HA!

Do you realize how many FO1 & 2 fans have been decrying the whole dungeon-crawl of FO3 as one of the worst things to ever happen to the franchise? Good riddance and may I never be forced to traverse another pointless, uninspired, boring Bethesda-induced dungeon crawl again!

I really just couldn't disagree more. To me there is nothing better than descending into an eerie dark dank place where you've never been. Turning off the radio and letting the atmospheric creepy music play while you inch your way along in stealth mode hunting whatever evil creatures you may find in the way of your progress. Finding remnants of something that happened way down there long ago and trying to piece together a story of some long-dead drama. There's nothing in gaming like the masterful dungeons Bethesda puts together, of course Osidian put this one together...

Hey, man - I can't argue with what you want out of a game. All I can tell you is that what you just described? It has absolutely nothing to do with the Fallout series outside of Bethesda's (unfortunate, imo) re-direction of the series. I understand (obviously) that many people were introduced to the series through this game and thus love it dearly - but it really has [censored]-all to do with what Fallout had ever been about before the game which many of us original fans wish never happened - happened.

There's actually quite a few "dungeons" in the Mojave wastelands it's just that there are a lot, I mean LOT, that don't have map markers. As you are travelling use your local map more.

Well, I personally like the fact that New Vegas doesn't include many "creepy" dungeons as per described, but in some sort of light you can see how it incorporates soem sort of dugneaon-esque setting. For example,


Spoiler was for people who are hardcoe spoiler haters, so, yeah.

The amount of "Dungeons" seem normally the same compared to Fallout 3, not that I really much care for it in that sense in exploring all of them. That say, I rather play Daggerfall to fill my "Dungeons" crawling needs.

Well, to be honest, New Vegas focused more on questing, in my perspective. Plus, in New Vegas, a lot of the "Dungeon" areas aren't marked on the map, even with the Explorer perk. In Fallout 3, you could damn near find every single accesible area in-game.

I believe New Vegas leaves that little stuff out due to having 200 more locations than Fallout 3

And I can't spell for my life, just sayin' <3

The Elder Scrolls and Fallout are my second and third favorite gaming series respectively, that being said, "dungeons" are an Elder Scrolls concept, and have absolutely no place in the Fallout series.

Well most people here are using the term "Dungeons" in place for "Dark scary caves with enemies and loot."

there is truly no real derivitive from Elder Scrolls in Fallout, except maybe SOME gameplay aspects.

Seeing and hearing that New Vegas was made from the remnants of the makers of Fallout 1 and Fallout 2, I expected that expectation and they deliver.


Yepper, it was a monster in Daggerfall, unique in Morrowind, but very lacking when it comes to Oblivion.

Well, who wouldn't have high expectations?
I know I did, and yes, to be sure they did deliver what I thoguht they would.

I have nothing against New Vegas and its gameplay, in fact I think for right now, it's top notch, despite some prominent bugs.

FO3 could have cut back a lot on the subway tunnels in the D.C. ruins, no doubt, but all-in-all, I don't see how the lack of dungeons in NV could be seen as a positive change. Maybe I would have been okay with it if half of the quests in NV weren't pointless fetch quests for NPC's I didn't care about at all and the game actually had more compelling and immersive story-telling. It doesn't really serve to make the game better at all in this case-- just less immersive. Funny too, because the "tips and hints" displayed during the load screens talk an awful lot about "prospectors" (scavengers) but there don't seem to be many worthwhile places to scavenge from.

I liked FO3's rewards for exploration (even if only for the experience) and not feeling tied to quests all of the time. Even stripping that out, I still find most of FO3's quests more imaginative and fun than the quests in NV. As someone who played FO1 and 2, I immensely liked the dungeon crawls in FO3, so please don't speak for "fans." Nostalgia is a powerful force-- so powerful in fact, it makes people say stupid things sometimes, so I forgive you.

Well said.

Translation: FO1 and FO2 are clearly inferior games only cherished by a small but solid fanbase purely because of nostalgia goggles. Bethesda's millions and millions of miles of aesthetically identical underground dungeons / metro tunnels make for a much better game. : |

I don't think so, Jim. I can go back and do a full replay of FO2 just about any time I feel like it.

I always end up quitting FO3 prematurely because I can't stand trudging through linear corridors shooting feral ghoul after feral ghoul... after feral ghoul.

Maybe YOU shouldn't speak for "fans."

I wish there were emoticons that I could use for those "I AM RAGING RIGHT NOW" moments.

I'm not speaking for anything other than the facts. NMA, Dac and RPG Codex have not had their stars aligned this way in a long, long time. Stake your claim however you like, but the overwhelming theme from the old fans is "Fallout 3 missed the point and svcks as an RPG and svcks even more as a Fallout game" while conversely the current sentiment is "While we have to sift through the [censored] that is the FO3 engine and the [censored] that their fanbase has brought on, this is the closest to "Fallout" we have had since number 2."

Claiming that you enjoy pointless dungeon crawls whilst also claiming you are a fan of Fallout 1 does nothing to shift validity in opinion. :shrug:

I don't think the continued comparison between FO1 & 2 and FO3 leads anywhere if all you're saying is FO3 was bad because it was not like FO1 & 2. Don't get me wrong, I can see where you guys are coming from, but it just doesn't do much for a discussion. Personally I have never played the first two Fallouts. I played the third one, and it was alright, but the story itself was rather meh. Fallout: New Vegas is much more my cup of tea.

Anyway; if you're going to say that FO3-style dungeons are not desirable because they are pointless, uninspired and boring (with which I mostly agree, when you're talking about the underground of the DC area. Waaay too many areas that felt exactly the same and were inhabited by the same boring ghouls) that's one thing. But it doesn't help your case if you keep stating how FO3 was not like FO1 and FO2 and was made by Beth. and that made it a bad game. Just say what you think made it bad, and leave it at that, and I think you'll have much better discussions.

