f03 vs NV

[frank lee]

What I was trying to say there is that FO3 felt way too complex for me. Okay, I got the idea of the main storyline, however, once you step out of vault 101 the capital wasteland is simply thrown in your face. You have no sense of direction, whereas in New Vegas if you ask around people will tell you about the outlying areas. Working for a faction is even better since you know where to find them. And thus, you have a somewhat clear picture of what the places are in the game and you vaguely know what to do, whereas the only guiding hand in FO3 was the main quest. And surprise-surprise, when the main quest ends, the game ends. This is present in New Vegas as well, which I don't like.

 

Chasing after Dad does seem similar to chasing after Benny, however since the map in New Vegas is more populated this means there are more quest hubs, which will send you out adventuring more, which in turn will make you discover more places, which will give you more coordination.

 

I'm not sure if you get what I'm saying but New Vegas simply felt more friendly to me than Fallout 3. The huge number of crashes in FO3 may have played a part in me losing my enthusiasm, though. I don't know.

 

 

Of course it's down to personal taste and preference and I'm not discounting the possibility that I'm just dim but I didn't 'have' to read a Wiki to try to work out what the hell was going on in FO3. Yes you can ask NPC's where your at and whats next, in fact you have to. Unfortunately knowing vaguely what to do, doesn't seem enough to avoid closing all sorts of paths for your game.

It just feels to me that the devs are pushing this story structure - game play concept too hard. They are revving the nuts off an old system and I suspect that's why there are so many quest glitches. Every damn quest in the game is tied to at least one other, some of them tied to many. Tied and tight, would be keywords if I was describing FONV .

Personal taste of course.

[CarlCorey]

I'm not sure if you get what I'm saying but New Vegas simply felt more friendly to me than Fallout 3.

And there's the personal preference part of it. I liked FO3 better because it felt more hostile, less inhabited. Wy would I find a pack of cigarettes or bottle caps in a garbage can in Primm? I'm sure Beagle would have kept them cleared of any thing valuable. In the DC ruins though, I could believe that they've been there for a long time and thankfully the raiders were too lazy to look and the super mutants too dumb.

 

I am enjoying New Vegas however; it's just a different game and I have to approach how I roleplay my characters in a different way.

[zerrodefex]

You may be right about the dark apocalyptic atmosphere that FO3 had, but then again i always felt the enviroments were very sterile and dull and the whole setting was rotating about gore, wich i think was used too much and on too many places, u had wide space to explore yet it was mostly tunnels full of ghouls and other vermin with nothing else to do then shoot and loot, in NV i feel like the exploration has more meaning then just getting xp. The liveness of NV is just great, there is always something interesting going on and after i remade my character and started to play on wery hard settings and hardcore mode..now thats real survival. Picked just a throwing spear and gone hunt, after half day hunting and running away from damn hard monsters i realized i had so much fun with just this, i did not even started to play the game by full.

 

Same here. Fallout 3 had a lot of locations that just had no real point in visiting. After going through those damn tunnels in DC I was happy to just fast travel hop around because I never wanted to go through them again. I hated that the city was subdivided into tiny areas with piles of rubble that should easily be climbable but have invisible walls around them. I like that Nevada on the other hand has more than a couple towns and some actual economy going on.

 

Most of what you did in Fo3 didn't effect the main quest so you could get a feel for where the story was going. Nigh on everything you do in NV affects the main story, before you have any idea whats involved. Once affected that's it, your locked into one story track.

 

Which I very much prefer. I like that my actions have actual consequences in the storyline rather than just having some annoying mercs show up out of nowhere to kill me just because I'm too nice of a guy.

 

Funny. that reviewer liked the story in NV better than f3; it was totally opposite for me. f3 had interesting characters and some great choices that really made the campaign resonate with me. NV's main quest just felt confusing, especially as none of the factions where particularily intersting. My favorites from f3, the Enclave, BoS, and Super Mutants are only minor players in NV, something that really saddened me. All in all I like NV but I think f3 had a much better sense of what it was trying to accomplish, and a great atmosphere. The 50s thing was cool in 2008; now it justs seems a little boring and weird IMO.

 

Aside from Fawkes and Moira the vast majority of FO3 characters are hardly memorable. NV on the other hand is full of interesting characters, especially the companions.

 

Also you're missing the point, Fallout in general is a universe where the US never quite left the 1950's. That's a major part of it's theme and has been since the first game.

