Your opinion on Fallout: New Vegas VS. Fallout 3
- Thread starter R4V3NSFAN1976
- Start date
Fallout 3 > New Vegas
Liam Neeson and Malcolm McDowell (the main guy in A Clockwork Orange). But then NV did have Matt Perry, John Doman (Rawls from the wire), Worf and MACHETE.
The way I see it is that NV was just another good and long expansion of F3.
Liam Neeson and Malcolm McDowell (the main guy in A Clockwork Orange). But then NV did have Matt Perry, John Doman (Rawls from the wire), Worf and MACHETE.
The way I see it is that NV was just another good and long expansion of F3.
sarge1942 said:
*Tip of the hat*Quazimofo said:
As much as I liked three dog it's funny that you mentioned him. He was actually one of the things that totally broke the immersion in the game for me. The problem was I don't know what I was doing but every time I played through the game he would fall out of step with reality and start reporting randomly. "Hey guys! I just got a visitor to the studio, a. cat. named. JAMES." "He's dead Three Dog. I saw him Die." "James was in the studio just the other day and he was telling me about this dream of his!" "NO THREE DOG! THAT- THAT'S NOT POSSIBLE! HOW CAN THIS BE?!?! BE GONE FOUL SORCERER!" So yeah, broken three dog was not quite infinitely amusing but only made it apparent this world was imperfect.boyvirgo666 said:
Both games are better than the other in different aspects in my opinion.
Things i think fallout 3 did better: Character's with actual emotion/character, rather than the emotionless creeps that almost every npc in New Vegas is, main quest that actually feels like it's important, rather than just something you have to do to advance in the game, more freedom, rather than invisible walls all over the place.
Things i think new vegas did better: Stealth doesn't make the game as easy mode as it did in FO3, combat is more engaging and your own ability dependant rather than your character stats, overall environment style is more like the one in fallout 1 and 2, rather than the heavy realism that was in FO3.
One major issue i have with New Vegas is, while they improved combat a ton, they made fighting way too easy, i've re-installed FO3 recently, just to compare the combat, and i'm actually finding it more difficult to survive fights in FO3 on hard difficulty, than i do in New Vegas with very hard, hardcore mode, and limiting myself to weapons that fit into the Cowboy perk(dynamite, knives, and lever-action weapons). Also, it's more of a personal preferrence, but i kinda wish new vegas had more areas fur urban combat, like it was in the Washington D.C. ruin area in FO3.
Things i think fallout 3 did better: Character's with actual emotion/character, rather than the emotionless creeps that almost every npc in New Vegas is, main quest that actually feels like it's important, rather than just something you have to do to advance in the game, more freedom, rather than invisible walls all over the place.
Things i think new vegas did better: Stealth doesn't make the game as easy mode as it did in FO3, combat is more engaging and your own ability dependant rather than your character stats, overall environment style is more like the one in fallout 1 and 2, rather than the heavy realism that was in FO3.
One major issue i have with New Vegas is, while they improved combat a ton, they made fighting way too easy, i've re-installed FO3 recently, just to compare the combat, and i'm actually finding it more difficult to survive fights in FO3 on hard difficulty, than i do in New Vegas with very hard, hardcore mode, and limiting myself to weapons that fit into the Cowboy perk(dynamite, knives, and lever-action weapons). Also, it's more of a personal preferrence, but i kinda wish new vegas had more areas fur urban combat, like it was in the Washington D.C. ruin area in FO3.
I'm not sure which side I'm on. I loved both of them so i'll try and do a list
Fallout 3
- Had Liam Neeson, I actually played as a good character because i didn't like the fact that he was disappointed in me if i was a bad character
- Lot's of the small places had a lot of personality, for example if in NV i'd find a shack with just some empty bottles in it but in Fo3 that would either have a unique person in it for a small wee story not necessarily a marked quest but just a nice thing to look into.
- Choice for direction. In NV i was told go south. I said "fuck that" and tried to take the quickest route north but i got eaten by flies, reloaded then got eaten by Deathclaws. In 3 i could go in any direction once i got out of the vault. After i heard my dad was in D.C i could go across the river and enter D.C from the top and take a half dozen routes or i could go south and try find one of the other crossings. I once ended wondering around in the ruins on the west side of the river for an hour, meeting a group of BoS soldiers who wanted my help rescuing one of their friends.
New Vegas
- Gave me story choice. I could side with Mr House, NCR, Legion or go it on my own. 3 didn't give me that choice it was just you're on the BoS' side.
- I liked the deserted deserts that stretched for miles.
- Had the Legion. For some reason i just really liked those guys. On my 3 playthroughs i've sided with them twice and gone it on my own the other time.
- Characters had better personality and dialogue
- Liked fighting majority human enemies, i just don't like mutants
Fallout 3
- Had Liam Neeson, I actually played as a good character because i didn't like the fact that he was disappointed in me if i was a bad character
- Lot's of the small places had a lot of personality, for example if in NV i'd find a shack with just some empty bottles in it but in Fo3 that would either have a unique person in it for a small wee story not necessarily a marked quest but just a nice thing to look into.
