Nah, I only managed 9 hours of Fallout 3 before giving up, but New Vegas is far better and requires no knowledge of FO3 to play.
Should I play through Fallout 3 before starting NV?
- Thread starter Tactical Pause
- Start date
Recommended Videos
1) Considering that story from one does not connect with the other, it doesn't matter which order you play them in. I personally find that NV is a better game overall, so I would start with that.ZombieFanatic said:
2) Hardcore mode doesn't really make the game that much harder (e.g. finding food or water is very rarely a problem), but it changes some gameplay mechanics in a way that vanilla NV doesn't take kindly (e.g. stimpacks heal over time instead of instantly). It can make game hard in unexpected places, and you have to take a different approach to some encounters. However, the difference blurs around level 3.
3) Whatever game you start with you should definitely check out the mods [http://newvegas.nexusmods.com/mods/topalltime/?adult=0], starting with Project Nevada and New Vegas bounties.
Yeah Fallout New Vegas continues the main plot of the Fallout universe as well as possible. Fallout 3 is, well, a side-story at best and easily totally ignored since it adds nothing to the series from a story standpoint. Fallout 3 is canon but doesn't really matter in the universe as a whole, it happens on the other side of the country and pretty much just combines the plots of Fallout 1 and 2, taking the main goals of both then shoving them together. Fallout 3 isn't a bad game but I was very displeased with the plot, the characters, and its usage of the Brotherhood of Steel was slanderous. In the end Fallout 3 feels like a fan-made game where Fallout New Vegas feels like a real sequel. But that's just my option and I'm no official voice on the subject, just a long time PC gamer with a love for Post-Apocalyptic roleplaying games.
I greatly disliked Fallout 3 but loved New Vegas.Sketchy said:
OT: New Vegas doesn't feel like a Bethesda game. It's basically the old Fallouts with the mechanics of FO3 (albeit polished up a bit).
Once you get to Vegas, there's no long much of a true "main quest" because everything you do will take you closer to the ending; it's is much less freely explorable than Fallout 3, but the story is a lot more malleable. Every single NPC (except two robots, one of which is a shop and one of which can body-hop) can be killed at any time they appear in the story and nearly every quest is related to the main plot in some way. I found it much more liberating than Fallout 3 whilst still being a lot more linear and directed.
GFWL is end-of-life so I doubt they care if you use it or not at this point.Dirty Hipsters said:
You can safely play new vegas as an independent game, however the game mechanics and open world feel are very similar to fallout 3, so if you found that game hard to get into, you probably won't enjoy NV either. Give it a shot, but maybe these open world bethesda games just aren't for you.
NV is more of a sequel to 2 than it is to 3, so there's no need to play or even like (due to the massive change in tone) 3 before starting NV.
And yes, play it on 'hardcore' mode. The need to track your hunger, thirst and sleep levels adds so much to the survivalist nature of the gameplay, and giving ammo weight means you won't be lugging around rocket-launchers with 500 missiles like you ended up doing in F3, which again adds to the survivalist nature of the game.
One last tip: Do not go near any red-stained hills until you're at least level 15, maybe even level 20.
And yes, play it on 'hardcore' mode. The need to track your hunger, thirst and sleep levels adds so much to the survivalist nature of the gameplay, and giving ammo weight means you won't be lugging around rocket-launchers with 500 missiles like you ended up doing in F3, which again adds to the survivalist nature of the game.
One last tip: Do not go near any red-stained hills until you're at least level 15, maybe even level 20.
Well, Besthesda is probably going to make Fallout 4 instead of Obsidian, so you should play Fallout 3 to get a sense of what to expect from it (worse writing and gameplay than New Vegas, but better atmosphere).
Its also worth playing to appreciate that Fallout 3 is arguably the reason New Vegas was so good. By using Besthesda's engine and character models, Obsidian pretty much had the pieces of a complete game; allowing them to spend time adding cool new weapons, enemies and fleshing out dialogue and quests. As much as we all like to hate on Fallout 3, New Vegas would not exist without it.
And on a personal note, I think Fallout 3 is worth playing for Tranquility Lane alone.
Its also worth playing to appreciate that Fallout 3 is arguably the reason New Vegas was so good. By using Besthesda's engine and character models, Obsidian pretty much had the pieces of a complete game; allowing them to spend time adding cool new weapons, enemies and fleshing out dialogue and quests. As much as we all like to hate on Fallout 3, New Vegas would not exist without it.
And on a personal note, I think Fallout 3 is worth playing for Tranquility Lane alone.
I played both extensively and I can assure you that it doesn't matter in which order you play them.
As for hardcore mode - I enabled it in my first playthrough of NV and never disabled it since. I love the fact that it actually gives a reason to stock and use food and drink items and get full rest.
