Fallouty as in "Bombs went 10 years ago" or as Fallouty "Rebuilding society ala F1 and F2"? :tongue:
I admit, the whole scenery looks nice but it kinda falls apart when you start digging in its consistency. And my god, that GREEN tint, argh! :ahhh:

fallout 3s atmosphere was horible bombs fell 200 years ago looks like it happend 5 minutes ago not realistic and no idea how to farm
nv is realistic they've rebuilt and everything

In fallout 3
you really don't understand radiation do you. depending on how many nukes hit an area it could take centuries for the radiation to be gone. Also the ground water would be radioactive for the same amount of time or longer. Growing plants would be hard if not impossible.

Only 2 large and safe communities that are well protected. From what I read most of the vaults that were in DC area were either experiments or destroyed. Any people that were still alive came out to a radioactive world with all kinds of horrors.

Also before the bombs fell it seemed every person that was able to drive a car had a mini nuke inside their car. There is several waste dumps that are constantly contaminating the ground and ground water. more radiation added.

fallout NV most of the bombs were deflected away from NV surrounding areas were saved. It seems most of the radiation comes from old vaults or waste dumps. Less radiation makes it a tad easier to grow food. Also New Vegas seems to have more resources to use.


Bottom line is in fallout 3 there is really not allot resources available and there is also more radiation. Also no large group restoring the city. New Vegas has the NCR and it's people and resources to get things going. Also MR house and the families were a big factor. less mutants as well.

This is not good for a post-apocalyptic game.

So why is anyone living there?

i agree, its a good game but it doesn't have the replay value of a bethesda game, the gameworld is very static and the first playthrough or two is pretty fun, but there isn't much variety, all the factions stay put and never travel around the map, no random events happen, its just not a dynamic world other than tumbleweeds blowing around, for instance, if you go to hidden valley, all you'll ever find there is some small scorpions, never any other factions there, not other creatures, a few brotherhood once in a while, and if you go back to that area 20 times, its the same thing every time, this is just an example but its like that everywhere on the map, so its a downside to the game, its still fun to play a few times but after that its hard to stay interested in it. also your character is like god at about level 20 with not much to do as far as exploring or qualitiy enemies to fight.

No,just no.

I'm not expert on such things, so I'd be interested in the source for the notion that "depending on how many nukes hit an area it could take centuries for the radiation to be gone". Where does this notion come from?
In NV, there are radiation hot spots coming from waste dumping or vaults - there is even a quest concerning radiation affecting farming.

F3 was seemingly designed as a strictly 'post apocalyptic' game giving the impression of the struggle for survival in the aftermath of nuclear war. As a game it's great fun, but as a fictional world it's incoherent and nonsensical. Bethesda designed it as a series of locations that can be fun to explore but have no continuity and gave no thought whatsoever as to how it's supposed to fit together. How do the residents of Tenpenny Tower feed themselves? Nobody knows nor cares. It's an isolated location plonked somewhere and we assume they have an endless supply of pre-war food. As portrayed, the Capital Wasteland could not function as there is nothing to sustain its inhabitants. These inhabitants live in plonked, isolated communities with no portrayal of how they sustain themselves long term. Their only trade network is four set caravans who are doomed once you get past level 10 and they can't handle the level scaled enemies as the wasteland magically adapts itself to your growing awesome powers. It's a computer game, so that doesn't matter if you just want to explore locations and shoot random enemies appearing all over the wasteland. If you want a fictional world, NV is far superior as Obsidian have put some thought into how the Mojave functions as a post-apocalyptic civilisation and how people might organise themselves. Which, after 200 years, they'd have done or died out. This can make it seem a bit dry and tedious if you just want to explore dungeons, find cool stuff and kill endless bad guys. It's taste. One of the reasons I prefer NV is because I like its superior plausibility as a fictional world, better characters and writing, continuity of storytelling with F1 & 2 & I actually like the fact you can walk somewhere without having to kill 20 random level scaled creatures en route - there's already gazillions of computer games where I can just run round killing things non stop. It depends what you want from your games I guess.

