The gameplay in Fallout New Vegas is better than in fallout 3 but I find the environment lacking in the general post-apocalyptic feeling that I have obviously come to associate with the newer Fallout games. However I did appreciate the greater number ammo types, weapon modes and the aim-down-sights.

*fixed.

I don't understand what the poll is about.
Is the thread about game balance?
Post apocalyptic feeling?
Gameplay?

Another one of these threads. Last one was locked because it just became people insulting one another.

I agree with gabriel77dan, whats this about? Which is better? Best way to settle it is "its your opinion" which one you like more.

I like New Vegas became it has a better story, more dialogue, its more advlt, it has damage threshold, reputation system, iron sites, hardcoe mode, more joinable factions and its not all black and white (good and evil). Its more like the Originals.

This.

I dunno if New Vegas will have the replayability of the old games but I can tell I am still interested in playing New Vegas.
Fallout 3 on the other hand got repetitive too fast and didn't offer players good ways to roleplay.

So I prefer Fallout New Vegas.

Aye, for the reasons that Gabriel and Styles mention I prefer New Vegas over Fallout 3. Along with other reasons such as, your actions can have definate consequences in New Vegas (IE if you do something, you can lock yourself out of some quests), also that we can't become a Mojavian Godling striding across the desert laying waste to any foe that has the temerity to dare to try to attack you aka if you just charge straight into a fight regardless of your foe or number of foes, you can still be killed sometimes with relative ease even when at max level.

Gotta join the choir. New Vegas imrpoves over Fallout 3 on every aspect.

Although it still isn't without flaws. A big bunch of good ideas feel a tad held back. Like the global DT, soft weapon requirements, HC mode, visible skill threshold numbers for dialog, pacing of the leveling, overall level of challenge (which, on many otherwise well implemented and written quests, leads to lesser to no feeling of accomplishment), still hanging with the quest compass and back-and-forth-quests apparently designed to be done using the boring teleport fasttravel, and so forth. All quite small issues on their own, but a lot of little streams grow up to be a river.

All in all, had the gameplay been even more of an RPG gameplay and had a bit more polish, FO:NV would've (imo) competed with the originals - the writing and reactivity to the players choices are top notch compared to other recent RPGs, and on top of that and despite the flaws, the game manages to feel like a Fallout game.

Not to join on the band wagon, but New Vegas is better in every way, the story is original and decent, the gameplay was improved, the companions were a step back to the right direction, and many more things.

I gotta say New Vegas, for reasons mentioned by people above me.

For replayability, story, and gameplay: Fallout New Vegas
For exploration: FO3

Considering the setting(which is quite a while after the Great War, and in a place that wasn't hit too directly/irradiated in most places), I think Fallout: New Vegas was acceptable with the mood and such. It would have been ridiculous if it had been as damaged as the Capital Wasteland, or in a nuclear winter still. I think it fit the Fallout series, as a whole, perfectly. Just because not everything is a depressing color, or because skyscraqers create rubble impossible to scale(which I actually came to hate at times), doesn't mean it's not Fallout.

As a whole, I've gotta say Fallout: New Vegas is better. Which is a good thing, in my opinion, I want the game series to continuously improve(or, at least, stay at approximately the same level of quality), not worsen. But the writing and general gameplay was so much better. The fact your actions have both short-term and long-term consequences, the fact you can actually interact with your companions after they join you, the fact that there's a reputation system, the fact that the skills were cleaned up to a more logical system, etc. etc. There might be less exploration, but it's not absolutely horrible-my favorite experience is looking at New Vegas from a far off cliff, it's pretty cool.
Also, the balance of the gameplay is far better in Fallout: New Vegas-you're character doesn't end up a generic God-like character like they generally would in Fallout 3.

I do like Fallout 3, but as a whole Fallout:New Vegas still wins overall when it comes to the quality of the games.

:shrug: I personally enjoyed fallout 3 alot more, the only thing in new vegas I liked more was the added gameplay eliments.

