Fallout: NV vs Fallout 3 : Fallout Series Discussion

» Sat May 28, 2011 9:50 am

What?

No? Last I checked Vault Zero is where the BoS Originated from acording to Tactics, And it contradicted the entire vault experiment.

» Sat May 28, 2011 4:12 am

I know that Avellone screwed some stuff up, for example, the NCR flag.

» Sat May 28, 2011 10:19 am

What?

No? Last I checked Vault Zero is where the BoS Originated from acording to Tactics, And it contradicted the entire vault experiment.

:blink: :wacko: :banghead: I am going to make a wild guess and say you never played Tactics. There was never such thing mentioned in Tactics. Tactics does say a group of "military vault dwellers" but thats not as bad as "I was born before the bombs fell" and other have said that ". Continents were swallowed in flames and fell beneath the boiling oceans" is not canon. Every fallout has inconsistancies (I am not defending BoS that game is beyond saving). Tactics got it part right BoS did start out as military but not in a vault, it was Mariposa.

People have said Vault Zero contradicts the Oil Rig but like I said in another post that to can be explained.

If I remember right, One of the missions you do is to get the fuel to power cars or something, Also the Plane is'nt canon most likely because it was functioning, Chris Avellone in the Fallout bible if I remember correctly, And the Beastlords were those people with pyshic connections with animals, But I don't recall why it was said they were'nt.

(sarcasm alert) There is a quest in FO2 to get fuel for a tanker or for the Hubologists Space ship but that would mean FO2 is not canon! :shocking: See every FO has inconsistencies but as long as they can be explained in a way that makes sence then its not canon breaking.

» Sat May 28, 2011 4:57 am

:blink: :wacko: :banghead: I am going to make a wild guess and say you never played Tactics. There was never such thing mentioned in Tactics. Tactics does say a group of "military vault dwellers" but thats not as bad as "I was born before the bombs fell" and other have said that ". Continents were swallowed in flames and fell beneath the boiling oceans" is not canon. Every fallout has inconsistancies (I am not defending BoS that game is beyond saving). Tactics got it part right BoS did start out as military but not in a vault, it was Mariposa.

People have said Vault Zero contradicts the Oil Rig but like I said in another post that to can be explained.

(sarcasm alert) There is a quest in FO2 to get fuel for a tanker or for the Hubologists Space ship but that would mean FO2 is not canon! :shocking: See every FO has inconsistencies but as long as they can be explained in a way that makes sence then its not canon breaking.

I last played Tactics last year.

I'm talking about the openning cutscene, I swore they said the BoS were in that vault.

EDIT: Alex, How in hell did Avellone screw up the flag?

» Sat May 28, 2011 4:47 am

I last played Tactics last year.

I'm talking about the openning cutscene, I swore they said the BoS were in that vault.

EDIT: Alex, How in hell did Avellone screw up the flag?

"In Chris Avellone's Fallout Bible 6, a version of the NCR flag with one-headed bear, based on the old flag of the California Republic is shown. It is inconsistent with Fallout 2, where a two-headed bear can be clearly seen. The flag seen in Fallout: New Vegas is a combination of both versions, as it shows a two-headed bear, but the rest of the flag looks like it does in the Fallout Bible."

» Sat May 28, 2011 5:54 am

"In Chris Avellone's Fallout Bible 6, a version of the NCR flag with one-headed bear, based on the old flag of the California Republic is shown. It is inconsistent with Fallout 2, where a two-headed bear can be clearly seen. The flag seen in Fallout: New Vegas is a combination of both versions, as it shows a two-headed bear, but the rest of the flag looks like it does in the Fallout Bible."

He makes errors in the Fallout Bible, We don't see the NCR Flag up close in FO2, So thats why it may look different in FO:NV

» Sat May 28, 2011 8:08 am

What?

No? Last I checked Vault Zero is where the BoS Originated from acording to Tactics, And it contradicted the entire vault experiment.

XD No Vault Zero was the "central hub" of the Vault network. It was stocked with the best members of humanity and enough tech to build all those robots to "tame the wastes" It had nothing to do with the BoS.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFV1QvnLVsM
It's even in the opening monologue!

