Back to FO3 from NV? : Fallout 3

» Fri May 13, 2011 2:12 pm

Radiation doesn't last thousands of years, especially considering you're constantly being irradiated by the air, by the ground, by yourself... According to that logic, we'd be constantly glowing green.

» Fri May 13, 2011 8:55 pm

Yup. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioactive_waste

» Fri May 13, 2011 2:51 pm

I don't see why anyone would go back to an inferior game.

» Fri May 13, 2011 4:18 pm

Well, I just took the time to actually read this entire thread, and I am firmly confident in stating that a number of my brain cells just died from ingesting the garbage strewn about in here.

Overall, worst thread I have bothered reading in a long time.

» Fri May 13, 2011 8:35 pm

Hmm.. Am I the only one who likes Fallout 3 for its setting? To me combat is tedious in both games and I avoid it. I just like the world and the story, far over Vegas. (I know I'm going to get bashed and burned for this, but I feel Fallout 3 was a better Fallout game than New Vegas, while Vegas was a better sequel to Fallout 2.)

I never understood those who imply that liking Fallout 3 for the story makes you a degenerate, inferior and someone who doesn't respect a good story. I don't understand. Do a load of generic, unimportant NPCs with bad voice acting ruin the whole story? Was Fallout 3's story stepping out of V101 and then directly committing suicide in Project Purity? Does New Vegas having better dialogue invalidate what was good in Fallout 3?

Not that I dislike any Fallout game. I've played the originals through dozens of times, and I played them before I played Fallout 3. I like them all equally and play them all. But I must admit that New Vegas died pretty soon for me. After 30 hours of Vegas I found myself walking in the Master's lair again, and solving problems in the Museum of History.

As I write this, I'm downloading FO1 from Steam - once that's done I'll start my first playthrough of it. I started out with FO3, have played through it several times, and have played through New Vegas (very lightly modded) once. My next New Vegas playthrough is going to wait until Dead Money comes out, and the NVSE team has finished updating NVSE to work with the DLC patch that was just released. Then I'll mod it up and start over again.

I don't participate in the back and forth between the FO3 fans and the NV fans; frankly, I'm of the "if you don't like the game, don't play it, and don't gripe about the people who do" school of thought. So now it's time to play the originals myself, and form my own opinion about which of 3 or NV is closer to them.

» Fri May 13, 2011 2:40 pm

I don't see why anyone would go back to an inferior game.

Well.... I wouldn't go that far. You gotta admit that the exploration aspect is damn nice. And fun. :tops:

» Fri May 13, 2011 10:33 am

I have recently gone back to FO3 from NV. Not because I needed a break from NV, but because I was craving FO3. Both games have there own charm really. I wouldn't change either one of them. Fallout 3 is missing a lot of the new features NV adds, but it has the exploration that NV lacks. That's why I never understood the NV vs. FO3 thing being they are both great games in there own way. So yes it is very possible to go back, and play FO3 after playing NV. I like the fact that they are quite different in a lot of ways, because I can alternate between games, and get a different vibe from both of them.

» Fri May 13, 2011 11:52 am

Well, I just took the time to actually read this entire thread, and I am firmly confident in stating that a number of my brain cells just died from ingesting the garbage strewn about in here.

Overall, worst thread I have bothered reading in a long time.

It was your own fault to read the whole thing. Why would you waste your time to read that all??

» Fri May 13, 2011 1:56 pm

Must say, I prefer the atmosphere of FO3 more than NV. Going into ruins, the trains, lots of houses, more land, and so on just does more for me than wandering a smallish desert with civilization. Felt like the world was really hit by the bomb in FO3 than in NV where half the game is NCR this, Legion that, and so on. Sure, NV has a lot more cloths, guns, ammo, speech checks, and some other features, but exploring the ruins of civilization with more environmental dangers, random encounters, and the whole DC ruins as a war zone was just a lot more fun.

I fully agree with Pistolero here, FO3 is a better Fallout game, while Vegas is a better sequel.

» Fri May 13, 2011 8:23 pm

Must say, I prefer the atmosphere of FO3 more than NV. Going into ruins, the trains, lots of houses, more land, and so on just does more for me than wandering a smallish desert with civilization. Felt like the world was really hit by the bomb in FO3 than in NV where half the game is NCR this, Legion that, and so on. Sure, NV has a lot more cloths, guns, ammo, speech checks, and some other features, but exploring the ruins of civilization with more environmental dangers, random encounters, and the whole DC ruins as a war zone was just a lot more fun.

