I say three things, and echo some.
1. Better songs. Really. I am not a big country fan, but they totally could have got more Rat Pack songs, some Deno, some Sammy Davis.
2. Random encounters. I understand the game limits your movement by where the encounters in the game are, but there is parts of the games where I can travel in a straight line with my eyes closed because I know I'm in a safe area. I wouldn't do that walking through the real Los Vegas area, but I can in a game with Rad scorps and raiders.
3. Scaling XP/fights/encounters. That was one of my favorite parts of FO3 knowing I would never fight a Rad Roach at level 25, I would be fighting giant Rad scorpions. But I keep running into pockets of Bloatflies, and Geckos. Also at a certain point of FO3 bam Enclave all over the map. Just made everything seem more threatening.

I feel that FO3 is just about impossible for me to play now after playing through FONV several times. The quests are richer, the dialogue broader, the morality and ethics and associated caveats more present and deeper, the game mechanics (skills, perks, hardcoe mode etc) make for better gameplay, and it feels much more like a natural progression of the Fallout series far more than FO3 did and this is in large part due to Mister Sawyer and his staff at Obsidian being closer to the subject matter

that aside, if I had to pick one thing from FO3 that I would like to see in FONV is that FO3 had a huge focus on indoor content. There were alot of sewers, and subway tunnels, and compounds to move through. And while the Mojave Wasteland has many, many locations to randomly explore I am mainly referring to that kind of content written in to the context of quests

Oh and Mirelurks. I felt those were really good Fallout creatures and fit well into the rest of the Fallout bestiary, but also added strategy to fights by forcing one to aim for the small "face" area, but was sad to see none in FONV

otherwise, I feel FONV is by far the superior game, and with every patch with bug fixes and balaces, it gets even better

The radio in FO3 is nowhere anywhere near what we have in NV. By the third playthrough i hated nothing more than hearing the sharp pitching annoying shout "THREE DAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWG" I didnt listen to my radio but i kept hearing it on other peoples radios throughout the game. Fixing his radio to be able to broadcast was the biggest mistake. The Enclave radio was much worse.

NV is a huge improvement in several ways over FO3, especially crafting. But it feels incomplete. The moment you see a subterranean gecko, or a radscorpion walking on its claws, the immersion is gone. NV is also alot smaller in size than fo3, which was alot smaller than oblivion. Easier seems to be the way for everyone these days. Just make a tiny map and add fast travel markers on every crappy location like jeans sky diving. But BUGS OMG.

NV also betrays the Fallout franchise by not including any random encounters at all. It feels too scripted. In FO3 when you saw cannibals hunting a guy, it seemed the wasteland is alive. You didnt feel like the central character. I dont think you have something similar to a guy strapped with explosives approaching you asking for help in NV.

As for story, I wont say NV story is worse or better than FO3. You shouldnt expect a good main storyline from bethesda games...not possible. And id suggest you keep your expectations for Skyrim pretty low too.

NV also feels alot more realistic than FO3. The way guns reload, the starvation, dehydration. These are very good ideas. But BUGS OMG.

The guns in NV are a huge improvement over FO3 too. There are alot of guns, with variety in ammo. Though ammo is way too common in NV. Especially the merchants.

The most important thing missing in NV is emptiness. Everything is too clustered. FO3 had a huge empty world, YET full of life.

This. Also, (in-game) Vegas never once threatens to feel like it was ever an actual city. And the static world, with the same enemies appearing in the same spots every single time, makes second and subsequent playthroughs lose their lustre somewhat. Whisper it, but the game would've benefitted from more level-scaling, both of enemies and loot. NV needs more decent-sized dungeons, too, and more combat against enemies that actually shoot back.

I had a major issue with this. I just felt this was a second-rate game compared to Fallout 3. I understood it could have been sequel-itis, in that the second version is always lackluster in comparison to the novel original. However, there are three problems that rise from the murk of "Unnamable Something" upon closer inspection: Atmosphere and Location

Let's begin with Atmosphere. Fallout New Vegas is great, don't get me wrong. It's intriguing and challenging. Unfortunately, it doesn't fit for post-apocalyptia. You can encounter Old West Sherrifs, 1950s Gangsters, Military Industrial Complexes (The Gun Runners and the NCR). And even 200 years after Nuclear Armegeddon, this doesn't feel right. The mish-mash of cultures just feels wrong, especially with all the development necessary to reach them. Handwaving such things with the NCR's increasing stability at home and Mr. House's teaching the Tribals feels... lame. If people are going to experience a world after Ragnarok, they want to see scattered tribes, survivalists, and small remnants of technology. Perhaps that why isolated symbols of progress like the small BOS chapter and the Remnants and the RobCo and Repconn facilities were my favorite experiences. They reminded me of looting Pre-War tech and experiencing these "ancient" wonders, as if I was in the Stargate universe and found a gate in Ancient Egypt. In Fallout 3, you had Rivet City, in the ruins of an ancient "war machine" and the isolated Brotherhood Outposts, and the majority of the land held by mutants and crazies, with rabid tribals wandering around and survivalists ambushing you on roads. The advancement and prevalence of the Cowboy-Gangster culture so prevalent in New Vegas saps this idea of "ancient mago-tech." You're no longer exploring. You're running into the ruins someone's already been through and made a shopping mall within.

