Poll: Halo:Reach Or Fallout:New Vegas?

[BloodSquirrel]

Alright, so today I was going to preorder Halo: Reach. However, today I just saw some of the gameplay footage of New Vegas. Being a fan of Fallout 3 this obviously attracted my attention. I am equally exited about both games, being fans of their prequels, but I do not know which one to get.
So Escapists, I ask you, what is your opinion?

Keep in mind that New Vegas is being developed by Obsidian, not Bethesda. Expect something half-finished.

 

[Tarmon'gaidin]

Both duh. Why is that not an option on your poll

 

[BloodSquirrel]

There's 50 other shooters coming out this year with regenerating health and limited weapons capacity.

One Fallout.

This man is right.

You should buy 50 shooters.

 

[Th37thTrump3t]

I preordered both! XD

Fallout New Vegas for the PC and then Halo Reach for... well you should know.

 

[Argtee]

I'd get Fallout: New Vegas.

I've never been a big Halo Fan.
I played some of Halo 2 when it came out, and I thought it was okay.

You could just flip a coin. If you're equally excited about both games, you could pre-order one of them now, and then when you have enough money, buy the other one.

Although, Fallout: New Vegas does have pre-order bonuses and I'm not sure if Halo: Reach does.

If you really want the pre-order bonuses for Fallout: New Vegas, just pre-order it and get Halo: Reach when you have enough money.
If not, flip a coin or something.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

your bound to get tons of bias in this thread..especially on the escapist, most people here are diehard fallout fans and think halo is mostly a piece of shit..

so on topic anyways, id say if your getting both eventually, which is what im assuming, go with reach first, as fallout new vegas is bound to be glitchy and whatnot at first, and they will patch that all up and have some decent dlc to download by the time ou can buy that im sure, while halo reach is that multiplayer and honestly i think its important to be in games like those from the start so you dont start behind and end up being the "noob" who can't keep up with the cheese strategies and whatnot.

but hey your choice, oranges and apples man if your getting both

 

[Dark2003]

Simply put my Halo days are unfortunately done, but Fallout 3 was my first Fallout so its still pretty new to me, I'm waiting for New Vegas

 

[joshthor]

i decently like halo. im interested in halo reach. however, im not interested in fallout new vagas. i did not like fallout 3. if i had to choose between those two it would be reach. but im probably waiting till both hit 20 bucks

 

[Meggiepants]

Why can't I pick both, dammit!

Well, if you are making me choose, it's going to have to be New Vegas. But irl, I intend to have both of these games. Expect me to disappear for a while come this fall.

 

[Assassin Xaero]

Well, what did you like more, Fallout 3 or Halo 3? Fallout New Vegas is just going to be a copy of Fallout 3 with new locations and minor changes (which is why I'm getting it), and Halo Reach is just going to be another copy of the original Halo with new locations and minor changes (like all the other Halo games except for maybe Wars).

 

[Generic_Dave]

To compare something with the depth of Fallout to something as shallow as Halo really hits my gag reflex.

Though the space combat does look intriguing, Halo: Reach is nowhere near the same class of game.

 

[Ch@Z]

Why is everyone so excited about New Vegas? It's Obsidian! When was the last time Obsidian made a good game? I saw the gameplay of it. I don't think it brings anything new.

 

[MikailCaboose]

Fallout. Personally, I liked Fallout 3. Halo's been practically the same since, oh I don't know, the first game. I'm getting tired of FPS's to be honest.

 

[Hyper-space]

It really depends. If multiplayer/online FPS is your thing, then Reach is probably the way to go. But if online FPS isn't a big deal to you or you don't have a Gold subscription, then you're bound to get a much more satisfying (not to mention lengthier) single player experience from New Vegas. That's not to say that Reach won't have a good single player, just that these games have different selling points for long term play. Frequent Live players will get the most out of Reach and dedicated single player explorers will get the most out of New Vegas. Which of these most appeals to you?

It's quite the same. I often play Multiplayer, but I like to have long stories and good replay value also.

then i would recommend F:NV.

 

[Cpu46]

BOTH!!!!!

I loved fallout 3 it is probably second only to Oblivion in hours logged.

Also I love the halo series and from the looks of the reach beta its gonna be an awesome game.

 

[bsga22]

That is a hard call for me because FO3 was great but I always have fun with halo games.

 

[That One Six]

I don't own a 360, so even though Reach looks pretty cool, I'm not going to get it. On the other hand, I've been drooling over New Vegas for quite a while now...

 

[lukemdizzle]

this is a weird comparison but I have a feeling that new Vegas will disappoint and Im a huge halo fan so Reach

 

[Evil the White]

I despise Halo and New Vegas is being developed by Obsidian, so I won't hold my breath. They've already put me off with that putrid orange tint that's all over the game.

I choose 'neither'.

Just saying, the orange HUD can be changed, like in Fallout 3. It just happens to be the colour they used for the videos. I personally consider it ill-judged to choose not to consider getting a game because the chosen HUD colour (that you can change) doesn;t suit your tastes.