As for dungeons, I don't mind them much, as long as stuff is going on inside them. Vaults themselves are very interesting, and you could easily see those as "dungeons".

To be fair, I've stated my case about this in detail over and over in more threads than I'd care to already. This forum has a tendency to just simply ignore what the person before you posted, so I admit I tend to get frustrated and short with my own posts.

Go to the outskirts of Vegas, and walk the streets (outside freewside around the Gunrunners and stuff) there are tons of manholes you can enter

This is not what I'm saying. I'm saying Obsidian could have easily implemented plenty of "dungeons" and immersive, cool stuff that reward exploration without it feeling similar. Probably over HALF of the areas I've explored in Fallout: New Vegas are so ridiculously token and otherwise serve no point to even exist other than to break up the tedium of walking along the highway all of the time it's not even funny. I know it's a good selling feature when the back of the box says, "has over twice as many explorable areas and quests as FO3!" but those quests and explorable areas are so insignificant they're not even worth mentioning really. Why would I ever care if I can fast travel to "miscellaneous powder ganger camp consisting of a tent and bunch of tin cans South?"

Like I said, Bethesda could have cut back on the subway tunnel crawls a lot-- especially the aspect where you're forced to use the tunnels to even travel to different areas in the D.C. ruins-- I definitely won't disagree there, but if you're going to tell me exploring something like the Dunwich building and revealing the unofficial quest related storyline there, Oasis or the Springvale school ruins is boring in comparison to quests such as "Keep your Eyes on the Prize," "Can You Find it in Your Heart?" or "Booted," I think you need to look up what fun means.

Even ignoring all of the bugs and whatever comparisons you can make to FO1 and 2, FO3 did a much better job at immersion than NV does. If you're going to strip that from the game as a throwback or whatever and put more emphasis on survival then it should at least do that, but NV doesn't. The original games had a cool atmosphere and charm to them that FO3 struggled to capture but they're so different-- different engines, different development teams, different perspective, more emphasis on this, less emphasis on that, you can't even reasonably compare them. Comparing FO1 and 2 is reasonable, as comparing FO3 and NV is reasonable. With that said, I don't think NV does that much of a better job at capturing the old atmosphere really than FO3 does, while simultaneously failing to capture the cool stuff about FO3.

I was a fan of the Fallout universe long before FO3 came out and I still think overall, FO3 is a better game than the old Fallout games. It has problems, sure-- but FO1 is so old and archaic I can't even play it for anything other than the story and lore at this point. If you can honestly tell me you're playing FO2 right now or have within the last year, start to finish nonstop and had a blast, I'd have a hard time believing you-- and if I were to believe you, I think at that point, no matter what, you'd dislike FO3 (and thus, you reasonably should dislike NV as well since it's significantly more like FO3 than it's like FO1 or 2) and nothing on the face of this planet would be able to change your mind. You'd hate it no matter what because it's different and even then, more than likely, you still complained more than your fair share about FO1 and 2 when they were still new or you first started playing them (though you wouldn't admit that now). I mean, why even bother picking up NV at all, if FO1 and 2 are so much better than FO3 in every conceivable way and you know damn well NV is just FO3 with a new paint-job more or less? This is why I mentioned nostalgia being a powerful force.

Hell, I remember picking up Doom 2: Hell on Earth when that first came out and played the crap out of that game. I was involved with the Doom mod community for many years, working on various maps and projects with source ports and while I still love the old Doom games, I'm not about to say they're better games than Half-Life 2 or whatever. I still love the atmosphere and I still have a soft spot for the fast-paced gameplay but they're nowhere near as immersive or as fun as many games I've played more recently. I'm still not going to say Doom 2: Hell on Earth is crap however-- it's just old and comparing Doom to something like Left 4 Dead simply isn't fair, even if the idea behind both games is precisely the same (gun down 1,000 enemies, some easy, some harder and make your way to the exit area; repeat until you win).

I prefer less dungeons over a ton of copy paste interiors that get boring fast.

the vaults were crafted better in nv. the best vault in FO3 was the gary vault and maybe the one with the weird brain/noise control thingy. vault 22 blows them out of the water for backstory and set design. i forgot which vault it was but basically you got a surprise at the end of the movie. i was literally eating some bagles when the "surprise" popped out.

i wouldnt mind more caverns but to be honest im on my third playthrough and i still havent looked at most of the map. currently im just doing the three branches of the mainquest and that doesnt show you even half the map. i have to stop myself from exploring the various buildings that i can see in the distance..........its kind of hard sometimes cause i can only imagine the unique weapons that im probably passing up.

overall i did prefer the world space that bethesda created but obsidian just did a much better job with game mechanics (yeah! for damage threshold) and dialogue and quests that it outshines its deficiencies. that and FO3 had waaaaaay better music and show hosts.

You must also prefer less token quests and pointless areas to explore to fetch quests and copy paste tent areas as well then. I suppose at that point, NV should have been about half as big as it is.

Point is, I understand that. If you read my post and thought "this guy wants more subway tunnels like the ones from FO3 to explore" you didn't understand what I was attempting to say.

NV makes FO3 look like a pile of garbage.

Uh, Im 70 hours into New Vegas.. lvl 20 and I have 28 ACTIVE missions (3 of them are main story missions and 3 of them are "fetch quests") with 35 Completed missions. So if you really think FO3 had more missions then you are mistaken buddy, because I havent even explored the north side of the map

His point is that while New Vegas has more locations on the map, many of them are just empty locations with none of my precious dungeons to explore with long fulfilling quests attached to them. Fallout 3 may have less locations, but more of them are actually larger play spaces with a story to explore.