I've spent my fair amount of time running from giant bugs...

I think NV is a little hard to wrap your head around, with so many different ammo types etc - it is almost too much thrown at you at once.

I agree with OP.

NV isn't as good as FO3, mainly because of the fact that NV feels like a $50 version of FOOK2. Everything in the game, besides dialog, is lifted from the fallout3nexus mod site. Exploration is shallow compared to FO3 and the area doesn't draw you in, like it does in FO3.

Merely Bethesda pullin' on the cow's udder for more milk.

I still enjoy the game though!

After reading this thread and a number of other comments around the internet I decided to pick up the game. I'm really enjoying it. Heck, I was up to 5am last night. It has been a while since I've done that while playing a game.

it's just you.

everyone who played fallout 1 and 2 feels that new vegas is the real fallout that 3 should have been. it's better in every possible way unless you enjoy mindless pointless dungeon crawls over and over and over and over and over.......

The only thing that I have found of significant difference between Fallout3 levels and New Vegas levels are that the Fallout3 levels have alot more clutter in them. It seems as though there were not enough clutter passes made through the levels, or perhaps more clutter was removed (or not placed at all) to increase game performance. I have not been to very many places yet so I really need to get a larger sample size to declare this a trend, but in Primm and Lipton the amount of clutter is tiny. Loading it into the GECK confirms this.

I'll report again later on when I am more sure.

It must really be scraping the bottom of the barrel then. Shame.

Care to elaborate, I haven't played the game yet?

It also reminds me a bit of Planescape Torment (I wonder why). You know, put the pieces of info together to discover your past, etc... Nothing is spelled out at the begining. It's a mystery to be solved that twists into a much bigger story. Good stuff.

In FO3, there were things like the radio cisterns which were little easter eggs. Or the bear cave. The always amusing Super-Duper Mart. The Nuka-Cola factory, Red Racer, Mama Dolces, the Teddy Bear factory and quite a few other weird and memorable locations. I'm not feeling that yet in FO:NV. It seems like if a location doesn't support the main quest, very little attention was paid to it.

Some specific cases from tonight when I wandered slightly off the beaten path:

I personally thought those things made the Capital Wasteland feel more like a theme park than a wasteland. :shrug: Some of that stuff was cute, but I feel like they went to far with the, "hey, let's do this or that screwy thing" concept. I mean, the Fallout universe has always had some of that, but Fallout 3 was mostly that.


You mean that, "let's railroad the player down a linear story and make them feel like their choices actually matter when they actually don't"' magic? Hehe...ok, that's a bit harsh. Fallout 3 had its moments...I just didn't feel like any of them depended on me as a player. I never felt like I was in charge of my story, or even my character, and that alone is enough reason for me to like NV better. Outside of Megaton and Tenpenny Towers very few of my plot, dialog, or even character development choices had any weight to them. It's like the game was trying to prevent me from deviating from a path or making any bad choices (heaven forbid the player be allowed to fail), and disguised it by littering the wasteland with interesting yet ultimately meaningless stop-offs to check out. I kinda feel the same way about Oblivion, although I loved every TES game before that. I appreciate all the little extras and flourishes Fallout 3 had, but they don't mean as much to me when I felt like I couldn't really impact anything positively or negatively as a player. People laud Bethesda as a company that makes games that give people the limitless choices, but what's the point if those choices don't have any consequences attached to them (or in most cases any effect on anything at all)? Oblivion and Fallout 3 had a lot of content, but it was all "fire and forget" rather than truly interactive in any meaningful way. I felt like a spectator that was permitted to play a combat mini-game in between shows. Just my opinion, of course.

In a sense, it feels like an expansion pack. I can't really explain it better than that.

That being said though, I absolutely love how the game is acknowledging its roots. I'm very happy they brought Nightkin back for starters along with the Crimson Caravan and the Khans. I also think they did a great job showing the natural expansion of the NCR.

Oh, and I could barely contain my happiness when I saw That Gun available again. I always wished they had put it in FO3. And I got a kick out of the old plasma rifle being brought back as the plasma caster along with the Glock plasma pistol. In the end, it was a great reintroduction to Fallout, and the honest spiritual successor to Fallout 2.

Maybe they'll release Van Buren as an expansion pack.

If you choose the wacky wasteland perk, I think your more likely to have an experience you prefer here.

Secondly I have found a lot of in-depth places here and there across the Mojave, but you see the difference between NV and CW, is that the CW was completely obliterated, and there has been barely any civilisation beyond small towns there for centuries. Now in New Vegas, you still have a load of anarchy, but you have big players moving in now, big political nations and factions meaning most big buildings and factories are already likely to be occupied and renovated for post war use.

Not to mention the devastation of New Vegas wasn't as complete and it leaves with the fact, that these are different places.

I don't think you can say whether the entire area of New Vegas is empty without possibly combing through the entire area which would take a long time, but I get the feeling that the Mojave is more populated, you run into more factions, more people. And so many more quests, you are literally swamped with quests to do, and they are all engrossing interesting quests as well, rather than some of the endless fetch quests against the same enemies in FO3.

