not a troll thread. why new vega sis a better game than skyr

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 8:09 am

In fact, its' probably the best Pure RPG I've played. And I'll tell you why. Skyrim, technically, is a great game. The game world is gorgeous, there's plenty of things to do, and it has polished gameplay, and an appealing interface. But the game is ruined for me due to a serious issue that infests the whole game. The game, touts itself as an immense detailed world(which it is), but there isn;t much interesting to do within it. And, yes I get that there's hundreds of side quests, and even more "Miscellaneous Objectives", but few, VERY few of the quest quests are very memorable at all, and are usually all "fetch this, or kill that type of quests". What's worse is that most of them suffer from minimal character interaction, and those interactions are not written very well at all. What's even worse is that you can go ahead and assassinate the Emperor, Slay Potema the Wolf Queen, or liberate a town from Vampires, and it doesn't effect the game world at ALL. No one talks of your achievements,s o you don;t feel all that accomplished. And you don't feel like an adventurer because your adventures are never really that grand. They all FEEL samey. A beautiful world that has very little in terms of depth. It's like Bethesda expected the world to be so wondrous that it would fill in that blank. Well it doesn't. It kind of creates a barrier. Skyrim is not so much a deep RPG, as it is a giant playground for you to mess around in, rather than a dangerous place where every little thing matters. While New Vegas has far more quests than Fallout 3, NV does a fantastic job of making EACH ONE unique and worth playing through. The stories and characters are just so good. And each one effects the game world dramatically. Beyond that, there's usually different ways to each quest you do, and that effects how the game world reacts to you. There's so many factions in the game, and that's where these choices come into play. There's Good and Evil in terms of a universal sense, in NV, and then there's how each faction feels about you. And depending on how they feel about you, that determines if they shoot you on sight or help you with whatever you need. and it WORKS. And people will talk to you or react to you about it. You'll get full quests out of it. Say I'm part of the Great Kahns, that means if I walk near and NCR encampment, they'll all try to murder me. HOWEVER, I can disguise myself as an NCR soldier and perform recon on them in disguise. IT's all so awesome! On my first playthrough, I assaulted the King's base of operations and killed ALL of them. Because I felt like it. It was a joy to hear all the city folk talking about "some guy wiping out all of them", and then having random members try to take revenge on me. It's a system of world immersion lacking from Skyrim.



It doesn't help either that enemy variety is lacking. I know EXACTLY what I'm running into every time I enter a cave or dungeon, based on the type it is in Skyrim. Do something fun with your enemies, Bethesda! What if I walked into a dungeon and found a captive giant being guarded by an arch mage trying to use it as a sacrifice. I have to fight two Earth Atronachs to set him free, or set him free to help me with the mage. You don't HAVE to do ANYTHING with that. You already have all the models done. Just place them and their stats on the dungeon accordingly. It's not hard to show a LITTLE creativity with what you have. Fallout: New Vegas isn't afraid to mess around with the bestiary in terms of their sizes and behavior and locations.




As for Fallout 3? Fallout 3 had a much worse story than New Vegas, and the only reason I think most people like 3 more is because it was there first. Despite NV being FAR more faithful and full of content than 3, 3 had that initial "shock value" attached to it. I cna understand why someone would look at NV and see how it looks samey on the surface, but it really is just the superior game in EVERY possible aspect. If this was the game released in 2008, 3 would look like a joke. So many good stories, adventures and memorable characters. Phenomenal game that's VERY under appreciated. Buy the Ultimate Edition. The DLC's are GODLY. Simply masterful.

User avatar
Craig Martin
 
Posts: 3395
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2007 4:25 pm

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 4:29 pm

1. why a black font?
2. apples and oranges. FO:NV is a on-rails RPG, Skyrim is a sandbox. Obviously in the former they can afford more depth, at the expense of freedom, while in the latter the total freedom prohibits a very deep gameplay. If however you have a very vivid imagination you can get a lot more out of Skyrim than you can out of NV.
3. this kind of thread has been done to death and will likely get locked.
User avatar
!beef
 
Posts: 3497
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 4:41 pm

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 10:39 am

I get it. You like New Vegas. There is a NV forum you can post that on. You said very little of Skyrim... and being a fan of both games I have to say I like Skyrim more than NV. I feel there is a whole lot more to do in Skyrim. Most quests in NV are unique.... but there are so few I would be disappointed if they weren't.
User avatar
Kevin Jay
 
Posts: 3431
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2007 4:29 am

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 6:55 am

What I read: ''In fact *gives opinion*''

It is fine that you prefer New Vegas, but it is your opinion. Here are a few variables for you:

1. The things you like about New Vegas, someone else might not care for them at all.

2. The things you didnt like in Skyrim, someone else might love them.

3. And even if someone agrees on each pro and con of both game than they still might consider Skyrim better because they simply care less about the cons of Skyrim or care more about its pros.

