New to The Fallout Series : Fallout: New Vegas

» Tue Jul 19, 2011 9:39 am

Personally I'd play them in order [1, 2, 3, nv]; but... I would say play FO3 to the end then play NV. NV is a change. Its the same game, but with many gameplay improvements and a different style than FO3.

(Beyond all belief, I actually saw Fallout 1, 2, and Tactics on the shelf at Walmart the other day.)

» Tue Jul 19, 2011 5:22 am

Personally I'd play them in order [1, 2, 3, nv]; but... I would say play FO3 to the end then play NV. NV is a change. Its the same game, but with many gameplay improvements and a different style than FO3.

(Beyond all belief, I actually saw Fallout 1, 2, and Tactics on the shelf at Walmart the other day.)

My local gamestop keeps a fallout collection on the shelves constantly. It's fallout one and two for under 10 dollars ^^

» Tue Jul 19, 2011 6:23 am

I suggest getting fallout 3 instead, it gives a more fallout feel.

New Vegas was a let down for some of us who are not interested in hoover dam or, more specifically; New Vegas, Mr House, Legion, NCR.

Vengeance is a rare trait in people, people mistake anger for vengeance and in fallout new vegas your character is predesposed with the vengeance trait.
In fallout 3 however, it has much more mystery to it.

You look for your dad who left a vault.

Awww jeez :facepalm: i'll admit fallout 3 is my fav out of all the fallout games and yes i have played the originals but fallout 3 doesn't have the true "fallout" feel like the rest of them do .It's almost book of eli.

» Tue Jul 19, 2011 3:54 am

Awww jeez :facepalm: i'll admit fallout 3 is my fav out of all the fallout games and yes i have played the originals but fallout 3 doesn't have the true "fallout" feel like the rest of them do .It's almost book of eli.

Think he meant the a realistic fallout feeling, not necessarily from the lore.

» Tue Jul 19, 2011 12:01 am

Awww jeez :facepalm: i'll admit fallout 3 is my fav out of all the fallout games and yes i have played the originals but fallout 3 doesn't have the true "fallout" feel like the rest of them do .It's almost book of eli.

Last time I checked, the apocalypse was supposed to have huge cities bombed out and rubble everywhere with few pure water sources. Sounds like fallout 3. New Vegas on the other hand is fruit growing without radiation, plenty of good water everywhere, huge city with neon lights, and not much of a survival feel

» Tue Jul 19, 2011 11:33 am

Last time I checked, the apocalypse was supposed to have huge cities bombed out and rubble everywhere with few pure water sources. Sounds like fallout 3. New Vegas on the other hand is fruit growing without radiation, plenty of good water everywhere, huge city with neon lights, and not much of a survival feel

Take the context of the setting into account. Fallout is not all about rocks, rubble and radiation -- not in the slightest.

» Mon Jul 18, 2011 10:01 pm

Awww jeez :facepalm: i'll admit fallout 3 is my fav out of all the fallout games and yes i have played the originals but fallout 3 doesn't have the true "fallout" feel like the rest of them do .It's almost book of eli.

Eh, well, The book of eli was released 2 years after fallout 3, so technically, the book of eli is almost fallout.

» Mon Jul 18, 2011 10:36 pm

I laughed in the Book of Eli when he called the raiders "hijackers".. The term hijacker doesn't even make any sense in that context...It seemed rather plainly obvious to me that they were forced into using a generic term because they couldn't use "raider"...

» Mon Jul 18, 2011 8:23 pm

Take the context of the setting into account. Fallout is not all about rocks, rubble and radiation -- not in the slightest.

A Fallout game should have those things though...When it doesn't your really leaving the desired atmosphere behind...It's not Fallout, without fallout.. Then it just becomes another cheesy adventure game..

» Tue Jul 19, 2011 6:12 am

A Fallout game should have those things though...When it doesn't your really leaving the desired atmosphere behind...It's not Fallout, without fallout.. Then it just becomes another cheesy adventure game..

Sure, I agree. But there are other things to consider too, which also affect the "desired atmosphere", so the series shouldn't be forced to wallow in them for too much -- unless (and also, even if) the timeframe was to take a few steps back. There are balanced ways of depicting a post-apocalyptic wasteland with rebuilding societies.

» Tue Jul 19, 2011 5:45 am

Guess who went out and bought Fallout 3 today?! That's right, ME!!! :fallout: I am really excited, especially for only $8.99 :clap: It's not GOTY Edition, but you can't go wrong for 9 bucks :dance:

Anyways, what do you think? Should I put New Vegas down, and throw Fallout 3 in? Like I said I am new to the series, should I start on Fallout 3 before I get too far into New Vegas? Or should I keep just keep going with New Vegas, and start Fallout 3 when I finish? I just finished the quest called "They went that away" or something? The mission I'm on now is the one where I need to find Benny. Am I too far into it to stop now? What do you guys think?

BTW I am so excited for so much Fallout in my future, this game is crazy fun!!! :woot:

Fallout 3 is great and is not so dated as that you should play in any order as the stories don't directly connect but you should get a used GotY edition as F3's DLC is awesome and really builds a much larger environment to play in. There's five of them and really expand the story (even going beyond the main story's ending and showing you the results of your descisions, good or bad).

» Tue Jul 19, 2011 12:24 am

A Fallout game should have those things though...When it doesn't your really leaving the desired atmosphere behind...It's not Fallout, without fallout.. Then it just becomes another cheesy adventure game..

Fallout is about recovery ~Arroyo, NCR and Vault City were not dilapidated ruins. There should be signs of the devastation in the world, but not necessarily in a every major populated area 'these days' in the game.