 

Fallout 3: Lots of lame Hollywood style writing and in-jokes (Planet of the Apes? Seriously?). Lots of mediocre voice acting, and a few spectacularly bad actors (the guy who did Sheriff Simms, for example). The main story was predictable, cliche, and unbearably linear. It felt like I was riding a Disneyland roller coaster more than playing an RPG.

 

Plus some very phoned in performances from some notable actors like Liam Neeson. The actors who lent their voices to NV sound like they're actually trying, aside from Benny.

 

Fallout New Vegas: Lots of surprisingly well-written story and some funny jokes here and there (especially with the Wild Wasteland perk). The voice acting is decent, but still nothing to boast about. At least they didn't turn in any really horrible performances (that I've noticed). The whole game feels a little boxed-in, but otherwise feels very much RPG-ish, the way an RPG should feel.

 

If anything the voice acting in NV has more panache and consistent quality. Even Benny's voice acting, which has some rather bad spots, still has a lot of style.

 

 

What I was trying to say there is that FO3 felt way too complex for me. Okay, I got the idea of the main storyline, however, once you step out of vault 101 the capital wasteland is simply thrown in your face. You have no sense of direction, whereas in New Vegas if you ask around people will tell you about the outlying areas. Working for a faction is even better since you know where to find them. And thus, you have a somewhat clear picture of what the places are in the game and you vaguely know what to do, whereas the only guiding hand in FO3 was the main quest. And surprise-surprise, when the main quest ends, the game ends. This is present in New Vegas as well, which I don't like.

 

I also like how in NV there is some sense of direction, rather than just being tossed out of the vault with no real clue as where to go next. People actually give you directions if you ask, and along the way many locations and sidequests appear along that path, with more available if you want to explore off the roads. I prefer this rather than FO3 where most of the sidequests were far out in the middle of nowhere in places you were not likely to ever visit without a Wiki to tell you about them.

 

Chasing after Dad does seem similar to chasing after Benny, however since the map in New Vegas is more populated this means there are more quest hubs, which will send you out adventuring more, which in turn will make you discover more places, which will give you more coordination.

 

They hardly compare. The only reason you left the vault in FO3 was because you had too as the Overseer wanted to kill you since with your father gone he no longer had to tolerate your presence. After that the only reason you track your father down is because the game tells you to do so.

 

With Benny it's a case of payback and revenge. While it's unbelievable that you recovered from that head trauma after only a couple days, it's still a very believable motivation to chase him down and it leads to something far bigger that allows you to transcend your humble origins. You also have a choice in how the story ends, rather than FO3 where you're locked into a single path to a single ending.

[Thoreai]

I absolutely agree with you zerrodefex.

 

Even tough im getting tired of the same quest design of Obsidian, i still enjoy NV more then FO3.

 

a lot of people here say they miss the apocalyptic feel of fallout, but for me it was a little too much apocalyptic. FO3 was set 200+-? years after the war wich should mean that it should have been a lot more populated then the actuall FO3 was, more lively, becouse i think humanity would have formed larger tribes/villages/cities after such time, trying to get back on feet. But i had the feeling FO3 was set more like 20-30 years after the war, becouse it was too dull and dead and even though you were able to go where u wanted and do what you wanted, there was always this feeling of shalowness/ not-satisfyiness.

 

Basically i think people spended too long with FO3 and after the first "this game sucks" and other simliar threads started, they were looking for more and more errors and bugs instead of enjoyng the game, they are just so used to FO3 that they cant let go of the setting and from all those threads became a mass hysteria where even those things that werent really bad, were pointed as bad.

 

Still im dissapointed with NV too, becouse there are zilion of things that could have been done much better, just like with FO3 and most of them would not require to spend half life on them, like spears...i never saw a spear being sheeted like pistol...just this irritates me to death in NV..that they didnt even bothered to change the sheeted holding to back...becouse they have geck they can change it themselfs ..right ? So that way geck is more of a fixing tool and that iritates me a lot too.

[Thoreai]

Oh damn i pressed the "post" button twice..sorry didnt wanted to double post Edited November 13, 2010 by pavy

[BloXboX]

Well. This thread will be about arguing more then FO3 vs FONV to be honest.

 

For ME after a while .. Fallout 3 just got soooo boring. It was just really boring walking around the wasteland with Dogmeat and never seeing any friendley face.

