No flaming or bashing allowed.

All you need to do is state your opninion, no bashing people for their opinion. No posting simple hate comments.

I like Fallout 3, I hate (Dislike is a much better word, sorry) Fallout: New Vegas.

I was hooked on Fallout 3, I had countless hours and hours of fun playing it.

I understand the great differences from the originals but I read the wiki and found it has a decent connection to the originals. The Enclave's Modified FEV.

I found Fallout: New Vegas to be boring, over-dramatic, dull, and lacking of drive to do much.

But that's just my opinion, post your's below.

Another FO3 vs NV thread?
Ugh.

FO3 is a crap Fallout game but awesome on it's own merits.
NV is an awesome Fallout game but it's wasteland is far too static.

Done.

Alittle to much of a hate comment, I'm trying to keep it peaceful and not spark a flame war that will result in this thread being locked, lost in the Forum and forgotten.

It's not a Fallout 3 vs. Fallout: New Vegas thread, it's a 'openly state your opinion, just no hate comments thread'

What? Did you even read your original post? I believe it say " I hate NV"

...or am I completely losing it?

I like Fallout: New Vegas, I dislike Fallout 3 as a Fallout game.

I am hooked on Fallout: New Vegas, I spend countless hours and hours of fun playing it.

I understand the great differences from the originals to Fallout 3 and found it has no connection to the originals. The Enclave's presence is ridiculous because they were supposed to be dead.

I found Fallout 3 to be boring, over-dramatic, dull, and lacking of drive to do much.

Thank you for the template.

GO ENCLAVE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I like your enthusiastic optimism.

Things derail easily, this thread will be no different. Once the words "Fallout 3" and "Fallout New Vegas" enter the same thread it derails into another VS thread.

You arent losing it, its just that its okay to hate on FNV because... just because. and you cant hate on FO3 as a Fallout game (We say "as a fallout game" because we recognize it is a good game in general) because... just because.

Yeah, I've seen how a simple discussion can change into a heated flame war with just two posts.

I'm hoping for it to be different this time, just a simple, calm discussion of your likes and dislikes... And if that doesn't happen I'll ask a moderator to lock this topic and I'll never think of it again...

But it all starts with the people who are flamming the threads, (and I know I'm one of them) if they just calm down and discuss then topics like these will stop spamming the forums.

Like and dislike then.

Fallout 3 didn't explain it's settlement enough, that is a great immersion breaker for me since it just makes me confused and angry each time I go into a settlement cause I can't wrap my head around how they survive.

I like in NV how they explained each settlement with economy, production and relation with other factions/groups.
Made me a happy girl. :]

What did I like in FO3.... Erm... Far more secret things really, dunno why but in FO3 it took a long time until I found every encounter/weapon/armor/event/npc.

While in NV everything is scripted and becomes far too easy to learn entire game world inside out in a few playthroughs.

"While heading back to his quarters" Now you see, here is someone who wants to have a civilized conversation, not a rant like the Scribes in the Order of the Quills tend to do about how history tends to go, makes me want to crack skulls every time i pass the archives lately. I salute you for your bravery for standing up and telling it like it is about your own opinion, Good luck. :thumbsup:

( in all seriousness, while i will avoid this argument, and state it if asked, i am glad someone is at least asking calmly and rationally about which is better.)

Thank-you, that is the type of attitude that I was hoping people would have. You sir are awesome and deserve a medal saying so.

And sometimes I like a good arguement, but hear it becomes flaming and rants, not debates.

Now how about we debate about two things.

1) How serious we want the quests to be (on a scale from 1-10)

and

2) On a scale from 1-10 how do you think the quests in all past Fallout games were

The originals had the best quests, FO3 and NV are mixed, Tactics has poor quests, but it's main quests is by far the most fun.

Purely subjective --

Fallout -- Only played up to the recovery of the water chip.

PROS -- Generally good, entertaining story. Really awesome art and sound design. Multiple ways to solve problems. Good interaction with game world. Turn-based combat rewards strategy.

CONS -- Isometric view inhibits immersion. Some game objectives (Doors, items) obscured by landscape and difficult to see. General sense of distance from game world.

Fallout 2, Tactics, The Horror -- Have not played.

Fallout 3 -- Good God. Hundreds of hours.

PROS -- Large, atmospheric world. Fun game-play. Generally entertaining NPCs. Some well-drawn factions (Lyon's BoS, Enclave). Outstanding art and sound design. Just seamlessly fun to play.

CONS -- Idiosyncratic plot and setting elements insufficiently explained. Some sketchy factions (Raiders, Talon). Some poorly constructed dialogue trees.

Fallout: New Vegas -- Catching up to F3.

PROS -- Well-realized themes. Factions very well done. Initial play-throughs full of rewarding surprises. Generally good, sometimes excellent, dialogue. Emphasis on story is a nice complement to the action-based predecessor. Combat enhancements and crafting options.

CONS -- Sense of discovery dwindles with subsequent play-throughs; enemy encounters are predictable. Story is a bit pretentious. Sense of game being unfinished.