Giving your opinion is fine, but I'm sure you can understand that it can be taken as trolling in a forum dedicated to Skyrim. Post a blog or something.
User avatar
Baby K(:
 
Posts: 3395
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 9:07 pm

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 2:21 pm

tl;dr
Skyrim plus 'Skyrim monster mod' with increased spawn rates and chance of bandits/monsters using deer/elk/rabbits/ spawn points means every trip across the tundra could very well be my last as I play DID.
Skyrim is by far more enjoyable than NV IMO.
User avatar
Baylea Isaacs
 
Posts: 3436
Joined: Mon Dec 25, 2006 11:58 am

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 2:34 am

2. apples and oranges. FO:NV is a on-rails RPG, Skyrim is a sandbox. Obviously in the former they can afford more depth, at the expense of freedom, while in the latter the total freedom prohibits a very deep gameplay. If however you have a very vivid imagination you can get a lot more out of Skyrim than you can out of NV.
What do you mean New Vegas is on rails? I spend forever just piddling about and sandboxing it. I haven't played Skyrim so I can't judge, but you must not have played New Vegas very long if it's 'on rails' >_>
User avatar
Josephine Gowing
 
Posts: 3545
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2006 12:41 pm

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 7:00 am

If you have to announce it's not a troll thread then it probably is.
User avatar
Darren
 
Posts: 3354
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2007 2:33 pm

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 6:37 am

As for Fallout 3? Fallout 3 had a much worse story than New Vegas, and the only reason I think most people like 3 more is because it was there first. Despite NV being FAR more faithful and full of content than 3, 3 had that initial "shock value" attached to it. I cna understand why someone would look at NV and see how it looks samey on the surface, but it really is just the superior game in EVERY possible aspect. If this was the game released in 2008, 3 would look like a joke. So many good stories, adventures and memorable characters. Phenomenal game that's VERY under appreciated. Buy the Ultimate Edition. The DLC's are GODLY. Simply masterful.

I didn't find it "superior in every possible aspect". I understand people's reasons for preferring one over the other, but ultimately they're opinions, not indisputable facts. I liked both and am glad I've had the chance to play them.

And please don't choose odd font colours, it's unpleasant to read on a white background, even when highlighted.
User avatar
Nathan Risch
 
Posts: 3313
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2007 10:15 pm

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 11:36 am

Couldn't someone turn the coin, and say why New Vegas is an inferior sandbox game when compared to Skyrim, (or Oblivion)? These games are different series with different design goals TESS has never been Fallout (though FO3 was close to being TES IMO). Just because New Vegas had some strong points as an RPG does not [IMO] demand that Skyrim copy or incorporate those points into it's own. (Some of those aspects are mutually exclusive and even damaging when mixed-n-matched between series).

I'd simply say play New Vegas OR Play Skyrim depending on which series strengths interest you the most. Calling for even more cloning and homogenization of game series is [IMO] a bad misstep that leads to an unsatisfactory mix. (Kind of like when you mix paints... pure colors are the richest, but you can't paint a house yellow and paint it blue, and paint it red; and when you add a bit of every color to the paint, all you get is brownish light purple :yuck:)
User avatar
courtnay
 
Posts: 3412
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 8:49 pm

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 2:45 pm


2. apples and oranges. FO:NV is a on-rails RPG, Skyrim is a sandbox. Obviously in the former they can afford more depth, at the expense of freedom, while in the latter the total freedom prohibits a very deep gameplay. If however you have a very vivid imagination you can get a lot more out of Skyrim than you can out of NV.

I'm sorry, but Skyrim is more of a litter box than a sand box. You can have a sandbox game, but the story lines that the gamer participates in need to be somewhat entertaining. The game was mundane, I found it more fun to just not play it at all. Skyrim does not deserve the acclaim that it has recieved.
User avatar
Joey Bel
 
Posts: 3487
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2007 9:44 am

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 5:43 am

In fact, its' probably the best Pure RPG I've played.