I fully agree with Pistolero here, FO3 is a better Fallout game, while Vegas is a better sequel.

Good post!

I really can't understand all the NV lovers jumping on every thread pointing out that NV is better.
For many people here, including me, F3 is the better game.

The only things that I like in NV are the weapon mods and the companions. Story is mediocre like any other game, revenge/save the world blah, blah, blah. No freedom, no random encounters, no sandbox.
Exactly a month after NV came out I went back to play F3.

I check many game forums and it is easy to see how big are the F3 threads compared to NV. No body is really interested in NV after 1 or 2 playthroughs. Everything is the same.

I was so excited about F3 DLCs, now I don't even check forums to see if there any news about upcoming NV addons.

» Fri May 13, 2011 9:53 am

Well.... I wouldn't go that far. You gotta admit that the exploration aspect is damn nice. And fun. :tops:

It was a darn good game in that aspect. In general, it's a really good game. It just doesn't deserve "Fallout" in its name, let alone the title of "Fallout 3."

» Fri May 13, 2011 7:24 pm

Good post!

I really can't understand all the NV lovers jumping on every thread pointing out that NV is better.
For many people here, including me, F3 is the better game.

The only things that I like in NV are the weapon mods and the companions. Story is mediocre like any other game, revenge/save the world blah, blah, blah. No freedom, no random encounters, no sandbox.
Exactly a month after NV came out I went back to play F3.

I check many game forums and it is easy to see how big are the F3 threads compared to NV. No body is really interested in NV after 1 or 2 playthroughs. Everything is the same.

I was so excited about F3 DLCs, now I don't even check forums to see if there any news about upcoming NV addons.

i agree, a lot of people are already tired of NV, except for the die hard anti bethesda fans who like bashing FO3, obsidian went for the "believable" and "plausible" and its just too dull, totally static, repetitive, no random events/encounters etc, i won't buy any more dlc for new vegas, i am done with new vegas, too bad casue it had good weapons. the game needed a lot more buildings and complexes in it, most of the map is desert with nothing on it except a few shacks.

» Fri May 13, 2011 10:55 am

I really can't understand all the NV lovers jumping on every thread pointing out that NV is better.
For many people here, including me, F3 is the better game.

The only things that I like in NV are the weapon mods and the companions. Story is mediocre like any other game, revenge/save the world blah, blah, blah. No freedom, no random encounters, no sandbox.
Exactly a month after NV came out I went back to play F3.

The revenge is the first act and just an excuse to get the PC in on the Vegas plot really and where does saving the world come in? Unless it was a would-be "New Vegas is so cliche, here are some more examples to emphasise my point that it is," except that revenge takes up two missions essentially, go to Vegas, deal with Benny.

I check many game forums and it is easy to see how big are the F3 threads compared to NV. Nobody is really interested in NV after 1 or 2 playthroughs. Everything is the same.

I was so excited about F3 DLCs, now I don't even check forums to see if there any news about upcoming NV addons.

No complaints here, everything is pretty samey in Vegas. Still think it's a far superior Fallout follow-up than F3 but whatever.

» Fri May 13, 2011 9:25 pm

The revenge is the first act and just an excuse to get the PC in on the Vegas plot really and where does saving the world come in? Unless it was a would-be "New Vegas is so cliche, here are some more examples to emphasise my point that it is," except that revenge takes up two missions essentially, go to Vegas, deal with Benny.

No complaints here, everything is pretty samey in Vegas. Still think it's a far superior Fallout follow-up than F3 but whatever.

well you prob aren't into exploring or combat that much, cause if you were, you would notice the lack of combat environments, the lack of enemies on the map, the lack of dungeons and buildings to explore and fight in, the lack of random events and encounters...some people are into the story and dialogue more, i think most bethesda game fans expect a dynamic world with a good amount of combat, enemies and plenty of dungeons and buildings to fight and explore in. bethesda makes their games so the story can be totally ignored and the environment drives the game quite a bit, but in new vegas if you don't do quests, there's not much to do.

