What Do You See are Big Diffrences Between New Vegas and Fallout 3?

[Dr Pussymagnet]

I think the biggest difference is that theres simply more stuff to do in New Vegas compared to Fallout 3. Seriously, it's overwhelming how much stuff there is to see and do in the Mojave.

Besides, I still can't forgive Fallout 3 for Little Lamplight.

 

[Cheesus333]

In Fallout 3, it's telling the story of the Lone Wanderer. He was born here, he did this, he went here etc. Although you're allowed a lot of freedom in where you go and how you go about doing your quests, you are still doing the same quests. It is telling one story, with two endings.

Fallout New Vegas, on the other hand, only forces two things on you as a character: you were a Courier, and you got face-shot. After that, you can be whomever the fuck you like. For example, my Hardcore character, Carlos (later nicknamed Slasher Carlos) is a cleaver-wielding Mexican immigrant who is occasionally overcome by his famine-ridden peasant ancestry and compelled to eat corpses.
In retrospect, I should have also made him gay. It would have made more sense that he always wears a beret.

But yeah, they are both fantastic games - I actually have Carlos running on my 360 right now - but Fallout New Vegas gives you more freedom in your role playing.

 

[Agarth]

I say Fallout New Vegas had gameplay going for it, (except how they made Deathclaws and Cazadors invulnerable even on easy) but Fallout three defiantly had better story, immersion, less glitches,your character felt like more of a person than a war machine, and your character seemed to actually fallen into the big battle between BoS and Enclave in a realistic way rather than, "You look like a strong, intelligent person. We're going to entrust you with killing everyone that opposes us." That just left me thinking, "Have I every done anything AT ALL for the Legion to prove I'm trustworthy? Also, why are they assuming I'm siding with them when they NAIL PEOPLE ONTO FREAKIN' CROSSES!?!"

 

[NuclearPenguin]

Story wise? I didn't notice -that- much of a difference except that Fallout 3 felt much more linear.
Gameplay wise?
Well..
Iron sights.
Seriously. That is the one reason I prefer New Vegas.

 

[mireko]

New Vegas had writing.

FO3 had mudcrabs.

 

[ChupathingyX]

,your character felt like more of a person than a war machine,

How? In Fallout 3 you're given much more limited dialogue and story whereas in New Vegas you're given much more flexibility with creating your character.

That just left me thinking, "Have I every done anything AT ALL for the Legion to prove I'm trustworthy? Also, why are they assuming I'm siding with them when they NAIL PEOPLE ONTO FREAKIN' CROSSES!?!"

Well there's removing Caesar's tumor, I'm pretty sure he would like you for doing that. Also they only nail people to crosses if they piss them off...that's the whole point. Caesar rules through fear, he rules with an iron fist. This is one of the strong points of the Legion, if you live under the Legion you know you'll be safe because any crime or treason is put down immediately, you don't need to worry about those things. If you make Caesar happy, he'll make sure you're happy, just don't piss him off.

FO3 had mudcrabs.

No it didn't.

 

[Outright Villainy]

Fallout 3 gives you freedom to explore a vast world.

New Vegas gives you freedom to do everything else.

That's the main difference for me. Fallout 3 had a better designed world (except for the metro tunnels. Fuck that shit), but New Vegas gave you much more choice to choose whatever kind of character you want, and solve even the most basic quest in multiple ways depending on the skillsets available to you.

 

[MrGalactus]

Fallout: New Vegas had no Republic of Dave. Great shame.

 

[ChupathingyX]

Fallout: New Vegas had no Republic of Dave. Great shame.

No, instead it had the New California Republic.

The Republic of Dave was stupid, it was like Betehsda were trying to be like the previous games but were just making a big joke of it. Dave never even properly explains how they're going to expand, what their main policies are, the NCR expanded through trade routes, diplomacy ad Brahmin trade.

What does Dave do? Nothing, it's just Bethesda trying to be funny again.

Seriously if Fallout 3 had the Wild Wasteland trait (or traits at all) then like 75% of the content would be gone if WW was not selected.

Edit: You're comment was most likely in jest but I just wanted to give a serious response anyway.

 

[SoranMBane]

The depth of the morals choices in each game is certainly a big difference, and the main thing that makes me prefer New Vegas over 3. In Fallout 3, you pretty much had inFamous-style choices, where you could either be a self-sacrificing saint or an asshole, especially for the penultimate choice of the game. New Vegas instead took various political ideologies, distilled them into the factions vying for New Vegas, and let the player decide which one they wanted to support, which just seems a lot more meaningful to me. Hell, my first run-through of New Vegas actually taught me something about myself, thus opening the door for self-improvement. I can't say the same for Fallout 3.

 

[FredTheUndead]

Primarily that New Vegas is well written while Fallout 3 is not.

 

[Infinatex]

Fallout 3 was good, New Vegas was bad.