In regards to Location, I have no doubt the small population of people who actually live in the deserts of Nevada, or go mountain climbing/hiking in the area, very much enjoyed this game. They recognized Primm and the Buffalo Bill (Bison Steve, in-game), and all of the other towns, etc. However, for the majority of the population, for whom only Vegas and the Hoover Dam are familiar, this game was strange and dissapointing. First of all, the only recognizable feature of Vegas is the Stratosphere Tower (Lucky 38, in-game). None of the hotels we know exist. This could be excused as Vegas was supposed to be frozen in the 1950s, but it makes for a boring game. Furthermore, the Stratosphere was opened in the 1990s, undermining this excuse, and making us wonder why the Omertas could not have run the Monte Carlo, the Bellagio, or the Venetian, why the Chairmen couldn't have held The Flamingo, and why Caesar could not have aspired to live in Caesar's Palace. Fallout 3, conversely, had landmarks we all recognize, and made you play through and walk around these landmarks in repeated quests. In New Vegas, you go to the Hoover Dam for the end quest and... that's about all it's relevant for. In Fallout 3, you're constantly in and around the monuments, changing the Wasteland for good or ill.

All of these problems can be tracked back to "returning the story to the west." Because they did so, they introduced us to boring, unrecognizable landscape, as well as the NCR/Mr. House, which opened the flood-gates to technological development, changing the Post-Apocalyptic world from one of Survival in Total Destruction to one of Man Recovering after Total Destruction.

Honestly, it's not as exciting.




P.S.
To a lesser extent, there's also a sense of false promises. New Vegas allows so many different options and promised an ambiguous and malleable story-line where there were no bad guys. That's not what we got. Despite the idea that we could change the story, there are certain inconsistencies that jump out: Like working for Mr. House and being unable to make use of the Brotherhood (there's still scrap dialogue left over where you could. Why was it removed?). Furthermore, it's not ambiguous. The NCR has at least double the amount of quests of the other factions, and has the most human, moral NPCs. They are obviously The Good Guys, despite their corruption and "taxing." Caesar's Legion gets a tiny amount of quests, they're cannibals, they're sixist, and they are against technology. I could tolerate the crosses and the horrendous punishments and the conquering as sensible parts of a post-apocalyptic society trying to instill order through fear - but not all the random "chaotic evil stupid" traits they were given to make them the bad guys. We were promised shades of gray and given Pale Gray, Mr. House, and Black.

Oh, also, I think that all of New Vegas's faults could have been made up for if they played "This Town" by Frank Sinatra as soon as you entered Vegas.

One of the things I really liked about Van Buren was that there were going to be a second nukeing... That would have "re-booted the wasteland".

Random encounters was what I missed...
And cannibals..

The buildings in the middle of no where without the ability to enter them, and seemingly without a reason to exist. I liked a LOT of the improvements made in NV, but I was not as immersed as I was in FO3. I'll grant, it's Bethesda's "thing" to make open explorable worlds. But I seriously walked the length and breadth of the Capital Wasteland, and I had fun doing it. There were more... surprises to be found and places you'd run into (like the sewer with the mannequin parts) and I'd wonder if anyone had ever found it before it made me feel special (within the game world). I never really got that in NV. The world didn't pull me in the way FO3 did. But I love the game and can't wait for more DLC.

In my humble opinion, it lost something making the brotherhood a weak presence, rather then a true contender for power in the area, also same goes for the Enclave, both of these would eat the California republic and Caesers legions alive with their advanced tech, they wouldnt need near the numbers, that is a weak story in my book .

The ability to knock down a Super Mutant with the shot from a sniper rifle? That was cool :disguise:

it's the post apocolyptia. the survival horror thats missing. the inhospitable WASTELAND. instead its a mutated western.

the constrast for me is high lighted by a random encounter in fo3 where people fight to the death over a few bottles of water, which emphasised the daily situation for most people. if i saw that in nv i would just laugh because it's such rediculous idea when a minutes walk in any direction will provide you with all the relative luxury any settlement can offer [food, shelter, supplies, safety, women, entertainment etc] i don't know about the realism of the the timeline but nv's progress is too civilzed for my tastes. i would love a renuking whether that be a barefaced reboot, spin off series or fittingly worked into canon before fo5 is nearer to mass effect than wht it should stay true to as the franchise name [the aftermath of a nuclear war]

Except that it's already been established that the NCR demolished the BoS and Enclave; both are really small and the NCR is really big.

Something I miss is the random encounters as In FM3 you never knew what was going to happen during trips while in NV after a few playthrough you know whats ahead in most cases

LOL!!! you trolling us? I'm pretty sure you are with that kind of response...no seriously..their never really was a sense of BALANCE in both Fo3 and FONV in anyway or form...sure it was tough in some fights but as you became the big dog of the Wasteland, most enemies just cower before you and run away..or even better, once you defeated mother ship Zeta, you basically won the entire game...nuff said.

