"Looking good so far."TheYellowCellPhone said:
FFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU-
Poll: Which do you prefer: Fallout 3 or New Vegas?
- Thread starter Pierce Graham
- Start date
Recommended Videos
FFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU-
Bugs should never be a factor in a Fallout 3 vs New Vegas discussion, as both were really buggy on release.
I hated Fallout 3. Like a lot of people, it was my first game in the series. I found the atmosphere relentlessly oppressive and bleak. I'm sick to death of daddy issues in media (please put that narrative motivation to rest for a while). I didn't like the look of the game: the overworld was ridiculously grey, while most indoors/underground areas were too freaking dark (it makes sense, but it is still frustrating to try to navigate). I didn't meet any interesting characters (aside from the part were you're trapped in that dream town). And the combat was VATS or blech.
I love New Vegas. They added enough color to make the game less of an eyesore. The story gives the player choice and it is much more interesting overall. The factions and people you meet are genuinely interesting (so much that it motivated me to play the first two games to learn more lore). It's more challenging, especially early in the game when some areas you either have to sneak through or avoid altogether because combat isn't an option. The feeling of threat makes it much more interesting. VATS (which I hate to use) is totally optional with the improved combat. And third person is more of a viable choice. Finally, you can experiment and do very well with non-combat focused characters. My last one specialized in Speech, Medicine, and Science (with just enough guns so that I could hold my own should problems arise).
I hated Fallout 3. Like a lot of people, it was my first game in the series. I found the atmosphere relentlessly oppressive and bleak. I'm sick to death of daddy issues in media (please put that narrative motivation to rest for a while). I didn't like the look of the game: the overworld was ridiculously grey, while most indoors/underground areas were too freaking dark (it makes sense, but it is still frustrating to try to navigate). I didn't meet any interesting characters (aside from the part were you're trapped in that dream town). And the combat was VATS or blech.
I love New Vegas. They added enough color to make the game less of an eyesore. The story gives the player choice and it is much more interesting overall. The factions and people you meet are genuinely interesting (so much that it motivated me to play the first two games to learn more lore). It's more challenging, especially early in the game when some areas you either have to sneak through or avoid altogether because combat isn't an option. The feeling of threat makes it much more interesting. VATS (which I hate to use) is totally optional with the improved combat. And third person is more of a viable choice. Finally, you can experiment and do very well with non-combat focused characters. My last one specialized in Speech, Medicine, and Science (with just enough guns so that I could hold my own should problems arise).
Whatt? no! I loved the fallout games, but I'm just saying that what you said was spot-oneasternflame said:
Victor digs the Courier out fairly quickly IIRC, and between Med-X and Stimpacks I don't think infection is really a concern.The Rockerfly said:
Wadsworth, the Mr. Handy, being able to give me purified water is a bit curious. Can we round up more Mr. Handys? Can we replicate the process independent of the Mr. Handys, or on a larger scale? If most of the water is still in the Basin, the Enclave can take control over it anyway.easternflame said:
This. This. This. This. This.effilctar said:
It really is bleak. I think there is just way too much grimdark in the game, and I don't think alot of that stuff can really be justified in the setting. (Why isn't civilization acting like the apocalypse happened a decade ago, rather than 200 years ago?)DustyDrB said:
New Vegas captures the spirit of the old Fallout games a lot better, especially if you include it's DLC. There was a lot more actual roleplaying going on, a lot more player impact.
On the other hand, I had more fun exploring in Fallout 3, as it's locations, while less numerous, were most often better fleshed out. It also wasn't as horribly fucked up technically as New Vegas.
Still, for having it's heart in the right place I'm going with New Vegas.
On the other hand, I had more fun exploring in Fallout 3, as it's locations, while less numerous, were most often better fleshed out. It also wasn't as horribly fucked up technically as New Vegas.
Still, for having it's heart in the right place I'm going with New Vegas.
The fallout has mutated more than just Mitchell:TheYellowCellPhone said:
Actually, it's 2 centuries after the apocalypse, and just look at what happened to Chernobyle even after a couple of decades. In Fallout 3 and New Vegas, didn't even bother to wash the damned windows of the buildings they live in. Stupid Gamebryo engine... Can't wait to see what a new Fallout with a new engine is going to look like.easternflame said:
i liked everything about new vegas... except for the damn Mojave Desert.... Capital wasteland was sooooo much better IMO..
New Vegas by far. Larger selection of weapons, more interesting setting, no green filter, much better aiming (I have never needed VATS,) large selection of side quests, and a main story that isn't atrociously moronic.
Strictly in terms of DLC Fallout 3 Wins by a mile. Dead money and honest hearts were really only good because of their characters. In terms on content these DLC's Lag far behind. Every DLC for Fallout 3 Had something worth getting along with interesting characters and back stories. The winterized T51-b, The perforater, the fertilizer shovel, the heavy incinerator and ammo for the alien blaster. However in terms of gameplay I think that Fallout:New Vegas is better, if only because they took fallout 3 and made improvements and changed what needed to be changed and left alone what was fine. Fallout: New Vegas, barring the bugs, was about as good of a sequel as one could have been. I must say I am partial to New Vegas because the unique weapons feel unique, It has more replay value and a better storyline
Well I prefer New Vegas' features and western feel, but I liked 3's environment more. 3 seemed to have more buildings to explore, whereas New Vegas feels like dirt and sand with a few shacks here and there. If I had to choose, I'd choose New Vegas. All in all, it feels like much more of a Fallout game. There are factions, as opposed to 3's "Are you good or bad?".
Play New Vegas again, noting any mention of or allusion to the Courier suffering from amnesia. Don't go too far, though. You won't find a single one. You don't remember his name because you weren't ever introduced, but you do know you were shot by a man in a checkered suit accompanied by two Khans. You know you had a delivery to New Vegas. There are several instances [http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Courier#Other_background_information] where you can comment on events in your life prior to your arrival at Goodsprings.easternflame said:
Your history isn't touched on so that you can fill it in yourself. Whereas in Fallout 3 you're background is pretty strictly defined, your character could have been anything before the start of New Vegas (maybe this was your first couriering assignment and you are a former raider trying to turn his/her life around). You tangibly define who you were up to the start of the game in one way: your build (SPECIAL, Skills, Perks).
Fallout 3's story was stupid as hell and completely broke the Fallout canon. Also, the green filter was beyond annoying. New Vegas is by far my favorite: Better story, better role-playing mechanics, more relatable and human characters, better writing, and being more true to the established canon. The gameplay itself in F3 was awesome don't get me wrong, but the story was awful.
FO3 is NV,s Alpha.
NV feels more complete then FO3 not just weapons but stuff like a grey/grey morality and weapon mod,s.
NV feels more complete then FO3 not just weapons but stuff like a grey/grey morality and weapon mod,s.
New Vegas, by a long shot. It's not even worth it to make point-by-point comparisons; anything that wasn't unchanged from Fallout 3 to New Vegas was improved, often by a great deal, and simply nothing from Fallout 3 is superior to its counterpart in New Vegas.
I prefer new vegas, it just didn't have the same linear main story lane, i want to pick if i help or just kill them off, e.g. the brotherhood of steel i hate (i don't know why) but i wanted to just kill them off in both games but was only allowed to do it in new vegas.
Therefore New Vegas wins.
Therefore New Vegas wins.