Thanks god obsidian dosn't make an other fallout :)

[kkk122]

FO3 would have had much more to offer in terms of atmosphere if it wasn't broken by every other character. Oooh, we have a super post-apocalyptic wasteland which is a dark and dangerous place. Okay, cool. Set about 150 years too late, but sure. And then you walk into Tenpenny Tower to hear: "I was worried about those Ghouls. Now I can get back to worrying about important things, like what color to dye my hair. Thanks for everything!". And yes, that is the actual quote (copypasted from GECK for accuracy). So there, your post-apocalypse, enjoy. Or another one: creepy atmosphere. Yeah, menacing and stuff. Example? Vault 106 (the hallucination one). All creepy and actually scary. And then you get survivors in there (how?) to completely break the tension. Let's also get a Russian guy from nowhere (seriously how did he get there?). Yeah, totally not breaking anything.

 

Oh, and I'd expect a spiritual successor to FO1 would have respected the fact that FEV research was never done by Vault-Tec, but by West-Tek in Mariposa (FEV experiment disk from FO1 clearly says that all FEV research was being transfered to Mariposa). But you know, wasteland orcs. Doesn't touch the atmosphere, but still.

Edited March 15, 2014 by kkk122

[Rennn]

 

I wish I could like New Vegas more, but I don't. The art style and entire theme of the game is just too random and silly. :/

This isn't really a "graphics" complaint (though it's clear Obsidian did less with more as far as performance is concerned), but there are only so many robot cowboys and purple mutants you can see before you stop being able to take a game seriously.

 

That's what Fallout was before Bethesda got their hands on it.

 

 

Then Bethesda improved it.

[kkk122]

With yellow mutants and soldier robots. Also Bethesda actually had a cowboy robot in Megaton. With a hat and a badge. It had a good chance of being the first thing you meet after leaving the vault.

Edited March 17, 2014 by kkk122

[DoctorKaizeld]

I like both games for features in both. I feel fallout 3 would have been better with NV's hardcore mode, and I feel the HC in NV should have been a bit less forgiving (though I can no longer play NV without it.)

 

I liked the urban fighting in 3 better, but this is just me as I love urban combat and exploration in RPG games.

 

I felt NV had way to many periods where you had nothing to fight. it felt like watching Lord of the Rings, there is a lot of talking and walking but when theres a fight its pretty good (except LoD had amazing fights.)

 

I like the weapon moding and the proper iron sights in NV and don't know why they weren't in 3.

 

I liked the radio stations in 3 significantly better then NV, I could listen to them all endlessly if I wanted. in NV, radio New Vegas was the only good one and I only liked half of the songs. big fan of the Ink Spots.

 

NV had much better guns and a better combat system in general.

 

3 had some good side quests that I enjoyed and I loved searching for the Bobbleheads.

 

NV the Deathclaws tended to be a tad OP. I mean honestly they can shrug off a missle... okay lets face it the big guns were awful in NV in general.

 

they both are great games, end of story. like all games they have their ups and downs and always could have been better. I can easily say these are good games to continue this amazing fun series, I just hope they can add many more features in FO 4.

[JimboUK]

 

 

I wish I could like New Vegas more, but I don't. The art style and entire theme of the game is just too random and silly. :/

This isn't really a "graphics" complaint (though it's clear Obsidian did less with more as far as performance is concerned), but there are only so many robot cowboys and purple mutants you can see before you stop being able to take a game seriously.

 

That's what Fallout was before Bethesda got their hands on it.

 

 

Wrong - Fallout 1 was far more serious than Fallout 2 or New Vegas.

 

In that respect, Fallout 3 strikes me as more of a spiritual successor to Fallout 1, and New Vegas as a direct sequel to Fallout 2 with all the same themes involved.

 

Personally, I prefer the serious, dark aesthetic of Fallout 3, but that's just a matter of personal opinion.

 

 

The aesthetic is all Fallout 3 has, the rest is of it is third rate. Since Oblivion all Bethesda have cared about it building pretty worlds, they do that and then phone everything else in. Fallout 3 is nowhere near the abomination Skyrim is but it's still a poor RPG. Bethesda are a developer that place no importance on writing, if they made mindless shooters that wouldn't matter, they don't though, they make RPGs where writing is more important than anything else.

