To all the people who think NV has more exploration : Fallout: New Vegas

» Sat Jan 31, 2009 6:09 am

I love New Vegas to death, but it's so much smaller than FO3.
Regardless of how many actual locations are, the maps are the same size, but New Vegas doesn't use like a third of its map. All that space is filled with locations and things to find in FO3.
NV also feels a little weak in terms of random encounters keeping things interesting.

Also, guys, people love to say that "New Vegas is bigger than Fallout 3" but take the Explorer perk and then look at the damn world map. There's SO MUCH dead space on both the western and eastern edges that is just totally devoid of any locations, or indeed anything but cliffs. It's literally there for no reason.

» Sat Jan 31, 2009 1:33 am

Getting from Bright Springs to Novac is a good hoof so there you go!

» Sat Jan 31, 2009 12:32 pm

i don't get why people are calling it "wasted space". every notable area in Fallout 3 is in the east or the south; the north and west are almost completely empty, apart from rocks and a couple pointless dungeons. instead of doing that AGAIN, Obsidian opted to put 90% of the interesting places in the game around the vicinity of the major highways, resulting in a) a world that looks and feels a LOT more natural and alive, and B) less mindless slogging through empty desert and molerat/radscorpion/protectron fights just so you can enter a building that contains nothing but three raiders and a teddy bear.

yeah the invisible walls are annoying in some places - i was trying to take up a sniper position in a burned-out building to drop some Fiends last night only to find that the building i wanted to use was sealed off, even though i was in the perfect position to jump into it from an adjacent building - but would you guys really rather have even more empty wasteland with nothing but rocks and dirt and a random enemy?

in terms of locations, no - New Vegas does not have more to explore. Bethesda makes games where you explore - that's their strength, that's the one thing they're good at, the one thing that makes them truly stand out. Obsidian doesn't. Obsidian makes games where you decide. but if you count exploring characters, exploring viewpoints and politics and psychology - it has more than enough.

That really does svck. I dont know how many boulders I could easily have jumped atop of to set up a sniper position where the radscorpions or ghouls couldnt get to me so I could pick them off, only to jump and hit a invisable wall not letting me get atop the boulder.

Same goes with the mountains to the north and west. I can get so far up and could still go more if it wasnt for that damn invisable wall.

Thankfully if you keep to the roads you can usually use a car to get an elevated sniper position if your lucky.

As far as dead space, when I took the explorer perk I couldnt believe how many icons there were so close together. Way more than FO3 but the only thing though is as has been said before most of the Mojave wasteland you see in the map isnt accessable. Not that it makes much of a big deal to me. I havent wandered much off the paved roads, or whats left of them. I still havent even discovered 1/2 of the locations you can find hell maybe not even 1/4.

» Sat Jan 31, 2009 1:35 pm

*bzzt* - Oblivion was empty as hell and boring because of it. even the most useless building in Fallout 3 had some sort of story in it, big or small, blatant or subtle - and that's what made it an interesting game. Oblivion would've been a much, much better game if there were more places to go that weren't just copy-pasted forts with necromancers, even if those places were small and empty.

Fully agree with this - FO3 and NV have both proved more interesting for exploring.

Which one is bigger? Probably FO3 (though I think the subways really padded FO3 out at times - getting from A to B could be quite lengthy, even when those 2 spots were close on the map.

Regardless, I'm loving NV easily as much as FO1, 2 or 3.

» Sat Jan 31, 2009 4:12 am

Getting from Bright Springs to Novac is a good hoof so there you go!

Try walking from The Dunwich Building to The Republic of Dave in FO3 for comparison.

I think I'll try walking from the Crashed Vertibird to Nellis Array at some point to see how long it takes.

» Sat Jan 31, 2009 8:50 am

i think your right about the wasted space.
they could have made it larger
but maybe the dlc will solve that eh?

» Sat Jan 31, 2009 10:19 am

i think your right about the wasted space.
they could have made it larger
but maybe the dlc will solve that eh?

Unnecessary bump is unnecessary... Oh wait...

» Fri Jan 30, 2009 11:46 pm

Does the size of a MAP really annoys you???

