Your opinion on Fallout: New Vegas VS. Fallout 3

[malestrithe]

I prefer New Vegas over Fallout 3. I prefer my apocalypses to have more whimsy in them. Also, I live in the Mojave desert, about 6 hours outside of Vegas, so any game close to home is always a bonus.

Both games are linear as all get out. Just because you get to sandbox more in Fallout 3 does not stop it being linear. All that really means is the game is a lot more patient while you dick around than it should be. New Vegas has you being stuck on one path until you reach Novac. After that, you can go anywhere in the game.

I still became an unstoppable demigod at level 15 once I discovered that laser rifle that can regenerate its own bullets and once I put the majority of my skill points into Energy Weapons, Barter, and Repair.

 

[OakTable]

Also, wondering, what's with the whole, "Sure, Fallout: New Vegas had better gameplay/story/etc., but it didn't let you go exploring, so that's why I like Fallout 3," attitude? IMO, exploration is just sprinkles compared to the story that is the hot fudge sauce that covers the delicious RPG gameplay ice cream. You don't really need it.

 

[Jake0fTrades]

Why can't I like both?

I'll play Fallout 3 when I'm feeling "Metro 2033" and I'll play New Vegas when I'm feeling "Book of Eli".

 

[restoshammyman]

i have one major issue with new vegas.
i took over houses casino by killing him, i want to open it up for business.
i know more then just a few groups that would love to have a foot hold within new vegas(the brotherhood, kings, the dudes from the camp with that doctor chick with the spiky Mohawk.)
then why cant i give them that foot hold by getting them to work for me?

i wanted my own casino QQ.

 

[DarkhoIlow]

I liked Fallout 3 over New Vegas,because in general I like western themed games,but New Vegas was really not my cup of tea.

I despised it in such a way that I stopped playing for a few months,before I stepped on my pride and continued the game to finish it.

My 2 cents.

 

[sbb]

NV was better than 3 in pretty much every way except stability. IT crashed on me an average of once every three hours which comes to a lot of times in a game like this. Otherwise, however, dialogue choices being affected by skill levels was great, factions were great. Hardcore mode was a good idea that was really not hardcore enough but was a step in the right direction. Weapon variety and mods were great. Companions personalities, dialogue, quests were great. Real choice in the storyline is a huge difference from 3. Very well done.


3 was not really less linear at all, especially when you had to do anything in downtown DC for the first time. Huge, impassible buildings blocked you at every turn, and the only way to get where you were going was through about a dozen different subway stops. And tough monsters do NOT make NV linear, because there's always the possibility of running right past them, sneaking around them, or even killing them if you're good enough. Just because it's harder doesn't mean the enemies represent a wall.

 

[artanis_neravar]

Maybe I'm the only one (Didn't feel like reading through three pages of walls) but I thought the motivation in NV was so much better than F3. I mean my dad lied to me all my life and then left me in this shit hole to run off with no explanation, fuck my dad he's a douche and if I could have I would have left him on his own and never found him. Now in New Vegas that guy shot me, I wanted to slowly kill him shoot his knee caps then his elbows, etc. I just feel that the revenge was a greater motivator for me.

 

[ashglent]

after sinking well over 100 hours into both i have to say for story fallout 3 hands down but gameplay i tend to lean toward nv purely because it feels a little tighter on the shooter parts

 

[artanis_neravar]

I liked Fallout 3 over New Vegas,because in general I like western themed games,but New Vegas was really not my cup of tea.

I despised it in such a way that I stopped playing for a few months,before I stepped on my pride and continued the game to finish it.

My 2 cents.

Why did you despise it?

 

[Snotnarok]

NV is far far better, in gameplay mechanics and the sheer volume of weapons added. Fallout 3 had like 3 in each category.

And the absolute killer to FO3 is the stupid bloody level scaling system, go anywhere you want! There's no enemies that will instakill you here! No there should be tougher enemies in certain areas and not everything should be a damned cakewalk.

Hell I tried a no town run in FO3 (No towns, no shops, only what I found out in the wasteland) and it was STILL too easy on the hardest mode.

 

[Lt. Vinciti]

The reputation system is painful....no matter what it leaves you feeling...dirty


Also I dislike NV for the fact it has no memorable characters....

Yeah you can say Veronica....but I prefered the silly things in 3 like Zipp when I loot thru items going "Nuka for Zipp" and cant recall much from NV that would really stick in the goofy things dept


Also I dont know about the bugs in 3 (my brother said everytime he tried to VATS a radscorp on the PS3 GotY version he froze) but I played (dl'd all the DLC) on the 360 and cant think of very many bugs....but yeah New Vegas has bugs...like a bad apt for a cheap price...and I disliked Dead Money...it was like The Pitt + Mothership Zeta but...I dont get to get my stuff...