» Sat May 28, 2011 5:32 am

I have to say I personally prefer Fallout 3. Mainly because it was my first Fallout-game, and NV is so very, very similar to Fallout 3, visually. That means that it didn't feel like something new, it felt like going back to a world I've already discovered. It felt like playing a mod. Not that NV was in any way a bad game, it certainly isn't. But if you take Morrowind and Oblivion as examples, they are so different when it comes to visual style that there is no doubt that you are playing two different games with two very different looking provinces, giving two very different atmosphere. So the novelty was gone. And the novelty of exploring Springvale school for the very first time, seeing the burned remains of the children skeleton while listening to 40s music is something I found first in Fallout 3. Nev Vegas can, unfortunately, never give me that. Therefore, I prefer Fallout 3.

» Sat May 28, 2011 3:59 pm

XD No Vault Zero was the "central hub" of the Vault network. It was stocked with the best members of humanity and enough tech to build all those robots to "tame the wastes" It had nothing to do with the BoS.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFV1QvnLVsM
It's even in the opening monologue!

Oh, I hav'nt played the game in a year so I may have forgotten.

But it did say the BoS were in another bunker in tactics.

:|

» Sat May 28, 2011 2:20 pm

Oh, I hav'nt played the game in a year so I may have forgotten.

But it did say the BoS were in another bunker in tactics.

:|

What they got wrong was saying there were from a "Vault" of "military vault dwellers" or some such.

» Sat May 28, 2011 8:54 am

What they got wrong was saying there were from a "Vault" of "military vault dwellers" or some such.

Yes, That was what I was talking about.

» Sat May 28, 2011 8:57 am

No, its not stupid at all. You just don't understand the level of research I have done. I have read the friggin Fallout bible 6 times over, I have watched someone play the game many times over as well, I have read almost every single [censored] page on the wiki, so I am an expert on Fallout.

I consider myself an "expert" because of all the research I have done.

Why haven't you played the originals?

» Sat May 28, 2011 6:27 am

Why haven't you played the originals?

The stores nearby may not sell it, Or he does'nt want to buy them.

» Sat May 28, 2011 2:57 am

Yes, That was what I was talking about.

Yep that part they got wrong but they were not talking about Vault Zero.

» Sat May 28, 2011 4:49 am

Mhhhh, i preffer New Vegas over Fallout 3, its feels like the old Fallout games, specially Fallout 2

» Sat May 28, 2011 5:48 pm

Fallout 3 is a million and one times better. Don't ask me why, it just is.

Totally agree. Except for the part where you said FO3 is better. Other than that spot on my friend.

:rofl:

» Sat May 28, 2011 2:12 pm

No it isn't and no it doesn't.

I am playing Vegas on Very hard with hardcoe Mode on, it has become a most interesting game for me, but FO3 was harder.

I find this to be the most baffling opinion/statement in this debate.

With much more skill points per level, skill books, bobble heads, invincible VATS, nerfed Death Claws, more powerful explosives, The Terrible Shotgun, Lincoln Repeater, Fat Man, Harkness' overpowered plasma rifle, that ridiculously powered special chinese Assault rifle, Dart guns to slow down the only remotely scary baddies (Reaver Goul), perks on EVERY LEVEL, overpowered Gass Rifle, that freaking Chinese Stealth suit (I refused to use it, just too easy), The almost perfect perk that gives you all 9 on Special, weightless ammo, instant healing stimpacks (which are way too plentiful), limb damage fixed by stimpacks, sleep fixing EVERYTHING...........

........I just can't conceive how ANYONE can find FO3 challenging. Not Saying NV is a particularly hard game but compared to FO3...........

I'll listen to "better exploration" but sorry, that one just has me at a loss.

» Sat May 28, 2011 3:31 am

Fallout 3 is a million and one times better. Don't ask me why, it just is.

And why we can t ask??? :whistling:

» Sat May 28, 2011 1:04 pm

I know that Avellone screwed some stuff up, for example, the NCR flag.

