What does fallout 3 do better then fallout new vegas

[Easton Dark]

No, it literally took me 50 minutes to beat it, doing only the main quest.
It wasn't even a speed-run, mind.
Skipped Three Dog though.

Also, not even going to begin arguing about the story since you immediately went for a strawman.

Must have skipped through all of the dialogue, huh. Here's something fun, sneak past the death claws and New Vegas wouldn't take much longer than that.

And I shouldn't have started to argue about the story since you didn't have an example to begin with at all. Only criticism. Hmph.

 

[jollybarracuda]

As others have said, I much prefer the environment itself in FO3 over New Vegas'. While NV did, technically, have more colors; with bluer skies, green trees, etc., the only big thing i can remember about the environments after a long time of not playing is a metric ton of tan-colored hills. Also, with FO3 having more destroyed environments, I felt it lent itself very well to the tone of the game.

 

[Burnswell]

It's hard to say, I loved Fallout 3 but I remember Vegas being way better. I can't tell you if that's because by that time I'd played Fallout 3 into the ground and Vegas was completely fresh though. Maybe just report the bug to steam and see if it gets patched by the time you finish Vegas.

 

[Amethyst Wind]

The settlements are better in 3, most other things are better in Vegas.

The subway system is not fun a fun way to get around though. That's one of the main drawbacks of 3.

 

[Xdeser2]

Im basicly going to say what most people on this side of the fence say

To me, at least, Fallout 3 had a better world, atmosphere, better music, and more secrets

Fallout NV was kind of reverse Fallout 3, in that all the meh parts of 3 were great and vice Versa. It had a better story, great characters/ followers, tied in to 1 and 2 more (even though to its credit bethesda did a good job tying in the lore of the first 2 into 3, 10+ years later.) and a higher inital level cap. The world and music, however, could have used some work, but each dev what it does best, and to both games credit, FO 3 and NV were very good

 

[Cowabungaa]

snip

Don't listen to this guy. What you are missing by not playing Fallout 3 is the utter ruination of the series, but admittedly, it does have some pockets of really cool atmosphere. That's usually undone by the sheer idiocy of the plot and dialogue, however.

Well I must say that New Vegas still felt a bit like that. Your embassy still looks like dilapidated shithole? They didn't even find the time in those two centuries to give the windows a wash? To move the rusted nuclear-powered car wrecks out of the streets? While not as bad as Fallout 3 in that regard there's still plenty of silliness in that department.

But what mattered to me the most, and what I surprisingly haven't read yet in these two pages, is that New Vegas is a better roleplaying game. You get a lot more freedom in how you want to solve your quests and you get a lot more use out of non-combat skills. In that regard it felt a lot closer to the original Fallout games.

But New Vegas and the surrounding area felt very underwhelming. The truly good locations came with the excellent DLC packs but before that nothing really sticks out. Damn shame to hear that NV being rushed is partly to blame for that. Obsidian just can't seem to catch a break, can they? They make such promising games only to be forced to shove them out of the door way too quickly.

 

[Isshiresshi]

What does 3 do better than NV?
The intro. That's about it.
Story, gameplay, the world and how you interact with the world; everything's pretty much universally better in NV.
Don't believe people who say the story in Fallout 3 is better, because it fucking isn't.
It is so simple and short that it's almost funny. If you only do the main story, you can complete it within an hour.
And the ending is amazingly stupid.
Still, Fallout 3 is a great game that you should play at least once.

Fallout 3 is a lot more "humanity is suffering from nuclear war and everything has gone to hell"-atmosphere and the story too is more focused on it as well, where New Vegas has a "did not get hit near as hard with nukes like everywhere else"-background. The story makes a lot more sense from the start to finish then New Vegas does.

They both play like each other. No different in the graphic or mechanics from the two games.

Fallout 3 has some interesting things as well as New Vegas so I think you should try and make it work so you can try it out!

Past the first sentence, every single part of this post is false.

Fallout 3's story makes absolutely no sense at all. It takes place 200 years after the Great War, but is designed as if it were 20 or so years ago. Pre-war computers still function and pre-war food is still edible. Enemies that were wiped out in FO2 suddenly have legions and legions of soldiers to throw at you from helicopters. Super Mutants are somehow all the way over on the east coast even though the FEV plants only existed in the southwest. There are vampires and organizations dedicated to robot emancipation. People continue to survive even though you'll never see anyone making any effort to--no one scavenges or tries to grow crops or anything.

The Raiders outnumber the settlers, so one wonders who they're raiding. There's a group of children who have survived as a child-only colony since the War, even though they kick all the people who reach breeding age out. And finally, the main point of the story (water purification) is completely undone by high-school science. Suffice it to say that there is no way the water would still be irradiated after all those years.

The mechanics are also quite different; New Vegas features iron sights, takes away that garbage where you take way less damage while in VATS, makes numerous small tweaks to the gunplay and reworked the perks system while changing some skills around and adding hardcore mode.

Don't listen to this guy. What you are missing by not playing Fallout 3 is the utter ruination of the series, but admittedly, it does have some pockets of really cool atmosphere. That's usually undone by the sheer idiocy of the plot and dialogue, however.

Looks like someone has a grudge on Fallout 3 for not being Fallout 1 and 2...

The pre-war food in New Vegas is somehow better then pre-war food in Fallout 3?

How does people survive in the dessert with nothing to transport water in / with? Or any water tanks at all to have water supplies in?