» Sat Jan 31, 2009 10:03 am

Edit: Double Post

» Sat Jan 31, 2009 3:36 pm

If you are playing the game, the map is more than big enough. If you are just running around shooting things, then it won't be big enough.

» Sat Jan 31, 2009 3:54 pm

One of the things I miss most are the forgotten or surprise locations that you wouldn't find unless you were just exploring just for the sake of exploring in FO3. They didn't have any quest attached to them, but they were just there for the sake of being there. Some of these places had some of the neatest stuff in the game, and some were pretty damn big and had epic combat too. Places like Mama Dolce's, LOB Enterprises, The Chryslus Building just to name a couple. I also liked Fort Bannister, Roosevelt Academy and Red Racer Factory too. I miss stuff like that in NV as it doesn't exist. There are PLENTY pf places they could have MADE into locations like that such as H & H Tool Factory, the Steel Factory and so forth, but for whatever reason they made them one-room interiors.

» Sat Jan 31, 2009 2:10 am

I count the different MQ paths, differing endingslides and varying ways to solve quests as part of the exploration too (and in a bit more prominent way than scouring every inch of the wasteland), so I'd say F:NV has more and more rewarding exploring. But that's just me.

» Sat Jan 31, 2009 7:06 am

I do no think anymore of the nv map will be opened up by DLC

All will be travelling to new off map areas, just like FO3

» Sat Jan 31, 2009 5:14 am

I didn't find Fallout 3's exploration that rewarding. When I found a new place I usually hoped to meet some people, see how they live and maybe get some quest, but they were always filled with enemies and didn't have any people to interact with. Mama Dolce's is a great example of this.

» Sat Jan 31, 2009 12:42 pm

Unnecessary bump is unnecessary... Oh wait...

I know. Like this thread didn't svck enough the first time?

I thought it was a new thread. :rofl:

There are PLENTY pf places they could have MADE into locations like that such as H & H Tool Factory, the Steel Factory and so forth, but for whatever reason they made them one-room interiors.

Thank goodness. All that dungeon crawling in nearly identical office buildings and metros became oppressive after awhile.

More real content and less dungeon crawling makes me a happy panda.

» Sat Jan 31, 2009 3:59 am

map size isn't the problem, there just isn't anything going on, but there's no enemy patrols or random events, most of the locations nothing is going on, FO3 had lots of dungeons/buildings/tunnels to explore and fight in, tons of good locations, little lamplight caverns fightings the supermutants, the roosovelt academy, national guard armory, chryslus building, red racer factory, the capitol building both inside and out, the entire downtown dc area, national archives, and on and on, tons of exploring and fighting in all sorts of areas, la enfant plaza, it just goes on and on, new vegas doesn't have any of that type of stuff, the only good spots to fight human enemies to me is black mountain and thats not saying much.

» Sat Jan 31, 2009 11:55 am

Now, for the people that say there is more locations, READ THIS: there is! But most of them are worthless, and are seconds from each other (running time) and I've been in so many worthless caves which I thought for sure might have something good to loot, or how many abanded homes (which I will say are important if you want to use them as a home for instant fast travel), or worthless enemy spawns.

I hope they at least let you access the west with Future DLC. (Btw, in my other thread I listed DLC spots such as a train station like the one that leads to the pitt..) nevermind.. anyway, take all this into consideration, and before you reply to someones thread about how small it is, think about this.

Define what is worthless.

Worthless as in empty? No skill book? No huge stash of goodies? No unique weapon? No loot cattle?

Can we see those as space preserve for modders (but we know obviously Obsidian had a bigger plan for Vegas)?

Anyways, there is at least 2 more DLC on the way, we should see then.

» Sat Jan 31, 2009 10:57 am

hey guys... maps can have different scales cant they?.......just saying

I'm pretty sure FNV's map is at a different scale then F3's. F3's area is a square while FNV's area is rectangular on a square map.

I think some people are just making a mountain out of a molehill because that's just how Obsidian drew the map. Now if it was zoomed in a bit more, so the boundaries are on the edges of the viewable space on the pipboy, there wouldn't be "wasted space".

JES already stated that the exterior grid count is a bit more than F3's. So I don't know why it's still up for debate.