Stopped reading there. If you think any Bethesda RPGs are "Pure RPG" you should play a lot more RPGs.
User avatar
Auguste Bartholdi
 
Posts: 3521
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 11:20 am

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 8:55 am

I'd say New Vegas is a better Fallout game than Fallout 3, because Fallout originally wasn't an open world exploration game, whereas Fallout 3 is the better sandbox exploration game. In turn, Skyrim is also a better sandbox exploration game than New Vegas.

I think it's not very useful to compare New Vegas to Skyrim. Skyrim is a typical Bethesda open world exploration game, whereas New Vegas is an Obsidian game. Obsidian's games have always been more about the story and RPG elements, never about vast open explorable worlds.

It's like comparing Fallout 3 to Deus Ex: Human Revolution. Which one is the better game as a whole? Can't say. They may both be FPS/RPG hybrids, but they're still completely different in what they're setting out to do. You can say which one has better combat, or character customization or whatever, but as a whole? Not so easy.
User avatar
[Bounty][Ben]
 
Posts: 3352
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2007 2:11 pm

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 2:25 am

The game was mundane, I found it more fun to just not play it at all.
I cracked up here. But aside from beautiful scenery, does Skyrim have anything that sets it apart from other generic Medieval RPGs? (Not asking in rudeness or trolling, but I was considering getting Skyrim to try it out.)

I'd say New Vegas is a better Fallout game than Fallout 3, because Fallout originally wasn't an open world exploration game, whereas Fallout 3 is the better sandbox exploration game. In turn, Skyrim is also a better sandbox exploration game than New Vegas.I think it's not very useful to compare New Vegas to Skyrim. Skyrim is a typical Bethesda open world exploration game, whereas New Vegas is an Obsidian game. Obsidian's games have always been more about the story and RPG elements, never about vast open explorable worlds.
True. I agree Fallout 3's world travel is top notch, but to be honest, New Vegas has the problem of 'Rich detail in a location' and 'Nothing here' locations. While the exploration isnt as....absorbing as 3, it's still very beautiful. The world was still vastly enjoyable. Could it have had more work? Sure, but given Bethesda pressured them into a particulare release date, I'd say they did very well.
User avatar
Motionsharp
 
Posts: 3437
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 1:33 am

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 8:06 am

NV is no way better than Skyrim. In fact none of the previous Bethesda game or an other rpg game for that matter is better than Skyrim
User avatar
Monique Cameron
 
Posts: 3430
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 6:30 am

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 3:03 pm

NV is no way better than Skyrim. In fact none of the previous Bethesda game or an other rpg game for that matter is better than Skyrim
http://memegenerator.net/instance/18087866
User avatar
Soph
 
Posts: 3499
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 8:24 am

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 4:30 pm

Confused. I can explore the Mojave Wasteland as much a sI can the Capital Wasteland or Skyrim. I never felt "railroaded" anywhere. It's just as much a sandbox as both Fallout 3 and Skyrim...
User avatar
Mario Alcantar
 
Posts: 3416
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 8:26 am

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 11:00 am

Confused. I can explore the Mojave Wasteland as much a sI can the Capital Wasteland or Skyrim. I never felt "railroaded" anywhere. It's just as much a sandbox as both Fallout 3 and Skyrim...
I think the area design is part of it for some; in NV there are [impassable] partitions that aid the AI, where in FO3, the player can travel anywhere ~until they hit the edge of the gameworld.
User avatar
brian adkins
 
Posts: 3452
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 8:51 am

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 7:23 am

IMO: Skyrim>Morrowind>FO:NV>Daggerfall>Arena>Oblivion.
Why? I loved Morrowind, and I love it now,but the world was too small and not very diverse (yes, west gash and ashlands are pretty different, but only by the color of soil and trees (yes, I understand the technical limitations back then))
User avatar
DAVId Bryant
 
Posts: 3366
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 11:41 pm

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 12:57 pm

For me, I also have always felt FO NV was a bit better game, skyrim is amazing and i love it! But a big thing for new vegas is the leveling! The leveling in new vegas is much more true than skyrim. In NV you actually have to kill something, complete a quest, or complete a challenge to gain XP. I skyrim there is too many tempting ways to go from 10 to 30, in 1 hour. Leveling played a big aspect for me at least, so i gotta go with nv
User avatar
JD bernal
 