Just fo3 has so many little things i'm still finding and enjoying after 800 hours thats what makes an epic game(well not just that )

Who said I missed the balance from FO3?

You could always just comply with the op and say something you miss from fo3:whistling:.

I don't miss anything from FO3.

I don't know. But I have a feeling that they didn't include Mormons and Pentecostals. No glossolalia.

I didn't think I would miss random encounters, but I totally do. Given how much more awesome Obsidian's writing team is than Bethesda, they could have unleashed some great encounters on the Mojave.

Lets start here. well Same could be said about Fallout 3 suffering from sequel-itis. not playing the first 2 games and being ignorant is not an excuse. they made this game with a 3 at the end. they did not reboot the series. and they borrowed so many plot elements from the first two games i think the original developers should get royalties.



the atmosphere is different from a post apocalyptic setting. as stated in the story Vegas is supposed to be a shining jewel in the radioactive wasteland of the rest of the country. and there is no hand waving being done with the NCR. if you played the 1st two games you would know that there has been considerable progress made in the past 100 years. starting off with survivors of vault 15 creating a small sustainable town in the california wastes named shady sands. after a run in with the Vault Dweller, and seeing what one person could do in the wastes, inspired Tandi to Expand and try to help others in the wastes. after about 87 years of forging trade agreements and forging a strong economy. and the NCR was born (sometime between fallout 1 and 2). and from there it grew to encompass most of Cali. the Gun Runners have been Manufacturing and reforging firearms for over 100 years as well. it was Bethesda's decision to place fallout 3 two hundred years away from the Apocalypse. i can say that fallout 3 feels too Post-apocalyptic for the date it was set in Radiation has half-lifes and would be at much lower levels. did you know its recommended that you only wait 200 hrs before leaving your shelter after a nuclear exchange? its the rule of 7's (lol while trying to find a good reference to the rule of 7's I came across http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Radiation on the vault wiki ) . plus humanity (i dont care how mutated or broken) will progress alot in 200 years, its in our nature.



because they would have to pay royalties for the building likenesses (yes they do that crap). doing it how they did, they could pay homage to Vegas back when it was Sin City and not the corporate monster it is today.



the West is where Fallouts Roots are. and its logical to go back to see how the Core Region is doing in the past 47 years since fallout 2 (atlease in references)
Again it was Bethesda's decision to place fallout 3 two hundred years away from the Apocalypse. I think the capital wasteland should be very much different from how it was portrayed in FO3. I mean the BOS was there for 30 years and couldn't make ANY headway vs the Supermutants? thats poor leadership



There are No Good or Evil factions in this game. and you can do almost all quest in this game regardless who you chose in the end (I've done it my self.) depending on what order you do them you may cut your self off from other quests for other factions. but back to the Good / Evil. to paraphrase Obi Wan "its all according to your point of view" Caesar does things differently than what "we" would consider a civilized person should do. But when he Subjugated his 1st tribe, he wasn't in a Civil location. and most of the tribes he Conquered were not civil in the least. just because the NCR is the most relatable faction to most Westerners, it is in no way the "Good" faction. its just as corrupt as modern governments. with the rich pulling the strings to make the govt move to protect the interests of the rich. House is his own beast.

try to think outside the box. don't believe what your told by someone. most people have their own agendas. talk to both sides before rushing to judgement.

but thats just my take on things.
and I do not mean to come off as condescending.
im just stating facts from the 1st 2 games, if I do I'm sorry its not meant that way I just cant think of a better phrasing to get the point across

I love NV and have spent more total game time in NV than I did in FO3, but I agree. I have always thought there was that intangible something that was missing from NV.

It's the setting. The Capitol Wasteland was simply the most compelling setting I have ever played. RPG's set in post-apocalyptic landscapes are nothing new, but Bethesda really hit one out the park.

I find myself hoping that FO4 re-visits DC and the DC area.

I will give Bethesda that, I do love a Shattered Metropolis. How I'd Like to pick over the boneyard DC style

but I say give DC a break lets go someplace Bigger. lets do Manhattan!

I miss a lot of things from F3 like Mirelurks, Amazing atmosphere, Three Dog (among others) Greyditch as well ( The fire ants freaked me out for some reason). The CW felt a lot more alive even though NV had more people. 3 was just amazing as you explored in the early game, so many things to discover. I really like NV but F3 was just a totally different experience when you first popped it in.

This is a good point. All the main questlines can be confusing if you haven't played the game before, and another thing that closely relates to that is that your motives for choosing a certain side are given (and things like it) . If I don't want to help the NCR for the sole purpose of not believing the NCR is capable of sustaining itself and in New Vegas, well that's just too bad, because the game thinks that I'm not siding with them because I, clearly, hate Democracy. That sort of thing was abundant in my first playthrough (although not that particular example) because the game was just generally confusing. The game didn't understand "how I felt." I was confided into feeling the way it wanted me to feel, often, not even knowing that my PC "felt" that way which lead to me facing consequences that I hadn't the slightest clue would happen-and not in a good way. More in a, "I didn't know that pushing this button meant I was siding with/against House" kind of way. I guess the objectives are kind of sloppy if you haven't played the game before.