Well setting aside the gameplay and the mechanics of these 2 games which wasteland did u like the most? I personally liked FO3s wasteland much more than FNVs wasteland becuz i liked the post Apocalyptic feeling. I honestly would like to see all of FNVs weapons and mechanics put into FO3s wasteland and i would definitely buy it over FNV and dis is my opinion so please don't troll me or anyone who agrees.

FO3 has the wrong wasteland. The Great War was 200 years ago. There should have been improvement. As in Farming, Rebuilding, working economy and laws. Radiation would not be everywhere.

Best Fallout for "post Apocalyptic feeling" is Fallout One.

How many of these threads do we need? Seriously OMFG.

I find it hard to compare the two. I like both of them, i like New Vegas for Vegas obviously, but also for the western/desert feel to it, but also don't like the lack of meaningful places to explore (like dungeon crawling). I also like FO 3 because it is America's Capital, and looking at all the death and destruction there just has something to it. it also has tons more meaningful locations to explore.

Come to think of it, I might lean a bit more towards Fallout 3, but with a few tweaks, or one good DLC from Obsidian added to the base game, and that would likely change my opinion.

Its one of the topics that will just keep popping up over and over.

Game world looks as a whole FO3.
Specific areas NV has that for me.
Like to wander around looking for details FO3.
Walking around to hunt NV.

DLC area looks, yet to see on that.

There's no "both"-option (poll is racist!), I like them both and would like to see them combined or something. I like the dry lakes with those lil dust storms, and I love the city of Vegas from the outside, surrounded by ghetto, but with beautiful neon lights shining from the heart (I don't like the size of the city though, but I understand it's because of engine limitations). But I also like Fallout 3's wasteland, well, except for a radscorpion or molerat every half minute, or that there are settlements with a number of inhabitants I can count on one hand. But I like places like Springvale, a street with burnt-out wooden houses. And places like The Pitt and Point Lookout.

I think you mean Fallout 3 had the wrong wasteland.


I prefer New Vegas wasteland, ignoring gameplay and story of course, mostly because I prefer the more realistic depiction of 200 years after the war and the desert.

Unfortunately this wasn't one of the choices.

FNV is without doubt the better fallout game.

ergo its wasteland is also.

Thanks, I just changed it. :fallout:



It should be.

I like New Vegas a fair bit more because it makes a lot more sense overall.

That said, with a few tweaks, the F3 wasteland could've worked better if it had been set close to the war.

Fallout 2 is without doubt the better fallout game

There is more variety in plant-life in FNV , but less encounters than in FO 3 . Unless you count in the geckos

This thread just needs to be locked before it get's out of control....again..

From those two options: FNV wasteland.



Nah, let people argue and let the mods take care of locking things when appropriate.

Fallout 3's

I voted Fallout 3. I liked fighting my way through subway tunnels, single-handedly storming buildings, and watching brotherhood patrols shoot passing critters. New Vegas just seemed too empty, not urban enough for me. Personally I got to the Strip and thought "Is this it?" I just had the feeling that the Fallout 3 wasteland was significant because of where it was and what was happening there. I think Vegas is only significant because of the Legion/House/NCR situation, and the location was secondary.

For sheer coolness and post-apocalyptic feeling mixed with a post-post-apocalyptic feeling, New Vegas.

For explorational value and repeated....annoying....copy+pasted walls of rubble blocking off different cells, FO3.

Keeping it positive. I really like them both. I want the environments to be different. The color palette was different too and I liked that. They're both fun and different from each other.

I don't mind either of them but feel New Vegas could have had more items in locations in general, so consequently I did'nt vote.

If we put all things aside except the wastes? FO3, don't get me wrong, NV was amazing and obsidian did a great job, but it was just the FEEL of walking though DC looking at the impacts/decays effects.

If they put ironsights in FO3...oh my god..Don't get me started how much better it would be aesthetically

Well determining how hard a place was hit the radiation could take fractions of a second to decay or it could take thousands of years,since D.C. was one of the hardest hit places in the country I thought it made since that it had so much radiation which there wasnt really a lot considering except in a few places but I enjoyed the constant danger of radiation poisoning.
Back on topic I liked FO3s wasteland better,it was the center for the iconic 50s and I thought it was neat to see all that destroyed.I also felt the places had more depth.

I prefer FNV's. But to be honest, I hate this current worldmap system.