:nono: And you've all forgotten the revival of the marvelous work of Mark Morgan http://www.markmorganmusic.com/

:cryvaultboy: I just got into the fallout newvegas universe recently coming off playing FO3, beating it a few times downloading extra content for it like broken steel and Id say it was very memrabable and enjoying! Right now FONV is looking like a great game to me just starting but it feels like there is a very higher learning curve to it unlike FO3 which I could just pick up and enjoy. There seems to be to much to do with the new damage threshold,crafting and extra. FONV seems overcomplicated in a way, confusing my enjoyment of it at the time. does anybody else feel the same? dont get me wrong I love FONV I just wish it could of been simpiler. I love the new hardcoe mode though thats a great addition but I didnt ever think I would have to learn to Gamble to play a fallout game. On the otherhand more stuff to do more fun in the long run, I believe they did a great job making this game!!! im a huge really devoted fan

Do you know what THACO means?
New Vegas, overcomplicated, nope.
It's a children's game in learning compared to older games.

Thats what I was going to say...Also yeah I know what THACO means.....(yay 2nd edition)

Really, it's not hard at all to figure out. They even dumbed it down from the original. It's no reason to stop playing NV. Just shoot stuff with normal bullets, if you get red shield, use AP bullets, is that hard?

Only thing I can't bother with is the cooking system.
I really don't care to go hunt for a crapload of different ingredients just so I can get some better food when I can just raise Medicine skill and use stimpacks instead.
Sure, some food give other bonuses and I heard that some food heals better than stimpacks but still, not worth the trouble for me.
If I could have my own little garden like thing somewhere and decide what "I" want to grow there then it would be easier to get a hold of the ingredients.
But mapping out all various plants and constantly going back and forward just so I can cook 3 lunchboxes?
No thanks.
I'll just cash out 100 super stimpacks thanks to Dead Money thank you.

Would be easier if they had "food vendors" or even farmers you can get or parts of the secondary supplies from in some what sizable portions. I really haven't messed with survival aside from healing powder but some of them you need quite a few ingredients to just make a steak.

Yup.
It's food to have for roleplaying reasons, like a tribal or master chef role, but the implementation of it was done rather poorly IMO.
While I don't consider Legion to be tribals, it would make sense for them to have an herbal merchant at Cottonwood Cove or at The Fort.
Maybe a farmer at Goodsprings.
Maybe buy some supplies at that NCR Sharecroppers place as well.
Several logical locations to have such merchants at, yet, none there = poor implementation to me. :shrug:

I find the difference to be this: Fallout 3 is a world I became immersed in; Fallout NV is a game. For that reason, on balance I have to vote for FO3.

NV is technically superior without a doubt, but I find the writing to be rather mechanical, soulless. Perhaps it's because the writing in FO3 was so sketchy that it allowed free rein to the imagination. NV is too determined to tell you everything, too insistent upon dotting every I and crossing every T; FO3 just throws in a few holotapes and lets you fill in the gaps. With FO3 I just wanted to keep on playing; with NV I struggle to see any point in playing through again - indeed the thought of doing some of it again positively bores me.

The above makes it sound like I didn't enjoy NV, which isn't true - I spent 150 hours in the Mojave so clearly I had a good time. I just find that it hasn't gripped me in the same way as FO3.

Yeppers, I have no intention on giving Fallout New Vegas Up yet, Its just kind of hard for me to get into right off the first, seems the enemies are to powerful to early on compared to FO3 and all those fun random encounters in the waste land are not as good or frequent, seems FONV is too scripted like thismany enemys are going to be here at this exact time. instead of im going to randomly run into some guys running from a death claw or Amata asking the enclave for help like in FO3. once I have completed the game I'll be able to give a better opinon. but the whole challange of FONV is at times more annoying to me than fun. like u cant travel as fast in FONV as in the previous game unless u have a perk and loading times get longer not to mention deathclaws and all that supposably being alot tougher with DT and HP havn't run into them yet, but I like being able to modify my weopons and ironsights and such. on the whole I jst view FO3 as a lot smoother in dialouge and I dont like the new companion wheel as well in FONV oppossed to selecting a verbal command

That sums up my thoughts. Played about 70hours on NV and whenever I boot it up now I can play for maybe an hour or two before getting bored. Just doesn't have that "hook" or whatever that F03 did for me.

Sane here... I only played about 40 hours before putting it away for good and pulling out Fallout 3 again!!!!

Well, thats your problem then.

May I have your copy then? Could use two of 'em in case I'll get banned on Steam or something, :fallout:

You can have mine, but you have to come over, and defeat me in hand-to-hand combat to get it. :toughninja: