Only thing I liked better with F3 where the subway tunnels and that it had lots of stuff to shoot at.

As far as I'm concerned, it's the same as it ever was.

It seems some of us have a different opinion on the meaning of depth, Fallout 3 had characters with depth, you got to know them, love them or hate them, Moira probably being the best example, show me characters(not followers) in NV that have that same depth, as I said somewhere else, the tribes are probably the biggest let down as far as depth is concerned, sure you get to know their story, but you don't really get to know individuals in the tribes, it's just run here, fetch that, do this.

Tell that to the people in the Morrowind VS Oblivion threads on TES General.

This is not going to stop.

Storyline improvement mod? Check.
Quest non-linearity mod? Check.
Combat system and character build overhaul mod? Check.
Dialogue improvement mod complete with voice acting? Check.

Hey, you might be right.



Have you picked up -any- companions at all in New Vegas? Cass alone blows away anything found in Fallout 3 as far as actually caring about a character is concerned. Honorable mention goes to Arcade Gannon.

Finest RPG since Arcanum I do postulate

I usually am :tops:

I'm pretty sure he said non-follower somewhere in that massive wall of text. At any rate I gotta agree that what I've seen so far, the people in FO3 seem much more alive than in NV

I'm kind of getting tired of people saying "It's a bad idea to say anything good about Fallout 3 on this forum."

90% of the people here don't think Fallout 3 was complete and utter garbage. We just think New Vegas is better.

i also disagree, this game is very interesting and makes me feel like im playing my role, it can satisfy my phantasies, thats why i would love it, if i just could play it the way its ment to be, so without this huge amount of bugs.

its not the same engine. its improved, the way people move in combat, the way they fall when they get shot, or isnt that a changing of the egine??
the talent system is balanced, the radio is GREAT if its unbugged.
the weapon mods are great.
the story??? who cares... i dont.
this is not god of war

Well said Expresate. If we can't all agree, at least let us RESPECT the others opinion. :sadvaultboy:

No-Bark
Caesar
Mr. House
To some extent Lanius
Benny
The White Glove Society as a whole

Want me to go on?

Yes I have, Cass and Boone, Boone with the best story depth in my opinion, but these are companions, I'm talking about folk you meet while exploring the mojave, like the Great Kahns, I immediatly took a liking to this group, that is until I realised they are nothing but a quest fest, heck I only remember Regis because most of the dealings were with him, I cannot even remember the leaders name because he had such a short part in it all.

Ah, you're correct.

But even so, how could anyone in Fallout 3 be considered "alive?" They were all extremely one-dimensional with the liberal use of "quirky" personality flaws. Moira Brown was just there for [censored] and giggles (though I didn't find her funny at all.) Tenpenny was an old pseudo-aristocrat with mental problems. Sarah Lyons was the typical tough-girl archetype who wanted to prove herself as a shining knight of the wasteland. The list goes on.

In New Vegas, there are non-followers who easily feel more like people. The King, underneath his "cool like Elvis" exterior genuinely shows emotion and concern for the state of Freeside. Doc Mitchell in Goodsprings (though unfortunately not expanded on) seems like a man who's had a rough life and finally decided to settle down and help others. And remember Michael Angelo, the agoraphobic artist who tasks you with helping him find inspiration for his work?

Oh yeah, and how could I forget Mr. House? His Machiavellian motives for rising to full power and ruling over Vegas at the expense of all the other factions are enough to make him a more competently-characterized figure than anyone in Fallout 3.

I honestly find a lot more depth to the characters in New Vegas than I did with the one-trick stereotypes found in Fallout 3.

I am fairly skeptical at the OP because if he hates the game so much then how come he played it twice? If I did not like the game then I would stop halfway through. Regardless, I strongly disagree with the OP as Fallout New Vegas recently took the place as my favorite RPG of all time.

New Vegas characters actually have fleshed-out personal histories that contributes to their personalities

Hey, who said you could bring your sound reasoning and logic into our rant/near argumentative fire-starter of a thread

Didn't everyone say that Fallout 1 was better than Fallout 2 and 3 anyway?
Still, I've only played Fallout 3 and so far I'm loving New Vegas to bits.
The exploring isn't quite as good as Bethesda's but it's still pretty decent and the writing is impecable.
I'm liking the new weapons and apparel (currently building up a nice hat collection) and the weapon mods are a nice touch.

Not everyone. Fallout 2 is my personal favorite of the series. New Vegas seems like a modern successor to it, minus a lot of the absurdly silly stuff, like talking Deathclaws.

Seriously, No-Bark rules supreme. Above everyone and everything in F3. :flamethrower:

I'm going to buck the trend and say I enjoyed both but for very different reasons.

FO:NV feels more like Fallout to me, I think they brought back elements that gave the series its characteristic charm: the grey morality, the complex faction politics (especially in FO2), the difficulty level and difficulty of sequence-breaking, the necessity of choosing a role rather than having enough skillpoints to do everything at once and do it well.

FO3 was different, but also very good. It was just HUGE, it is easily the biggest game map I've ever played on. It had many, many more nooks and crannies to explore and more reasons to want to explore them (skill books, more unique weapons, bobbleheads, ect). It also had, ah, how to put it, a stronger "cohesion" for each of the areas. Every little place had a story, sometimes funny sometimes tragic, sometimes an unmarked quest sometimes just a cool little thing.


