I enjoyed Fallout 3 wasteland much more than New Vegas's.

I thought bethesda made both NV & FO3 ?

Erm... No, did you miss the Obsidian Entertainment that pops up everytime you start the game?

This thread makes me feel much better. The amount of people over in the Skyrim discussion who claim that FO3 is better than NV just blows my mind. Not even that they preferred the setting, that the writing and story in FO3 was superior. I just can't see how they came to that conclusion. As far as gameplay goes, NV is a better rpg, I enjoyed the story in NV more than FO3, and the writing was much better. The NPCs are actually characters that have some development to them, and the setting just makes more sense to me. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but it still shocks me as to how much I disagree with most of the posters.

Really?

Fallout 3 has several ES things in it to captivate those fans:
A story that focuses on saving the world from evil itself, no matter how badly written it is.
An intro that is... Detailed? No... It's just... Different, from what other games has done for intro's.
It's a dungeonpalooza.
You can master anything and everything.
You get perks every level and tons of health and up as a demi-god.
It has a fully sandboxed map (with the exclusion of the DC bit but that's quite frankly just a giant dungeon.).
It has EPIC! moments such as super mutant behemoths popping out of nowhere when taking a teddybear.
It's quests was basically a themepark of crap to do. Vampires, finding a golden violin, assassinating 5 people by shooting them in the head, fighting giant fire ants etcetera.

Tons of reasons for ES fans to love it.

Why love it over Vegas?

Cause it's intro didn't feel very special and some felt there was no purpose to the Couriers ambitions and goals.
A story that focused on a political front.
Very few dungeons when compared to Fallout 3's monstrosity.
You can't master everything. (Well, with DLC's you can...)
You get a perk every other level, forcing players to choose more carefully and you only get +5 health every level. (Half as much as in FO3)
It has a map that is structured so that the player advances in levels and gear at a pace the developers intended for.
It has it's own EPIC! moments but they aren't as ridiculously huge as FO3's were.
It's quests were more down to earth and focused on more realistic things, but it did have it's few themepark quests as well, just that those are spread out a lot more.

So there is a reason for it.
Fallout 3 was more of an Elder Scrolls game, it was Oblivion With Guns.
New Vegas on the other hand... It's not a Fallout game, but it's not ES either.
But out of the two it's definitely more of a Fallout game than a ES game.

I just don't consider it a full Fallout game but that's just my opinion on it.
New Vegas was the best we could get out of that crappy deadline, Gamebryo and Oblivion design.
Hopefully Fallout 4 will be an actual Fallout game and leave behind even more of the Oblivion design.
Even so, it is very VERY different from Fallout 3 and Oblivion.

So I guess they were expecting more of Fallout 3 and were left disappointed when they found out what it actually was.

a Fallout game?

I don't know - I still felt like New Vegas was still very much a "Bethesda/Elder Scrolls" style of game.

I mean, you're still essentially exploring a really big contiguous game map full of dungeons, etc...

I'm also pretty sure that going forward we're going to be seeing further iterations of the series still being based off of a game design philosophy developed through designing Elder Scrolls games. :shrug:

Tough question. And a great one.

Given I've only played FO3 and FONV, my opinion is in no way as definitive as perhaps others here who have played all iterations of the series.

Having said that, my own view is that both games have their strengths and weaknesses.

I loved the setting of FO3. The perpetual overcast grey sky, a metaphor for the world's muddied moral pendulum. I loved Three Dogs musings. The so called sovereign nation - "Republic of Dave". I loved the music. Bob Crosby's "Way Back Home" . Lyrics are just brilliant. Fits the "Retro 50s" universe and the plight of vault dweller 101 perfectly. I would constantly have the Radio on in FO3. Not so FONV.

And then having completed FONV and recently reading more about the Enclave and the Remnants on here, I found myself re-visiting the game only to discover new content. Befriending Arcade Ganon, recruiting the Remnants, unlocking the door to the Remnants bunker. All very cool and indicative of the amazing game depth. Who said “Nihil novi sub sole?" lol

FO3 for setting. FONV for gameplay.

Very likely and I can't say I want them to completely abandon what they've done so far.
I would like to see them deviate further away from the Elder Scroll philosophy, where exploration is first and foremost. I'd like to see them design the game more about the choices you make, from your character design and progression not allowing you to do everything (DLC included) to how quest play out and effect the world.

I've played FO3(my first game in the series) and my brother owns FO:NV. I made a starting character and I like the quicker Character Creation so far. Not sure yet if I'll like the atmosphere since I did like DC's ruins but a flatmate of mine swears by the game. Going to have to get a game going AFTER Skyrim though

F3 was fun, killing stuff and blowing them up.
F:NV was amazing.
Edit: What Road Warrior said.
& Kyle... your face is weird. :shakehead: :cryvaultboy:

I asked my brother and he said that he liked FO3 better than NV because NV was too predictable. After thinking about it, it sort of makes since, since we were both new to fallout. Everything was new to us.

