Fallout 3 & New Vegas were more fun : Othor Games

» Wed May 16, 2012 10:19 am

I'm looking forward to Fallout 4. Combine everything that is great about Skyrim, with the new hardward of next gen consoles, with the goodness of what is fallout... :thumbsup:

» Wed May 16, 2012 12:38 am

New Vegas may have been more realistic, and I understand that's appealing to some, but it was ultimately very plain and boring to explore. Fallout 3 on the other hand was fun BECAUSE it was unrealistic. It's best not to think about things too much, you could open up gaping plotholes about pretty much any game, let's face it.

» Wed May 16, 2012 3:34 am

I don't think that logically anolyzing something is ever a bad thing. Also, it would be amazing if Obsidian got to do an Elder Scrolls game. Avellone and Sawyer could do some amazing things for the series.

» Wed May 16, 2012 6:54 am

New Vegas may have been more realistic, and I understand that's appealing to some, but it was ultimately very plain and boring to explore. Fallout 3 on the other hand was fun BECAUSE it was unrealistic. It's best not to think about things too much, you could open up gaping plotholes about pretty much any game, let's face it.

Yeah, why can't I shoot a super mutant with my rock-it launcher and use teddy bears as ammo? Because there is no rock-it launcher in F0NV.

» Wed May 16, 2012 12:35 am

What I do like about Fallout 3 is that it basically forced Bethesda to implement choices into their quest, because it's an important part of the series. Some of the quests were pretty cool (though I think NV did it even better with less black and white choices and more options overall; Compare FO3's http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Blood_Ties to NV's http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Beyond_the_Beef). With Skyrim on the other hand it seems they went back to Oblivion style questing. The quests were fun, mostly, but there weren't a lot of choices to be made. Obviously the 'random' quests were shallow, that's just the nature of the design, but I expected a bit more from the rest.

Me, too. Fallout 3 seemed to be a huge leap forward in quest design for Bethesda, but then they seemed to discard all the progress they had made when they started work on Skyrim. The quests are just too linear, particularly the main quest and guild quests. I don't see any reason to replay it, because most of the quests will play out the same way every time.

So, in regards to the OP, I agree. I will almost certainly play Fallout 3 and NV again in the future. With Skyrim, I'm not sure I will even play the DLC.

» Wed May 16, 2012 8:20 am

What I do like about Fallout 3 is that it basically forced Bethesda to implement choices into their quest, because it's an important part of the series. Some of the quests were pretty cool (though I think NV did it even better with less black and white choices and more options overall; Compare FO3's http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Blood_Ties to NV's http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Beyond_the_Beef). With Skyrim on the other hand it seems they went back to Oblivion style questing. The quests were fun, mostly, but there weren't a lot of choices to be made. Obviously the 'random' quests were shallow, that's just the nature of the design, but I expected a bit more from the rest.

you might want to compare beyond the beef with http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Our_Little_Secret. It's got the same cannibal theme.

» Wed May 16, 2012 7:44 am

you might want to compare beyond the beef with http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Our_Little_Secret. It's got the same cannibal theme.

Yeah. I picked Blood Ties instead since it's somewhat close to the theme and also has a person to rescue, whereas that quest is very basic in its set up.

I'm currently playing NV and keeping track of interesting Skyrim mods. I'll probably go back to Skyrim for another long playthrough when the first DLC lands. Simple quests or not, the world is a joy to explore.

» Wed May 16, 2012 7:18 am

Agreed. Skyrim's world is the greatest of all time. The pinnacle of exploration.

» Wed May 16, 2012 9:40 am

Watch the making of videos. They tell the voice actors to cram as many lines into a session as possible, changing tones quickly, and thus lowering the quality. In other words: Bethesda doesn't care about dialogue or the quality of voice acting, the only reason its in there is because text-based dialogue won't sell.

Really?
Hadn't seen. I've seen the making of New Vegas vids, and the guys in charge of the voice actor direction seemed very involved. Don't recall the making of vids stating who was directly responsible (shows Avellone, Sawyer, Bergman and the sound board guys conversing with the actors) but they all seemed to take time to direct.

That's disappointing. Extremely disappointing. Infact, I cannot stress enough how disappointing that is to hear that Bethesda just doesn't care about quality, but rather efficiency. :confused:

Side-by-side comparison, for those who care:
Skyrim: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJIJ4WevxGA&feature=related
New Vegas: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=he2h-fgvV5w

Both the directors and the voice actors themselves just seem more personable and involved with the project.

» Wed May 16, 2012 7:34 am

New Vegas may have been more realistic, and I understand that's appealing to some, but it was ultimately very plain and boring to explore. Fallout 3 on the other hand was fun BECAUSE it was unrealistic. It's best not to think about things too much, you could open up gaping plotholes about pretty much any game, let's face it.

It's not just about New Vegas being more realistic, it's about it being more true to Fallout. It has been said many times, but Fallout was never about the exploration. Fallout was about the character, dialogue, the interaction between characters and factions, their conflicts, the lore and the politics of the wastes. Fallout is entirely about thinking through your choices and becoming involved in the conflicts of the people you meet, all of this amazing interaction means that people who have played the originals can't help but think about these games too much.

» Wed May 16, 2012 12:05 pm

New Vegas is superior in every way to Fallout 3.

NV is the best thing from bethesda in ages and it wasnt even developed by them. Patterns within patterns. Skyrim seemed awesome at first and Im sure almost everyone agreed. They should wait a couple weeks before posting reviews of huge world games like that because it takes time to realize that in the case of skyrim its the same blasted thing over and over. NV seemed like more of the same old routine too at first but again it took a while to realize that it had a completely different structure than any bethesda produced rpgs. Less open ended in terms of where you can go and when but MUCH more open in terms of choice and concequence. Better written too.

One thing I don't understand and find quite odd....

Look at the quality of voice actors in New Vegas compared to the quality of voice actors in Skyrim. Is it just me, or are the New Vegas ones x1000 times better? Still bumps of course, but overall better. This is especially odd considering many of the voice actors are actually the exact same people. Who directs the voice actors for Skyrim?

What I cannot wrap my head around is WHY for the love of all that is holy did they record different actors reciting the exact same lines? Its ridiculous! Why waste the disc space on ten actors saying the same thing?