That's one thing I miss from FO3. There are random caves, lots of them, sure, some with tough enemies and legendary deathclaws. But there aren't nearly as many prewar ruins, and there are not nearly as many cool little side areas with a quest and a story. A lonely group of houses with a dark secret, a scared little boy besieged by ants, a prewar military radio beacon endlessly looping one last distress call. For all the politics New Vegas gained and the flavor it recaptured, it lost the feeling of being a complex, interlaced, *REAL* world.

With my experience with New Vegas thus far, I'm really thinking the character and writing is a bit over-rated round these parts, while the Fallout 3 characters and writing is a bit under rated.

I do admit that I haven't gotten all that far in the game so far, but really, I haven't met a truly memorable character yet.

The closest I've come is No-Bark, and due to the type of character I'm choosing to play, I sent No-Bark to his doom, sending him out to get killed by Boone. Boone also seemed to have potential, and I won't know, at least with this character.

I found a lot more character and life in Megaton alone than I've found in all my wanderings of the Mojave Wasteland so far.

Lucas, Moira, the ghoul bartender who's name escapes me at the moment, Moriarty, Amata, the Tunnel Snakes, Arkansas, I believe his name was, the Ghost Town sniper, these characters all felt like actual people with unique personalities that stood out from the rest. Not to mention all the little environmental details that could tell a story without saying a word.

Right now, everyone that I've encountered is just an NPC with a different name. I haven't really encountered any characters that have any real -life- to them.

Three Dog and Eden added so much more life to the game than the radio stations in New Vegas. I really felt the struggle for survival in the Capital Wasteland, the Mojave Wasteland just feels like a desert.

The most interesting characters I've met so far are a crazy old loon and a man who thinks he's a ghoul, and come across a town that is named for a burnt out "No Vacancy" sign.

I'm not saying that New Vegas svcks, I'm enjoying it a bunch right now, but it just doesn't have the same character and charm of Fallout 3.

IMO for me those were the prime examples of run out of mill generic NPCs.

The Knight, the clown, the poor guy, the greedy guy, the lady-in-distress, the asshats, and of course, the crazy guy with a gun.
Sure, maybe you could think of gazillion different backstories so you could expand their terribly one-dimensional personalities but that just doesn't work for me. :unsure2:

Well, different strokes for different folks I guess. That's probably why I never understood Talimancers on the Bioware forums.

New Vegas improved on almost everything in Fallout 3... 90% of the things I can think of were improved. But, as I've been saying since the beginning, the things it doesn't do right, are HUGE for some of us Fallout 3 fans. The world is so incredibly boring, after exploring 80% of the map I can't bring myself to explore anymore. The world does not live up to Bethesda's standards, and that includes the dungeons.

New Vegas is an RPG first, and a Bethesda game second. That is the major problem I have with it. I don't play Bethesda games JUST because they're RPGs, I play them JUST because they feature worlds I can explore for hundreds of hours and have fun every second. The RPG elements are a bonus. Obsidian did not understand this major feature of Bethesda games, and chose instead to make a great RPG that is boring as hell to explore. I don't think the people who vastly prefer New Vegas and hate Fallout 3 understand this. Just because it's a better RPG, does not make it a better game.

From now on, if anyone asks whether they should buy New Vegas or Fallout 3, I'll ask them if they prefer interesting open worlds to explore, or it they prefer good RPGs. If it's the former, I'll recommend Fallout 3, but only if they say they don't care about open worlds or exploring will I recommend New Vegas.

Now the problem with saying that is, that even though I said New Vegas improves on almost everything, someone will still come in and argue with me about it. A lot of members here are so happy that New Vegas is such an improvement to Fallout 3, that they refuse to acknowledge anything major is wrong with it. Sure, they point out obvious things such as bugs, but they refuse to let someone say a single thing from Fallout 3 was better. Yes, there are some people that are willing to compromise, but most people I've seen aren't.

Did you know that not even Oblivion vs Morrowind arguments are that divided? Usually, if you chime into one of those arguments, the people who prefer Morrowind will be able to list several things that Oblivion did better. But not in New Vegas vs Fallout 3 arguments. It's either "I prefer New Vegas" or "I prefer Fallout 3" with basically no possible compromise in between.

I've just done Boone's quest today, and started Arcades; I did Veronica's last week. These quests are pure brilliance in writing.

On the exploration part, even just a simple, nothing special dungeon was nearly impossible to find in New Vegas. I agree that New Vegas did most things better than Fallout 3, including superior mechanics and combat mechanics, but the reason I recently just put down New Vegas in favor of Fallout 3 (I put Fallout 3 back into my PS3 and started a new game after I bought New Vegas) before completing many parts of it, including the main quest, was just because of the lack of exploration. Going into it, I never expected them to match any of Bethesda's three previous games in gameworld creation and exploration, so I'm not too surprised at the end result, but I expected them to throw in at least the occasional dungeon just for the sake of exploration. Good exploration and gameworld creation may only be one aspect of a game in speech and writing, but it is an enormous aspect that takes far more time and dedication than any other aspect, in my opinion. Someone's going to come into the thread and claim writing and story are the truly difficult to create parts of the game and that exploring in Fallout 3 was just hunting for more stimpacks with no reason that can just be added by modders, but that's far from describing Fallout 3's exploration and is just a false claim to try and hold everything about New Vegas or, symbolically, Fallout 1 and 2 above Fallout 3. Fans who don't recognize something good about a game they're not a fan of exist for more than one game series, of course, but the intensity of this in the Fallout community is both overly spread and exhibited, in my opinion.

Also, to the OP, as for what happened to Bethesda, they gave Fallout 3's engine to another game company and let them make this game while they work on their next game, which I hope is TES V.