is Fallout new Vegas better than Fallout 3?

[Wickedforce]

I love both, for different reasons. I like Fallout 3 more for its story, its characters and the true feel of being in the capital wasteland, espically the element of all the monuments and government buildings that instantly add character.

 

New Vegas has some better gameplay additions like Aiming down the sights, and the Companion wheel, Hunger and water system, not to mention feeling like you have more choice when it comes to factions, Then again theres mods for fallout 3 to add most of these things from New Vegas.

 

If you want to immerse yourself in a recognizeable world that lets you feel like you are there, I suggest Fallout 3, if you wan't more gameplay benefits and factions, I suggest New Vegas.

 

Hmmm what he said. More "epic story" in Fallout 3, But NV have better roleplay elements

 

Edited February 26, 2013 by Wickedforce

[JkKILER]

Honestly, Fallout 3 is my favorite game of all time. I love the way everything (non modded) feels. The struggle by humankind to recover from nuclear war always had me from square one. Even though NV was very fun for me to play, I just love the way fallout 3 is because doing things seem like much more of a struggle in it. FNV is really developed and while i love the setting and Vegas feel of it, FO3 still wins in my mind.

 

That being said, FNV's DLC was some of the absolute best I have ever seen. I especially like Honest Hearts and Lonsome Road. And FNV did feel more like an RPG.

 

Both are absoluteley amazing though. I recommend them to any video game person i meet.

[Pharnham]

No, New Vegas is merely a carbon-copy of the plot devices in Fallout 3, but without any coherent story. Furthermore, the folks who did New Vegas ... which are apparently the folks who did Fallout 1 and 2 ... appear to be obsessed with "moral ambiguity" which is the modern phrase for "no good allowed". Which is to say, there are black hats, and there are gray hats, but there's no white hats.

 

So unless you are emotionally about six years old, there's not much in New Vegas to capture the imagination. Some minor gameplay extensions are all that differentiate New Vegas from Fallout 3 on the technical level. But at the bottom line, this game was designed to exclude. Only "evil" need apply.

 

The writing in New Vegas is absurdly bad, and each faction is sledgehammer stereotypical and without shade or nuance. We have the apparently obligatory "alternative lifestyle appreciation" that certain developers feel must intrude into even our private gaming, as if we don't have enough gayness shoved in our faces daily already. The overall mood is about what you'd expect from a twelve year-old male who really wants to see a naked breast for the first time. Combine that with the tired, dusty practice of building all your sentences around the f-word ... which is every fourth word spoken by everyone in the game ... and it's an utter lose. I hope the folks who did New Vegas are never permitted to tamper with this franchise again.

 

Orville and Wilbur Wright may have invented the airplane, but I wouldn't fly in that contraption, even though the idea was good. I'd take a Piper Cherokee instead. Likewise, I won't be wasting any time on Fallout 1 or 2, and I uninstalled New Vegas immediately after dragging myself through it. Other people are able to build a better product out of this good idea, and so far the only good product is Fallout 3.

Edited March 11, 2013 by Pharnham

[Dweedle]

Fallout 3 is far superior.

 

When you get it grab FWE and MMM.

 

New Vegas is good too, but.. meh, Fallout 3 is more of a challenge.

[bben46]

The best thing is neither one relies on having played the other one. So you can play either one first and not be missing anything when you play the second. :thumbsup:

[charwo]

No, New Vegas is merely a carbon-copy of the plot devices in Fallout 3, but without any coherent story. Furthermore, the folks who did New Vegas ... which are apparently the folks who did Fallout 1 and 2 ... appear to be obsessed with "moral ambiguity" which is the modern phrase for "no good allowed". Which is to say, there are black hats, and there are gray hats, but there's no white hats.

 

So unless you are emotionally about six years old, there's not much in New Vegas to capture the imagination. Some minor gameplay extensions are all that differentiate New Vegas from Fallout 3 on the technical level. But at the bottom line, this game was designed to exclude. Only "evil" need apply.