- Choice for direction. In NV i was told go south. I said "fuck that" and tried to take the quickest route north but i got eaten by flies, reloaded then got eaten by Deathclaws. In 3 i could go in any direction once i got out of the vault. After i heard my dad was in D.C i could go across the river and enter D.C from the top and take a half dozen routes or i could go south and try find one of the other crossings. I once ended wondering around in the ruins on the west side of the river for an hour, meeting a group of BoS soldiers who wanted my help rescuing one of their friends.
New Vegas
- Gave me story choice. I could side with Mr House, NCR, Legion or go it on my own. 3 didn't give me that choice it was just you're on the BoS' side.
- I liked the deserted deserts that stretched for miles.
- Had the Legion. For some reason i just really liked those guys. On my 3 playthroughs i've sided with them twice and gone it on my own the other time.
- Characters had better personality and dialogue
- Liked fighting majority human enemies, i just don't like mutants
Some of these comments make me wonder how much people hate Cazadores, seeing as people are willing to say Fallout 3 is better just because it doesn't have them, even when they say in the same sentence that New Vegas had a better story/gameplay/hats/etc. Recent patch just nerfed their aggro range, so they're not AS bad.
Oh yeah, I'll go for the Fallout New Vegas>Fallout 3 side, mainly because Fallout 3 had a pretty boring story. It could've been good, had Bethesda put more than a minimal effort towards implementing good RPG elements (Choices and Consequences, good dialog, characters that stand out from one another) and not just reusing old factions and plot elements from the first 2 games and adding just plain dumb stuff to the game. A city that willingly built itself around a nuke? A Peter Pan-esque settlement of annoying brats? Brotherhood of Steel isn't full of giant techno-loving douchebags? I ALWAYS have to work with the bratty kids and the BoS? Excuse me while I run uninstall.exe.
Oh yeah, I'll go for the Fallout New Vegas>Fallout 3 side, mainly because Fallout 3 had a pretty boring story. It could've been good, had Bethesda put more than a minimal effort towards implementing good RPG elements (Choices and Consequences, good dialog, characters that stand out from one another) and not just reusing old factions and plot elements from the first 2 games and adding just plain dumb stuff to the game. A city that willingly built itself around a nuke? A Peter Pan-esque settlement of annoying brats? Brotherhood of Steel isn't full of giant techno-loving douchebags? I ALWAYS have to work with the bratty kids and the BoS? Excuse me while I run uninstall.exe.
Things in Fallout 3 are less black and white? Are you kidding me?sumanoskae said:
Do I even need to mention Megaton, or about the Brotherhood being the unambigously good guys unlike they were in the previous games?
As an old fan of the Fallout series, after playing New Vegas I felt that I could recognize that game as a closer sequel to the first games than Fallout 3. Emotionally and intuitively, New Vegas reminds me of the experience of playing those cherished old games, while Fallout 3 felt like an imitation that did not understand them as deeply.
Of course, the enjoyment of players who played only Fallout 3 is perfectly valid. I've tried to rationalize what differentiates New Vegas beyond the influence of Feargus Urquhart.
The original poster points out that your movement in the early game of NV is restricted compared to Fallout 3, and I agree that this is important. It's important for establishing a mood of isolation, which connects the game to the openings of those older games. Unlike Fallout 3 which immediately dropped you into a mess of choices, the beginning of New Vegas removes you from the center of the game, which has the effect of making the whole world feel grander. IMHO.
I've also noticed hearing some musical cues after turning off the radio while playing New Vegas which remind me of the older games.
Though I don't know to what extent groking the Fallout vibe is a requirement to making a fun RPG - certainly I've played a lot of fun RPG's that weren't Fallout - but I could imagine that understanding that Fallout core gave the developers extra confidence, which definitely improved their ability to craft a fun game.
Of course, the enjoyment of players who played only Fallout 3 is perfectly valid. I've tried to rationalize what differentiates New Vegas beyond the influence of Feargus Urquhart.
The original poster points out that your movement in the early game of NV is restricted compared to Fallout 3, and I agree that this is important. It's important for establishing a mood of isolation, which connects the game to the openings of those older games. Unlike Fallout 3 which immediately dropped you into a mess of choices, the beginning of New Vegas removes you from the center of the game, which has the effect of making the whole world feel grander. IMHO.
I've also noticed hearing some musical cues after turning off the radio while playing New Vegas which remind me of the older games.
Though I don't know to what extent groking the Fallout vibe is a requirement to making a fun RPG - certainly I've played a lot of fun RPG's that weren't Fallout - but I could imagine that understanding that Fallout core gave the developers extra confidence, which definitely improved their ability to craft a fun game.
I was talking to a friend about this a few days ago.
I would say I prefer NV, at least for now. The reason being that I'm playing them on the 360 and not on a PC. Without the PC version weapon mods stealth in F3 is pointless.
