Fallout 3 vs Fallout New Vegas - Page 3

quote justplayingitcool

Wait?! What?!

If that's the case, maybe you shouldn't be playing Fallout, Fable might suit you.

Or maybe I just don't like the way they handled giving lots of choices.

I enjoy plenty of RPG's where a quest can give you an a good 5 or 6 ways for things to pan out, just because I don't like the way NV handles that point doesn’t mean I suddenly want a linear game or some sort of corridor shooter. Fallout 3 offered plenty of choices with certain quests yet I haven’t complained about that. The same applies to linear RPG’s such as Dragon Age and Mass Effect the former (at least in Origins) usually gave a few different choices for quests yet generally speaking I enjoyed that.

quote

In Caesar's defense, they crucified criminals and the people at Nipton kept attacking Caesar's patrols. They offer protection to their traders, and remember this game has a deep politic message in this game. Caesar believes Democracy doesn't work, and it is proved that the most famous NCR Leader, President Tandhi was in office for a long while. This game is basically what you believe in and how New Vegas and the Mojave Wasteland are going to benefit and having long term stability.

The political theme was good in New Vegas; it was one of the things I actually enjoyed. My original complaint is the way random shades of grey were inserted for the sake of it and never really elaborated on.

quote

I agree, maybe the introduction is better, but after that it was poor, very poor, when I found James and found out why he ran away. I felt so underwhelmed. There was so many flaws in why left, I know maybe its a good time after 18/19 years to ditch my son and head out to the Capital Wasteland so my son can't follow me, even though he is probably going to be killed by the overseer, but I'm a selfish douche anyway. What a fantastic story. Not....

In Fallout New Vegas, you are shot in the head for unknown reasons, maybe for money, maybe for power, but who knows? While you explore the Mojave wasteland you meet various tribes all seeking power to control The Strip. When you finally meet Benny, you find out that the chip is a device that allows you to upgrade the robots and how he wants power over the strip too.

Not to mention the fact that absolutely everyone (except YesMan and children) can be killed. No random invincible people because they are tied to a quest here.

I’m not implying it is a particularly fantastic story, and some of the flaws you mentioned do detract from the overall quality of the story. I’ve been playing F3 recently and from what I remember originally the plan was that Jonas was going to fill in the LW and explain everything but his death threw everything into disarray. I’ll admit it was a bit stupid for James to just leave and expect everything to be hunky-dory, but I wouldn’t say he was selfish.

New Vegas also had a fairly decent story which once you got to the city really picked up. You already know how I feel about the beginning but it was still enjoyable enough. Maybe it was the fact my copy of the game bordered on unplayable so I could never really get into the game. No Bethesda game has had an amazing MQ so I can’t really fault either 3 or NV for that, especially when both were decent in their own right.

In regards to most people being able to be killed that isn’t really a big deal for me. I don’t kill npc’s for the sake of doing it so that really doesn’t bother me much. Much like Skyrim I’ve had quests ruined because of something random killing an npc thus screwing up the quest so I would rather some npc’s are made essential at least until they’re no longer needed for a quest.

Fallout 3 has a special place in my heart. It may not be as expansive with choices of play or diverse in weapons as New vegas, but I say I like FO3 the most.
If New Vegas were more like 3, such as the freedom and space of travel, as well as the surroundings it would be #1. But the linear, mostly rocky and desert terrain really got me. If I want to play a nuclear apocalypse game, I want to be surrounded by dilapidated buildings all the time reminding me how *bleep*ed up everything is.

F3 they did their homework , NV was whack. mr.house was garbage. more factiony than awesome aftermathy apocalypsey . making the wasteland survival guide .. awesome.
only some upgrades in NV were better. F3 was WELL DONE

blegh..

rad poisoning.

quote Darnit

quote KainDog

I prefer NV. BUT, F3 takes the DLC cake. Aliens,slavers,destroying the government, and a swamp. Compared to robo-brains,nukes,a zombie casino, and tribals. I really only enjoyed NV more because of how bright it was. The monotonous gray of F3 got old.

This was what kind of ruined FO3 for me. At first I was impressed as it did indeed capture the whole 'post apocalyptic' feel but after a week or so of playing I just wished that there was somewhere a little more civilized to go. I know Oasis was a lot brighter but it just felt more weird than civilized. Whereas in NV you had Vegas to go to which gave the everything a brighter feel. Plus the area in the mountains around Jacobstown had a somewhat pre-war feel to it.

That is on the contrary, the monotonous grey is what kept it interesting to me. You can be heading for a quest marker or mapping the area on your pipboy, and then a ragtag team of mutants turn the corner with a gatling laser. Often I would be in an area that I thought was very familiar, and then discover a building I had not explored or spot a landmark amongst the ruined houses.

NV is a monotonous green yellow.

They're both great. If I had to choose one though it'd probably be New Vegas. It felt like it had more content, more choices, and RPG elements. Of course I can not remember F3 for the life of me. I just remember Liam Neeson.

FO3 gets it for me, purely because it was the first Fallout game I played in the series and I fell in love with it. That and the fact that it was influenced so much by The Road which is one of my favourite books.

quote Solx

I.....hate......Cazadors......

(if you could not figure this out, my vote goes to FO3: GOTY. *bleep* NV!)

40mm Grenade Rifle and a Cowboy repeater

quote Rat Sass

FO3 Muties were definately better than those Shreks in NV.

The green mutants in NV are actually lore friendly whilst the ones in F3 are not,in the original Fallouts they could talk and were capable of reason,unlike the ones in Fallout 3 I guess you could argue that the FEV used to turn the ones in F3 was a different strain of FEV,explaining why later generations of mutants are different from Fawkes,being uncapable of reason,but then Fawkes should have been green like the ones in NV not yellow,that is one of my main arguements against F3 it did not stay true to the lore on the mutants,although I did enjoy Harold in Oasis that was a good reference to the old games (which I enjoyed).Back on topic I cannot give it to one game or another,although I do think NV has more to offer in terms of quests and weapons but I cannot denounce one of my favorite games in my collection (F3).