The entirety of Point Lookout, the entirety of Mothership Zeta, vault 87, Washington Monument, Rivet City. Harold, that town and sewer with the fire ants, much less the one with the deathclaws. Now that place was good. Dunwich building. Gary!? GAAARRRRRYYYYYY (Ironically more interesting than anything the likes of Boone ever spoke about) There's more but I last played in '09, quite a few memorable places considering the length of time and the fact I don't even remember most of what happened to me just a week ago lol.


Contrast that with just the one vault that had the overgrown plants everywhere. That's the only location I found legit interest in everything else was boring desert.

You're correct that all of those areas are memorable...in how bad they are. Especially Zeta, the most Fallout canon-breaking non-Fallout thing that's ever happened to Fallout (this side of Harold).

I liked em, which is all that matters to me.

I like them both equally for separate but equally enjoyable reasons.

Capital Wasteland- It's got an iconic and classic Americana feel of the 1950s America and what we view as 'campy' by today's standards. I enjoy the level of detail in various random setpieces like an overpass with a skeleton beside a car making you wonder who they were and what happened to them. It also presents a very nice post-apocalyptic feel and the D.C. ruins with the cloudy overcast leaves a poignant reminder of the sorrow in the air over the countless lives lost during and shortly after the War. It also feels very expansive too.

Mojave Wasteland- The Mojave doesn't feel as wide and vast as the Capital, but it beats the Capital in terms of how rich with detail and life in varying ways it has. You may stumble upon a coyote den or a neat side battle or very neat setpiece with a quick visual story to it. It also captures the 1960s Las Vegas atmosphere VERY well and I love how the Mojave feels so much more alive and productive it is.

I don't have to like any one Wasteland more than another, I enjoy each Fallout for its own unique merits and each Fallout has its own downside to it as well. I don't waste my time with childish side-taking. I like the series and its installments for different reasons that identify them from their predecessors.

You clearly don't know about The Burned Game.

I must have forgotten, or it's possible though implausible that I never knew...

What is The Burned Game?

Also, Martyr, how are you enjoying the Commonwealth?

By avoiding anything that smells Main Questy to me I'm having a hell of a time not dying.

P.O.S.? It couldn't have been that clear since I clearly do. And I don't consider a part of this or any other conversation because it's an abomination which need not be considered.

The most misguided game since E.T.

The one game thats name must never be uttered within the Fallout installments.
As for Fallout 4, I have yet to get it. Can't afford it, but it looks like a fantastic game if you know what to expect from the usual Beth design perspective. There's things Fallout 4 neglected from Fallout NV, but from what I've seen a lot of it is forgivable. My opinion doesn't matter much to Bethesda nor anyone else, so I don't waste my time being bottom befuddled over things I can't change and find ways to find enjoyment from a game. Some games don't have much enjoyability though, like Watch_Dogs for example. But Fallout from Fallout, 2, Tactics, 3, NV and someday 4 each for their merits and have fair criticism of each on what I do not like.

Ah, but it is. That was such a bad game it was discarded as canon by fans and Bethesda. To ignore the existence of the Burned Game and go straight to saying Fallout 3 is the worst Fallout is just blatant cherry picking no matter what way you try to spin it.

Ah, fitting title. Burned, scoured from the memories of the world.

Although I do kind of like the idea of a super mutant army in Texas. Everything's bigger down there after all.

You should pick it up when you can. It is indeed lighter still than F3 on the RP mechanics, but it's fun just the same and I'm having a blast. Might stop playing to wait for some of the mods that livened up New Vegas for me....but it's hard.

One place they definitely f'ed up. No "That Gun." How can I be Rick Deckard without That Gun?

By using This Gun instead.

Sacrilege!!

Burn the witch!!!

Sit and buy noodles from Takahashi. I was so expecting a noodle stand in their Bladerunner homage that I clapped like a moron when i found it.

Nah.

Even the P.O.S. forum on NMA is long since closed. It's very much a case of "It goes without saying" when talking Fallout that nobody ever anywhere is talking about P.O.S. unless saying "Christ, can you believe somebody gave that [censored] the green light?" But if it'll make a Bethesda forumite happy, here you are:

Other than the game we shall not mention by name, Fallout 3 is easily the worst Fallout, the least Fallout-y and Bethesda acquiring the IP the worst thing to happen since Van Buren's cancellation.

*polite bow*

Your bow is deserved. You're a true master at the art of cherry picking, good sir. I dim my master terminal monitor to you.

The Mojave wasteland will forever be where I call home.

Are you insane? The mirelurks in FO 3 at Anchorage are not domesticated. They are wild caught. Domesticated animals generally won't rip your head off the first second they get. So, they are "hunting" and catching wild mirelurks. Domesticated ones do not exist. The Bighorners in settlements in NV are domesticated. Then, there are wild ones.