As for hardcore mode - I enabled it in my first playthrough of NV and never disabled it since. I love the fact that it actually gives a reason to stock and use food and drink items and get full rest.
Fallout 3 without a doubt, play that before you play NV. Fallout 3 provides a beautiful world for you to explore. New Vegas is mostly empty space....and it looks horrible.
Games for windows live? How could you say that, how does it affect the game...it doesnt. All you notice is that it says GFWL when you fire it up.Dirty Hipsters said:
It doesn't really matter.
If you beat Fallout 3 first, the only change is you'll go "Aha! A reference!" once or twice during your NV playthrough.
If you really want to recognize everything in NV, play Fallout 2. As another person mentioned, NV is much more of a sequel to that then to 3. I played 2 a fair while AFTER playing NV and was shocked by just how related the two games are.
Hardcore mode doesn't really change much unless you add mods to make it harder. Do it if you want, but only if your character won't need to carry a lot of ammo.
I hope you enjoy. I know many people who disliked 3 that enjoyed NV quite a bit.
Fallout 3 is my favorite game of all time (no, really), but I get why people feel it's aimless. NV, while not as interesting but still quite good in my opinion, has much more of a traditional story and is generally more focused.
For 5 bucks, play it.
Also, add some mods, but don't go crazy or you'll break the feel and challenge of the game. Leave the mod orgy until after you've played it for a while.
If you beat Fallout 3 first, the only change is you'll go "Aha! A reference!" once or twice during your NV playthrough.
If you really want to recognize everything in NV, play Fallout 2. As another person mentioned, NV is much more of a sequel to that then to 3. I played 2 a fair while AFTER playing NV and was shocked by just how related the two games are.
Hardcore mode doesn't really change much unless you add mods to make it harder. Do it if you want, but only if your character won't need to carry a lot of ammo.
I hope you enjoy. I know many people who disliked 3 that enjoyed NV quite a bit.
Fallout 3 is my favorite game of all time (no, really), but I get why people feel it's aimless. NV, while not as interesting but still quite good in my opinion, has much more of a traditional story and is generally more focused.
For 5 bucks, play it.
Also, add some mods, but don't go crazy or you'll break the feel and challenge of the game. Leave the mod orgy until after you've played it for a while.
I much preferred New Vegas to FO3, I sank about 3x more hours of playtime into New Vegas (300 hours) and I found it a far more legitimate Fallout experience. In fact, New Vegas should have been named "Fallout 3" and Fallout 3 should have been named "Fallout: DC".
No, there are no connections between FO3 and FO:NV. NV takes place on the other side of a continent and I'm pretty sure in a different time period, so there's not really any way for them to be connected anyway.
As far as the debate between the two, FO3 is the superior game by miles. It has a great sense of life and adventure, since every little piece of the world has some kind of story behind it. It's one of the most immersive games I've ever had the pleasure of playing. NV, on the other hand, was almost entirely empty space with no life or character, and the one "strength" people talk about (the story) still sucks because the characters and world feel so dead that you just can't care what happens in any way.
As far as the debate between the two, FO3 is the superior game by miles. It has a great sense of life and adventure, since every little piece of the world has some kind of story behind it. It's one of the most immersive games I've ever had the pleasure of playing. NV, on the other hand, was almost entirely empty space with no life or character, and the one "strength" people talk about (the story) still sucks because the characters and world feel so dead that you just can't care what happens in any way.
I know people who loved 3 and hated NV. I also know people who have the opposite opinion.
Aside from the fact that the games are on the same engine, they really couldn't feel more different.
For the record, I had a hell of a time with 3, I loved it. I also thought NV was fantastic, just different.
Aside from the fact that the games are on the same engine, they really couldn't feel more different.
For the record, I had a hell of a time with 3, I loved it. I also thought NV was fantastic, just different.
I'm in the same boat as the OP. Never played any of the Fallout games, but couldn't pass up a $5 deal for a game that, from everything I've read, is an awesome experience.
As far as mods go, which ones should be priorities? Not looking to go mod-crazy, but I've seen that the NV community has some decent fixes to the game.
As far as mods go, which ones should be priorities? Not looking to go mod-crazy, but I've seen that the NV community has some decent fixes to the game.
I require a link, as GFWL is the only reason I don't have a PC copy of FO3, and I would very much like to run A Tale of Two Wastelands.ZombieFanatic said:
OT: FO3 is a great game itself, with some control issues, basically I run it down as such, 3 has the better story, NV has the better controls.
A Tale of Two Wastelands packs all of the games files of FO3 into the New Vegas directory, you can actually uninstall Fallout 3 after you've installed a tale of two wastelands, it's a mod. GFWL never need appearFayathon said:
