combat rather dull when your standing in a field of nothing. not to say vegas was bad and it made lots of improvements on problems fallout 3 had but i think it needed more time and more playable environments