Poll: Fallout 3 or New Vegas, what would you rather play?
- Thread starter Daemascus
- Start date
Recommended Videos
New Vegas by far. Obsidian is the modern day incarnation of Black Isle studios, and it really shows through in the feel of NV.
Fallout 3 had a much more 'doom-and-gloom' vibe about it, wandering through the wastes that had been blasted by the war picking up an automated distress call from someone from two hundred years ago who had just been bombed in the war, before picking through a town still in ruins from the war and finding a computer terminal with survivor accounts from the war - it was a bit overstated on the whole war front.
Whereas NV picks up where Black Isle left off - the world is a lot lighter in tone, with thriving communities, (mutated) life everywhere, and a whole raft of slightly crazy (even comical) characters. Yeah, ok, the war happened, but it happened hundreds of years ago; you don't get people in Europe these days still banging on about the Black Death. Yeah, nukes are bad, deal with it. The original theme of the Fallout games was that life dusted itself off and carried on, not sat around in a crater feeling sorry for itself.
Don't get me wrong, I like Fallout 3 (I'm on save #3000+, so I can't hate it that much!), but 3 is serious where NV is lighthearted, 3 is dark and tense where NV is up-beat and fun. There's nothing wrong with dark and tense, either (Metro 2033, one of my favourite games, is a prime example) but the Fallout series was never dark or tense, it was always slightly kooky and a laugh to play - and on that basis NV feels more like a Fallout game than 3 does.
Fallout 3 had a much more 'doom-and-gloom' vibe about it, wandering through the wastes that had been blasted by the war picking up an automated distress call from someone from two hundred years ago who had just been bombed in the war, before picking through a town still in ruins from the war and finding a computer terminal with survivor accounts from the war - it was a bit overstated on the whole war front.
Whereas NV picks up where Black Isle left off - the world is a lot lighter in tone, with thriving communities, (mutated) life everywhere, and a whole raft of slightly crazy (even comical) characters. Yeah, ok, the war happened, but it happened hundreds of years ago; you don't get people in Europe these days still banging on about the Black Death. Yeah, nukes are bad, deal with it. The original theme of the Fallout games was that life dusted itself off and carried on, not sat around in a crater feeling sorry for itself.
Don't get me wrong, I like Fallout 3 (I'm on save #3000+, so I can't hate it that much!), but 3 is serious where NV is lighthearted, 3 is dark and tense where NV is up-beat and fun. There's nothing wrong with dark and tense, either (Metro 2033, one of my favourite games, is a prime example) but the Fallout series was never dark or tense, it was always slightly kooky and a laugh to play - and on that basis NV feels more like a Fallout game than 3 does.
I loved Fallout 3 but New Vegas improved upon it in every way , especially in the morality department
also Fallout 3 is alot more depressing, the world is bleak, broken everyone you meet is ether mean, miserable, apathetic or downright insane, the aftermath is still around, its jsut a feeling you get weighing down your soul also the fact that you are out to find your father...the only like to a life that is long gone...I found it very emotional
Fallout New Vegas (haven't finished yet) however you get the sense that things are improving, that there is hope for this world afterall and where it goes...thats up to you
also Fallout 3 is alot more depressing, the world is bleak, broken everyone you meet is ether mean, miserable, apathetic or downright insane, the aftermath is still around, its jsut a feeling you get weighing down your soul also the fact that you are out to find your father...the only like to a life that is long gone...I found it very emotional
Fallout New Vegas (haven't finished yet) however you get the sense that things are improving, that there is hope for this world afterall and where it goes...thats up to you
In more ways than one I felt that Fallout 3 insulted the audience's intelligence time and time again. I'm sure you, the reader, can probably name some of those occasions yourself. It did so often enough that I began to question the intelligence of the people that produced it. I'm just going to name one instance for you: A "town" of 4 people? Seriously. And that original ending? Can you get anymore half-assed? Someone here called Fallout 3 shallow and immature, I think those are accurate descriptors. Some one with a Soundwave avatar said he missed the long boring interior dungeon crawls, I couldn't be happier they're gone.
That said you can probably guess I feel Fallout New Vegas is the better game. All the faults I had with fallout 3 were apparently faults obsidian had with it and they aggressively tackled them all. From companion orders to the inviability of melee combat to the fact that if you're going to set a game in a desert, how about using a region that's really a desert? It rains in Virgina. Washington DC's natural surroundings are swamp and it's state should be a swamp. It made no sense to ape Mad Max in that region and still never have it rain.
In one section of New Vegas an npc makes fun of people who unbelievably actually still eat 200 year old food. She and I both laughed the same laugh. And I realized this was hands down the better game. I wanted to high five a writer someplace. And speaking of writing, writing that doesn't insult my intelligence. I'll take that over all the big empty spaces to wander around doing nothing and seeing ugly flat yellow nothing that fallout 3 had to offer.
Note about fallout 3 though. I'll hand the writers credit for two things, scripting in rivet city that made residents attend mass on Sunday. Brilliant little detail. Game needed more of that sort of thing. Second, the quest: Ya gotta shoot em in The Head. Great quest, nice commentary on human nature and how it normally relates to video games. Whoever was involved in those two gets a gold star from me. Still not enough against the vast weight of crap I wallowed through, but I'm still glad I played it.
That said you can probably guess I feel Fallout New Vegas is the better game. All the faults I had with fallout 3 were apparently faults obsidian had with it and they aggressively tackled them all. From companion orders to the inviability of melee combat to the fact that if you're going to set a game in a desert, how about using a region that's really a desert? It rains in Virgina. Washington DC's natural surroundings are swamp and it's state should be a swamp. It made no sense to ape Mad Max in that region and still never have it rain.
