Now this what fallout should be. Fallout 1 and 2 were great, but suffered from technological constraints of the time. Fallout 3 was larger and had better graphics, however the world felt like a barren waste filled with disjointed city states that were nothing more than towns filled with hermits. The plot was hackneyed at best and the game as a whole didn't feel like a fallout, mainly because it lacked the depth of the other two.

New vegas on the other hand is deep and compelling, the factions are interesting and the world is almost thriving (due to numerous G.E.C.K.S in the west coast, play Fallout 2 for details on that). The world feels tense, the story is better and the characters are much more memorable. This is what Fallout should be.

When I heard the original creators of Fallout were making New Vegas I was excited. I was also not dissapointed. Obsidian has proved their creative talents in Fallout 1, Fallout 2, and again in Fallout: New Vegas. I knew Bethesda's strengths, they are excellent at creating a great world with endless quests, look at Oblivion. However, Bethesda's weakness is their inability to create a decent story or memorable characters, and I beleive several fans of Bethesda's games would agree to that. Obsidian though can create great stories, and very memorable characters, I still remember the master from Fallout 1.

I felt all year long that the union of these two companies would create the best fallout of all time. Bethesda's strengths of world creation, with Obsidian more than compensating for the hackneyed writing. The best of both worlds, and I personally believe I have it.

If anyone at Bethesda or Obsidian reads this, I hope that all future installments of this franchise will be a joint work. I beleive the franchise would benefit greatly, but it probably won't happen because the corporate world doesn't share, but I would happily sign a petion for it, or if I visited this site more than once a month, I would start one.

i think i like this game more than FO3 but FO2 and, as unpopular as it was, FO:tactics were flipping fantastic.

i wish they could remake fallout 2 with a new engine. id play it right now if the graphics werent over a decade old.

For me, right now, the order is pretty much: Fallout 2 > New Vegas = Fallout > Fallout: Tactics > Fallout 3.

Word. I didnt read all that but, as much as I much I loved FO3, FNV is really growing on me.

Feels a little more FO-ish.

I am also finding Fallout New Vegas to be extremely awesome in so many ways... FO3 also felt like it was missing something and i didnt really care much about any of it, i found the Ghouls to be the most interesting interaction in the entire game.

Great work all around, everything feels as it should!

:)

its arguably the least fallout-ish!

1. you're not a/the "vault dweller"

2. main quest isnt to save the vault you're from

3. supermutants play a small role in this one

Love it. This game just keeps dragging me further and further down the rabbit hole.



nugget of truth.

You weren't in Fallout 2, either.



Neither was Fallout 2's, but it was close.



Same thing for Fallout 2.

I heartily disagree!

I came to Fallout through Fallout 3, and though it's almost become taboo to say it around some of the more fundamentalist fans of the originals, I love Fallout 3. Where some players saw gaps in the story or gameplay, I found room for my own creativity. Vegas feels a little over-populated. Like I can walk a ways and encounter a friendly. Having encountered so many friendlies early in the game, and then adopting the American Werewolf in London strategy of "don't stray from the path", before I started exploring properly it felt a little like I was moseying to and from populated places to do a few quests, which is exactly why I did spend so much time around Goodsprings, and then every town after it. I felt like I was being rushed along a linear path.

DC felt a little more hostile and barren, and Fallout 3 promoted exploration a little more. S'just IMO as a player though, these are just feelings you get while playing. FO3 and its Wasteland, and DC, felt more barren, but threw enough my way to keep pushing me onto the next... whatever. Mystery. I hate to make comparisons because I know Fallout 3 inside out pretty much, and until I know Vegas as well as I do DC, and until I've given it even half as much time as I've put into - and will continue to put into - Fallout 3, couple of 100+ hours easy, may be over a thousand, I'm not sure. I'm holding off on any brash judgements as to which I prefer.

That I'm already considering replaying F:NV with a new character, knowing the lay of the Mojave a little better, is a great sign that it's definitely a win in my eyes. I can't even mention half the things F:NV has brought to the table because I've barely scratched the surface. Item/ammo creation, weapon modding, character builds, different reputations across different play-throughs will yield different experiences (playing neutral so far in my first play-through means I'm pretty much moseying as I said, had I picked a side I may well feel things are more hostile) - so meh, deffo a win. Deffo will be pumping copious quantities of time into it. :thumbsup:

I agree completly, and if Bethesda and Oblivion worked together, things like that could be managed. Bethesda excels at the exploration thing, New Vegas could use some of that. However, we don't want to lose the writing of Obsidian either. That's why I personally want to see them work together on the franchise, so we can have both.

Unfortunately I see the easiest way for that to happen is for Bethesda to buy out Obsidian, to get their employees and experience to enrich the Fallout franchise. As I said, the corporate world does not like to share....