 

The writing in New Vegas is absurdly bad, and each faction is sledgehammer stereotypical and without shade or nuance. We have the apparently obligatory "alternative lifestyle appreciation" that certain developers feel must intrude into even our private gaming, as if we don't have enough gayness shoved in our faces daily already. The overall mood is about what you'd expect from a twelve year-old male who really wants to see a naked breast for the first time. Combine that with the tired, dusty practice of building all your sentences around the f-word ... which is every fourth word spoken by everyone in the game ... and it's an utter lose. I hope the folks who did New Vegas are never permitted to tamper with this franchise again.

 

Orville and Wilbur Wright may have invented the airplane, but I wouldn't fly in that contraption, even though the idea was good. I'd take a Piper Cherokee instead. Likewise, I won't be wasting any time on Fallout 1 or 2, and I uninstalled New Vegas immediately after dragging myself through it. Other people are able to build a better product out of this good idea, and so far the only good product is Fallout 3.

My goodness gracious! You made me side with No Mutants Allowed for a second.

 

This is a bad critique, and really it's so bad it's not even wrong. Fallout 3 CAN be a better game, but only with extensive modding. Though there are quality mods for New Vegas, Fallout 3 has a lot more, and that does ding it.

 

As to not even being wrong, I mean you can't quantify it. In the third place, Fallout 3 is only vaguely aware that that it takes place 200 years after the war, not 10 or 20. It wants to be The Road, and flushes realism out the window. There are ghouls in places where they couldn't have enough food to eat for 200 years, think Mr. Kelley in the basement of the National Guard Depot. Or in the tunnels. It doesn't think to explain how the supermutants get in and out of Vault 87, that the clones of 108 should have died from old age well before the LW loots the place, Vault 106 doesn't have enough gas to keep scavengers from going crazy for 200 straight years, the cities are obscenely placed with no notion of defensibility, water access,. and then don't get me started on people surviving on 200 year old Salisbury Steak, no matter the depopulation, as the US was in the middle of massive 1917 Russia style food riots in the last year of WWIII. Then pure water being twice as expensive as Vodka is obscene: to purify water from all things, radioactive particles included, you need to distill it, boil it and collect the steam. Anyone who can access a fission battery, any energy ammo or the still functioning DC power grid could purify water for pennies on the bottle cap. And just a slight realism check: the water beggars don't need purified water, they need Rad Away. Fallout 2 got that right in the Vault City courtyard.

 

It was Vegas that explained the self replicating vending machines in Dead Money, justified the power still being on with the Hoover Dam, it actually looked like people did any kind of building post war. In contrast, stuff's there just for scenery in Fallout. It took the Khans and the Zion Valley tribal to see raiders and tribals as actually fitting in the context. The development of the Sorrows is the ONLY time in Fallout tribal have ever been justified. Even the Feidns, who are there to be killed, are there for more than to just be killed.

 

And in terms of moral ambiguity, a rejection of black and white morality isn't indecisive, its mature. Everything and everyone carries with them vast imperfections. NCR is what a realistic, if head in the ass, depiction of the front lines of a democratic state at war. And all of the horrible things that come and go is to provoke this question of morality. To expect the classic white hat is to create a pedestal that will hold no man, no polity, no hope. It also asks the question: what is America? Was America worth it? 'Where have you gone America?' is the best line in the series hands down. Beyond the more complex and nuanced desires of the factions in Vegas, each at least with a fig leaf, that's the most important question the post war world would ask itself. And this is a question you play out: to continue the Mad Max charade with the Independent ending, to sign liberal democracy's death knell to technocracy with House, or to reject liberalism entirey with Caesar. To side with NCR is never the siding with the lesser evil, its a choice the Courier and the player make, to say that for all it's many flaws and sins, America was and is a good idea and must be fought for. That is not bad writing nor shallow characterization: it is a question to strip away both self assurances and self righteousness. It makes you decide for yourself what is right and why right is right. And that, not killing mooks, is the purpose of interactive fiction.

 

Fallout New Vegas is closer to realism than Fallout 3, and it more nuanced, and it is superior even in gameplay, if just for the crafting and DT. Fallout 3 is unplayable out of the box.