Poll: Fallout 3 or New Vegas, what would you rather play?

[martin's a madman]

I'd be equally happy playing either.

 

[phantasmalWordsmith]

I like new vegas. the hardcore mode is a good addition, the mods make weapons like the hunting rifle actually useful (I only used it in fallout 3 because it felt like a signature weapon), I like the companions (boone, Cass and Rex are my favourite) and I like the story...and the gambling, love the gambling

 

[suitepee7]

i preferred the location of fallout 3, i preferred the more linear storyline with sidequests, because it doesn't force me to do several playthroughs to explore it all (its a huge game anyway, i feel too many choices makes it quite a daunting challenge to 100% it)

also NV had too many bugs. minor bugs i don't care about, but new vegas had a habit of completely freezing my PS3, loosing all my data until my last save (i only saved when i was turning my console off, so if it does it after 6 hours of gameplay, you can see my frustration). the VATs aiming system was slightly slower in loading on NV which annoyed the shit outta me, and the guns SEEMED less accurate on NV than on FO3 when aiming manually.

so i cast my vote for Fallout 3, but only because of the issues i personally have with New Vegas, both games are still fantastic overall

 

[MiracleOfSound]

I think it depends on your preference. From what I've seen, FO:3 does seem to have the edge in terms of exploration, or even atmosphere (though I think they're about even on that one), but to me, New vegas improved on so many other areas that it more than makes up for that.

I've seen so many more unique and memorable characters already, whereas in FO:3 they all seem to start bleeding into each other after a while. Not just because it's the same bloody actor, just many have nothing really interesting going on with them.

I agree 100% man, It all comes down to whether you prefer exploration or the story side.

 

[legion431]

Well I did everything there possibly was to do in Fallout 3. I collected evry gun, every peice of armour and I completed every quest, and I also liked Fallout 3 more because of the atmosphere. New vegas just seems more empty, maybe there will be a good peice of DLC that will improve it substantially.

 

[Irridium]

New Vegas. No question.
Better story, better choices, better characters... its the Fallout game I've been waiting for.

Fallout 3 was a good game, but it wasn't a good Fallout game. Not by a longshot.

New Vegas is a good game, and a good Fallout game. It combines Fallout's storytelling with Bethesda's gameplay style. And it is amazing.

Plus instead of relying on some stupid good/evil scale, it focuses more on factions. Its not about if something is good/evil, its about if your willing to sacrifice your morals to have others like you better. Which is awesome.

Plus the companions were more then annoying puppets who just got in the way. In New Vegas they were unique, have depth, and have their own little quirks and stories. In Fallout 3, I never had a companion travel with me. They just annoyed me. In New Vegas, I never go anywhere without a companion. Usually its me, ED-E, and Boone. But I'll switch Boone out for someone every now and then to mix things up.

I liked Fallout 3, but the fact that its main story was just plain awful, and it wasn't a good Fallout game. New Vegas has a good main story, good writing in general, you can actually influence the story and world, and its just amazing.

I could go on, but I already did that [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/326.256286-Irridiums-Top-7-games-of-2010-Plus-other-things].

So yeah, New Vegas for me. No question.

 

[Callust]

100%, absolutely, New Vegas. Ten hours in and I had already decided to never, ever put Fallout 3 back in the console again. Fallout 3 felt like an alternate dimension where the Fallout franchise had been drained of anything worthwhile and recreated in today's greenish brown realism standard. New Vegas, on the other hand, felt like a return to the glory days of PC RPGs in first-person format. I tolerated Fallout 3 because it was decent, and I had nothing but Oblivion to compare it to, and it was an improvement over Oblivion, I suppose. But New Vegas in comparison to Fallout 3? No contest, unless for some reason you liked the huge, copy-pasted sewers underlying D.C., and the heavy emphasis on fighting groups of the same raiders over and over again whilst exploring. New Vegas' quests also offered more paths to solving them, more interesting choices, and the factions made choices seem worthwhile and relevant to the plot. The return of actual humor in a game was appreciated as well, something that was very present in the original games and glaringly absent in Fallout 3.

 

[GonzoGamer]

Fallout 3 - by far.

(the following is a rant I made elsewhere a while back)

I've been playing New Vegas a lot and now have 2 and a half playthroughs done, about 100 hours in total. After this short amount of time, I feel like I've seen everything the game has to offer. Most map markers are hugely disappointing, consisting of shacks with nothing but an empty bottle, a campfire on a hill, an airport terminal with nothing but two cases of caps and some radscorpions, a few caves with not a single piece of loot or backstory in them... it feels so empty compared to the Capital Wasteland which had something new, unique and interesting over every hill.

