'kay. Hope you like Escrima. And telescopic batons. And ninja wizards. :batman:

Ninja wizards ain't got nothing on http://onepiece.wikia.com/wiki/Franky!

Does Maid Ninjas count?

Maid Ninjas are above all other beings, living or dead, material or spiritual, they will kill you and clean you up in the blink of an eye!

I highly doubt I'm the only one... If so then I'm a freak and you're right.

The game had terrible atmosphere (which is odd because I never thought of it as necessity until now), boring missions, a terrible amount of bugs, and was just through and through a boring piece of crap of a game.

Fallout 3 has the "terrible atmosphere" it looks like the Great war happened only weeks ago when it was 200 years ago. New Vegas has the right atmosphere because it shows people are improving and are smart enough to grow crops and get power from the dam and Solar Power. It also lets us know that the people in the West (NCR) has continued to improve even more to the point where they are expanding into the Mojave.

FO3 for over 200 years the people just lived in radioactive mud holes eating cram (No farming). Yet some how there were people that learned how to do complicated facial surgery :thumbsup:

Neither games were crap.

But from the 'Fallout' standpoint, F3 fails so miserably. Every quest tried to be the typical TES 'Epic' adventure which pretty much turned into a wacko theme-park(Wannabe Vampires? seriously?) and a chore afterwards.
The whole 'ooooh looks desolate' atmosphere works for the first time, but everything falls apart after realizing that the whole world is so inconsistent, it's not even funny(timeline, settlement placement, food etc.). And your actions impacting the Wasteland? Well, apart from some mindless 3-Woof rant, it's completely non-existent. :shakehead:
Sorry, but green-tinted 'exploration and shinies' only is just not enough for a good Fallout game.

NV blows it out of the water and the orbit too.

>IMHO<

You just named Fallout 3! Good job.

My previous joke was a joke, so way to fail.

Fallout 3 was crapl IMO

:fallout: i agree with you for the most part, i do like new vegas better, the skill/perk/special system is better, better story, more quests, more of most everything except new vegas was lacking in a couple areas and thats overall combat, FO3 had more especially as you leveld up, new vegas is lacking a bit in the human type armed enemies, i notice they put an emphasis on melee enemies , they over did it in this department, for one thing all the insects and creatures are melee, all of em, then on top of it half of ceasers legion is melee so way too many enemies without weapons to shoot back, its fun being pinned down by a sniper or something from farther away, also there was a lack of dungeon type facilities, i'm not talking about metro tunnels but FO3 had tons of huge building complexes to battle in, capitol building(inside and out) chryslis building, national guard armory, national archives, lob enterprises, hubris comics, red racer factory, roosovelt academy etc, and thats not counting the metro tunnels, so in this department FO3 was better, much more combat. i realize FO3 it prob had too much combat since you ran into a mole rat every 30 seconds it seemed and way too many scorpions and deathclaws but new vegas could of used a bit more combat and some more enemy patrols here and there.

I've seen many threads on this subject so far and I always have time to comment on them because I hope that everything we post here will form the basis of Fallout 4. Irrespective of whether you prefer F3 or FNV the one thing that we can all agree on is that any game that combines the best of both would be absolutely fantastic.

I think that from a role-play perspective, and certainly from a Fallout history one, FNV is the better game. Not having ever played anything pre-F3 I can't comment from experience, however from everything I've read and seen FNV seems to pay tribute to the Fallout origins in a way that F3 did not. Also, the extra features, weapons, hardcoe, faction reputation are significant upgrades on F3.

Having said that, I've just returned to F3 despite not even being half way through FNV yet. I think that the urban DC setting has more character and danger around every corner, as opposed to following the safe FNV highway and only encountering enemies should you venture off the beaten path. Also, the F3 quests are exciting adventures, whereas FNV consists of so many fetch quests designed to improve faction reputation. After a while I simply got tired of it. Sure, F3 isn't perfect - the main quest is a simplistic choice between good and evil and it would benefit greatly from many of the cool FNV additions.

Don't get me wrong, I love both games and the dedication that has been put into each of them by the developers shines through constantly. However, F3 is my favourite game of all time, and even playing through it now I'm still discovering new things.

Fallout New Vegas never gave bad reputation to Bethesda, FO3 on the other hand,,,,,,, well, its not necessary my opinion, but as far I am concerned about Fallout 3, NV is the sole reason for some "fans" to bash Fallout 3 to what have they done, heck, there is even some massive protest against Bethesda, and thats uber ridiculous even for me that I hate FO3

The real thing is, There is no proof that none of these 2 games given bad reputation to the company, both games was a success in their ways and got a lot of fans,saying that NV or FO3 gives a bad reputation to Bethesda is like returning to the old Morrowind and Oblivion threads, where both games (in that time) were considered for some fans, really bads games and doesnt deserver a merit, when those two games have good reputation, and fans, and modding comunity, like FO3 and NV

Fallout NV all the way!

If the next game has STALKER style combat it will murder all previous titles...IMO :toughninja:

Indeed. There was one guy raving about NV "giving bad reputation" to Bethesda, which is laughable at best. :shakehead:
For Beth its a win-win situation if you look at the sales anyway.

Haters.

That's better.

What?

http://boxerhockey.fireball20xl.com/stuff/141.html

Exactly

i played the two games and recently finished nv. new vegas has most improvement regarding gameplay, but somehow not as impressive story line and exploration as fo3. but overall new vegas is impressive. in my opinion, specially the story content that i usually consider in rpgs, i prefer fallout 3.

That was the weirdest thing I've ever seen...

Fallout 3 leaked of cliches which is why a lot of people didn't prefer it *shrug*

DON'T EVEN TRY TO SAY NEW VEGAS DIDN'T HAVE TONS CLICHES EITHER...

They made it EXTREMELY unbalanced on how much land each faction owns, and the followers were ridicules as well (how they were either NCR lovers or just didn't give a sh*t about any faction).

The cliche good vs. evil was even more apparant in Vegas due to nobody being neutral (the Outcasts)!!!

How was New Vegas black and white? All of the major factions were neutral, the NCR and Legion leaned towards opposite sides of the alignment spectrum but they weren't flat out good or evil. Despite bringing order to the wasteland the NCR is a very oppressive regime which heavily taxes its citizens and uses underhanded tactics to force communities to join them whether they like it or not. The Legion seems completely evil on the surface, but they're extremely disciplined and their land is safer than even NCR territory. The Legion is brutal, but if you can fit into their society and perform well it's not a bad place to be.