I am massively impressed with New Vegas, and if only they fixed the damn bugs which only harm immersion, it would be a truly amazing game...

Perhaps this is showing that some gamers are looking to gain a different type of gameplay experience compared to others. If one enjoyed the rewarding exploration in a bleak and daunting iradiated post apocalyptic environment that FO3 gave then understandably they would be dissapointed with this aspect of New Vegas. However, if it's the characters & NPS interaction, storyline, FO history etc that gamers enjoy then I expect you would rate New Vegas above FO3.

Someone said earlier a collaboration between Beth & Obsidian would be spot on, I would agree with that and it would have been more likely to produce an outcome that keeps more customers or fans happy.

Innovation comments earlier were interesting, didn't the work bench weopon modding and crafting come from FO3 mods? I remember an interview with a developer who mentioned they liked a FO3 mod that created this and decided to build it into Vegas.

I've learnt my lesson and have stopped wasting hrs and hrs exploring the environment and killing giant bugs & nasties in the desert, I'm really enjoying the main story now, found a follower, obtained a new home and done some great side quests and I've yet to reach the strip. Hoping for more of the same as the game progresses

I really enjoyed Fallout 3, but that's also because I had never played anything like it before. I don't look back on FO3 with rose colored glasses like some. Take the MQ for example: Bethesda did a good job of balancing between "find your dad" and "You just missed him" moments before it got stale.



My experience thus far:

New Vegas is taking me a lot longer to play. I still haven't finished it, and my big complaint is that I can't find a character I am happy with. I am going to restart another one where I dump a lot of my early level skill points into guns. I was at level 4 with 40 small guns and after leaving Prim, approaching & leaving the next town has made "gun play" a chore with my 40 gun skills. I think over leveled non-combat skills too early.

So, I am not as far as most of you, but I still really enjoy the game.

Comparing this game to fallout 3, fallout 3's content could be compared to 100% while new vegas in comparison is about 40%. Not to mention the world is tiny and boring in comparison to fallout 3's.

Rally dont get why so many people says exploring in F3 was more "rewarding".
F3 had alot of great places to come by sure- But it had ALOT of plain, dull, downright boring places aswell. Alot of the Capitol itself felt monotone and copypasted. The same thing applies to NV really. There are some great areas to find, some more boring. But from what i've seen so far, the areas in NV are more scattered around the they were in F3. Everything is better mixed which ultimately makes your exploring that much funnier.
The main quest in NV is superior to that of F3 in every possible way. And the path it drags you along, gives you alot more opportunities to find sidequests and introduces you to alot more of the map, than the main quest in F3 did.
The followers's history and quests adds content that F3 didn't even have, and if you decide to do all the followers's quests, you get to experience some very nice stories.

I'm not really getting the whole "F3 had more content than NV". No it didn't.
There are more quests in NV than in F3. There are more actual locations to find in NV than in F3. More "fun stuff" (gambling, Carava, weapon mods etc.) than in F3. The game has been out for 1 week give or take. Noone has explored everything yet to such a degree that they can say they've experienced 100% of the game.
It's taking me alot longer to progress in NV aswell than it did in F3 simply because there's more to do and you're not forced a certain way.


To me it seems like people are complaining about NV not holding your hand and telling you where to go all the time. F3 did that alittle too much. That whole "you can follow the main quest or chose to go in a different direction, should you chose to do so" just didn't apply to F3, you were naturally dragged into the main quest whereas in NV you actually can do whatever you want, without missing something to do. People see the map, find out that a part of it is cut off and instantly start to think "man, this game has no content!".

i loved FO3 and i played it for almost 2 years, however new vegas has so many imporvements and sure it might have some flaws but it is greatly superior to FO3, its blows it away in almost every category, the skills and SPECIAL stats, perks etc are all a lot more menaingfull and the game is a lot harder and the story is way better also there are loads of quests, kinda along the lines of oblivion and they aren't all short quests, a lot of em are failry complex so i'm really happy with the game.

LOL WHAT? You can't be serious. You think new vegas's story is better than fallout 3's? LOL WHAT?? :facepalm:



WRONG! Main quest sent you places that were very explorable, you choose to do them or not to, same as fallout new vegas. HOWEVER... What map are you referring to in new vegas? This one?

http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1132344-lack-of-used-space-in-the-game-startling/

Riiiiggghhhttt....

Not to metion Fallout new vegas's complete location is utterly boring. It's so dull compared to how rich fallout 3's explorable areas were that its laughable. Also its so enjoyable when running into boulders with invisible walls. That was very enjoyable. :flamethrower:


No I have to disagree completely with you. This game pales in comparison to fallout 3. Yes, its core gameplay is better regarding stats/ weapons / skills / crafting/ The mechanics and core is there. Still boring to play compared to F3 though.

Its not forceing you to go in a certain direction, you can and explore where you want, but it will probabally result in death... NPCs are better especially mr house.


