I have nothing against epic quests really, it's good to have some that stand out, the problem I see with FO3 is that it "only" have these quests.
Sure there are small crappy ones like making Angela and some dude marry or preventing the suicide jumper from killing himself but those are too few and too short.

Huh so you wish fo3 was more mundane?

Well, the replayability is good for me, four different playthroughs already seem like an improvement compared to FO3's one... :whistling:

_{The OP must be rubbing off on me, I'm feeling a sudden urge to go to the FO3 forum and post numerous comments about how much I dislike stuff in that game. But I think I'll resist :B}

In terms of mq fonv decimates fo3 but in everything else (sq .epxloring hidden quests schematics) fo3 tears up fonv like a deathclaw eating grandma sparkle.

Good thing I don't play RPG's to be Dora the Explorer. Give me quality and content all day.

1. I agree with that some form of dynamic gameworld should be implemented.

2. That's not really fair, cause it's the same in FO3 really, when you go east of Super Duper Mart you encounter 3 raiders across the river, when you swim over there two super mutants come on the other side and a fight engage. So specific areas were still very very static in FO3 too, BUT it did have some random encounters, that place across the river where the three raiders are there is a random encounter spawn, so it can be random, thing is, it's always a random encounter there, and then it's not so random after all, it's a list of spawns that can and will happen for each random spawn and once those are through it does it off the top again. And the rest of the enemies are leveled, so... Let me see... There is an abandoned village somewhere west of Arefu where yao guais can spawn, when you're at low level though something less threatening spawns there, point is; it's not random, it's just a leveled spawn.

So while FO3 might seem more randomish all it had was leveled enemies and fixed random spawns where the "random" were just a random pick of a list of chosen spawns for that specific area.

I want true random encounters, I don't want that like when I go to super duper mart I find a random encounter, that's not random, that's a fixed static spawn.
I want to not know what the hell I might encounter out in the wastes, I want that when a random encounter happens it can be from 1 vicious dog to 12 vicious dogs and a kid with a minigun.
Specific areas should still be static until you clear them out though, if there is a super mutant outpost then there should be super mutants there, if I kill them on the other hand then the place becomes deserted and something else might move in.

But yes, westoftherockies, I agree that the gameworld needs to be more dynamic, I disagree on more dungeons, I disagree about the world feeling empty, but on that point I do agree fully. (But FO3 didn't exactly hit the spot either.)

i agree, even fallout 3 had that this problem to a large degree, i don't think quite as bad, but it true, i think all future fallout games need this adressed, cause both of the games did have areas that were just too predictable and i got tired of going by the same radiers every single time in FO3 just like the same powdergangers in new vegas. i think randomness affects replayability a lot, and for the story driven people its prob the same thing with the story, i think both story and ennvironment including factions and enemies, patrols, spawns etc, need a large degree of randomness to keep the games from getting old too fast, i know every game is gonna get old eventually, but at least if its fun for a year you feel a lot more satisfied.

No, but your Karma would effect how good a job your faction do at keeping order.

Why is this thread not locked? it started by a troll to troll.

Holy f***, did we reach a consensus?!

_{So can we all please admit both games have replayability - each for people interested in their respective aspects - kiss and make up?}

Umm why are you calling people names?? Thats not nice. Also its not nice to make rude comments.

Umm why are you calling people names?? Thats not nice. Also its not nice to make rude comments.

I don't know how long you've been watching these forums, but West is always insulting Fallout: New Vegas and has been for quite some time.

No hes not hes just stating his opinion and some facts. I was talking about that guy that is making fun of the OP.

Look through his older posts, and you'll see what I mean.

I can are helpful? http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1174444-where-the-hell-is-the-next-dlc/page__p__17351626#entry17351626

No, every time he posts it's always the same thing, he states his opinion over and over like fact and thinks he speaks for everyone.

Look through his older posts, and you'll see what I mean.

EDIT: Not to say that I don't do that sometimes, but the people I can mostly speak for are the Dinosaurs.

I can are helpful? http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1174444-where-the-hell-is-the-next-dlc/page__p__17351626#entry17351626

Saying "People are bored of New Vegas because there is no exploration" isn't a fact.

That's an opinion being presented as a fact. He shows no evidence pointing to that conclusion, he just assumes and assuming is always bad in debates.

Saying "People are bored of New Vegas because there is no exploration" isn't a fact.

That's an opinion being presented as a fact. He shows no evidence pointing to that conclusion, he just assumes and assuming is always bad in debates.

But most people are bored of New vegas if you would like to go through all the posts made so far you can do so. Because there are many that say so.

There are some of you that are bored because of that which is a fact. However, there are others who are bored of the game for other reasons.

It is not a fact to say that every single person that is bored is because there isn't alot of exploration.