is this game easier then new las vegas? new las vegas is a pretty hard if u ask me. i was wondering if this fallout 3 is easier i heard its a great game what do you guys think?

thanks!

Yes, I realize that I'm everywhere on these forums.

To answer the questions in the title.
Easy game? As with New Vegas it depends on difficulty level, character creation and limitations you place on yourself.
Good Fallout? No, but it is a good game.

The game is alot easier than New Vegas. What makes it easier is because it has nothing in it that makes it a good Fallout game IMO. The enemies in Fallout 3 are level scaled. So they will be within your level ability to kill. There are no consequences to your actions so you don't have to worry about people getting pissed at you. You will get a faction that comes after you if you are good though.

The game is clear cut Good vs Evil. There is no hardcoe mode, so if you were using that in Fallout New Vegas, that could be one reason why it was harder for you. Ammo has no weight in Fallout 3 so you can carry all you want. You get a perk ever level.

Anyways, its a good game just not a good Fallout game IMO.

This will become a New Vegas vs Fallout 3 topic. Based on reading some of the OPs posts, I have a feeling that's what he wanted.

Also its just Fallout New Vegas, not New Las Vegas.

thanks, but what does "IMO" mean?

In my opinion(IMO). It is something that isn't said enough on the internet.

I thought 3 was a lot harder than nv. Great game but a rough one.

I actually found both to be rather easy, but the first few levels of Fallout 3 are rather challenging with the FWE mod.

And New Vegas is the superior Fallout by far.

I felt New Vegas was easier than Fallout 3, but I liked New Vegas better.

My friend doesn't like New Vegas because it's too buggy, and for some reason he prefers the atmosphere of FO3 then New Vegas, but that's because he doesn't follow lore as much as I do, plus I always try telling him "What wasteland would look like that after 200 years?" He just doesn't care

i dont want this to be a "this vs that" thread! i just want to know is fallout 3 good?

Fallout 3 is fine, story line wise it's not great, Gameplay wise it's fine.

New Vegas was a sad disappointment because it was almost like fallout 3 but with a few stuff added.

Its great.

Difficulty wise they can be about the same however NV can be much harder. While Fallout NV was the better all around game my i found myself enjoying Fallout 3 more then NV. I've beaten 3 numerous times and have yet to beat NV because i felt my characters in 3 actually had a motive to see the story through to the end and a personal conection to the story while in NV no matter how i tried to role play my characters they always end up feeling like they were errand boy/girl. While I'll admit there are plots holes aplenty and alot of things that dont make sense and lore inconsistencies I just enjoyed 3 more then NV.

I guess you ignored the little differences like story, dialogue, depth, writing, characters, a setting that makes sense, consistent lore and explanations that are more thorough then "because".

Well the Difference with Fallout 3 and NV is that the game company went the way of several Mods that had came out for Fallout 3.
Like in New Vegas you can set the difficulty level too hardcoe the only way to play, plus it added in another mod that came out for Fallout 3 the weapons/Ammo/Weapons mods.
So basically saying is that you like the Mod Version of Fallout 3 due to that’s why NEW VEGAS HAS THEM in the game at release. If it was not for the modders then THEY WOULD NEVER OF HAD IT IN NEW VEGAS....

My opinion if Bethesda ever went back and added a New Vegas hardcoe/Weapons/Ammo/Weapon mods to Fallout 3 then Fallout 3 would possible be the TOP GAME EVER and New Vegas would not have **** on it. I love the ones who say NV has better dialog then Fallout 3, I find that it does not and find it about the same if not worse.

Who knows if its true? Do you have an interview that you can link that has the makers of New Vegas saying that they did this?

I really liked Fallout 3, but the dialogue was slightly better then Oblivion's. If you think the dialogue of Fallout 3 and New Vegas are on par then I don't think you were actually listening when people were talking. Talk to Mr. House again, then talk to someone in Fallout 3. Read the Survivalist's story from Honest Hearts and tell me that anything Bethesda has ever written compares to it.

Three Dog: I fight the good fight with my voice!
LW:[Intelligence] So you fight the good fight with your voice?
Three Dog: I can see you are very smart.

And then there's Chief Hanlons speech from New Vegas:

You do realise that alot of the stuff that was modded for Fallout 3 was content that the Original Fallouts had right? So the modders were just putting content into Fallout 3 that should have been there in the first place. Since New Vegas was made by people that worked on the orginals, they would have added it anyways. So you are giving way to much credit to the modding community.

Also Fallout 3's writing and dialogue does svck. It has its moments but over all its just crap.

IMO FO3 goes to great lengths to support both gameplay and a [skewed] world setting that have little or nothing to do with the Fallout series; and in many instance presents a direct 'about face' to core the precepts and what made Fallout and Fallout 2 so great; (like having to accept being vilified for one's actions).

*That said... I think FO3 had incredible art & design in it; it presented its own ~albeit anachronistic view of what the Fallout world could have looked like after the war... but [strangely] it was set 200 years later and all progress from the prior series was ignored, and there was no way to respect the inhabitants anymore... where before they were striving to recover ~in FO3 they lived in squalor ~liked it; and maintained it indefinitely. IMO this was absurd, and very un-Fallout-like. Take the Citadel for instance. In Fallout 1 the BOS bunker was spotless; in FO3 they lived in a trash heap ~when it would (of course) be expected that they would have had the Pentagon livable within a week and presentable within a month.

Game-wise (as per topic) I think it was a good and easy game, but a poor example of the Fallout series.
*(It didn't have to be though... It's clear that the project had all of the potential for it; and then some, but IMO that's not what we got.)

The Citadel was far from a trash heap. There was one room where the cieling had collapsed and wasnt being used and the court yard was a bit of a mess but it was a training yard. But the rest of the Citadel was was pretty clean and orderly.

The Citadel was one of the places that disappointed me the most. The first thing any military orginization would have done would be to get a bunch of grunts together and get the place cleaned up and painted. This would have been done before anything else was started. They would have then assigned regular clean-up crews to keep it clean. It gave me the impression that the BOS weren't very efficient. It was in direct contrast to Raven Rock that was spotless.

The Citadel was probably the most clean outpost/settlement in the game. I finished a play through awhile ago and i fail to see how it could be considered remotely dirty.

I like the Aliens in this game.


I suggest playing Mothership Zeta, over and over again.

Did you see Raven Rock? Or the Brotherhood HQ in Fallout 1? Or the Mojave Chapter's bunker?

The Citadel was a disorganized dump in comparison and goes completely against the military aspect of the Brotherhood.