I can definitely say that I didn't expect what anything would look like I n fallout 3. Or halfway through the enclave would show up.

How was Fallout 3 not predictable? I knew as soon as Liam Neeson is the voice of your dad he was going to die pretty quickly after you find him, and I had this weird suspension that Eden was a robot or something.

I want Bethesda to try something new and make a true Fallout game, not an Elder Scrolls game in disguise.

it's not like Fallout has ever been unpredictable. The Series has always been Find the McGuffin, discover a larger threat during your search and then stopping it.

I do want to say I really liked some of the dialog in New Vegas.

Now, what always comes into play when dialog between the two games comes up is

But it is kind of an easy cop-out to take the worst example of dialog from one game, and compare it to your favorite line from another. I don't think I had any real problems with Fallout 3's dialog, to be honest. Some of it was really nice, I thought - a lot of the log entries you'd find in the computers, some of the radio signals you'd come across, etc. (Heck, even ThreeDog I thought was nice to listen to, for the most part.)

What I really liked about New Vegas, though, was the unique characteristics that a lot of the different sorts of people you'd come across exhibited. Like how Vault Dwellers tended to use a lot of slang related to life in a Vault, the Families' tendency to use gambling metaphors, and so on. It was nice to see them go that extra mile to come up with ways of applying a character's background to the way they spoke to you.

I just thought it was a nice little touch, that I didn't even really pick up on until later on in the game.

I think the worst example of dialogue from Fallout 3 is.

"I'm looking for my Dad, a middle aged guy"

That really narrows it down doesn't it sport?

I mean all they had to write was "I'm looking for my Dad, he looks like me but middle aged"

Makes more sense when you realize everyone in the game says you look like him.

They're apparently reusing that line in Skyrim with slight changes: "I'm looking for an old guy lurking out somewhere in Riften." Glad to see they have improved their writing. :laugh:
I'd give a link to a screenshot, but I'd probably get banned.

Story? Fallout.
Gameplay? New Vegas.

New Vegas felt like more of a Fallout game, and I liked the story better, but if you compare the actual open world, Fallout 3 takes the cake.

Basically, New Vegas is a better Fallout game, which is why most old school fans like it more. While Fallout 3 is a Fallout game heavily influenced by TES, and so it's kind of a hybrid. Doesn't make it better or worse, just different.

Heavy air nuking would justify it.

Justify what?

Are you trying to defend how Fallout 3 looks? Because if you are, a "heavy air nuking" would not explain how the building are still standing. A nuclear bomb going off above the ground does far more damage then one going off on the ground. The shock wave goes down, bounces off the ground then back up and out. That does far more damage then just going up and out. One or both the nukes used during WW2 was detonated above the city.

DC was the capital of the United States, it should have been a huge crater. Hundreds if not thousands of ICMBs would been sent to destroy that city.

Fallout 3: Still doing just fine without all the haters.

And Fallout 3 had amazing writing too, look at some of the terminals in the game like the one at the Germantown police station where a National Guard nurse is documenting everything that happened right after the bombs fell, look at Carol in Underworld when you ask her about what the war was like, look at the sewer where the father was sending out a radio signal asking for help for his sick son, those were all amazing.

Yeah the main quest had some plot holes in it that the fans that had been with the series since the begining would have a problem with, and I can understand that, but don't say that the writing in the game svcked as a whole when it didn't.

Oh and before somebody else says it: vampires, collecting nuka cola for a psycho, blah blah blah every other little nit pick people like to come up with.

Well, I highly doubt the Chinese had thousands of ICBMs.

According to ye old Enclave debate the President isn't even in DC along with countless other politicians who are not in DC, and the Chinese spies would for sure know this.

Also... seems like I read somewhere, maybe the wiki, that the Chinese nukes all had to be dropped from planes, and they had no ICBMs? I know I read that somewhere, even though it kinda boggled my mind.

But regardless, we also don't know what kind of missile defense the government had, ala House.

So, maybe it not as much of a target you would think.

China wasn't the only country that was involved in the Great War :facepalm: Every country that had nukes and hated America which everyone did at the time would have sent nukes to DC.

China had nuclear missile subs, hence the Shi in Fallout 2 and we learn in point lookout that China had no problem getting subs close to the eastern seaboard.

We don't know that the president wasn't in DC at the time. The info that says he left to the Enclave oil Rig isn't canon. Still doesn't matter if they werent in DC because other countries would have nuked DC as well.

ICBMs exist in Fallout Universe. Wiki is wrong on that, as I already pointed out they had missile subs as well. "We were winning too, and then those Damn Reds LAUNCHED" - President Richardson.


People really need so get the water out of their ears, open their eyes and learn that America and China were not the only ones involved in the Great War. Seriously how many times to I have to point that out?! :swear: :flame:

Well... that nuke sticking out of the ground in megaton is for sure not a ICBM nor a submarine nuke.

I am also not going to assume how many nukes hit DC or what countries targeted the USA.

I thought you were one of the folks who believed pres went rig pre nuking, but it can be hard to keep all of your arguements straight.