I like how a dialogue option somewhere in the game went like, "Can you believe that people still eat 200 year old food left lying around?" I laughed for a good 5 minutes.

New vegas and fallout 3 were completely different games. But what I really wanted for new vegas was the feeling of exploration like in fallout 2. You know you go out to the edge of the map and just keep going hoping to find something. Maybe run into to some unsuspecting characters like Mad Max, T-1000, Riddic. Stuff like that but no we got a sand box which is ok I guess but feels more like COD then an RPG.

Fallout 2 exploration was random encounters that could appear anywhere on the map.... it is real hard to do this in a 3d world. Try putting a randomly generated building anywhere without having issues with the terrain alone.

FO3 - tons of rubble
FO:NV - tons of sand

But besides that, the games do have other major differenes.
It's hard to say witch one is better one - to be honest - I enjoyed both games, maybe I can say NV is a tad superior to FO3, because once a year passes from NV's release...we will have many many mods, that will upgrade the already rich content of NV - imagine MMM, FOOK, quasi-FEW mod and other gameplay mods merged together, that make the game even more balanced, plus there are DLC's to come for NV, that will further expand the world (and lev cap).

FO3 felt more like classic fallout, NV feels more like Mad Max movie - due to the sand in the eyes with the each step, mixed with western themes.

A good comparsion between the games can be made, by bringing up the one that applies between GTA 3 and GTA: Vice City

GTA 3 - darker, grimer theme with concrete jungle athmosphere

GTA: Vice City - more colors, candy like graphics, but more gameplay content added

IMO same thing applies to FO3 and FO:NV

Um...what? I disagree with this so much I think my head might explode.

I'd have to join them in there "say what?" commentary....

I really don't think you can compare both games without taking into consideration how much Bethesda gave Obsidian to work with in terms of the graphics and the textures and whatnot. There are so many things that are identical to FO3 graphically, it's astounding. Bethesda built FO3 from scratch, Obisidian did not. When I first played FO3 I was amazed by the level of detail. I still am with New Vegas but to a lesser extent because I've already played FO3. I think Obsidian owes Bethesda a great deal for reinvigorating the franchise and giving them such a solid base on which to build a more polished game.

Also, is anyone else a little annoyed by all the "hardcoe" Fallout fans that have to hold it over everybody's heads that they've been their since Fallout 1 and that the original Fallouts were "so much better until Bethesda screwed it up!" Get off your high horse and take off the nostalgia goggles.

Indeed, New Vegas feels like a proper sequel to F1 and F2. I think Obsidian did a wonderful job to capture the spirit and feel of the classic games. It's great to see how the setting developed and moved on since the previous games, seeing old factions like the NCR and the proper BoS again gives me feelings of nostalgia, and the world and its inhabitants feel alive and interconnected. What you do matters, and the people of the Mojave acknowledge your actions and the consequences they entail.

While I enjoyed F3 for what it was, I can't see it as anything but a spin-off or reinterpretation of the old series. It's a Bethesda sandbox game with a post-apocalyptic paint job. A fun game, but not what I wanted from a Fallout game. There were neat ideas here and there, but it seemed as if they had just been dropped on a map and not thought through well enough. What others praised about F3, the exploration aspect, bored me to death. I didn't want to go through yet another copy-and-paste cave/subway/abondoned building to kill a few more ghouls/mutants/raiders and loot my stimpak and 200 year old blood pack. It felt shallow and meaningless to me. Give me world filled with people whose lives and fates I can affect over this any day.

Hell yea. I've seen so many crappy sequels of old games that weren't worthy of their old prequels.
Was a bold decission to make Fallout into a sandbox fps/rpg game.
I'm a hardcoe fan of F1 and F2 too but i think Bethesda's FO is more than worthy of being the fallout series successor.

I like FO:NV -- I'm on my second play-through. I put quite a number of hours into on my first play-through -- in excess of 80. I used to explorer perk to explore every location marked on the map -- and found a number that weren't.

However... I feel that FO3 had more things going on -- so much so that I played it through no fewer than 7 times (with DLCs, too). I just can't see myself playing NV that many times. I used to like just wandering around FO3, not so much in NV.

In addition to the "random" things, the "unimportant" building and ruins had more to look through (explore) in FO3. Many times, you just didn't know what was going to happen. In NV I (mostly) do. Besides the random "monster" you may encounter, there's little to wonder about if you're just trucking across the country side.

Compare:
http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Fallout_3_random_encounters
http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Fallout:_New_Vegas_random_encounters

I do like the weapon mods. However, I like the "build-able" weapons in FO3 more. I'd love to have my dart gun and railway rifle back -- maybe even a nuka-grenade. There's just so much useless junk in NV -- unless you're REALLY into "crafting", and I'm not, as it wasn't that important to playing the game.