F3 also made it too easy to max out all specials and skills, I ended up raising the difficulty up to very hard out of pity to the enemies and on the odd occasion that I lost health I would just spam a bunch of stim packs. I enjoy hardcore mode on NV as it increases the challenge, forcing me to think and not just run in with a minigun churning bullets till everything stops moving.
That all said, NV didn't hook me in as much as F3 and NV felt more like an expansion or a mod rather than a full game.
I would say I prefer NV, at least for now. The reason being that I'm playing them on the 360 and not on a PC. Without the PC version weapon mods stealth in F3 is pointless.
F3 also made it too easy to max out all specials and skills, I ended up raising the difficulty up to very hard out of pity to the enemies and on the odd occasion that I lost health I would just spam a bunch of stim packs. I enjoy hardcore mode on NV as it increases the challenge, forcing me to think and not just run in with a minigun churning bullets till everything stops moving.
That all said, NV didn't hook me in as much as F3 and NV felt more like an expansion or a mod rather than a full game.
i also agree, when three dog was working, he added immersion to the game, little things that revealed little bits of the game that just made it seem more full. but when he broke, it was a bit irksome. im sure if they made a little fix there, it would have been loads better. or if they added some extra music to his library. i know its been 200 years, but still, if we still have functioning radio equipment, why not some more archived songs?Ghengis John said:
New Vegas is the all-around better game.
Better writing, better characters, better quests, and a much more entertaining story coupled with endings that actually make you pause and think for a second.
NV felt more in-tune with the traditional Fallout titles: it's back out West, The Brotherhood of Steel aren't the paragons of virtue that they were in Fallout 3, and you're constantly at a battle with the Wasteland as opposed to turning into an unstoppable demi-god halfway through the storyline.
Better writing, better characters, better quests, and a much more entertaining story coupled with endings that actually make you pause and think for a second.
NV felt more in-tune with the traditional Fallout titles: it's back out West, The Brotherhood of Steel aren't the paragons of virtue that they were in Fallout 3, and you're constantly at a battle with the Wasteland as opposed to turning into an unstoppable demi-god halfway through the storyline.
Fallout 3 looks more with what a post-apocalyptic would look, has better atmosphere, more interesting locations.
Fallout NV: Looks more like the old Fallouts, has more locations but more boring ones, The Strip is a letdown, it has a better plot, better characters, better quests, better karma/faction system.
Altough I know I should love NV more as a gamer, the atmosphere and the set-up in the first 20 minutes of FO3 go a long way to make the game more enthralling.
PS- Better songlist in FO3, don't believe me? (bigironhishipbigirononhiship)
Fallout NV: Looks more like the old Fallouts, has more locations but more boring ones, The Strip is a letdown, it has a better plot, better characters, better quests, better karma/faction system.
Altough I know I should love NV more as a gamer, the atmosphere and the set-up in the first 20 minutes of FO3 go a long way to make the game more enthralling.
PS- Better songlist in FO3, don't believe me? (bigironhishipbigirononhiship)
Fallout 3: More stable, Liam Neeson, has full DLC, overpowered energy weapons (and dart gun), I preferred the atmosphere in some places.
New Vegas: More varied palette, more dynamic storyline, more quests, less retarded companions, more weapons, your dog is a robot, better range of characters/situations/personalities, Black Mountain Radio (two head bear people astride battle cattle!), a faction system, will have full DLC soon, overpowered melee and unarmed.
New Vegas: More varied palette, more dynamic storyline, more quests, less retarded companions, more weapons, your dog is a robot, better range of characters/situations/personalities, Black Mountain Radio (two head bear people astride battle cattle!), a faction system, will have full DLC soon, overpowered melee and unarmed.
I preffered Fallout 3 simply because of all the bugs in New Vegas. I had too many broken characters with Vegas before the XboxLive patch. Add to that the Chinese Stealth armour and the near perfect perk put the choice firmly in the Fallout 3 category. Being Invisable and sneaking are way too much fun for me. It's also how I play Oblivion.
I like Fallout 3 more than New Vegas.
In New Vegas, I feel the conversation system is just somehow better (kind of hard to explain), but it just doesn't have the same "fun factor" that Fallout 3 (still) has.
I also like the idea that I can still do quests and what not after completing Fallout 3 (I never played without Broken Steel). New Vegas kind of ruined that for me.
I do, however, also like the iron sights option in New Vegas. If that was added into Fallout 3, I'd probably delete New Vegas sraight away.
In New Vegas, I feel the conversation system is just somehow better (kind of hard to explain), but it just doesn't have the same "fun factor" that Fallout 3 (still) has.
I also like the idea that I can still do quests and what not after completing Fallout 3 (I never played without Broken Steel). New Vegas kind of ruined that for me.
I do, however, also like the iron sights option in New Vegas. If that was added into Fallout 3, I'd probably delete New Vegas sraight away.