In one section of New Vegas an npc makes fun of people who unbelievably actually still eat 200 year old food. She and I both laughed the same laugh. And I realized this was hands down the better game. I wanted to high five a writer someplace. And speaking of writing, writing that doesn't insult my intelligence. I'll take that over all the big empty spaces to wander around doing nothing and seeing ugly flat yellow nothing that fallout 3 had to offer.
Note about fallout 3 though. I'll hand the writers credit for two things, scripting in rivet city that made residents attend mass on Sunday. Brilliant little detail. Game needed more of that sort of thing. Second, the quest: Ya gotta shoot em in The Head. Great quest, nice commentary on human nature and how it normally relates to video games. Whoever was involved in those two gets a gold star from me. Still not enough against the vast weight of crap I wallowed through, but I'm still glad I played it.
I had more fun with Fallout 3 but thats because it felt innovative and new. New Vegas is fairly stale.
So far, New Vegas has been better for me. I haven't played that much, but the voice acting, faction system, and level in choice in general is far superior to 3.
Exploration seems a bit limiting, right now, so I haven't seen that much, but the fact that I'm not hearing the same 4 voice actors everywhere is aiding the immersion immensely. (as is the fact that I started playing after the recent big patch, so I've yet to see any bug, aside from occasional frame skipping.)
Also improved: Speech checks, giving more options for more situations, and having your speciality actually carry some weight in more conversations. Giving a non violent approach more often was much needed as well.
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 prefer the more blank slate approach in Fallout. Not to say that a predefined character isn't fun to play as, but honestly, Bethesda kinda suck at it. Bioware are way better at that sort of thing, and it doesn't mesh well with the extreme open endedness of Fallout.
Exploration seems a bit limiting, right now, so I haven't seen that much, but the fact that I'm not hearing the same 4 voice actors everywhere is aiding the immersion immensely. (as is the fact that I started playing after the recent big patch, so I've yet to see any bug, aside from occasional frame skipping.)
Also improved: Speech checks, giving more options for more situations, and having your speciality actually carry some weight in more conversations. Giving a non violent approach more often was much needed as well.
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.MiracleOfSound said:
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.
This cuts both ways though. Fallout 3 was more driven by the main quest, which to me didn't sit well with the idea of arsing around, a major factor in these games. Here I am trying to save the world, when really, the local flavour is ten times more interesting. With New vegas I'm taking the main quest a lot more slowly, more sauntering from town to town, with it just being in the background. And honestly, I prefer that approach, as it seems more in line with how I'm actually playing the game. FO:3 seemed to be trying to force this connection with you and the character, but honestly I didn't really care all that much about them, or finding my dad to be that imperative (aside from hearing more liam neeson of course)squid5580 said:
I prefer the more blank slate approach in Fallout. Not to say that a predefined character isn't fun to play as, but honestly, Bethesda kinda suck at it. Bioware are way better at that sort of thing, and it doesn't mesh well with the extreme open endedness of Fallout.
I think Fallout 3 was a better constructed world but it is one I have thoroughly explored. By contrast, the world of New Vegas isn't terribly interesting but the people populating it are.
I've beaten the crap out of Fallout 3, as I have every weapon and armor available, my character is basically perfect and all-around nigh unstoppable, and I've done all but make a second character with high charisma and speech (but low intelligence). I'm considering buying New Vegas to check it out, to have something relatively new.
I had this complaint above as well. On top of that, Fallout 3 actually worked... Until goty that is.MiracleOfSound said:
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.
Exactly. I know no one including my character. Which makes no sense either because I was in the wasteland for what 20 years? Should have at least made 1 friend in that time. Everyone else seems to have. But no gotta go with the cliched amnesia ploy. And since the Dr is some master plastic surgeon no one will ever recognize me now.Ultratwinkie said:
Fallout: New Vegas.
Fallout 3 is still a great game. There is much more ground to explore and the map markers usually lead to a more interesting place than in NV (Although The Strip in NV takes some beating). The radio is a lot better, the final mission is a lot more friendly to my computer (and more epic) and there are a lot less glitches in the game that have caused it to crash.
Fallout: New Vegas fixed a lot of errors I found in Fallout 3. There is much more to do in the Mojave than the Capital Wasteland, the gunfighting is improved (and there are more enemies to fight in one battle), the companions are better, the difficulty is increased, the main story gave me more choices in how to do it, the karma system is much better, there were more throwbacks to the original games and the ending felt a lot more conclusive to the game than F3 did (Although not being able to play afterwards to observe your results in person is still a pain in the ass)
Fallout 3 is still a great game. There is much more ground to explore and the map markers usually lead to a more interesting place than in NV (Although The Strip in NV takes some beating). The radio is a lot better, the final mission is a lot more friendly to my computer (and more epic) and there are a lot less glitches in the game that have caused it to crash.
Fallout: New Vegas fixed a lot of errors I found in Fallout 3. There is much more to do in the Mojave than the Capital Wasteland, the gunfighting is improved (and there are more enemies to fight in one battle), the companions are better, the difficulty is increased, the main story gave me more choices in how to do it, the karma system is much better, there were more throwbacks to the original games and the ending felt a lot more conclusive to the game than F3 did (Although not being able to play afterwards to observe your results in person is still a pain in the ass)
New Vegas wins me over for the amount of quests and the fact it feels more related to the old CRPG's.
But I can't shake the feeling I'm just playing an expansion, it just feels I'm playing Fallout 3 with a sandy paint job. I feel no atmosphere what so ever.
But I can't shake the feeling I'm just playing an expansion, it just feels I'm playing Fallout 3 with a sandy paint job. I feel no atmosphere what so ever.
