Hey guys, just a quick question,
Who should I support between Mr. House and Yes Man? I know most of you's will say it's personal preference but I was just wondering who's final quests are more fun or interesting?
Any input or comments are appreciated

Cheers,
bigdavoo.

That depends on what you want. Running the Yes-Man route means you're going to take over. Working for Mr. House, you're aiding him in his dreams of reigniting economic and technological industries.

It truly mends down to which side you want to support.

I found Mr.House's set of missions pretty lacking, then again, Yes man's are roughly the same ? Of course there's the different endings I spos. Guess most of the work went into the NCR and Legion stories.

I did like some of the conversation stuff with House though, Yes man is a pretty one dimensional character.

Neither. Legion kills them all!!

Just kidding. Yes man is pretty hilarious though.

To be honest, I never leave House alive and I leave Yes-Man standing on the curb like the moronic machine that he is. "'Scuse me a sec. I have to run to the washroom. I'll be right back."

The one saving grace that Mr. House possesses is a smidgen of humanity. Though it's doubtful that it would be viable enough to allow any spark of self determination in the overly regimented, though technologically superior society he would foster.

The missions are quite identical, from what I recall.

So it really is about personal preference. Do you believe the Mojave inhabitants should have their own independence or is a (somewhat) benevolent ruler the better option?

If you do Yes Man, you have kill or disable Mr house. If you do Mr House, you have to kill B.O.S.

Other than that, they're pretty much the same. Although the ending suggest that picking Mr House as the ruler is the most prosperous way for New Vegas.

Yes Man is much more fun than House. I don't mean the quests.

I say play 'em all. I've done the House ending, working on Yes Man now. I've traditionally hated the Legion, but I'll probably side with them next just to see what all the fuss is about.

The fuss is that there awesome. No, its just that the Legion in my mind is better written and less [censored] to the player.

Yes man is a bit like House +.
Not as great in dialogue, history or ending.
However you can tailor everything up to the end quest exactly as you like.
Kill anyone, help everyone or neither.

All that said it really does not matter in the long run.
If you're looking for a great ending none of the factions offer it imo.

I kind of prefer Yes Man. More comical. Also, you have more freedom and I don't really like wiping out factions.

My order is probably Yes Man > House > Legion > NCR.

Between the two I would pick Yes Man, mostly because I like having flexibility in how I handle the various factions and House's quest line does not offer that. I always go Independent now, although I have done all four options to see how things play out.

I think that is the main idea. FO3 was similar, but not as stark.

Like the movie War Games, where "The only way to win is not to play;" the FONV endings are meant to illustrate the futility trying to affect the outcome when the aggregate of humanity is slave to human nature.

While "war never changes" is succinct as an aphorism, a less poetic but perhaps more explanatory presentation would be that Man's proclivity and predilection for war never changes.

I don't know, House has some more bad endings related to it than Yes-man. Though it really depends on many of your other decisions as well.

This just cheered me up strangely ( but I am strange, who said that? ).
I've been trying for a week to think of a way to rationalise why you can only fix it for one faction only, rather than continue the stalemate.
You just presented one to chew apon :foodndrink: .
Though technically having a stalemate would be a never changing war... damn it ....

Yes Man.



Mr. House is bat[censored] insane.