Needless to say, the Pros outweigh the Cons, or I wouldn't be posting on these boards.

in fallout 3 i loved that there was a lot of super mutants but i disliked how New Vegas didn't i didn't like how fallout 3 didn't have lot of weapons and i liked how fallout New Vegas had more weapons but i feal that fallout 4 should have even more but only if they fit into the 50s feal so world war 2 weapons and bring back tommy gun but i would like weapons from vietnam era i liked fallout 3s feal of destruction and chaos but there should have been farms

sooo... you want... Fallout 1?

well there are other things MAKO but im tried

well new vegas isn't nearly as good as FO3 game ratings even show that, and a map world with not one random encounter, the same stupid scorpions in nipton and hidden valley every time you go there and the same stupid powder gangers near goodsprings walking around in a circle like they always do and not one good battlezone on the map, no fun enemies to fight on the entire map, unless you like spearthrowing ceasers legion of hatchet wielding powder gangers, there is no decent cover on the map, no fun areas to hide in, fighrt and stalk enemies, its the most static map i ever saw in a game in recent years.

I dislike Fallout 3 as a Falloutgame and as an RPG (it falls short on both accounts); it isn't even a decent FPS (nor should it be). Quite simply, the halfassed RPG mechanics and balance issues interfere with the FPS aspects which tries to be prevalent, and on the other hand the FPS part tries to play itself out well, but is interfered by the RPG part. A clash happens, and the outcome isn't the best of both worlds, as it should be, but more like a mishmash genrepizza that does not do either well but averagely at best.

New Vegas does not improve much gameplaywise, but a little is something nonetheless. NV, however, patches up some of the gameplay deficiencies inherited from FO3 with its writing department (story, c&c, playerimpact, dialog, quests, setting consistency, etc). It's much more tolerable, though not completely ideal (lots of good ideas downplayed - like global DT, soft requiremets, HC mode...).

imo

But what if I give NV 10/10 points and FO3 4/10. New Vegas is better game from now on.

I also give NV 10/10 and FO3 4/10.

You believe our game ratings less because we don't have a fancy homepage and/or a gaming magazine?

Fallout 3 Pros-Cons

I liked fallout 3 because of the large map and.....noticeable scenery (Alaska, Washington Monument, Pentagon, Capitol Hill, National Mall, and the Museums) because i have been to Alaska and DC numerous times, this brought back memories of waltzing down the National Mall with my girlfriend. But it did heavy in its cons. As it had a halfassed dialogue, speech was like robots, i could NEVER find ammo for my weapons, and here is my biggest problem: It was more of a FPS than a RPG. When there is a Super Mutant around every corner and i can't avoid him because i HAVE to go back to the Jefferson Monument, its not a RPG.

Fallout: New Vegas Pros-Cons

I loved Fallout New Vegas because it brought back memories of Fallout 1 and Fallout 2. I had been to Las Vegas alot in the past, i liked the Goodsprings start, and all those towns that are really there (Primm, Cottonwood Cove, Boulder City, Henderson, Nelson, Nipton). It had the great RPG touch with the paths. Its FPS element was better than Fallout 3s, as this one you probably have ammo. But the cons are there: Bugs, freezing, crashing, barely any patching, corrupted saves. There is also the AI mess up constantly, im friendly with NCR and they attack me like shunned.
----------------------
My Results

Fallout 3: 3/10

Fallout: New Vegas: 5/10
------------------------

(Ok, to be serious, i will sum up my reasons in a pro/con reason as well:)

FO3-Pro I loved the Story, add on's, exploration, random encounters, and general feel of the story, it was great, and drew me back time and time again and sometimes, i was terrified as to what was around every corner because of the randomness, not to mention the Vaults, buildings, caves, and subways had a good factor to them in terms of explorability and creepiness to it. And i loved most of the people in the Capital Wasteland, Eden and Autumn were good antagonists.

FO3-Con It had a lot of glitchiness to it, i had to save it often to get anywhere. While the story was good, some of it was indeed a little far fetched at times, like the amount of Enclave troops for example. It needed more connection to real world examples, while the landmarks were good, i would have liked to have seen highway markers. I thought there was a few bad people in here, like the Nuka Cola Fan.

FO:NV-Pro The Connections to the West, and to FO and FO2 were great, The weapons modifications were wonderful, i thought they complimented the weapons well as well the addition of other weapons that were rarities like the Gauss Rifle. The Survival skill and using the desert plants for survival was excellent as well. I thought the Courier was done well, at least how you can set him up to be older or younger, i like that feature, and how they will go into his backstory in further DLC's. Plus i thought there were some good designed people in here, like Hannon, and Hsu, even Ceasar was a good Antagonist.

FO:NV-Con The Story was very linear at the beginning, and when it breaks up to the factions, it just got to be somewhat repetitive with most factions, i thought that was weak, and while some the side quests were. The Energy weapons were greatly reduced in my opinion to favor the ammunition type weapons. The exploration factor was greatly reduced, and there is no randomness to the encounters, every enemy is pre assigned to an area and also based on the difficulty as well. The caves, buildings, vaults,, while having a creepy factor to them sometimes, are not as full or big this time. And some of the people were just awful, such as Oliver to name one off the top of my head.

(so in short, if i were to give it a scale out of 10 simmilar to like the Dinosaur Club uses it, i would go with what my feelings say, and go with FO3 9/10 and FO:NV 7.5/10* (* but the last judge is still out due to the fact that the DLC's have not been released and played))

( and infantry121, love your theme! :thumbsup:)