f03 vs NV

[Thoreai]

Honestly i think both games had their good and bad points, but what i think we can all agree on is... there is a ton of potentional wasted on those games..there are things that just could have been done a lot better. I think sometimes that most creators of sandbox games work more on the look of the game then the game/play itself, in my opinion we will never get anything better from the creators of FO3 and NV, i just hate the feeling when playng both games that "for christ sake why the hell they did this, this could have been done so much better", most of those things would not taken ages to do, they just didnt cared... for exaple animations..i have the feeling they are even worse then anims in FO3, especially the left side running and crippled running/walking..like a retared horse..jesus.

 

Also i recognized an animation wich i saw a loong time ago when i was playing KOTOR1 , KOTOR2, the npc's who just stand and point fingers over yonder..now the same do the npc's in NV...god Obsidian.. did they copy/paste that from it ??

[LadyMilla]

Start off I see the most interesting of note is that No one is bringing up how much fallout 3 didn't fit with the Fallout universe originally created by interplay/blackisle studios.

 

I really don't want to hijack the thread as my personal blog, I just want to add a few things that came to my mind after reading gimfandang0's really well-written post:

 

I have the Fallout/Fallout 2 trilogy because I wanted to experience the precursors: the result is not so happy, I have a hard lockup every time I try to start Fallout 2 (I'm trying to run it on Win 7 x64) so forming a hands-on opinion of the prequels is not possible for me right now; if anybody can give me a hint as to how I should set up and run Fallout/Fallout 2 without lock-ups, please PM me, or point me to a forum/thread where it is discussed in detail, I really want to get a feel for those games.

 

grimfandang0 is right and wrong at same time: I saw people who voted for e.g. Tomb Raider - Underworld as the best game of the Lara Croft/Tomb Raider series. Old school Tomb Raiders will very likely sneer at such polls: those who played Tomb Raider 1, 2 and 3 will be eager to voice their disagreement with the new generation of Tomb Raiders - for them, the greatest Tomb Raider game ever is probably TR 1. I have mixed feelings about this matter: as someone who was dragged into the world of gaming by an enthusiastic brother, I can understand both sides: those who would like to uphold the legacy of a game, and those who - due to the fact that they are unable to run the previous games of the series - regard some of next generation episodes as the pinnacle of the franchise.

 

For me, the decision of Bethesda to move the story of Fallout 3 to the East coast is actually a clever move: it was an 'enabler', something that allowed them to distance their vision from the original lore. They moved away from the dogma and they evolved:e.g. their version of the BoS is actually a progressive organization that breaks away from the tenets of the old-school BoS (hence the existence of the Outcasts who can be regarded as the 'purists' or the 'defenders of the original' mission/canon/lore). I think, in a way, the Outcast are the mockery of the Fallout 1/2 fans who would have preferred a more old-school Fallout 3. But the world (and game development) moved on. Just like in the case of the old-school Tomb Raider fans.

 

One lesson I learned during the years: time will never flow backwards. Old games, old lore will be transformed into something new. You can either accept it, or sit on the sidelines and moan over the depravity of the game studios who mismanage the lore. Or you can try to get rid of your preconceptions and enjoy their take on the subject matter with an open mind.

 

I have to make a confession. In my first post in this thread I wrote 'New Vegas is a flop". I forgot to add "New Vegas is a flop for me at the moment". To be honest, my first foray into the world of FO3 was disastrous. So I should have added: my opinion is subject to change.

 

(Kudos were given to grimfandag0 for reminding me of my own feelings about the Tomb Raider legacy).

[vometia]

Also i recognized an animation wich i saw a loong time ago when i was playing KOTOR1 , KOTOR2, the npc's who just stand and point fingers over yonder..now the same do the npc's in NV...god Obsidian.. did they copy/paste that from it ??

I wondered what that was all about; I guess now I know! Probably included as an easter-egg of sorts, I assume...

[Thoreai]

Could be, but i dont know ...its wierd when an npc stares at a wall, few steps from it and points over yonder...bah maybe im poking into that too much. :unsure:

[andrewajc]

To expand on my post from yesterday.

 

There's quite a few things I don't like about New Vegas. Number one has to be the game crashes and screen freezes. Considering the screen freezes were in Fallout 3, the fact that they weren't ironed out in New Vegas I thought was unbelievable since Fallout 3 is two years old, but when there were more game crashes and freezes, well that was just taking the piss imo. I'm talking about the PlayStation 3 here by the way.

 

Other major complaint was that I thought it was missing "feeling". In Fallout 3 it came across as if people genuinely needed you to help them. In New Vegas, there isn't that feeling. I don't really like the main quest either, I might be being picky here, but the whole point of the game is finding Benny and getting revenge so I was pretty disappointed when I found him so quickly. To me, once I got revenge on Benny that was that. Everyone else seems fine, there's no "feeling" of being needed by people in the game. NCR and The Legion are fighting over the dam, House/NCR/Legion want to take control over Vegas. In terms of the actual player character, he/she isn't from Vegas (just delivering the platinum chip if I followed things correctly) so why would they care who controls Vegas?

 

I found myself putting more energy into doing the Brotherhood of Steel questline and doing the stuff for Veronica. Seemed more interesting than the A, B, C, or D ending of the main questline - all pointed out clearly for you to see what would happen. In the game I got as far as killing Benny in Ceasar's tent and upgrading Mr House's robots. I could clearly see how it would end, I choose A, B, C or D and something happens that stops me from playing the game after I make my choice.

