Fallout New Vegas: Why all the hate?

[camrulez]

I'm asking because recently I was on a website and every other comment after "When does Old World Blues come out?" was "FNV sucks!" or "F3 was so much better!" which got me wondering, why? It is, when u get down to it, a F3 expansion pack. Same engine, same character creator, even some of the same enemies. Personally, I love both games and will enjoy playing them until they get off their asses about Fallout Online. So, my fellow Escapist, can anyone tell me why FNV gathered some much ire from people?

 

[lasherman]

EDIT: Wow, O.K, oops, I meant to say "Ive never seen anyone who liked Fallout 3 better", not the other way around. I guess I need to re-read my posts before posting them. Fallout New Vegas is way better than Fallout 3.

 

[Zacharine]

I've never seen anyone who liked it better than Fallout 3.

Than allow me to be the first.

New Vegas rocked FO3.

My main beef with New Vegas (besides the occasional crashes) was that the 'normal' mode was actually 'easy' mode and 'harcore' was 'normal'. The second largest problem was the too tied-down final plotline. Why couldn't I become the ruler of the Strip, while having excellent relations with the NCR and let them deal with everything not directly within the walls of Vegas? It was either NCR takes over everything, Legion takes over everything, or you let Yes-man take over everything (in your name).

Otherwise, I loved it. Loved the humour, the quests, the wacky pieces of dialoque and funny items and movie/book references found all over the place. Whereas FO3 was good, but it wasn't Fallout - it was more Wasteland Survival. It didn't have the magnetism.

 

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

I've never seen anyone who liked it better than Fallout 3.

You just met him.
OP: New Vegas was so much better. The more story driven focus and faction system were a godsend.

 

[Who Dares Wins]

You know what I hate? Fallout 3 supporters complaining about things in New Vegas that were present in 3 and complaining about the lack of things in New Vegas that weren't present in 3.

New Vegas improved EVERYTHING that was wrong with 3, had a better story, had more additions and features and was a good Fallout game. 3 was a good game, but a bad Fallout game.

 

[BrotherSurplice]

Now me personally, I love F:NV, and I think the "Fo3 expansion pack" argument is not true. Yes they had the same engine, same character creator, and some of the same enemies and weapons. It was also set in a completely new area, had loads of new weapons, a completely unrelated story, and dozens of new factions and enemies. Does that sound like an expansion pack to you? it doesn't to me.

Consider the fact that Fo2 used pretty much the same engine as Fo1, had pretty much the same character creator as Fo1 and a lot of the same enemies and weapons. Yet people don't call Fo2 an expansion pack to Fo1.

 

[TwilightAvalon]

Because it lets my xbox overheat and that aint a good thing...its broken

 

[Smagmuck_]

Because no matter how hard I try, I always wind up with the NCR...

 

[Daveman]

I've never seen anyone who liked it better than Fallout 3.

You're gonna get quoted SO many times. I think there was a poll on this site and New Vegas was a tiny bit more preferred. I personally couldn't wait to stop playing Fallout 3 and yet New Vegas is probably my favourite game ever. Can't explain why, I think it was because the fact that everything had a green tint in 3 made me feel constantly nauseous. I probably only explored a quarter of the map on 3 whereas I have explored every single part of New Vegas and both DLCs.

 

[MercurySteam]

It was buggy at first (I mean really FUCKING buggy), but it turned out alright after it was able to get past most of its major bugs.

 

[AlternatePFG]

I've never seen anyone who liked it better than Fallout 3.

Let me be the 5th or 6th person to tell you. I really, really liked 3 for the exploration and atmosphere but the story, writing and characters were absolutely wretched. Other than being buggy, and not having quite the creepy atmosphere 3 had, New Vegas improved on it in every single way.

Edit: Also, New Vegas had a huge amount of choice, much more than nearly any mainstream RPG to come out recently.

 

[Kaytastrophe]

I think I prefer the atmosphere of FO3 as opposed to FNV. FNV does improve a lot on FO3 (although Ive had more bugs with FNV which is a major setback). However, I feel like the Capitol wasteland felt more post apocalyptic than NV. I know its not supposed to be hit as hard but it kind of made me lose the feel of the game. Also I find new Vegas more linear than the previous game. In the end though there both great games and it comes down to a "do you like pepsi or coke" scenario, both are great and relatively the same, but for me I gotta go with FO3

 

[Who Dares Wins]

It was buggy at first (I mean really FUCKING buggy), but it turned out alright after it was able to get past most of its major bugs.

This seems to be the deciding point for many. Too bad it completely varies from person to person. For example, I never, EVER had a bug or a glitch in my 100 hour New Vegas playthrough.

However, I feel like the Capitol wasteland felt more post apocalyptic than NV. I know its not supposed to be hit as hard but it kind of made me lose the feel of the game.

200 years passed since the bombs fell. The world is supposed to be recovered. Ask any Fallout 1 and 2 fan, they'll tell you that the East Coast status is completely illogical.

 

[MercurySteam]

It was buggy at first (I mean really FUCKING buggy), but it turned out alright after it was able to get past most of its major bugs.

This seems to be the deciding point for many. Too bad it completely varies from person to person. For example, I never, EVER had a bug or a glitch in my 100 hour New Vegas playthrough.

Well I found that the instability of the game causing it too crash every so often was a bit retarded. Plus the lag due to the game engine only running at 59Hz (when it should have been going at 60Hz) was quite annoying. But I was able to get past that and enjoy it.

 

[Woodsey]

Ask them. Most people on here love it, it would seem.

 

[GiantRaven]

I've never seen anyone who liked it better than Fallout 3.

I don't think there was a single thing that Fallout 3 did better than Fallout: New Vegas, other than giving your character an interesting backstory (and even that looks to potentially be remedied in upcoming DLC).

So yeah, New Vegas kicks ass.

 

[conmag9]

I didn't hate New Vegas, but I found FO3 somewhat better (given that it was my first Fallout game, I can't compare it to previous editions, so that might change my attitude on the matter). Vegas did have a few things against it: bugs, first and foremost. Thankfully, those can be fixed (maybe not ALL of them, but whatever). Second, I find FO3's atmosphere lightyears above NV. Third, it's set in a desert. FO3's wasteland didn't paint everything in Boring Brown, and yet still captured the post-apocolyptic feel just as well. Fourth, FO3 had Liam Neeson in it (a critical blow to NV by itself!).