the new vegas map is very static, and not dynamic, its a good game but its too predictable and since its not dynamic it doesn't have the immersion and unpredictablility FO3 did, i know the communites could of made more sense in FO3 but the static map of new vegas is a far bigger problem, once you've played new vegas 2 or 3 times there is nothing new in it, the same enemies appear in the same areas, they never move anywhere, the same creatures appear in the same areas, for instance when you kill the deathclaws near or in the quarry, no different enemies will ever be there, this is how the entire map is..also no random events or encounters happen in new vegas. every area is super predictable and most of the map doesn't pose any hazards at all. FO3 i was playing for 2 years and still finding new areas, also new vegas doesn't have any good exploring in it, all the buildings are very simplistic and usually just one or two rooms. no dungeons at all to explore and the caves are all small. so for exploring its not really a good game and most of the locations are just a shack or a pile of trash.

Because exploration isn't NV's focus? Perhaps its... Oh I dunno actual RPG mechanics?

In a Fallout game I really don't care about exploring. Fallout 3 focused too much to it. Around 20 quests and 5 settlements in the vanilla game? Come on!

Fallout elitists. How wonderful we get to be graced by their presence and condescending replies.

To the point: F:NV *is* an awesome game. There are plenty of other awesome games, but this is about New Vegas so I'll just limit my opinions to THAT game.

IMHO - Obsidian - too little
Bethesda - way too much

I'd agree it can get a bit too static and I think they should have had a bit more in the way of random NCR/legion patrols or vipers appearing, but in IMHO F3 way overdid it in terms of random creatures with no discernible purpose appearing everywhere to make it 'exciting'. At least in NV deathclaws live in packs with young and dominant male and female. In F3 only advlts exist and they appear all over the place only when you're a high enough level just to give you something to fight. By which time you're uber powerful and they're no threat whatsoever unless they take you by surprise.
F3 locations are very predictable, as are the random encounters once you've experienced them. The unpredictable element is random level scaled spawns in the wasteland, though for me these ruin the immersion both in terms of things that make no sense (like the constant waves of killer robots that plague the wasteland for no apparent reason) and the way the wasteland becomes a death trap nobody could possibly survive in just because you're level 20. I've ended up legging it past slower random creatures because I don't like leveling too fast, can't be bothered one shot killing them with my unique plasma rifle and just want to get where I'm going. It's using standard FPS philosophy that enemies must get harder as you progress but are easy at the start, as opposed to letting you discover where is dangerous and taking it on when and if you choose. IMHO Bethesda are quite lazy in their game design by using a random sandbox with level scaling to make it 'challenging', whereas Obsidian seem to have been more thoughtful.

Personally I couldn't care less if quarry junction doesn't spawn more deathclaws or anything else. If I've cleared it, I'm not interested in going back there again and again just to kill more creatures for the sake of it. What's the point? The story is a pack has moved in and you can help clear them up if you choose. There's no reason for all sorts to keep spawning there just because you've cleared somewhere that was supposed to be somewhere people worked in the first place. Personally I don't want to get attacked every 20 seconds just because I've decided to walk somewhere and not fast travel. To me that gets boring and predictable. I get more fun out of deciding how my character decides to resolve different quests, whose side they're on and the immersion of a game world that feels like it could conceivably exist and in which my actions have repercussions. If I want constant action, I'll declare war on the NCR.

And Fallout was never supposed to be a dungeon crawler. That's just how Bethesda decided to make it. I'd agree Obsidian made too many pointless locations (whether that was due to time constraints or design I don't know - they did create some interesting and large locations, but an awful lot of one room shacks too).

Ultimately, it's about your taste in gameplay I guess. But not many games have the quality of writing NV has.

At any rate, I think personally I'll be prepared to be bitterly disappointed with F4 as it'll be back to F3 gameplay.

