A few things:

1) I didn't care for hardcoe Mode, wasn't challenging, just a nuisance

2) Damage Threshold was good but wasn't a big improvement to me

3) The Reputation System could have been better, although it is a little better from F3's 'kill somebody, come back 24 hours later and they like you again' thing

4) Traits were not well done or very effective

5) Iron sights was better (I admit it)

6) F3 was in absolute chaos, do you really think they'd have a [censored] economy?

7) Yes it did, and was better with Power Armor, but that was a small thing

8) The dialogue written below the person didn't even match what they were saying 1/5 of the time (no it was worse in Vegas)

9) The followers and quests were somewhat better (If the game didn't have all the followers NCR or neutral then I'd say the were better)



Exploration is a big part for me too.

F3 Shouldn't have been "in choas" 200 years after the war. Humans always organize, and get together one way or another. It's the way people work together.

Mad Max Thunderdome comes to mind, a bunch of raiders basically got together to create their own kinda town instead of just preying on the weak on the road like in Mad Max 2.

Raiders came together and made anarchy, D.C. supermutants (who were mindless) fueled the chaos, and so did Talon Company. I thought they had a pretty good explantation to why it was so bad, While playing I kept thinking (it was probably better before Talon Company and before Vault 87 with it's Supermutants opened).

Raiders never got together, there were just like 5 of them each time except at Evergreen Mills, attacking people randomly, torturing people etc and not really caring about "raiding". The Super Mutants were indeed mindless, and why was that? They're not supposed to be that mindless. Just like humans they can be dumb, intelligent, schizophrenic, aggressive, but one thing thing muties do is following orders, they don't run around randomly killing innocent people (who they would need to make new mutants) and there were never anyone in F3 that gave them orders. And why was there FEV in a Vault when FEV was only to be found in WestTek and later Mariposa? :s
And the Talon Company... why are they so damn aggressive towards anyone? I mean, they are mercenaries, they need people who employ them but if they kill anyone, people not even on their contract and so forth, who is there to employ them. How does that differ them anything from "raiders". These mercs do merc-work just as much as raiders do raiding in F3.

I swear I'm gonna kill a kitten if Bethesda decides to make Fallout 4 a Skyrim with guns. They should ditch all the exploration and a big sandbox map and instead focusing on to improve all the stuff that made the Fallout franchise worth buying in the first place.

Then it won't sell as well (Hypothesis) and if it's not a great cash cow they won't make another game or they'll just make Fallout 5 even worse.

And that makes me sick. :yucky:

Oops, I mistyped, "if it's NOT a great cashcow."

That's likely true, and if so, maybe, just maybe they shouldn't do it anymore. The series will never be the same again, that much is a given - however, there are ways for them to stray from their current formulas and more towards the Fallout style, without losing their grip on "what they do best" and "what sells". F:NV is good starting point on that and only needs a bunch of relatively small fixes to get it as close as the golden midway as possible - all that is missing, is (the knowledge of) Bethesdas willingness to reach for it.

Talon Company was employeed by somebody outside of the Capital Wasteland to cause as much chaos as possible, killing people ect.

Raiders in F3 don't usually kill eachother, which is why I said they were one big group...

Have you listened to Black Mountain Radio in Vegas? Tabitha calls the Marisopa Supermutants (the onces the Enclave made with the FEV) stupid... I think that means that Supermutants need somebody (like the Master) to keep them from becoming mindless savages (Plus D.C. ones don't attack eachother, like how the Marisopa Supermutants and the Master's Supermutants live with eachother), if the D.C. Supermutants had somebody like the Master then they probably would have been like the Master's Army.

I don't know about FEV... Maybe they teamed up since they all where private U.S. contractors? Maybe Vault-Tec managed to steal some FEV? Didn't the U.S. Army have FEV too?

Yes, Vault 87 was being controlled by the USAF, if I recall right, it's the only one in the Fallout world as of yet we know was military controlled.

Wow that was a really lucky guess! :celebration:

I know exploration is a big deal to people but its not the whole point of the game. I can understand FO3 having more things to explore fine. Just I don't see the point in FO3. What is there to find in FO3? Skill Books and Bobbleheads to make you more of a god, "unique weapons" that were not that unique. Only thing I liked to find in FO3 were the Taps but it was clear were things like that would be found, the big radio towers for one.

New Vegas has things to find as well. Uniques weapons that are unique like "This Machine." There are unique items and snow globes, there are notes and pages. I agree FO4 should have more exploration just to make the people happy.

I also agree they should keep the improvements of New Vegas.

My original post and my not really caring about pointless teddy bear collecting and skill book finding is not to put down others. Its just if Exploration is your end all to be all for a game then thats really baised. Its what people have been saying "We don't hate FO3, we just don't see it as a good Fallout Game." (one of the reason) Deal

I am hoping FO4 will have more areas to explore and items to find just as long as those items don't make me a super god like FO3.

