Poll: Fallout3 vs. Fallout:New Vegas

[ShinobiJedi42]

Fallout 3 is one of my favorite games of all time. I got to a point where it was an addiction, I would get visibly irritable if I didn't get to play it every day. I love the exploration, the story, the characters I ran into in the wastes. I loved the DLC, the random elements, and... did I say exploration? Exploring the wastes was the most engaging aspect of Fallout 3. And I am one of the few people who was saddened by the Broken Steel DLC. I loved the idea of the main character giving his/her life for everyone else and so it made the ending emotionally impactful for me. Broken Steel just reversed all of that.

I played about six hours of New Vegas and quit. It's boring, I had trouble following the story and knowing what to do next. I didn't like the leveling system, the graphics, the changed gameplay mechanics, not to mention the game glitches out on me like mad crazy. And most importantly, the game doesn't lend itself to exploration, which, as I said, was my favorite aspect of FO3. Unless you are a high level, you can hardly go anywhere because the enemies don't level with you. Everywhere I went, it was Deathclaws and those annoying orange winged bastards. I don't understand why everyone likes New Vegas more. I'm sure it's already been explained in this thread so far lol.

 

[TheDrunkNinja]

I've played through both games two times now, and I still can't decide which is better.

Fallout 3 is a typical Besthesda game; they prioritise making an expansive, atmospheric world for the player to explore, but they don't put as much effort into the NPCs. Conversely, New Vegas has an uglier, more plain world, but fills it with interesting characters.

I will argue that Fallout 3 had the better soundtrack though.

Wow, this is exactly how I felt.

I never cared about "lore inconsistencies". The mechanics in New Vegas are better... but let's be serious here. That's only due to Obsidian looking through the most popular modding list for Fallout 3. All the new stuff I had in New Vegas, I already had in Fallout 3. Though, I appreciate not having to download and install all those mods again. Thanks Obsidian!

Actually, no, you get no thanks from me. Because here's the defining factor for me:

Bugs? I can handle bugs. I can handle a few game crashes. I can handle a dog walking backwards and a supermutant imploding into itself and flying off into the sunset.

What I can't handle? Spending 5 hours playing the game for the first time, and then finding out all that fucking time and effort was wasted because the fucking save system didn't work until a week after launch. All my saves? Gone like it never happened! Obsidian has yet to prove to me they can make a working game. Not a game without bugs, mind you. A working game.

 

[Davey Woo]

No, the idea isn't about being good at everything, the idea is that based on your character build there are going to be some things you can do and other you can't.

I just didn't like the "you must be this tall to ride" attitude of the quests, grinding is never fun, espeically in a single player game. But I was having to just roam about looking for kills because all of the quests I had I needed to level up one thing or another to progress.

In Fallout 3 most quests would have a few different skills required (speech to convince them, sneak to pick their pocket, science to hack the door yourself etc) whereas I felt most of the quests in New Vegas had less different options available, and that it was always a skill that I wasn't high enough in. The very first quest, you need speech, barter, and explosives at about 25 to complete it fully, and unless you had tagged those skills on creating your character, the quest was pretty difficult.

 

[Freaky Lou]

No, the idea isn't about being good at everything, the idea is that based on your character build there are going to be some things you can do and other you can't.

I just didn't like the "you must be this tall to ride" attitude of the quests, grinding is never fun, espeically in a single player game. But I was having to just roam about looking for kills because all of the quests I had I needed to level up one thing or another to progress.

In Fallout 3 most quests would have a few different skills required (speech to convince them, sneak to pick their pocket, science to hack the door yourself etc) whereas I felt most of the quests in New Vegas had less different options available, and that it was always a skill that I wasn't high enough in. The very first quest, you need speech, barter, and explosives at about 25 to complete it fully, and unless you had tagged those skills on creating your character, the quest was pretty difficult.

That's not a failure to fully complete the quest, that's just a particular route you can't go. If you poured all your points into combat stats, you might not have the speech, barter, OR explosives to enlist all the help, but you also probably can handle the Gangers on your own.

It's just a matter of what route you like to take for your quests. I personally always go for a smooth-talking sniper with low endurance, while skimping on things like Medicine, Science and Lockpicking.

 

[Fidelias]

Well, I like New Vegas better, just because it had more characters I actually gave a crap about. That, and the motivation for your character made more sense.

I mean, the motivation in Fallout 3 works if you're playing a good guy, but if you're playing an evil psychopath who likes to kill everyone he/she sees, why do you care about finding your dad?

In New Vegas, you have either revenge, curiosity, or a thirst for power as motivations to continue along the plot, and these work with just about any character you can create.

 

[Davey Woo]

That's not a failure to fully complete the quest, that's just a particular route you can't go. If you poured all your points into combat stats, you might not have the speech, barter, OR explosives to enlist all the help, but you also probably can handle the Gangers on your own.

It's just a matter of what route you like to take for your quests. I personally always go for a smooth-talking sniper with low endurance, while skimping on things like Medicine, Science and Lockpicking.

I suppose that's what I get for being an obsessive completionist. I like to make cowboy types, good at shooting and survivability, not much else. Even that is harder with that damage threshold thing, so many enemies just soak up my bullets.

 

[Freaky Lou]

New Vegas has FISTO! in it.
/thread

This pretty much does conclude all argument; can't believe I've never brought it up before.

Fallout 3 doesn't have anything like the prostitute-recruting quest! It definitely doesn't give your character dialogue options that indicate he gets off on metallic drills in his sphincter!

 

[zehydra]

Story is not terribly important in an open world exploration game, which is precisely what Bethesda games are.

It makes sense that NV is going to be the most popular on this site, because most users on this site are "STORY ABOVE EVERYTHING ELSE!!!1!"

