Why do people seem to prefer Fallout New vegas to fallout 3.

[ginnyfizz]

Thanks both of you for being so darned patronising. Another reason for disliking FONV - the way the fanboy and fangirl base dismiss people who think the game sucks as stupid/noobish and act as if Obsidian are the be all and end all. And yet some of this same community can't even follow the instructions and install a simple body mod - check out the Type 3 New Vegas thread - despite their apparent superior intelligence.

 

Some of us are actually intelligent and have been playing video games for quite a while, and don't need our hands holding, thank you very much. There is just a point where this so called clever faction interplay gets so bloody clever it renders playing the game an ordeal rather than fun. Note - I did not actually say breaks the game, please try and quote me correctly.

 

*Waits for the arrival of the Inquisition and trial and burning for the heresy of criticising NV....*

[Dominico10]

Genocide lolita has a point though. I must admit, when i was playing it I thought against going with the legion for the whole point they are pretty much evil and wanted this side of the river. You should figure out if you go through with them you will be the same. Its therefore best to explore vegas first (this was my thought train)

 

I must admit you do end up screwing yourself over sometimes with factions, i have done it but then its your fault not the game. Its impossible for them to failsafe every action you could have or the factions would be pointless. Ie you could murder romans and they still love you, murder ncr they still love you.

 

ps i was in exactly the same situation when I got to the point where i must go to the roman camp to follow benny in my first playthrough. Only problem was i was villified by the legion. I felt a bit hard done to but i had caused it myself lol.

 

One thing that messed up first time i played through was in the roller coaster town (sorry im bad with names)

 

I proceeded to wipe out the bad guys around the vicky vance casino. Raid all the huts and buildings then go into the vicky vance casino only to be shot to hell by everyone in there. Still not sure to this day why, though i guess it may havse had something to do with raiding the houses. maybe i flagged as stealing their gear. That was pre patch though and i think they fixed it hopefully.

[ub3rman123]

I liked New Vegas more, because it seemed like the world was more connected. While their way of building it makes it seem like the player is being railroaded (And unless you want to take on deathclaws, you are), it allows for the game to be more complex story-wise, with more endings and options for the player. It doesn't seem like a series of unrelated dungeons; it seems like a world.

 

That said, Fallout 3 had a better theme, the radio was more interesting to listen to, the quests were more interesting in terms of gameplay, and the story started off in a better manner (But I dislike the single-way-through approach it had).

[documn]

Things I liked about F3:

- the beginning. I liked how it puts you right in the story and I found myself pretty emotionally attached by the end of it. Overall I liked the branching story of NV better, but I liked F3's approach too.

- Three Dog was the bomb.

- Liberty Prime was cool.

- The first time I heard Riley's Rangers distress call.

- Solving the computer puzzle (choose the right number) in the museum. Took me a while, and yet it should have been obvious.

- Solving the puzzle in the vault simulator.

- The size of the DC wasteland.

 

Yeah, I do like NV better, but I liked F3 a lot too.

[Ruadhan2300]

new vegas:

More features, more characters, more quests, more content.

packed into a space about 1/3rd that of Fallout 3.

DLcs add in world-spaces which are actually enough to bring it up to the same size anyway.

 

the improvements far far outweigh the problems in my mind :P

but I definately agree with previous commenters, there wasn't really anything new added to new vegas which hadn't been done as a mod in Fallout 3. but then, we've got a few thousand amateur and not so amateur developers here on the nexus, they've got about ten or twenty professionals.

its a no-brainer that we'd come up with all the obvious (and a hell of a lot of not so obvious) ideas long before they would. I don't hold it against them.

that and OWBs had so many fun ideas It made up for pretty much all the remaining gripes I had with the games :P

 

stabiity-wise. I find NV to be a LOT more stable than F3, but I get the impression it varies wildly from player to player how stable the game is, one friend can't get more than ten minutes without f3 crashing, another hasn't had a bug yet. for me, F3 suffered from chronic failure every hour or three. but NV was generally stable except with certain circumstances. (visiting hidden valley tended to cause save-corruption until the more recent patches)

 

on the other hand. NV has done nothing which has managed to match up to that glorious moment after you leave the vault, step out into the sunlight and see the ruins of DC on the horizon....

or the sheer awesome/epic of watching Liberty Prime at work....

 

oh, except the finale of NV. which depending on how epically badass your character is, is probably an extended Crowning Moment Of Awesome that quite possibly matches up to liberty-prime's rampage through the enclave...

incidentally, did anyone else go through that battle salvaging ALL the enclave power armor and gear in their path? I know I did...and I was rightly irritated to have to walk through the last ten minutes of the game :P

[yevic1992]

I think both had their merits, but really I can't compare them, they may be in the same franchise, but they really do play like totally different games imo.

 

FO3 really pushed the post end if the world setting, and thats what I really loved about it.

