I was wondering if anyone knew how much NV grossed in the first day/week/month/all time vs. What fallout 3 sold. Or does anyone even know how much
It sold? What the total sales where?

Someone will link Vgchartz, i can't be bothered atm:)

Its not copies sold. Morrowind sold a lot of copies for example but only a fraction of purchasers actually finished the game. Morrowind probably would have been a failure if it hadn't lured people into buying with its features.

FNV might have had the same thing going as Morrowind. Riding on the success of F3 and complete lack of competition, but a majority might be dissapointed with it, and will be wary in the future.

Steam (and probably xbox live) keeps statistics of what people are doing in the games and how many people are playing it through. If we had access to those figures we could judge the success of FNV over F3 or vice versa.

I see what you're saying, but your assumptions leave me confused. Morrowind is an acquired taste, no doubt about it you either love it or hate it, but what makes you believe the majority of people who played NV disliked it? Especially those who picked it up just because they liked 3.

He was asking how much money Fallout 3 made vs New Vegas, not how many people like it or how it made money.

I'm cynical. F3 isn't too taxing on 13 year olds, FNV is.

I can just see the average gamer getting frustrated pretty quick with NV.



5 million units sold equals 300 million dollars according to Pete Hines. Both F3 and FNV have sold more than that.

And fans should be interested in how a game is received beyond initial sales, it's a big factor in determining how the sequals are handled.

Yeah but what you said had nothing to do with the question, you just went off an some random tangent.

I was assuming that OP wanted to judge the success of FNV vs FO3 by the sales. I was saying that you can't judge on initial sales alone.

wow the game made 300 million dollars???

They would be fools not to let Obsidian work on another Fallout game, FOOLS *shakes fist*

Well I'm pretty sure there gonna do it alone. Tharts why they got the liscense.

-Cheers
Daniels

I think most people who played it got frustrated by the fact that once you visited somewhere once, there was absolutely no point visiting it again.

I can understand this if you clear out a vault of something. But when you can walk from Mojave outpost to Goodsprings without drawing your weapon once because you already walked that way, once, that isn't taxing, it's boring.

I think most 13 year olds can handle the complexities of "Walk this way. Do nothing else."

I had to go back to Vault 22 several times. (Once for mantis eggs, once for HEPA filters, once for There Stands The Grass.) I had to go back to Vault 11 twice. I had to go back to Forlorn hope several times. Ditto Nellis. All this to complete quests.

I don't really see what you're talking about here.



What are you talking about? The critters along that route respawn. The convicts in Primm don't once you do the sheriff quest though, but everything else in that area does.

Anyway, three hundred million sounds like a lot, but you have to factor in the cost to make the game too to get actual profit.

Of course NV sold more. Sequels released soon after a previous, successful game will always sell more no matter how good it is in the end.

There were quite accurate numbers for Fallout 3 sales, but sadly I don't remember it any more, just the term "a lot".

New Vegas probably sold more, but only because of the success of and how awesome Fallout 3 was.

i agree new vegas is boring, ESV 5 here we come !

So 13 year olds can't figure out fast travel?

He means that locations only have such a limited purpose. Even if you have to go back to Nellis multiple times to do the quests associated with it, after they're done, it's pretty much just aesthetic. There's no real point to go back to it, unless you like the Boomer's tastes and decide to kill everyone and take their panties. And don't even think that donating missles is going to keep you satisfied through the rest of the game.

It also helped that after New Vegas's initial sales, the price plummetted to $20, where Fallout 3's didn't. At least I don't think it did. Point is New Vegas' price has been low for a long time.

How is FO3 different? Other than the shops, what places in FO3 have anything interesting once you finish their associated quests?

well more popular games can demand a higher price for longer, MW2 was like 50 or 60 dollars for a long time, new vegas doesn't have a lot of replay value or enough reason to keep playing it so the price plummeted.

But they don't have to, they could let Obsidian do all the work and Bethesda can sit back in rake in the cash. :fallout:

Still hopefully they learned from New Vegas, and hopefully they will take more from the Originals. Remember Bethesda Fallout isn't apart of the TES Universe.




It could also be because alot of Original Fallout fans that were put off from buying Fallout 3, bought New Vegas after they learned it was made by people that know Fallout because they worked in past Fallouts.

well it depends what you want in a game, new vegas doesn't have much combat, its got creatures to kill out in the desert and black mountain which is pretty limited but thats about it, FO3 had all sorts of cool areas to battle in with respawning enemies, like la enfant plaza, or takoma industrial or the around the capitol building and the mall, FO3 had all sorts of good battle locations in the city and around it. lots of places to hide and stalk enemies in etc, new vegas doesn't have any of that.

I'd be willing to bet that wasn't a factor in anything.

Of course you'd like to think like that. However if you looked at the world outside your window, you'd notice that sequels will always sell well for entirely irrational reasons if more or less directly succeeding a successful game. Morrowind most likely sold more than Daggerfall, Oblivion sold more than Morrowind, Skyrim will definitely sell more than all the past games combined. That that doesn't mean they are any better than their predecessors, I assume most sales today are made in hours and days following release before a general consensus on the game's quality can be made.
If one is to by any means point that sales = quality, Fallout 3 beats the originals by a long shot in any aspect.

Most users don't give a damn who developed the game. NV had same graphics as Fallout 3. Fallout 3 was a good game (no matter what you say to yourself, it received unanimously positive reviews), and thus NV is a good game. That's how people think. I doubt there were more than a few thousand people who bought NV because of its developers. To most it's just Fallout like the rest of them.

If you want that then why not just play Borderlands? The controls are much better. The combat is better. There are more enemies and a lot more guns.