 

[DRSH1989]

Falout III Newz Vegaz iz bestest worztezt game ever.
Translation: Both games are just as good, BUT BUGGY for some of us.

 

[Amondren]

Fallout 3 immersed me due to the intro which made me a character not a black slate (sure it took a bit for a tutorial but it was better then a slate in a game like FO3. I liked NV's game play and story a lot though and the characters are memorable and I really enjoy the game play.

 

[Al-Bundy-da-G]

I feel alone when I say that Fallout 3 was much better compared to new vegas. From the discussions I've seen, Almost everyone thinks that new vegas is better. I completely disagree. Seriously, Play new vegas for a few days, then play fallout 3. Fallout 3's graphics are better than new vegas'! Plus when you start out in new vegas, Its secretly linear. Because if you go anyway but south toward Primm, you get either eaten by cazadors or mauled my deathclaws. I'll admit it opens up once you finally start heading north, but still. Plus the story of revenge just doesn't resonate with me as much as finding my father does. Oh, and if you say that new vegas is better because of the new weapons and mods, well listen to this. Almost EVERY new addition to game play(i.e. new weapons, weapon mods, special ammo etc.) all of that had already been done by the modders of fallout 3. Everything that makes New vegas unique from fallout 3 was already done before obsidian began development on next game. There were new weapon mods, weapon mod... mods,special ammo mods and even desert mods for fallout 3.

But I digress...

So which do you think is better and why?

Actually my first play through i went towards black mountain and avoided the death claws altogether since they couldn't reach me on the cliff i was on.

As for which is better it's kinda a toss up NV has more weapons enemies and more variety between each location than fallout 3 did. And the iron sights work better for me instead of just zooming in.

I would say it's better than 3 but the way they tried build a story around only a few locations kinda felt a little tedious compared to how fallout spread the story through the wasteland from V101 to Megaton to the Radio station and so on it felt like you could either find dear old dad or just ignore him completely to do your own thing. In NV I was always doings someones bidding like a slave even when i went independent without house it seemed like yes man was the boss.

So 3 but just barely because of the freakin fort glitches

 

[Golden potatoe]

Don't you guys know what they say? What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas, because it got glitched inside a rock. Oh Ma Lawd, the glitches in NV completely ruined the experience for me. Which was a shame because I loved FO3. Also I was really disappointed that after about 2 and a half years the same graphics engine was in use with barely any NOTICEABLE improvements. Seriously c'mon guys, you can't say that the character models don't look like ass in comparison to the other current AAA titles on the market today.

 

[Johnson294]

Fallout 3, by far, everythign was better, dialogue, the radio stations by far, the cities (NV cities were dull empty and consisted of just a bunch of unnamed NPCs), the wasteland is much more interesting, some "locations" in NV consisted simply of an abandoned shack and a never inhabited bed (this made up about 1/3 of the locations), the quests and characters were much more memorable (really pretty much every quest in NV was boring, FO3 had you assassinating people for an old man, blowing up towns, murdering an entire skyscraper worth of people, going back to your vault and solving the problems, etc. I can't even remember a single quest in NV tbh...), the story was more original (you're near death and are on a trail of revenge, sooo original...), a better, grittier atmosphere, reputation is just awful and has many irritating flaws, karma in NV is broken (no karma loss for killing humans but you gain karma for killing ghouls...?), and not to mention the glitches, oh god, the glitches...

I can't really help but think the people who like NV better are just thinking it because of old Fallout and Obsidian nostalgia, as FO3 is really the better game in every respect.

 

[Megahedron]

People have probably already said all this, but here goes:

Fallout 3 had a much better main story line. I actually felt connected to it, and wanted to see it through to the end. There seemed to be more giant interior areas in 3 as well, especially because about half of them were full of non-hostiles in NV (at least, if you played nice). Also, the crazy factor of the random locations was way higher in 3. I absolutely loved that you could wander into a building and it would turn out to be full of Chinese soldiers somehow, or that you could find random Lincoln memorabilia.

New Vegas had better companions, not only did they have interesting character arcs you could influence, I actually took them everywhere because they didn't die all over the place. The number of factions in NV was also great, and the reputation system was a vast improvement over straight karma. Most importantly, however, was that the Courier actually had a hand in how the game ends. I was really upset that there was no way for me to side with the Enclave in 3 (I played NV first, so I was expecting that).

The swing factor, I think, is both the atmosphere, and the bugs. Fallout 3 was all grey, all the time. I honestly don't think I could have played the game without Three Dog keeping me company, that's how dreary it was. In NV, the mood just seemed lighter, there was generally brown instead of grey and the companions were a lot of fun to just listen to. And this one is definitely subjective, some people will prefer the more apocalyptic setting, I found that the Mojave was more inviting, so I was more open to wandering around. And then... Everyone seems to prefer whichever game was less buggy for them. In my case, that was NV by a landslide. But depending on your personal experience... Yeah.

To wind down the wall of text, I like New Vegas. The companions kept me company, and the desert seemed (somehow) hospitable. And the game didn't crash a dozen times, but everyone else's did, apparently.

 

[Blatherscythe]

NV is better than F3 in like every way, especially when it comes to linearity.

Most importantly the characters are actually interesting and you feel like you're in an apocalyptic world, which F3 failed at spectacularly.

Man, even with all the bugs I still think NV is miles better. I mean it's not even close for me. NV is still a long shot from F1 and especially my beloved F2, but atleast it feels like a Fallout game.

So wait, a barely irradiated wastland with tons of farms and a large body of fresh clean water along with a prewar city and power feels more apocolyptic than a barren, irraidiated hell hole filled with monstrosities, impure water, mutation and a destroyed city? Bullshit. When I think apocolypse I don't think New Vegas, besides Fallout 3 had to remove the bad taste that BOS left in people's mouth as well as attract new players and catch them up to speed.

Back on topic. With gameplay, I'll give the point to Fallout New Vegas, iron-sights, more weapons and armor and new enemies along with a shit load of mods beats what Fallout 3 had.

Visuals, point to Fallout 3, while NV shows how the world would really be like 200 years after a nuclear exchange, I think DC got nuked more and so they could get away with the radiation more. Besides, Fallout 3 had more interesting areas to explore then all the others combined, there was just so much to explore and it really pulled off the post apocolyptic feel, even with food being easy to come by.

Characters are a whole differant story, in Fallout 3 you had 3 kinds of people, the asshole, who tells you to fuck off for no reason, the quest-giver, repairman, vender or talkitive NPC is the, helpful one and then you have the evil bastard, the person who is evil for it's own sake. Fallout NV had more interesting characters, like Arcade or Veronica and most of the factions weren't evil (except those bastards across the river).

Finally we have story, while the story of Fallout 3 is engaging once you find your dad the game's main focus was exploration and it shows. The story suffered and thanks to fans and a limited time Broken Steel made you actions feel less powerful than they should have. Fallout NV is telling a story about a four way stand-off of idealogies. It became hard to not be intrigued by it, and once it sucked you in you didn't want to let go. Point to NV.

Fallout 3 was a good game and Fallout NV is an excellant sequel to it, the only downside is the boring locations, that will hopefully be fixed with new DLC.

And one more thing, both games have a lot a bugs, people just need to give Beth and Obsidian time to fix the bugs.

THE BUGS! THE GOD DAMN BUGS!

 

[Al-Bundy-da-G]

i actually liked dead money took me out of my element of blood guts and machetes to sneak around and sucker punch their heads of with spears. that and it didn't freeze my damn game every 5 minutes like FO:3 broken steel dlc on my ps3 still haven't beaten it yet cause it freezes in the air field like it was on a timer.

 

[DarkhoIlow]

I liked Fallout 3 over New Vegas,because in general I like western themed games,but New Vegas was really not my cup of tea.

I despised it in such a way that I stopped playing for a few months,before I stepped on my pride and continued the game to finish it.

My 2 cents.

Why did you despise it?

Hm..where to start:

-Half way through the game it became so tedious that I couldn't stand it anymore.

-The whole "Amnesia" at the start of the game was a bit "meh".Seen it before in dozens of games.

-The radio channels had so few songs(I think around 5 total?)that I had to use my own playlist in Winamp to get some variety into it.

-The whole story was too dragged.After I finished the game,I felt that I barely accomplished anything.I helped both sides settle their difference and put House in charge(yay,now what?).

-I played the game back when it was so buggy that every few minutes it would crash.It really ruined the whole immersion for me and this is one of the top reasons I stopped playing it,until the patches that fixed this issue somewhat.

Those are a few reasons why I didn't enjoy New Vegas compared to others that have played it and enjoyed it.We are all different in our tastes when it comes to games.