And I thought it was better. Looking for your run-away Dad after leaving your life behind, working to bring water to the wasteland and protect it from those who would abuse the power that would grant them. Better than "Delivering a package to a guy who wants to control a dump of a city, like 2 other factions, and got stopped. Choose which one you'd like to win".

Not to mention that "it does not make sense" that a nobody of a mailman in this barren dessert of a war zone has the luxury to think of revenge when everyone else is fighting to survive.

If you want to sit and cherry-pick things that do not make sense...in a game... there will always be a million things you can pick and show as "this game does not make any sense therefore it is bad!".

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

Oddly I think Fallout NV's hardcore system would have been much better in Fallout 3. There were just too many resources in Fallout NV to ever be concerned about your health/water/food while the capitol wasteland existed mainly on 200 year old snacky cakes and dodgy water sources.

Fallout 3 made you much more attached to your character through it's story. New Vegas was just like 'You are some random guy, have fun' If they had actually combined the attachment factor of F3 with the story of NV that would have been amazing. Especially if they had incorporated the story of Lonesome Road into your origin story. (Like if your character grew up in Lonesome Road and then you blacked out the rest of the events through trauma leaving a gap in your characters memory and the players experience) It would have been really dramatic that way.

I personally was like, okay Chandler shot me in the head and I lived *shrug* :| while my character was apparently thirsting for bloody revenge. I didn't feel the same way my character did because I had no attachment to her or her life.

I prefer New Vegas to Fallout 3 but those are the things I think it does better.

(For those discussing it the earlier Fallout games had their own silliness too. in Fallout Tactics for example there was a guy who was tasked with refilling the Nuka Cola machines. http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Phil,_the_Nuka-Cola_dude. The setting of all the games makes no sense at all. Doesn't make it any less fun.)

 

[Denamic]

Looks like someone has a grudge on Fallout 3 for not being Fallout 1 and 2...

Except that I said it's a great game.
My issue with it is the shitty main story and shittier ending.
The main story isn't the focus of games like these anyway.

 

[SajuukKhar]

As for bugs, they can be fixed, bad writing, boring atmosphere, illogical plot, black and white morality, and boring characters can not.

To bad Obsidian never fixes their bugs... leaving their games with constant CTDs, and broken quests to such an extent that Bethesda's games look stable.

Writing the best book ever means nothing if you can't get it printed on a book that doesn't dissolve after 3 minutes.

And sure bugs CAN be fixed, but a lot of things CAN happen, but that doesn't mean they actually will happen.

It really seems like the people who use the argument you just made don't actually think it through, because if they actually did, they would realize how idiotic and broken of an argument it is, especially in Obsidian's case.

*captcha*
Face the music

What people need to do when it comes to Obsidian.

 

[Sean Hollyman]

New Vegas had better combat and weapons, aiming down the site was good too, and it had fun quests and companions

3 Had a better environment, everything looked more apocalypse-is.

 

[piinyouri]

I'm not bothering to say which one I think is better.
I enjoyed them both.

As most have said, I really enjoyed FO3's bleak atmosphere and better exploration.

At the same time, I loved FO:NV's tighter story, more dynamic factions, having zones that you absolutely cannot go into until you are stronger, and marginally better writing.

 

[DRes82]

New Vegas is a superior game in every aspect. That's not to say FO3 is bad, it isn't. Its a thoroughly enjoyable game. New Vegas just feels more believable. The soundtrack in New Vegas was awesome, as well.

Is there a hardcore mode in FO3? I can't remember. I should go install it again.

 

[Vault101]

New vegas does everything better

Morality
story
charachters

it has the the scope of FO3 with the story aspects of a Bioware game

 

[loc978]

The one thing I'd say Fallout 3 did "better" than New Vegas was be grimdark as fuck at every turn. Fallout has never really been about that, though. Oh, there's also the part where it revived a franchise we all thought was dead. That was good stuff.
*edit* forgot the radio. 3 had a much better set of radio stations. Memorable, involved in the plot, often funny, much better music.

I still say the series should go:
Fallout 1
Fallout 2: New Reno
Fallout Tactics: Chicago (spinoff)
That one console abomination I shall not name (not even worthy of being called a spinoff)
Fallout: DC (spinoff)
Fallout 3: New Vegas

Not to downplay the Chicago and DC games. Loved 'em both, they're just not really part of the main storyline started in FO1.

Is there a hardcore mode in FO3? I can't remember. I should go install it again.

Yes and no. It's called Wanderer's Edition and it's on the FO3 Nexus.

 

[Tropicaz]

I loved them both, they're probably 2 of my top 10 favourite games. I preferred new vegas though, it was just awesome, i thought. With fallout 3 it felt like i spent bloody ages wandering around underground tunnels/getting lost in the main city and it got a bit frustrating sometimes. But Old world blues/Lonesome Road are certainly my favourite DLCs i've ever purchased.

But where fallout 3 truly lost the battle in my eyes was the ending. The first time i did it, I had fawkes as a follower and they came up with some piss poor excuse why he wouldnt sort out the job for you (seriously fawkes? you're going to let me die when you're immune to the radiation?!? Cheers, you douche). Then i decided fine, i'll sort it, but could not remember what the code was for the reactor, so everyone died in there. (Except fawkes, who presumably strolled out chuckling to himself and talking about destiny). But the ending screen thought that i had pissed off and left everyone to die, so i got the douchebag ending. They never realised that someone could be quite as inept as I was, and programmed in no 'you idiot' ending.

EDIT: Can anyone tell me the name of the quest where you went into that kind of dreaming state in fallout 3? You went to this weird little suburbia. That quest was awesome.