I think your kinda missing the point though Styles. When we say "exploration" (or at least when I do), I don't mean "finding freakin' sweet items to make me A GOD!"

Just hear me out on this because I can understand your view because its true, Fallout was orginally more concerned with the storyline and quests. However, what I love about Fallout 3 and that I find lacking in Vegas is the feeling I got when trodding through a DC metro while trying to get a picture of what life was like before the war through the bits and pieces of pre-war life that still remain. I've said this several other times but one of my favorite places to explore in F3 was a house in Georgetown with a Mr. Handy who reads "And There Will Comes Soft Rains" to the bodies of two deceased children. Loot? No. Poetic beauty and atmosphere? Yes.

Finding that "AWESOME GUN" was never a priority for me in Fallout 3, I explored in Fallout 3 in order to get a feeling of being in a post-war world and saying to yourself "wow...there was a world before all this and now its gone....", and New Vegas simply doesn't give me that same feeling.

Fallout 3 didn't give me the greatest main storyline, but it gave me so many backstories that I could literally come up with a narrative for a skeleton sitting on a chair in a destroyed office with a message to her loved ones on her computer that would give me the chills.

That in my mind, is the point of Fallout 3. New Vegas tells you a great story, but Fallout 3 allows you to make your own.

Lt. Andronicus I am with you about coming across things like that Mr.Handy and skeletons and computer notes and holotaps. Just not the part about finding items to make me a god. I like that there are areas where if I go I'll get my butt handed to me. FO3 I don't really enjoy walkng the tunnels in because I can just cap anything that moves. In New Vegas there are tunnels and I find myself being killed by swarms of rats and ghouls. I still get that "what has become of civilization" in New Vegas. I enjoy seeing the new civilizations that have popped up in the last 200 years and their takes on how to run things. Having everyone stuck in the mud doing nothing for 200 years just waiting for the Kid from Vault 101 to lift them out of it is dull. I can understand why people like the atmosphere in FO3 but its 200 years after the war so it makes no sense. A game with great atmosphere is FO1.

How is having the quality of exploration as my top priority biased? It's just what I like the most, just like you like RPG elements. I like RPGs too, but when it comes to Bethesda games, my primary motivation to play the game is to explore. If the exploring isn't very good, like how it wasn't great in Oblivion, then I can't get into the game. A similar thing happened with New Vegas. I explored almost all of the map, at least 80%, but it was all so boring that I couldn't bare to finish exploring the rest. So what I did was I finished the main quest and any side quests I had remaining and went off to play other games. Don't misunderstand me, I wont play a game that's all around terrible just because it's open world, I do obviously care about the actual quests in the game. And considering how incredibly bored I was after exploring what I did of New Vegas, it's a testament to the game's good storytelling that I was able to muster up the motivation to finish it.

Not all Bethesda fans may be as concerned about exploring as I am, but there are plenty that are concerned enough about it that they recognize New Vegas' failings in creating an open world. "I don't hate New Vegas, but I just don't see it as a good sandbox game."

Bethesda is never going to abandon their open world design philosophy. Not only do the developers themselves enjoy making sandbox games, but they know it's where the money is, and they know it's what the majority of their fans want. Their new in-house Creation Engine is tailored specifically for the type of vast open worlds that they make, and I think it's pretty obvious that they wont just be using this engine for Skyrim, only to scrap it and switch to an engine like Id Tech 5 to make a linear Fallout for their next game.

There are just some things you have to accept Bethesda wont be bringing back to the series. I certainly hope they will implement all the new improvements introduced in New Vegas into Fallout 4, which should at least somewhat satisfy fans of the originals- but them making a hub-based Fallout game like the originals just isn't going to happen.

It is when its all you care about in the game. When all the other improvements of New Vegas arn't even considered. People point out the improvments in New Vegas and why they like it more then FO3 but some people keep coming back saying things along the line of "Story does not matter and everything about New Vegas is crap next to FO3 because New Vegas does not have the same Exploration! and You just Hate Bethesda."

Edit: "You" is just anybody. I am not directing this at xXAntibodyXx.

But that can be turned right back around in Fallout 3's favor as well.

"When all the great things that Fallout 3 offers aren't even considered and New Vegas is now automatically superior". The truth is, not everyone sees those improvements as being a good thing, it all depends on one's perspective.

The truth is that we're all biased when it comes to our own opinons.

It is annoying to be accused of hating Bethesda because of our opinons about New Vegas and the fallout series.

Edit: I should not accuse people of being biased sorry.

Then, Bethesda only cares about their fans but nor Fallout fans

@Lt.Andronicus

You hit the nail on the head for me about the fun of exploration.

I loved the acheology aspect of F03. :clap:

Here's a good article about it: http://www.playthepast.org/?p=459

Okay, I'm confused now. Are we still talking about MY opinions here? Because if you think those are my feelings, then you must have been completely skipping over my posts.

No sorry I was not talking about you. I was going to make an edit. "You" is just anybody. Sorry for the confusion.