Not really, fallout 3 forced me through metros, now I get overpowered enemies that herd me into the direction the devs want. Go north, oh wait you will just be killed by those over powered bugs and deathclaws, go the opposite way "oh another bloat fly". Sorrry not really sandbox when I am forced to go in certain directions due to enemies.
Exploration is mixed, the vaults are good, and so isi finding a random bunker inthe middle of no where, but there are many useless locations.
NPCs are better yes, but the game is still pretty black and white e.g caesers legion = bad, and it tries to convince me ncr are the good guys, it tries to get me to work with them due to most merchants being ncr, most places of interest ncr, and most quests ncr.

It's a matter of personal taste i guess, but the main quest in F3 was too cliché and boring. It was basically the same idea as the main quest in F1, except you didn't search for better water, your father did. The only good part about it was Liam Neeson's voice acting.

And you didn't get my point about the main quest dragging you along. Yes the NV map is smaller, but the main quest drags you around it alot better than the main quest in F3 did. In F3 you didn't touch the north eastern part of the map at all unless you went there yourself. Essentially you only entered the southern half of the map, enclave base excluded.


I agree that the invisible walls are annoying, but that's allready modded out.


Overall the reason so many people prefered F3, was their anticipation. When F3 came out people didn't know what to expect, so they got pleasantly surprised (most anyway) when they experienced it. With NV people know how the game works, so it takes alot more to surprise them, which ultimately makes NV seem less interesting. You simply can't look past your experience, it blinds you to certain things unless you're really aware of it.

It's the dreaded curse of the sequal really.


Edit. @ the guy above me: I'm thinking you're not really given the writers a chance to convince you about the different factions. From the start CL appears to be the bad guys and NCR the good guys, but that's certainly not something to take without a grain of salt. Caesar actually has some very good points to his way of acting and the NCR is actually a perfect version of today's governments; everlastingly friendly and caring on the outside, full of ulterior motives on the inside.
I actually find this game to be alot more "grey" than F3 was.

What I'd do is not listen to these moaners.
You might love it to bits, you might hate it.
I wouldn't put too much weight in the opinions of others unless they are the agreement of the whole community (which this thread clearly shows it isn't)

I know the ncr isnt full of saints, but CL is clearly wrong, and the ncr are fighting them, the ncr arent perfect, but they are more right than wrong. The NCR is expading, yes, but it brings order and democracy, the legion brings nothing good, go to caesers camp, people crucified for any reason, listen to the radio, they beat people to death for not working properly, they put slave collars on tootight, so the slaves always know they are owned. Honestly the legion dosent have order, it may say it dose, but go to the camp, it is just a bit better than your average raider camp, so it still fails. I dont care about what thier policies are, actions speak louder than words, its clear whos wrong in the conflict.

It's just you i say.

I loved Fallout 1 and 2, New Vegas feel like a true sequel while Fallout 3 is more like a silly spin-off like Fallout Tactics: BoS.

Excuse me? I like fallout 3, but what?

Find your dad

"He's not here. Try the radio."

"Nope, not here either. Try the boat."

"Nope, not here either. Try the building to your left."

"Hi son, I'm not here right now, please leave a message after the beep..."

"Ah, so you were a dog the whole time."

"AHHH!!! The enclave!"

"I can has power armor plz?"

"Kids only, no adaults allowed!"

"Here's the geck... and the enclave!"

"You're a computer?"

"Robot SMASH!"

How riveting. The enclave and the Brotherhood want to play Halo while your dad wants to make a giant Purina water filter.

New Vegas, though I'm still new to the game, is a lot more open and a lot more of a post-nuclear survival horror game with a LOT more RPG depth.



Explorable? People talk about hating invisible walls in New Vegas, but DC was mostly underground subway and streets blocked off with debris. New Vegas looks fantastic. Everyone remembers "the vampire town" in fallout 3, but in New Vegas I will never forget the first time I walked into Nipton. New vegas is far darker with far more mature themes [[censored], slaughter of innocents, etc.] that Fallout 3 wouldn't touch with a 10 foot pole. Fallout said the F word when you meet Gob and has a club for Emo kids. How edgy.

People are allowed to pick the story they liked best. If they think the fallout 3 story is better or not that's their [censored] opinion not a rule that's supposed to followed by everyone playing this game.

That being said, I do agree that that fo3 story is better, deeper, but it's for fo3, like it's been said, the game is different, the location is different, the struggle for survival is a lot more different.

I felt more like I was in borderlands when I started the game for the first time. And to be honest I was bored to hell wit dead DC. A clear sky, clear water, a plant here and there were a welcome sight. Made the world look a bit more alive. Plus I was tired of the brotherhood [censored] bravado fo3 promotes. But one year ago I was enjoying it, just as I am enjoying this now. That makes them both good games.

Keep in mind you are comparing a game that's been released for what.. 10 days, give or take, with a game that's been around for years. People expect too much from the first shot, that's how we are. To be honest I really don't remember how FO3 was 10 days after release, I didn't get it till much later and it still seemed buggy and lacking with two dlcs released but slowly got better. Give it time. Fixes will come, new things will be added. Assuming they don't start a console war with making a habit out of favoring just one platform like they are doing with the xbox exclusive dlc.

Replace dad with benny, and its pretty much the same damn thing, atleast dad was linked to the conflict, here its from tracking the guy who shot you, then suddenly you pick a side, last I checked my only otivation was to kill benny.