Some of them arent even really screw-ups, the Bibles show the debate on "What harold is"? to some devs, he's a ghoul, to some he's not.

» Sat May 28, 2011 9:41 am

I didn't think he screwed up the flag, it has just been changed over the years.

» Sat May 28, 2011 2:15 am

At the risk of pissing off both sides of the argument, I'd say that many of the New Vegas fans are being a bit elitist, while many Fallout 3 fans are willfully not understanding what it is that made the Fallout brand name worth being bought by Bethesda when Black Isle Studios went down.

I played the hell out of FO3 and most of its DLC. Bethesda got the look of post-apocalyptic alternate-universe D.C. down perfectly (I have some quibbles about why there'd still be so little civilization after 200 years, but that's beside the point). They do atmospheric 3D enviroments like a champ (The Dunwich Building still gives me the creeps). They changed their RP system to more closely match the originals, while keeping the sandbox aspect that they've become so good at.

That said, it was still a compelling failure as a Fallout game (NOT a failure as a game. It was a great exploration shooter with RPG elements) because the choices were black and white. You basically chose good or evil each time, and black & white morality was never what the original Fallouts were about. New Vegas gives multiple ways of completing each task, and there are simply more tasks to do (there are more side quests in the first four quest hubs than there were in the entire un-modded Fallout 3). The storyline in New Vegas is tons more compelling, too (the original ending for FO3 made me bang my head against the wall until I could watch the TV in the neighbor's apartment).

THAT said, however, New Vegas would never exist without Bethesda appropriating the property and giving it an immersive 3D look. Black Isle/Obsidian would have never have gone to this level of 3D immersion had they not been forced to; modelling environments was never their strong suit.

While I am an old-school Fallout fan and believe that New Vegas is the better game because it gives me more of what I, personally, like, I'm not going to say that FO3 was a waste of space or imagine that the game I like would have been nearly as immersive if FO3 hadn't come before. I'm grateful for Bethesda for saving and reviving the licence, and allowing Obsidian to do what they do best.

Whoa whoa whoa. Someone who can see both sides of an argument? On an internet forum?

» Sat May 28, 2011 6:08 am

Whoa whoa whoa. Someone who can see both sides of an argument? On an internet forum?

I know. I'll go shoot myself now.

» Sat May 28, 2011 9:11 am

No, its not stupid at all. You just don't understand the level of research I have done. I have read the friggin Fallout bible 6 times over, I have watched someone play the game many times over as well, I have read almost every single [censored] page on the wiki, so I am an expert on Fallout.

I consider myself an "expert" because of all the research I have done.

I don't for one second dispute your lore expertise. But... that's still not the same as actually playing the games, and it's both nonsensical and pretentious for someone who's never played them to idealise them in the way you seem to. Who is it that you're trying to impress with this absurd "we [except not me 'cause I didn't play it] liked it the way it was"* stance?

Let's say... I could read any number of books, essays and crib sheets about Great Expectations, so much so that I would be able to converse at length and in a learned fashion upon the book. However, without actually reading the book itself, I would still ultimately be a pseud.

I don't base my opinion on gameplay

What, not at all? But... it's a computer game. Surely the game bit is at least a teeny tiny bit important, otherwise why not just read a book or watch a movie? You'll find better stories there.

[Someone who thinks stories are of little consequence when it comes to judging a game's merits, and misses the days when the story of a game could be summed up with a sentence on the back of the box and would never deign to interfere with the actual game itself.]

» Sat May 28, 2011 3:53 am

I didn't think he screwed up the flag, it has just been changed over the years.

Just a question, Is your avatar that guy who played Lieutenant Dan in Forrest Gump?

» Sat May 28, 2011 8:38 am

I dont think either is truly better than the other. They beat each other in certain departments. But I honestly think alot of the 'New Vegas is better crowd' are picking sides based on who developed it, not how well developed it is. Both games are beautiful and fun in their own rights, both are not perfect, both have their major flaws. To say one is better than the other is pure opinion.