New Vegas, that post end of the world aspect didn't really play as much of a role....at all.But it made up for it with some brilliant quests and story telling

 

But....I really can't compare them beyond that, which is funny, they're so similar, but so different in my eyes.

[arcane20]

Well I just played for about 40 min of NV before it crashed. I should really download that stupid update not that I plan on playing. But yeah. I can't really say I respect new vegas in anyway. I just really have it in for obsidian for making the worst decision they could and not to update the game engine. They took all the complaints of fallout 3 being too buggy and piled them in the garbage so they could release a quick effortless game, then they stuck a new title and pricetag on it and called it original. I'm not going to buy the DLC I've wasted enough money on the game. Half the resources the armors and the weapons I already paid for in fallout 3 so yeah I can honestly feel cheated the game was far too expensive for what it gave the least the could have done was upped the graphics to DX 10 and gave us some better textures. But i'm sure they knew that someone else would do it so why bother. I can say with complete conviction that I refuse to buy another obsidian title ever. If it were a mod made by a player i'd endorse it, it was fun. But no way was it worth the $100 AUD I had to pay, especially while the americas got it for like $60 or something even though our dollars are about the same (though that's most games to be fair). So yeah complete scam in my opinion. So much so my friend in maine is buying skyrim for me then mailing it over. Which is what I should have done for new vegas too :wallbash: All in all with half the content already owned I feel the game should have been released as a DLC for $25. Then it would have been fair but as it is.

 

If I viewed these games in terms of public transport;

see fallout 3 is like this some wierd beta transporter to another world that sucks you in. When problems go wrong you deal with them because the experience is worth it. Then when it's over you want more so you gudgingly pay for more but it's not as great the second time you see it.

but...

New vegas is like this; it's just a stupid bus driver in a rusty old bus with its engine hanging out picking his nose and sticking the boogers in the window cracks to make sure they don't fall off then charging people $100 for a lift to the middle of nowhere where he abbandons you and tells you to wait a few months for the next bus to come along to find out how to get home maybe.

[Azrael120782]

Having played FO1/2 They were good,fun.

 

 

FO-3 What I liked.

Loved roaming DC,always something new to explore

So many historical refrences,stuff I knew I could explore.

The Close Quarters always made things interesting when Muties were lauching rockets everywhere.

Quantum.Love the soda that lets me write my name in glow-in-the-dark urine. Nuff said.

Three Dog>Mr.New Vegas.

 

Didnt like

Craptacular writing.

Craptacular engine stability.Some days I could pay all day no problem.Next I cant make it 10 feet without crashing.

Meh quests

DLCs were pretty bleh too. Zeta was poop.

 

 

FNV What I liked

Factions

Better writing and acting

Turf wars made things fun to watch.

Felt more in depth than FO3. But I didnt feel attached to any character,like I did with Dad and Moria.

Consequeces for your action. You can be shunned or attacked on sight. Or loved and handed goodies.

 

 

Things I hate

HORRID engine stability.it seems Obsidian just half assedly CTRL C + CTRL V'd it all. Nothing really new it felt.

Again the horrid engine stability.No matter how hard you try,you WILL get a CTD. Trying to correct it can and will make it worse.

Copy pasta everything. From buildings to environment and critters. There really is nothing new save for a few items.

It feels half baked. Buggy,not optimized for current hardware.Horribly game breaking bugs and patches seem to break more than they fix.

Bugs that were in the previous games using this engine not fixed. I know its hard to build a game,but some of these have been around for years. Dontcha think its time to fix em a bit?

 

Between the two

Both ultimately feel half baked. FNV more so. Its great dont get me wrong,but i felt like i was being led along ONE path. FO3 I could go explore everything from the start, vs go explore and get raped by all sorts of critters or go to Primm. FO3 was halfbaked as not everything was implimented like it could,would,shoulda been.All in all theyre great games. But they arent fleshed out enough.I found myself playing and enjoying the mod quests more than the vanilla ones. Sure FO3 was the same way,but I had more freedom it felt. New Vegas feels a bit too empty. I know that its a desert and all,but really its too quiet vanilla.

 

Both games get a solid 7.5.

[Rotenlutafish]

^

Even over the top characters like Benny are believable within the context of their world. The only believable characters in FO3 are ones that are mentioned in notes and never show up in game.

It is not the perfect sequel, but NV is a much more deserving continuation of the fallout series and is the true FO3 in my opinion.

 

 

 

I personally hated the Sierra Madre due to the fact I couldn't get the Super Mutant NPC to stay where he needs to for the main quest, that an I thought the graphics where poor on it like they where in The Pitt off of FO3. I will go back and retry the Sierra Madre to see if I can get back into it.

[Quetzlsacatanango]

I wasn't crazy about it the first time, though I really like the interaction with Christine.

Every time after that I used the cheat mod that disables head popping and poisonous clouds and it was much more enjoyable.