What does fallout 3 do better then fallout new vegas

[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.

 

[Mr.Squishy]

I like both a whole bunch, really. Can't see much difference, but I don't regret having both.

 

[Mr Cwtchy]

It appears that when people dislike F3, they REALLY dislike it. I mean either that or the NMA regulars with a stick up their arse have descended on this thread.

For me, I don't find the games to be all that different. The combat is pretty much the same; point and shoot(from the hip or with ironsights) or use VATS. I loved exploring random places in 3, that took up so much of my time really that the main story gathered dust. Similar deal for NV too, albeit the exploring was more limited, and I didn't much like that.

The beginning sequence felt better in 3, and the 'primary motivation' of the story is likewise IMO. Yes, the (first) ending was awful, but the Tranquility Lane sequence more than made up for it for me.

Overall, these games seem to be heavily polarised, and frankly I don't think there's such a massive distinction between them that they should be.

 

[loc978]

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.

Dude. I've been waiting for someone to ask that. I have the answer in photograph form:

I love the implication of that sign.
Oh, and it's Tranquility Lane [http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Tranquility_Lane], not Dead End.

 

[Tropicaz]

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.

Dude. I've been waiting for someone to ask that. I have the answer in photograph form:

I love the implication of that sign.
Oh, and it's Tranquility Lane, not Dead End.

Thank you It's been bugging me for a while now. That was such a good section of the game. Where is that picture from btw? And dont say just next to Tranquility lane.

 

[SajuukKhar]

J.E. Sawyer is a genius. Read his formsprings for a bit, and I don't see how you might think otherwise.
http://www.formspring.me/JESawyer

Reading that makes him seem like incredibly smug, and a person who thinks he knows everything.

This is the same guy who bold face lied to everyone when he said you cant patch DLC.

 

[loc978]

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.

Dude. I've been waiting for someone to ask that. I have the answer in photograph form:

I love the implication of that sign.
Oh, and it's Tranquility Lane, not Dead End.

Thank you It's been bugging me for a while now. That was such a good section of the game. Where is that picture from btw? And dont say just next to Tranquility lane.

A little dead end country road called Tranquility Lane near my property... middle of nowhere, Clackamas county Oregon.
And you're welcome.

 

[Westaway]

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!

Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait,
Wait.
How does Fallout 3 make more sense than New Vegas? The bombs were dropped over 200 years ago, shit would have been rebuilt way fucking past a sheet metal shanty town. Speaking of Megaton, in Fallout 3 people built a town around A FUCKING NUCLEAR BOMB. Not only does that not make sense, but the inhabitants in Fallout 1 and 2 were characterized of all being REALLY FUFKING AFRAID OF NUCLEAR BOMBS, and therefor breaks the lore.
Honeslty, man. You can't say Fallout 3 makes more sens than New Vegas, you just can't.

 

[Mycroft Holmes]

Fallout 3 has a more cohesive and tightly told narrative that is more focused. Which depending on what you want out of a game can be a bonus.

I enjoyed the radio music more on Fallout 3 than on New Vegas.

Fallout 3 did post-apocalyptic a lot better than FNV. Half the built-in appeal of FNV was the cowboy theme; if you liked Westerns, the setting would probably appeal to you more than FO3's nuked-out feel.

I really don't care that much about westerns at all. Don't like John Wayne that much, and the few westerns I have seen(The Unforgiven and 3:10 to Yuma) I liked for reasons beyond the western genre. On the other side of the spectrum I absolutely love the idea of post apocalyptic worlds. I played the fallout games in my youth, I've donated for a new Wasteland game, I read post apocalyptic books(A canticle for Leibowitz, Anthem, The machine stops, that one Philip K Dick short story about a post nuclear apocalypse society living under ground while machines fight the war above) and intend to write a PA book myself.

However I very very much prefer New Vegas to Fallout 3 in terms of atmosphere. New Vegas is about the rebuilding and restructuring of societies that are struggling to survive in a post apocalyptic world. It's people trying to put things back in order in a destroyed world. Fallout 3 was taking a vibrant post apocalyptic franchise and then watering it down and making it as generic PA as possible while still using Fallout brand words like vault, nuka-cola and buffout(which hilariously Bethesda didn't even want to use; but Australia wouldn't let them use real drug names.)

 

[SajuukKhar]

Well is it smug to say things that are true?

Yes, in fact, saying true things in a certain way is what 90% of smugness is about. Being smug is knowing you are right, and then rubbing it in other people's faces.

Also, what he said about patching DLC was 100% wrong, and people called Obsidian out on it numerous times.

Just another excuse Obsidian made up to get out of fixing even one of their games.

 

[MiracleOfSound]

It does atmosphere and exploration a hundred times better than New Vegas in my opinion. NV has much better writing though.

 

[SajuukKhar]

I wouldn't even bring up lies when we all know your favorite is one of the biggest liars of them all.

Funny because..... most of the things people say Todd lied about... were really
-He said something
-Fans blew it out of proportion in what they expected it to be like
-Then when the game didn't meet their overblown expectations they claimed Todd lied

Most of the shit Todd supposedly "lied" about whas shit the fans made up. Furthermore Todd hasn't made such a obvious, and downright lazy cop-out excuse such as "you cant patch DLC".

Seriously, did ANYONE believe Obsidian when they said you cant patch DLC?

 

[Vivi22]

What does fallout 3 do better then fallout new vegas?

Honestly, if it does anything better then I either didn't notice or it wasn't important. New Vegas is the better game by far.

 

[Misterian]

immersion.

I don't know exactly why, but I found Fallout 3 more immersive than F:NV.