 

I also thought the Strip was too small. After seeing so much of it before the game came out and hearing how the designers were saying how amazing it was, I was expecting it to be a lot bigger than it was. I was also expecting less ruined towns and boarded up buildings since "Vegas was never hit by a bomb like DC was".

 

Had I not paid £70 for the Special Edition box-set of New Vegas I would have returned the game.

[soot00]

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.

 

This is one more thing that I do not like in NV. If I want that kind of hand-holding, I play Dragon Age or Mass Effect, and I can get my fill of invisible walls, no-turning-back points, etc. Don't get me wrong, I loved DA and ME/ME2, they were excellent animated movies, but I got bored of them due to their linearity. But then again, I'm an exploration freak and a sandbox addict.

 

Huh you guys actually died in vanilla Fallout 3? Main reason you could go pretty much anywhere at level 1 fresh out of the vault was due to creature level scaling. Players could if they wanted go straight to the main quest, rescue dad and complete the game by level 5 if they wished due to the level scale incorporated into the vanilla version.

[JimboUK]

Honestly i think both games had their good and bad points, but what i think we can all agree on is... there is a ton of potentional wasted on those games..there are things that just could have been done a lot better. I think sometimes that most creators of sandbox games work more on the look of the game then the game/play itself, in my opinion we will never get anything better from the creators of FO3 and NV, i just hate the feeling when playng both games that "for christ sake why the hell they did this, this could have been done so much better", most of those things would not taken ages to do, they just didnt cared... for exaple animations..i have the feeling they are even worse then anims in FO3, especially the left side running and crippled running/walking..like a retared horse..jesus.

 

Also i recognized an animation wich i saw a loong time ago when i was playing KOTOR1 , KOTOR2, the npc's who just stand and point fingers over yonder..now the same do the npc's in NV...god Obsidian.. did they copy/paste that from it ??

 

I thought I'd seen that before, it doesn't surprise me, there was dungeon music from KOTOR in KOTOR2 and NWN2.

 

 

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.

 

This is one more thing that I do not like in NV. If I want that kind of hand-holding, I play Dragon Age or Mass Effect, and I can get my fill of invisible walls, no-turning-back points, etc. Don't get me wrong, I loved DA and ME/ME2, they were excellent animated movies, but I got bored of them due to their linearity. But then again, I'm an exploration freak and a sandbox addict.

 

Huh you guys actually died in vanilla Fallout 3? Main reason you could go pretty much anywhere at level 1 fresh out of the vault was due to creature level scaling. Players could if they wanted go straight to the main quest, rescue dad and complete the game by level 5 if they wished due to the level scale incorporated into the vanilla version.

 

Very rarely, if I did it was usually a result of MMM.

[csgators]

Honestly i think both games had their good and bad points, but what i think we can all agree on is... there is a ton of potentional wasted on those games..there are things that just could have been done a lot better. I think sometimes that most creators of sandbox games work more on the look of the game then the game/play itself, in my opinion we will never get anything better from the creators of FO3 and NV, i just hate the feeling when playng both games that "for christ sake why the hell they did this, this could have been done so much better", most of those things would not taken ages to do, they just didnt cared... for exaple animations..i have the feeling they are even worse then anims in FO3, especially the left side running and crippled running/walking..like a retared horse..jesus.

 

Also i recognized an animation wich i saw a loong time ago when i was playing KOTOR1 , KOTOR2, the npc's who just stand and point fingers over yonder..now the same do the npc's in NV...god Obsidian.. did they copy/paste that from it ??

 

I thought I'd seen that before, it doesn't surprise me, there was dungeon music from KOTOR in KOTOR2 and NWN2.

 

 

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.

 

This is one more thing that I do not like in NV. If I want that kind of hand-holding, I play Dragon Age or Mass Effect, and I can get my fill of invisible walls, no-turning-back points, etc. Don't get me wrong, I loved DA and ME/ME2, they were excellent animated movies, but I got bored of them due to their linearity. But then again, I'm an exploration freak and a sandbox addict.

 

Huh you guys actually died in vanilla Fallout 3? Main reason you could go pretty much anywhere at level 1 fresh out of the vault was due to creature level scaling. Players could if they wanted go straight to the main quest, rescue dad and complete the game by level 5 if they wished due to the level scale incorporated into the vanilla version.

 

Very rarely, if I did it was usually a result of MMM.

 

What I liked about F03 was that if you played alert and smart you could play without dying, I sometimes died when I got caress or complacent but almost never when I was being careful. I take death very seriously in a roll playing game...I sometimes force myself to start over. After all if you were the character you'd be dead. NV is similar but honestly it is way easier to die for no other reason than going into an area they don't want you to go to yet.

[Liquidacid23]

in all honestly I loved fallout 1 and 2 but didn't care for 3 that much.. it just didn't feel like fallout for me and got boring before I even beat it.. not to mention it was drab and very depressing of a game in vanilla... if it wasn't for this mod community and the ability to run 100 mods at once I probably would have never even finished the game.. NV on the other hand I enjoyed enough to actually play through the vanilla all the way and am much more entertained with it and the mods than I ever was with Fallout 3

[Davidid]

..."Fallout 2" still rules-/-"Tomb Raider 2" still rules-/-"Grim Fantango" still rules......TESNEXUS ROCKS

 

PS LadyMilla go here and download the "latest" unofficial patch and the "latest" restoration project:)