» Fri May 13, 2011 12:52 pm

well you prob aren't into exploring or combat that much, cause if you were, you would notice the lack of combat environments, the lack of enemies on the map, the lack of dungeons and buildings to explore and fight in, the lack of random events and encounters...some people are into the story and dialogue more, i think most bethesda game fans expect a dynamic world with a good amount of combat, enemies and plenty of dungeons and buildings to fight and explore in. bethesda makes their games so the story can be totally ignored and the environment drives the game quite a bit, but in new vegas if you don't do quests, there's not much to do.

I thought we went through this, I am a lore buff, if I want to play a game with good mechanics and story then I'll play Fallout 2; when we are dicsussing which of the new Fallouts I think is a better FALLOUT I'll will choose New Vegas because it doesn't annoy me with problems which I can't solve.

» Fri May 13, 2011 5:36 am

I don't see why anyone would go back to an inferior game.

Provocative. From a RPG perspective, New Vegas is superior, no question. But some of the quests get repetitive whereas F3 offers a freedom of exploration right out of the vault that NV does not. Same franchise, same software engine, but other than that they were both created with very different goals in mind and comparing like for like (as often happens on this forum) misses the point, I feel.

But to answer the original post - yes, I also have returned to F3 since playing NV. But I love both, though my heart clearly lies with Charon and Dogmeat.

» Fri May 13, 2011 11:34 am

Fallout 3 is better than new vegas in almost every way,(other than story),but new vegas has things that help me feel like Im in the game( i.e. hardcoe, handloading,cooking,better workbench,ect).The thing you (or at least I) will miss the most is A.D.S. I cant stand just zooming in some how,it makes no sence, and it makes combat feel strange after playing NV.Still, I find fallout 3 better because there is more to do.I always run out of things to do in new vegas, and I can only start so many new characters.In NV, I have had 11 characters , and in 5 of them, I have done every thing in.In fallout 3, Ive had 4(an begining one, a test one, and a good and bad one),all lvl 30, and Im still finding new things in them.

» Fri May 13, 2011 5:46 pm

Um, Cow500, Fallout 3 was junk compared to New Vegas ine very way, but exploration

» Fri May 13, 2011 7:30 pm

Um, Cow500, Fallout 3 was junk compared to New Vegas ine very way, but exploration

I found New Vegas lacking in every way except for hardcoe mode and staying true to the originals.

What a horrid monstrousity of a game.

» Fri May 13, 2011 8:26 pm

Um, Cow500, Fallout 3 was junk compared to New Vegas ine very way, but exploration

Meh,to each is own I gues.There are three major aspects to these kinds of RPGs, exploration, story, and setting. Like I siad, NV had great story, fallout 3s was junk, and all of those things I mentioned helped it feel real. But the setting, a nuclear war zone, danger every where, stuff to scav,ect, was much more appealing to me than NV, where all there is to find is one room shacks with nothing in them but a skill book or 2.There was just more to do in fallout 3, thats why I liked it better.Like I said though, to each is own. :foodndrink:
Off topic, I like your picture thing :dance:

» Fri May 13, 2011 3:51 pm

Edit: ugg... no more...

» Fri May 13, 2011 9:26 am

Most definitely. I've been playing NV hardcoe since it came out, yet the alluring siren song of FO3 is drawing me back once again. I don't really miss any of the NV features; workbenches and campfires were overcomplicated systems that I never really used. I do miss the weapons, they gave Energy Weapons and Unarmed characters some really nice toys, but mods like FOOK help fill the gap there.

FO3's setting, more than anything else, is what keeps me from ever really being done with that game. Mods keep it fresh and the setting remains engrossing.

i only played F3 by its main quest, practically ignoring all the side quests, hence 'beating' it in under a week. i began playing FNV, trying to get every quest the game would allow me to obtain, and played for nearly a month and still barely reached the halfway mark. i have been Fallout-less for nearly a month now as it is (idk how im not in a straight jacket yet -- its miserable to not be able to play) but i think that im going to go back to F3 and play the *whole* game before i make another attempt at FNV.

» Fri May 13, 2011 1:07 pm

Um, Cow500, Fallout 3 was junk compared to New Vegas ine very way, but exploration

Yeah let's state opinion as fact why dont we? By the way, I prefer F3