While it MAY be, and I haven't tried to count the brahmin in FO 1, it is still talked about by the NPCs, and, as I said, there are farms.

If they have domesticated Bighorners, then they have caught wilds ones, and tamed them. Pretty much common sense, that they thus hunt wild bighorners. Or did a bighorner sprout out of nothing all domesticated like?

Now, if you want to be super anol about canon and what shown, then lets looks at your brahmin in FO 3, and the whopping ONE that is in Megaton. I guess it is going to mate with Moira to make more, or how is that one cow supposed to be a food source at all for Megaton? Where is their Garden? When counting the cows in Fo 3, are you including the pack brahmins, which obviously are workers and not used for food? That means at least 4 are eliminated right there by the fact they used by our walking merchants, which, if you compare the brahmin right there in FO 1, when you take a caravan mission, there are a few pack brahmin shown(at least 3 quest canon). So you have Far-Go traders, Water Merchants, Crimson Caravan, who all use brahmin in their trading(did you count those and all the varied trade routes?). In FO 2 with those quests there are about a dozen brahmin shown(canon).

Another important thing to remember is the scale of FO 1 and the fact there really are not that many locations. Shady Sands, Junktown, Hub, Boneyard are the only human settlements we see in game. 3 of those 4 have brahmin, I can't remember if Boneyard does, but I know they have crops. Junktown has 7 or 8. Shady Sands 3 or 4. Hub has a bunch.

Remove the pack brahmin from the game(not a food source) and the absolute non-existance of crops, and the 1 Megaton cow, and that is the point people make when talking about FO 3 being durpy when it came to food, and this was fixed in NV and FO 4 continued the trend of fixing. If you want to count cows, at least in FO 1 they had combo of brahmin pens and crops. People didn't look at the maps and wonder wtf these people eating, dirt, or the 1 cow?. How about more that is shown, are the Hunters ever shown walking to a settlement to trade their food? Not shown, not talked about, doesn't happen for canon right? They just trade to people who out wandering about. Does a single hunter say oh we taking this food to Megaton or Paradise Falls or Arefu for trade. Nope.

Anyway, whatever. Point was it wasn't good in FO 3. I never said don't know what they supposed to be eating, I understand what they are "supposed" to be eating, it wasn't shown very well, and it was improved greatly in FO NV and FO 4.

After having gone back to play Fallout 3 to relive the Capital Wasteland once again, I have to say I've come to love both of them.

However, in terms of world design, the Commonwealth has most certainly taken the cake over both of them for me. The urban areas such as the Financial District of Boston are among one of my favorite places to explore. Hours and hours of wandering and discovering from one street, one building, one alleyway to the next.

Loved NV, it was the first Fallout game that I actually fell in love with (though my first game in the series was 2), but I have to say I enjoy the Capital Wasteland far more. The Mojave was great but it was a little too westerny for my tastes (not a bad thing, I just prefer a more bleak Fallout experience).

I much prefer the Mojave, because it made some degree of effort to make sense.

Fallout 3's wasteland was rather empty and New Vegas had a lot of invisible walls.

Between the two I prefer NV but I think Fallout 4 has the best one.

Pretty much this.

But I think Boston is the best so far.

Mojave feels more fitting for the series as far as I'm concerned, the tone and feel were (and are) immediately more familiar and "belonging" than CW.

If we were still in a Fallout 3 or New Vegas era, I'd agree. However I feel that Fallout 4 is a massive improvement in world design which stands to the assessment Fallout 3 feels like an attempt to dip their feet in the water before they dive into the pool. Fallout 4 feels like Bethesda's response to the complaint that the Capital Wasteland wasn't very alive and adds more life to it. I like the looks and improvements of the Commonwealth over D.C. very much, personally speaking.

i didn't like the new vegas map, locations svcked, the city area wasn't that great, it was too much empty area, thats a cop out, saying "well the desert is empty so thats how it is, that doesn't work for me, there's actually more in a desert, artistic license needs to be employed to make more interesting locations, there were very few complex building locations for combat, nothing on the scale of what was in fallout 3 and nothing even remotely close to what fallout 4 has, also the enemies in NV were few and far between, mostly deathclaws scorpions and geckos, they're not fun to fight, they just run straight at you and all melee, even the few human enemies were melee mostly, powder gangers, ceasers legion etc, not nearly enough enemies with any ranged attacks, but back to the location, it wasn't tactical for combat, you were just out in the open basically everywhere.

Definitely F3. What made the big difference for me was all the underground network we could explore in F3. Vegas was more vast, but F3 was more compactly vast.

I did really get a kick out of those tunnels. Loved sneaking around popping ghouls heads off.