There are no huge, detailed interiors like Nuka Cola Plant, Capital Building, Red Racer Factory, Springvale Elementary, Roosevelt Academy, The museums of History and Tech, National Archives, LOB Industries, Hubris comics... this was my favorite part of fallout 3 and all we have in New Vegas are a few vaults, 4 Casinos, Repcomm and an empty sewer

And then there's the atmosphere... Fallout 3 was haunting, beautiful and soulful. Standing on a ruined flyover watching the sun set over the burnt out forests and ruined Washington monument was just sublime. Nothing in Vegas gave me that same feeling or immersed me in its atmosphere like f3 did at any given moment. Just sand, sand, red rocks and more sand.

I had this complaint above as well. On top of that, Fallout 3 actually worked... Until goty that is.
Also another thing that immersed me in Fallout 3 were the (unique ones especially) random encounters. They gave me the feeling of it being a living breathing world. Fallout NV had a couple at the beginning but other than that the only spontaneous interactions were random beast attacks. Nobody I saved before came by to give me a mininuke, no kid stopped me to ask for help finding his father, not even random slavers escorting their catches. The world of NV felt more dead and contrived.

While the capital wasteland felt like a real place, the mojave wasteland felt like a movie studio backlot.
The biggest disappointment however was how glitchy it was. I expect a normal (Fallout 3) amount, but this one started getting really absurdly shoddy near the end.

You do realize that civilization destroyed the "breathing" in fallout 3 right? Slavery was decimated by NCR presence, Raider promptly slaughtered, and rebuilding of critical rail and military structures. The wasteland isn't ruled by raider tribes anymore, and has rebuilt to the point of actual nation vs. nation war. You don't see raider tribes raiding major highways in our world do you?

By the way, the Mojave desert is a DESERT. Anyone who isn't a part of a military raiding party is dead. In the capital wasteland you can walk around, but in the desert its best to stay in the town otherwise you would die of exposure. If you also notice trade to the Mojave was shut down by the NCR due to concerns of things getting violent.

Everything is explained.

How does that explain everything? I understand that the sands in the mojave would have different encounters than dc but they could?ve been more creative than random beasts and faction grunts. There were slavers in the desert wandering around, it?s just that they weren?t doing anything than attacking the non-slaver faction that was wandering around doing nothing. Why couldn't these factions that did wander about do more interesting things.
That?s what I mean, the story was cool (constructed better than fallout 3) but the world itself was bland uninspired. Sure there were a couple of funky places but as MiracleOfSound pointed out above these places were few in number and not as deep as some of the crazier locations in Fallout 3. And I understand that it?s a desert, but it didn?t seem like one with every location a stone?s throw from another location.
And I don?t care where it?s set, I?m sure if they put their minds to it they could?ve come up with a few more interesting encounters than being attacked by wasps for the 100th time. Especially with all these locations on top of one another.

 

[Vibhor]

Anyone who plays F3 doesnt have a PC.
Or in this case, has a PS3

 

[Tomo Stryker]

Fallout New Vegas, it has far more option and things you can do, creating bullets and poisons are some of the few things that I have been looking for.

 

[KuwaSanjuro]

Fallout 3. I've been thinking for a long time that New Vegas originally started out as an expansion to Fallout 3 like Mothership Zeta, etc. And I still think it has that general feel to it, also the bugs which affect a save game for a game so intensive of saving content just means it is broken.

 

[GonzoGamer]

Fallout 3 - by far.

(the following is a rant I made elsewhere a while back)

I've been playing New Vegas a lot and now have 2 and a half playthroughs done, about 100 hours in total. After this short amount of time, I feel like I've seen everything the game has to offer. Most map markers are hugely disappointing, consisting of shacks with nothing but an empty bottle, a campfire on a hill, an airport terminal with nothing but two cases of caps and some radscorpions, a few caves with not a single piece of loot or backstory in them... it feels so empty compared to the Capital Wasteland which had something new, unique and interesting over every hill.

There are no huge, detailed interiors like Nuka Cola Plant, Capital Building, Red Racer Factory, Springvale Elementary, Roosevelt Academy, The museums of History and Tech, National Archives, LOB Industries, Hubris comics... this was my favorite part of fallout 3 and all we have in New Vegas are a few vaults, 4 Casinos, Repcomm and an empty sewer

And then there's the atmosphere... Fallout 3 was haunting, beautiful and soulful. Standing on a ruined flyover watching the sun set over the burnt out forests and ruined Washington monument was just sublime. Nothing in Vegas gave me that same feeling or immersed me in its atmosphere like f3 did at any given moment. Just sand, sand, red rocks and more sand.

I had this complaint above as well. On top of that, Fallout 3 actually worked... Until goty that is.
Also another thing that immersed me in Fallout 3 were the (unique ones especially) random encounters. They gave me the feeling of it being a living breathing world. Fallout NV had a couple at the beginning but other than that the only spontaneous interactions were random beast attacks. Nobody I saved before came by to give me a mininuke, no kid stopped me to ask for help finding his father, not even random slavers escorting their catches. The world of NV felt more dead and contrived.