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

Shields up! We've been quoted!


Keep those shields raised, Space Cadet Sally.

just letting you know, that i am going to have to agree to disagree, i couldn't be further in the opposite direction of you on opinion of how much I loved NV compared to FO3's absolute shite setup, the only slight thing it possibly had going for it was it's turd steam rolled atmosphere, which i didn't like anyways, and that's it.

keep those shields raised for the rest of your life, because what I do have are a very particular set of skills; skills I have acquired over a very long career. Skills that make me a nightmare for people like you.If you admit NV is better now, that'll be the end of it. I will not look for you, I will not pursue you. But if you don't, I will look for you, I will find you, and I will kill you.



(I hope people see the sweet irony in me quoting that in defense for NV)

 

[Raddra]

I voted FO3.

However that was for certain reasons.. I feel that F:NV was the better game mechanically. However I feel that FO3 just felt better from an immersion perspective.

 

[ToastiestZombie]

They're both equally good, here's why:

Gameplay: New Vegas hands down, the combat was improved a ton, the hardcore mode was amazing and the fact that it's impossible to become as OP as you would of in 3 makes it better.

The World: FALLOUT 3, NO CONTEST! The Capitol Wasteland was amazing, the Mojave just felt way too civilised and clean for a Fallout game. I can see what they were trying to get at with New Vegas, a post apocalyptic world being remade, but it just makes it seem like a crappier version of another game's open world. Towns didn't feel like safe havens at all, they just felt like boring old towns. Rivet City and Megaton over Freeside and Goodsprings any day in my opinion.

DLC: New Vegas, this is purely opinion based of course. But really, I fucking loved every single minute of New Vegas' DLCs, even Honest Hearts. Dead Money had the best atmosphere in any Fallout game ever. Honest Hearts gave a massive area to explore, and an intriguing plot, along with weather for the first time in either game. Old World Blues was simply amazing, the best writing in a Fallout game ever and the rest was pure bliss. Honest Hearts again, had an amazing feel and the story of the Courier and Uylleses (can't spell it) was awesome. The DLC for Fallout 3, spare Point Lookout all really felt like a mission pack instead of an actual big thing added to the game.

But overall, I loved both games to bits. I've played 150+ hours in both of them, not including DLC. I'm currently playing through them both again but this time modded to high heaven, and it's simply amazing. Some of the graphics mods are simply beautiful, and take away the grimey green look of 3 and the grimey orange look of New Vegas.

So yeah, Fallout's fucking amazing and Bethesda really needs to get started on Fallout 4.

 

[DustyDrB]

Yes because it's realistic to always get what you want. I hate it when actual consequences are scoffed at for wimiting pwayer fweedom.

Hardly anything about Fallout is realistic...

My point was that in Fallout 3 you were not punished for focusing on one or two skills, meaning you could take one combat kill and one utility skill and be OK. Whereas in New Vegas you need to be good at just about everything, which isn't how I like to play the game.

My current NV character has less than 40 points in Lockpicking, Science and speech. The game is not FORCING you to do anything.

Yeah...I don't know how anyone could come to the conclusion that New Vegas forces you to build your character a certain way.

I've played the game seven times. Among them:
-A Total Survivalist. Guns, Survival, and Repair focuses (with other skills getting maxed out much later)
-A non-combat oriented manipulator. Speech, Science, Barter. For most of the game, I relied on companions and a weak skill level in guns to defend myself.
-An Idiot. 1 Intelligence (for the dialogue options). Unarmed, Explosives, Lockpick.
-A Wasteland Ninja. Melee Weapons (using that sexy GRA Katana), Sneak, Survival.
-A Medic: Medicine, Science, Energy Weapons

 

[Launcelot111]

Both games have their perks. For Fallout 3, I've spent a fair bit of time in DC, so the familiarity with everything added a lot for me, but I felt like a lot of the locations were interesting and the weapons lead to a fun but not especially deep game. New Vegas added a lot more reliance on stats for roleplaying, and the companions were a fantastic addition, but aside from a couple exceptions, the locations were pretty dull and the story didn't particularly engross me. I like New Vegas more because of the companions and the surplus of quests, but it's a far from lopsided decision

 

[gorfias]

Anyone know if Fallout 3 Vegas is less buggy than FO3 for PS3? Bugs killed game for me (after single player done and I'd played 150 hours of great fun with some frustration). I'd also want the edition that has all added content.

 

[Gandanga11]

People keep saying that NV is just a more polished FO3, thereby unwittingly admitting NV is better.
Seriously though; I played Fo3 then NV and originally thought FO3 was better. Then i went back to FO3 and realised I was wrong. I had become one of those annoying fan-boys who think that everything new sucks. NV is much better. A less linear story, big open world that isnt copy pasted city and vault, better gameplay and a feel more reminiscent of the original games. Add to that the better DLC and greater replay value and i thnk that NV is the better game.

Although in all fairness it did have an excellent game to base itself on.

 

[Kroxile]

New Vegas.. why? Because I don't have to spend hours finding my way through underground tunnels in order to get around destroyed buildings.

Factions, companions, hardcore mode, among other reasons make NV by far superior to FO3, which is still a great game, just Obsidian did a better job is all.

 

[Bostur]

FO3 had a post-apocalyptic setting that was purer in some ways. FO:NV dilluted this a bit with the Western angle. But that angle actually made it feel more like Fallout to me, because FO1/FO2 and even the old God Father of post-apocalyptic RPGs Wasteland had that angle as well. NV went back to the roots and I like it for that.
The idea of getting back to Vegas was right down my alley. It even had plenty of robots, the only thing missing was the Scorpitron.

NV is also better technically and has better voice acting. But I did like the plot and simplicity of FO3.