Posts: 3450
Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 8:10 am

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 3:30 am

I would like to suggest that there [in future] be a distinction observed between the terms 'Game', 'RPG', and 'Sandbox', because the better sandbox cannot be the better RPG and vice versa ~while both of these examples are equally games, RPGs, and sandboxes. :shrug:

I cannot see how one compared to the other can be branded a 'better game', they are both great games, but not both great sandboxes.
User avatar
marie breen
 
Posts: 3388
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 4:50 am

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 3:39 am

Because it's just is that's why.

Wooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo !!!!

But Skyrim looks good too, just not my thing.
User avatar
Da Missz
 
Posts: 3438
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2007 4:42 pm

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 4:29 pm

I would like to suggest that there [in future] be a distinction observed between the terms 'Game', 'RPG', and 'Sandbox', because the better sandbox cannot be the better RPG and vice versa ~while both of these examples are equally games, RPGs, and sandboxes. :shrug:

I cannot see how one compared to the other can be branded a 'better game', they are both great games, but not both great sandboxes.
That,sadly, won't happen. In this era of gaming, we've become lazy. Early 90s or so? You'd see like 1 genre, then 5 subgenres. But as gaming has become more commercial, the developers have become far more corporate, the naming method is simplified. "Has inventory? Places to explore? RPG!" I think the younger generation of gamers at large is oblivious as to what a real RPG (As in the defining term) is.
User avatar
naana
 
Posts: 3362
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 2:00 pm

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 2:39 am

That,sadly, won't happen. In this era of gaming, we've become lazy. Early 90s or so? You'd see like 1 genre, then 5 subgenres. But as gaming has become more commercial, the developers have become far more corporate, the naming method is simplified. "Has inventory? Places to explore? RPG!" I think the younger generation of gamers at large is oblivious as to what a real RPG (As in the defining term) is.
Ain't that a kick in the head. :sadvaultboy:
User avatar
Allison Sizemore
 
Posts: 3492
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 6:09 am

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 3:42 am

It's really no surprise that RPG Purists like FONV better than the other Beth games. It's also why we like KOTOR II more than KOTOR 1 (except for the last hour of KOTOR II)

Obsidian made FONV and KOTOR II and made them for old school, pure RPG fans. Fans of depth, customization, choice, tricking out gear, stats that matter, gameplay that varies etc....

What I love so much about FONV and KOTOR II is how deep you can go, or not go. Converting companions to Jedi, or Sith, or keeping them as core class was epic in KOTOR II. Total freedom to do what you want. Only complaint I had was opening up that side quest for the companion had to be perfectly timed and could easily be missed

FONV, 90hrs in and I've still got tons of faction and main story quests to go. Only did Honest Hearts so still have that other DLC to go. So much depth and content.
User avatar
Shelby McDonald
 
Posts: 3497
Joined: Sat Jan 13, 2007 2:29 pm

Post » Fri May 04, 2012 8:33 am

It's really no surprise that RPG Purists like FONV better than the other Beth games. It's also why we like KOTOR II more than KOTOR 1 (except for the last hour of KOTOR II)

Obsidian made FONV and KOTOR II and made them for old school, pure RPG fans. Fans of depth, customization, choice, tricking out gear, stats that matter, gameplay that varies etc....

What I love so much about FONV and KOTOR II is how deep you can go, or not go. Converting companions to Jedi, or Sith, or keeping them as core class was epic in KOTOR II. Total freedom to do what you want. Only complaint I had was opening up that side quest for the companion had to be perfectly timed and could easily be missed

FONV, 90hrs in and I've still got tons of faction and main story quests to go. Only did Honest Hearts so still have that other DLC to go. So much depth and content.

One of my favorite gaming moments was in KOTOR ll. It was a Sith run and how I did things throughout I was able to turn the handmaiden into a Sith turning her clothes black and with Visas had two padewans rocking duel light sabers as I spent all my time in learning Sith lord powers. So epic. I had tried to turn the hand maiden Sith and Visas good on a few occasions but failed so when I did it, it I was pretty stoked. That's choices in a game for you
User avatar
Noely Ulloa
 
Posts: 3596
Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2006 1:33 am

Next

Return to Fallout: New Vegas