I like the faction system in NV -- but no more than the karma system in FO3. They're just different. The thing that gets me in NV, though, is that during my second play-through I've made it a point to kill every single NCR I run across -- I'm vilified everywhere. However, they still come up as "friendly" when I enter a new area with NCR. That shouldn't be. They should ALL hate my guts by now. (I haven't "aligned" with Caesar either, because I've been killing them all off too -- and they DO hate me.) Anyway, the faction system does seemed skewed towards the NCR.

Just my 2c

[Intelligence]"So guys... Why is there this atomic bomb in the middle of a town? Why hasn't the Enclave or the Brotherhood scooped it up?"



It's rather hard to be nostalgic about something you're still actively playing/using.

I think the real difference between FO 3 and NV, is that FO 3 had tons of continuity issues with some parts of the map being treated as "the day after the bombs dropped" and others as "centuries have passed and the world is struggling still". In reality people would be moving out of the cities after the bombing because you can not sustain yourself on an area covered in asphalt and concrete without some sort of established agriculture and trade systems...not for 200 years anyway. FO3 totally messed up the SPECIAL system....since the SPECIAL felt like stat thresholds instead of skill modifiers. NV attempts to fix the inequity among SPECIAL stats, but there is plenty of room for further improvement. I think FO3 was entertaining in the way an action movie is and NV is more of a war-era drama. FO 3 had tons of content, but all of the details were disconnected...even though they did tell a story for each area they do not present me with a feeling of WHY their tales are part of the DC tapestry and not just things to experience. FO NV content does at times feel stunted, especially in some of the side quests where a bit more detail would have made them much, much more satisfying. I do appreciate that everything in NV seems to feel like it fits in with story of the region. FO3 felt sort of like, "See what we did there?" and NV was, "Here is the situation, now deal with it."

[Explosives]Because if they had, you wouldn't be able to blow it up. :deal:

[Barter] All for the sake of getting this alternate house! Also eyecandy! It sells, because it isn't fallout with out nukes going off left and right!

[intelligence] Indeed, What I would have given to see more low intel dialogue surprises like we got with Tor.

People rarely respond to my posts! I need to work on my writing skills.

The only major area in which I feel New Vegas is less fun than Fallout 3 is in the random exploration. There are minor annoyances like the changes to VATS and the peculiar morality system, and the bugs are annoying as hell (particularly the radio bug ) and take the sheen off the game, but I can live with these. I'm not overly enamoured with the number of pure fetch-and-carry quests, but hey, they're often a reason to venture off-road. But I do miss the pleasure of aimless exploration, exploration for it's own sake with no particular objective in mind other than idle curiosity, which Fallout 3 gave me in spades. To borrow softnerd's anology, I like theme parks and I liked that there was something interesting or weird or sad or funny over virtually every hill. And I'm a spelunker, too, I love dungeon-diving; and Fallout 3 offered far, far more opportunity to sate that urge than New Vegas does. I was one of the three people who actually liked the metro system and the secrets it contained. So it would be fair to say that whilst I like New Vegas very, very much, I don't quite love it like I do Fallout 3, for all its obvious faults.

That's a good way to put it. I completely agree. Sorry if I sounded argumentative at any point. I'm so used to arguing with my brother who thinks that FO3 is garbage without realizing that he probably wouldn't have NV if it wasn't for FO3.

I agree. The Mojave Wasteland was so boring, and the quests were really predictable. I also feel like guns are so much weaker this time around, even when used on lightly armored enemies.

I thought this at first too.... then I found out how the system works and 1 shot kill most stuff on very hard mode.

Newbies to the Fallout experience cunfuzzled by the "new fangled" DT system?

ZING

How is it boring compared to the Capital Wasteland? I'm not telling you you're wrong...I'm just curious why you think that. I actually love the tweaks to the weapons. I pay so much more attention to my inventory in NV than I ever did in FO3. In FO3 I found myself sticking to one weapons and owning everybody with it. In NV I carry different weapons for different situations, think about how much of each type of ammo I'm carrying, etc. It feels more authentic to me.


Yeah, there were some other companies in on the auction for the Fallout IP...obviously Bethesda won. I wonder what kind of FO3 we would have ended up with if someone else would have wanted it more.


I have the same problem. In my case it's prolly because my posts are too damn long. Or maybe my points are impossible to rebut... :whistling: :angel:

Nah, just did not know what to expect as far as enemy DT is concerned. Your encounter armored opponents a bit sooner that I expected.

Maybe its just me, but I have to constantly score multiple headshots with high powered guns on lightly armored enemies to get a kill. Not saying its difficult or anything, just that they seem to (in my opinion) be able to absorb much more damage despite having weak armor and low health. An example would be 3 point blank headshots on a Fiend with a Hunting Rifle before the Fiend is killed.



There are less random encounters. Getting held up by random people, Megaton Refugees wanting payback, etc. The Mojave Wasteland just seems like "[Insert Enemy Here] is attacking, kill them, keep walking" instead of "A random named NPC is robbing you, decide whether to kill him or not."