[charwo]

I wouldn't even say Fallout 3 has a good aesthetic. Even in the 22X22 square miles or so that make up the Capital Wasteland, it would be dotted with small towns that would at least have been squared the nuking. From what I've seen from the gameplay, the survivor settlements in State of Decay made more sense, in terms of taking advantage of existing structures that could be fortified and made habitable. Girdershade and the the smaller settlements and houses make NO sense whatsoever in Fallout 3. The Wastelands is SO completely dangerous that living in anything less that a Megaton or Rivet City would be suicide in slo mo. Settlements should have been much heavier fortified, and in places like Northwest Seneca Station Plaza and Olney, with many settlements made out of reinforced and heavily barred Sky scrappers, more or less scavenged into acrologies. Arefu is a nice idea for a town, but it's neither populated enough, for fortified enough to be a proper moot and bailey. Let not forget how Lamplighters become phenomenally stupid are leaving Lamplight (itself a stupid concept) when getting to Big Town, forgetting all of their stealth and foraging skills as well as any guns and the engineering knowledge it takes to maintain the Neverland architecture of Lamplight itself.

 

And the Vaults 77, 106, 108 are mind blowingly stupid. The experiments going awry in 87 and 92 are kinda understandable, but you'd have to be too dumb to live to be the Overseer in 106, and if things actually went wrong in 108 the Gary's should have been LONG dead.

 

Fallout 3 as a cohesive story is a theme park version. And sandbox games do NOT lend themselves to roleplay unless confined to single city or has the bankroll of Rockstar. Vegas works simply because settlement opportunity in Clark County is so scarce they can KIND of fudge it. And even then they couldn't help f*#@ing up Vegas itself, just didn't have time to create a city as big as Stillwater. Fixing Fallout 3's narrative problems would mean modding every settlement and every character in the game. All I really need to do in NV is swap a pretty Strip mod and replace the NCR flags with Commonwealth ones and I'm good to go.

[Talwyn224]

Good topic and lots of interesting ideas & opinions here.

 

For my part Obsidian released a vastly better game in the form of FO;NV as opposed to Bethesda's FO3. when FO3 came out I enjoyed it for about 3/4's of the game but once I was in the home run stretch I began to see the massive plot holes and awful story telling begin to show up so glaringly that it became a true let down. At least in FO:NV there are 4 options for the player to take when it comes to the ending plus the game is so non linear that it's one of the few sandbox RPG's that does have consistent replayability. After not playing it for over a year and finally breaking my addiction to world of Tanks [it's a stupid game but took me 12 months to see it :( ] I return to the Mojave because it offers me a story in which I can shape the outcome. Yes I know it back to front, played it thru now probably a dozen times by now but I still find the odd thing here and there that I missed on earlier play thru's.

 

I agree that there are some really poor elements to the game and items like Lonesome Road really let the entire game down because its such a poor story. I suspect they [Obsidian] rushed it through and were probably sick to death on working on FO:NV by then because it shows glaringly.

 

However if there is to be a follow up game, it'll be Bethesda doing it as Obsidian are too busy working on their fantasy RPG Pillars of Heaven right now and Bethesda are focused on Elder Scrolls online atm. So FO4 won't happen till late 2015 and I suspect will be just as bad as FO3. Why? Because they'll be focused on ESOL and FO4 will be a sideshow for them.

[JimboUK]

Fergus Urquheart has said he'd love to do an Elder Scrolls game, Bethesda have also said they're not against an outside developer doing the Elder Scrolls, so you never know, we may be in for a surprise somewhere down the line.

[Madcat221]

I must agree with the OPer on visual quality control. Hands-down, BGS made better meshes and textures. One merely needs to look at the visual quality comparison between the Plasma Rifle and the Multiplas Rifle for an example. Good god, the Multiplas rifle's UVW map layout is a travesty. :ohdear: There's a reason I did a massive overhaul of it for Plasma Rifles Awesomefied (which is also in Weapon Mods Expanded). I don't think they did any geometry baking on a lot of the normal maps either.

 

There's also simply more embellished locales in FO3 as well.

[reallancem]

Yeah f*#@ you Obsidian for making an incredible plot and backstory, genius NPC development, numerous moral choices, extended gameplay options, almost a hundred more side quests, and a harkon back to the classic games. f*#@ YOU, BGS WATER PURIFIER FTW f*#@ THE LORE