 

Then u see some Deathclaw in a Green Tinted wasteland then Dogmeat dies and you kill the Deathclaw. It was like that for me even with 57 Mods.

 

For me .. Ill be playing NV Muuuuuch more then Fallout 3 for the following reasons: Life( The game required more life then meeting 1 Enemy after 30 H Exploring ), Cowboy survival/wasteland theme( This inspired me really really much.. Something ive wanted for AGES ), Better weapon handling & ironsights( This just adds so much more hours to the game.. I just cant get enough of the Brush Gun and Anti-Material Rifle )

 

Its pretty much up to the players decision. NONE are better then others. Its simply like that.

[leetgamer]

With Benny it's a case of payback and revenge. While it's unbelievable that you recovered from that head trauma after only a couple days, it's still a very believable motivation to chase him down and it leads to something far bigger that allows you to transcend your humble origins. You also have a choice in how the story ends, rather than FO3 where you're locked into a single path to a single ending.

 

What I meant in the similarity between FO3 and NV is that you have someone to chase after, you catch up with him after a while, you do his quests, then something dramatic happens to him.

 

Also if I'm not mistaken FO3 has two endings, activating the water purifier or sabotaging it.

[soot00]

Vanilla New Vegas > Vanilla Fallout 3 minus Mods

 

Modded Fallout 3 > Vanilla New Vegas

[LadyMilla]

For me New Vegas is a flop. After 70 hours into the game I find myself completely uninterested in how the game will end.

 

I do not feel connected with the Courier. I do not feel connected with the environment. I have no history, unlike in FO3 where the Vault 101 period built a good background story for me. Revenge is a weak reason to go on a rampage in an attempt to find the guys who 'killed' me. In Fallout 3, you are basically expelled from Vault 101, and you have a good personal incentive to go and find daddy, and to face the dangers of the wasteland in addition to the 'you have no place to back' element. Here, your motives are simply twisted and irrational. You were almost killed, you wake up with nothing but your bare butt and a bad case of amnesia, you get a few survival lessons from the local 'tuff gal', and you want to find the killers who did this to you? Instead of getting the hell of out there? Yeah, right.

 

Also, as I ventured deeper and deeper into New Vegas, I found that I did not care about the city at all. And why should I? There are a few big casinos, every one of them is effectively run by thugs, freaks, the head of the city is a megalomaniac geek-turned-millionaire who has 'great plans for humanity' (yeah, right, I heard that story before). The NCR, as it appears in F:NV, is just the revival of the pre-war political system (oh, Senator Whatshisname wants more votes, let's drive out the mutants from Jacobstown, shall we) with a few well-meaning soliders who were led to believe they are fighting for honor and values, while they were just pulling the cart for a few politicians who, in turn, were on the payroll of wealthy local Brahmin ranchers. The Brotherhood of Steel is a shadow of its former self. Ceaser's Legion is so obviously the bad guy that they could not have sent a clearer message if they had put big red warning signs along the road, saying "Legion is Bad', "Legion is a bunch of fascistic lunatics", "Legion = Oppression of women", etc. The Great Khans, as they appear in F:NV, are little better than foul-mouthed raiders banded together who have delusions of grandeur. The Boomers are just 'meh...'. The radio stations are a joke, with their limited selection of songs, even in comparison with the vanilla GNR. Actually, I preferred listening to Black Mountain radio.

 

Not to mention that I do not feel the post-apocalyptic atmosphere in this game. By the looks, the region might have been struck by a big global economic crash instead of a global nuclear Armageddon. In Fallout 3, you are always reminded of the Great War, either by personal accounts (e.g. Tulip) or other relics of the nuclear conflict (like the bomb in Megaton). In F:NV, the whole story feels like playing the game version of "Last Man Standing" with Bruce Willis.

[JimboUK]

I didn't enjoy vanilla FO3 one bit. The story didn't interest me at all, this wasn't helped by the awful voice acting and atrocious dialogue. It was Oblivion with guns and I didn't much like Oblivion either for the same reasons. Mods really turned FO3 around, things like MMM made it a lot more fun, without them I would have struggled to find the motivation to play through the game once. NV was great without mods, the NPCs are actually worth listening to, companions are more than bots that just follow you around and the story is much better. What I'm not so keen on is the way mobs have been placed in NV, they make the start of the game very linear as there is only one path to follow if you don't want to die.

 

@pavy Bioware made Dragon Age.