 

[JamesStone]

I personally love the 2 games equally (No, that doesn´t mean that FO3 is better because FNV didn´t improve things, I´m just saying that they are so good that is pretty hard to be better, so shut up, mindless "Fallout 3 is better in every single way" masses.
Also, I´ll try to give reason to some of the things said here.
FNV: "The Courier has no backgroung or story" argument - good one, but your forgetting something. He/She is who you want him/her to be! The Tag skills determined who he/she was, what has him/her talents. Over the Wasteland, we find out who she/he was by some characters (The funniest of them all is if you have the Lady Killer perk and talk to the Lonesome Drifter, go stahead and try), and people, come the fuck on, he/she was a nobody because he/she didn´t had and objective. He/she was a normal wastelander trying to survive, until Bam!Bam!, shit happends.

What I´m trying to say is, Fallout 3 lovers who are also Fallout New Vegas haters are most likely nostalgia victims. I played first New Vegas and then Fallout 3, so I´m immune to that. They are both great games, both 94-96%, so please come to your senses.

P.S.: If I insulted anyone or my opinions disagreed with your former ways of thinking, please tell me why. If anyone is gonna waste a message telling me that I´m wrong, at least explain me what makes my opinion wrong and your´s right.

 

[DustyDrB]

Actually, your age is sort of pre-determined in Fallout 3 (I can't remember if they tell you exactly how old you are once you leave the vault, but everyone in your age group is still in their late teens or early twenties). Your family life and history in the Vault is pretty much set too. All that is set about New Vegas' player character is his occupation and the events around his being shot in the head. You could be a 12 year old red headed pyrokinetic courier.

Eh?

Everything about the Lone Wanderer is player-determined. Very little is truly set in stone other than "you lived in a vault, escaped your crib, and the Mr. Handy ruined your birthday cake. Oh, and your dad ran off."

The Courier on the other hand... has a history set, but we are neither privy to nor allowed to determine it for ourselves. He apparently is a native and knows a few things, but apparently forgot a lot since he has to be re-educated about the various factions in the Mojave (hence why I previously referred to him as amnesiac).

Well, I see other people have pretty much responded for me, so I apologize if this is redundant. Nothing is said about the Courier's background because it's up to the player to decide what their history was. Fallout 3 provides a good bit of the back story for you. You're always a young adult from Vault 101 whose mother died giving birth to you and whose father ran out to save the Wasteland. There are some choices you make in the intro section of Fallout 3, but they are mostly binary (protect the girl, join in the abuse of her). Your character's history is mostly set in stone.

 

[MordinSolus]

Fallout 3 was more fun.

I'd say that's difference enough.

This, and that New Vegas was pretty much like hick central, but that might be just me.

That's not just you, Fallout 3 is much better, and is also my favourite game of all time.

I'm glad that I'm not the only one who thinks that.

 

[hoboman29]

Fallout 3 was the experiment to see if it would work NV was doing what any good sequel does improve on what was wrong plus NV had something to do with the Fallout universe. If you called Fallout 3 something different it would have been its own great game rather than the almost non canical fallout game

 

[MrGalactus]

Fallout: New Vegas had no Republic of Dave. Great shame.

No, instead it had the New California Republic.

The Republic of Dave was stupid, it was like Betehsda were trying to be like the previous games but were just making a big joke of it. Dave never even properly explains how they're going to expand, what their main policies are, the NCR expanded through trade routes, diplomacy ad Brahmin trade.

What does Dave do? Nothing, it's just Bethesda trying to be funny again.

Seriously if Fallout 3 had the Wild Wasteland trait (or traits at all) then like 75% of the content would be gone if WW was not selected.

Edit: You're comment was most likely in jest but I just wanted to give a serious response anyway.

I love the Rep. of Dave just for its silliness. I like the idea of a nation of about 10 people in a space the size of a tiny village. I love little quirky things like that, just like the holy hand grenades and Indiana Jones fridge of NV. Shame the crazy stuff was more small-scale in NV, really.

 

[Hamhandderhard]

Fallout 3 was about emerging from a Vault and discovering a new world, a world ruined by atomic hellfire and filled with raider gangs and dangerous creatures. You know nothing about the world but, in order to find out why your dad left you and the Vault, you have to brave it. You learn of a town built around a nuke, a aircraft carrier turned city and a group of power armor wearing soldiers called the Brotherhood of Steel. While it may be in a canon sense terrible, the world makes no sense and has some terrible towns and areas (Lamplight, tunnels.) and it limits your RP (You will always be a 19 year old ;_, I still consider it more fun to explore and play.

New Vegas, on the other hand, had a world that was more "set" (I guess) as 3 was. You were delivering a package, shot twice in the head by a man in a checkered suit and woke up in a town. All this is taking under the shadow of coming battle between two forces: The democratic but overburdened New Califorian Republic and the militaristic slave-state of Caeser's legion. After some exploring, you meet the man in charge of the city of New Vegas and you find out why you were shot in the head and why the thing you carried was so important. Story wise it was better and it gave you more choice. Think that Caeser's harsh rule may be just what the wasteland needs? You can kill NCR forces in his name. Going for a wild card? Choose which factions are alright and which ones can get out. And that's just the factional choices. RP was better cause you're just a courier, your past is all up to you. But the towns are bland, I can't remember 75% of the quests I did, and too many invisible walls limit exploration.