While the capital wasteland felt like a real place, the mojave wasteland felt like a movie studio backlot.
The biggest disappointment however was how glitchy it was. I expect a normal (Fallout 3) amount, but this one started getting really absurdly shoddy near the end.

You do realize that civilization destroyed the "breathing" in fallout 3 right? Slavery was decimated by NCR presence, Raider promptly slaughtered, and rebuilding of critical rail and military structures. The wasteland isn't ruled by raider tribes anymore, and has rebuilt to the point of actual nation vs. nation war. You don't see raider tribes raiding major highways in our world do you?

By the way, the Mojave desert is a DESERT. Anyone who isn't a part of a military raiding party is dead. In the capital wasteland you can walk around, but in the desert its best to stay in the town otherwise you would die of exposure. If you also notice trade to the Mojave was shut down by the NCR due to concerns of things getting violent.

Everything is explained.

How does that explain everything? I understand that the sands in the mojave would have different encounters than dc but they could?ve been more creative than random beasts and faction grunts. There were slavers in the desert wandering around, it?s just that they weren?t doing anything than attacking the non-slaver faction that was wandering around doing nothing. Why couldn't these factions that did wander about do more interesting things.
That?s what I mean, the story was cool (constructed better than fallout 3) but the world itself was bland uninspired. Sure there were a couple of funky places but as MiracleOfSound pointed out above these places were few in number and not as deep as some of the crazier locations in Fallout 3. And I understand that it?s a desert, but it didn?t seem like one with every location a stone?s throw from another location.
And I don?t care where it?s set, I?m sure if they put their minds to it they could?ve come up with a few more interesting encounters than being attacked by wasps for the 100th time. Especially with all these locations on top of one another.

Well The nations are basically doing trench warfare, except instead of an open field they choose a river with a narrow crossing point over hoover dam. In fact that is the only thing that would happen as trade was shut down to the area. Actually, New vegas doesn't have many encounters, and instead used wild wasteland (which changes EVERYTHING). Monsters attacking you isn't an encounter, its just creature spawns to allow for a more organic world.

Yea. I was kind of expecting the wild wasteland trait to make things totally Fear and Loathing. It changed about a dozen little things around the map but it didn?t change everything and certainly wasn?t a fitting replacement for random encounters.
What MoS & I were trying to say is that the Fallout 3 Map was much more zen. You had these large and elaborate dungeons in the middle of broad empty spaces. Those spaces were made more exciting by spontaneous events that were many and random. Rather the FNV map crammed more locations that were smaller.
I just like the bigger and more spontaneous environment of Fallout 3. I can see how the story in FNV would be a bigger draw, but I always spend more time exploring all the environments in these games and it just wasn?t as interesting with this one.

 

[rockyoumonkeys]

I've played F3 to death, and only played NV once since it was so utterly fucking broken.

Now, if NV is indeed "fixed", I'd go with that, at least because it's the one I'm less familiar with, and it's probably a great game under all those game-breaking glitches, freezes, and problems.

But if this is like a "you can only play one ever again", I'd still have to go with F3.

 

[MartianWarMachine]

New Vegas. Mostly because, despite all the bugs, it actually runs on my PC. Fallout 3 has yet to let me finish character creation without crashing.

 

[The Unworthy Gentleman]

Snip

I don't need to be logical in the way I decided which story I prefer.

 

[Generic_Dave]

I much preferred the complexity of the characters and interactions in New Vegas. I played through Fallout 3 and finished with it until the DLC started coming (it was a bit of a wait on PS3) but New Vegas has kept me hooked. Bug issues aside (and there were a HUGE number of those in Fallout 3 when it arrived too), New Vegas is a far superior product. The choice of allies and endings, and the evocative way in which the interactions are handled as well as the interesting asides and fleshing out of the non-human characters.

At this stage I have played through New Vegas about 4 times, I played through Fallout 3 maybe the same overall (including going back after the DLC came out). But in Fallout 3 I experienced each side of the story, did the bad and the good, and it rarely bothered me...in New Vegas I have yet to side with Mr. House or Caesar.

House's building a gambling den and milking the wasteland dry to sustain his own power (combined with the fact that an eternal dictator in chief has no place in the world outside North Korea), made it impossible for me to side with him.

And Caesar? I just couldn't bring myself to side with that slave mongering bastard. I couldn't do it. Started off twice with the intent of bring Caesar's reign to the Mojave. I think I can pin down the moment too, when I was playing my first play-through, and on my way to the bunker under Fortification Hill. There was a little girl, she wanted her doll back...but this legionnaire had given it to his mutts, and he then forced me to fight his dogs to the death in order to get the doll back for the girl. There was no moment in Fallout 3 like that for me, no moment when the inhumanity of the Enclave came through as it was brought by that little girl and her doll. Obsidian made me hate Caesar in a way Bethesda did not with the Enclave.

That kind of emotion is rare in gaming.

So I am going to keep playing New Vegas, I am going to get every piece of DLC...but I tell you something, this Lone Wanderer will never submit to Caesar.