Thats why bethesda have got it spot on. Pure RPG games only appeal to a select amount of gamers, whereas an RPG with great exploration and action appeal's to a much wider fanbase. If they add some more quality dialogue and different endings (which i think they will) then fallout 4 should be one hell of a game. Personally i thought NV was a bit of a disappointment, didnt like the 'wild' west theme or the lame story. But it took up 3 to 4 weeks of my time so was still probably worth the ￡40 i paid

what are all these people talking about the GREEN tint. I dont know what this is. Or if i have even had this happen to me. I like the Fallouty look as in it just fell lilke 10 years ago. It looks cool and feels Super awesome walking around the wastes with it like that.

BTW Socks FNV they underdid the Encounters. Also you have to do the same in FNV you level up to fast in that also. so FNV isnt all that great.

i agree with your comments 100%, exploration does appeal to a wider fanbase, even with FO3's faults, there was enough in the game to keep you busy for years, same with oblivion, but apart from exploration, new vegas also has such a static world that it breaks game immersion and the same enemies in their respective area respwan and you never find any human enemies anywhere except their few outposts thats it, so for example, you'll never find any ncr or ceasers legion lets say near the boat ramp where the boomers plane is, that area would of been a good area to put some other factions in patrolling ,or another example, once the legion leaves nipton, no other factions ever appear there, its just an empty area, i know the game needs some empty area but almost the entire map is static like this, no factions are anywhere to be found except at their main outposts etc. and considering they have all these dlc planned its hard to keep interested with such a static gameworld. so if a dlc doens't fix some of this, i doubt many people are gonne be left playing the game, these are all major problems, they're not minor problems, they're game breaking problems. so even though obsidian did so much right, they went 2 steps forward and 3 steps backwards.

yes i agree on this. The only "real" humans that patrol around are the Fiends and i don think they count as enemies since you can kill them so easy and arent really apart of a faction. I couldnt believe that they just keept nipton just deserted and didnt add anyone there to clean it up or something. F3 the BOS patrolled the Region and sometimes you could see them. These types of problems will cause some major trouble down the road when people are getting sick of not enough action and Very hard and hardcoe mode won cut it. You didnt need hardcoe mode in F3 because it was already pretty challenging with all the super mutants and constant threat of Enclave. Plus some of the quests in FNV are lacking like some of the CL quests and also theres not enough of them.

nv is realisitc? are you kidding me?? the entire map is static, the game world in new vegas looks nice but its not dynamic, nothing moves around, so in an area where you find lets say gecko's, you never find anything else in that area, no factions will patrol through it, no other creatures will ever be there, so every time you go by that area, you know exactly what is or isn't gonna happen, so the game is lacking realism in lots of areas, the built up new vegas might be "realistic" i suppose, but the static gameworld and lack of random events or encounters isn't realistic and those are far bigger problems that totally ruin game immersion and makes it pointless to travel around the map.

i agree epic, it seems there's two main groups, some are mainly interested in the story and others are more interested in the exploration and combat, the wider fanbase does like exploration and combat and even though there may of been too much combat in FO3, new vegas has so little combat and so little exploration with such a static world, that even though there are very good aspects to it, it just falls shorts.

I do agree with how static the map is, but i disliked how, in FO3, over every hill was a team of some hostile faction, oh and the fact that you dont get a choice in who your friends are, the game chooses, and it wont let you change anything about that.

You dont count in the fact that maybe they didnt think about Reputation in the game or anything that is in NV. They added and improved upon from F2.

Improved upon F2? By forgetting about reputation, consequences, making sense?

Funny how the originals had a reputation system. :hubbahubba:

I thought FO3 was quite restrained in its random encounters, they never seemed too many or unrealistic to me. Try playing the average Japanese RPG where you get random encounters every few yards (eg Lost Odyssey)!

i didnt think they did... But why did it take so long for F3 to come out? that is what i always wondered. Was it financial troubles.