Fallout New Vegas blows Fallout Three into an bliviongate:

The dialogue is better, the story is MUCH better, and it is more immersive IMO.

They used the same engine I thought? like the same exact engine. So they should look pretty much the same.

They used the exact same engine.

A couple of spam/flamebait posts have gone away. Do not insult folks for their opinions and if you don't have anything to add to the discussion at hand walk on by the thread.

Are you talking about when two NPCs pass each other and talk about seeing a mud crab the other day? If so, I don't miss it. We traded that for settlements and factions that actually have relationships to one another. In Fallout 3 they were implausible, isolated pockets of people milling around bombed out buildings. The only exceptions were Megaton and Tenpenny Towers, but even then none of the wastelanders had any kind of history, personality, opinions on other factions, dealings with other factions and settlements, etc. I think it was a good trade, personally. I'll take more fleshed-out settlements, factions, and characters that seem more like they're part of the setting as a whole over random pvssyr any day.


I get the distinct feeling that they weren't finished, number one. Outside of that, though, I thought FO3 felt waaaaaay too packed for a post-apoc setting. Heck, NV feels too packed.


Random events would have been cool. Again, this seems like something they didn't have time to implement.


Really? So, the silly no-name raiders from FO3 with no motivation or personality are better than the named groups (Fiends, Vipers, Khans, Powder Gangers, etc.) in New Vegas? I'm not following you. The raider groups in New Vegas are a zillion times better than the implausible target practice the raiders were in FO3.


Yeah, I very much disagree. There is a lot more to get involved with in New Vegas, in my opinion. There are direct equivalents to collecting for the Regulators, number one, but is that even all that immersive or impressive anyway? I was really disappointed with all of that in FO3...why bother to have a faction like the Regulators if the only thing you can do is hand them body parts for money? You couldn't be a part of the BoS...you HAD to be a part of the BoS. Do not want...to be railroaded like that in this type of game. Are you sure we're playing the same NV? The setting is so much richer than that of FO3 in terms of factions and the player's involvement I almost feel like we're playing the opposite game here.


Disagree again. To me NV is superior to FO3 in every way I can think of. Sorry.

Gamebryo is used since Morrowind (2002 i think) but they only did little tweaks

I agree that New Vegas feels like it came out before Fallout 3. I disagree that Fallout 3 is better.

But the Mojave IS a desert, of course it's going to be more desert than D.C. :laugh:

That's a pretty nice opinion you got there.

Fallout 3 is the odd man out in the series; its the mutation. Fallout3:New Vegas is [for me] like a half step back in the right direction. (still a long way off the path though )

Factions, story, settlements, interaction and all that good stuff, are better on NV. Throw in some neat features, such as iron sights, and you have to say its a step up. However, the atmosphere and post-nuclear feeling is lacking. Maybe that's the point? Personally I prefer the sort of atmosphere FO3 offered. Much more immersive IMO, and the CW is a far better setting than the Mojave. New Vegas did recapture that feel to an extent with the Dead Money DLC I think..

Both are brilliant games, but FO3 still is my favourite ever game, simply because I became lost in 500+ thoroughly enjoyable hours. NV, on 85 hours encounting, isn't giving me the same buzz. Fallout 4 must be a combination of the two, and MUST ditch the current engine. Good graphics, smooth gameplay and minimal bugs, along with the capabilities to add whatever the developers feel necessary. That, and making sure the game is released when it is ready, after the developers feel they have implemented everything they can to make the game great, and after it has been extensively tested to make sure it is playable. Fallout 4 has the potential to be the best game ever. I just hope Bethesda and Obsidian do things properly.

I felt Fallout 3 was better in terms of the introduction. The whole Vault 101, GOAT, and first time outta the vault thing was better done than just getting shot and being interrogated by a doctor. But other than that, I feel that New Vegas is superior in every aspect.

Actually, that's what you'd call a pretty nice indisputable fact.

Indeed, I blame the crybaby/crybabies who shoe-horned in the "Wild Wasteland" and possibly hindered a lot of random event development.

I think you're looking for a different game than i am. To me the way Fo3 was built made it feel like post apocalypse disneyland with no thought to placing of buildings or settlements and their reasons for being there/intercactions with the enviroment beyond not having had a dungeon or town for 50 yards. They tend to be self contained little bubbles dropped on to the landscape almost at random. NV goes some way towards creating a functioning world with agriculture, an enviroment that isn't spawning something to kill you every cell and believabley safe zones that are hostile but not so much that it seems nobody could live or travel there. It's not realistic but it's at least immersive.

The enterable places is a double edged sword. If you could enter every house what would the point be? Oh more scrap and waste and re-used graphical assets... Tbh i thought NV had a fair amount of places to go in to. Too many perhaps as there were a lot of abandoned shacks and prospector camps that existed just for world building purposes. Fo3 went overboard in the sense they tried to make everything have something special to the extent that it was exhausting. When NV makes the really cool places all the more interesting by having the mundane ones to provide contrast. I never know when i open a door or enter a cave what i'm going to find.

With regard to the random encounters well i seem to come across a lot of random clashes between wildlife and traders, NCR vs. legion, fiends etc. The scripted ones you're talking about... Well i suppose a few of them would have been nice.

While i don't really see this as a Fallout 2 sequel it does feel like a natural progression from Oblivion>Fo3>NV with each game making improvements on the formula.

I think NV came out too soon. It's a great game nonetheless, but a lot of people, I believe, were already fed up with Fallout 3 and its DLCs. Having a lot of improvements, like better writing, more logical game mechanics and many others, NV still doesn't deviate sharply from the formula established by the previous instalment. That's why many people claim to be more engaged when playing Fo3, as it was a whole new experience for them (although it bore a lot similarities with Oblivion, one may argue).

For me NV is better in every way, but I'd still appreciate it much more if it came out around 2012, on a new engine and without Fo3 at its core.

[*]The fact the wastelanders rarely (if ever?) communicate with one another. I am completely shocked as to why they don't in New Vegas, did the writers just forget?

I've seen lots of interactions, they're short and there's a lot of repetition but they occur.

[*]Random Events! Where the hell are the random events? In Fallout 3, you could be traipsing through a forest, only to see a group of slavers firing at a group of escaped slaves. I realise New Vegas does, in some way, contain events. But the only difference is that they are bound to happen, Nipton will always be set on fire by Caesar's Legion, there will always be that same pair of escaped convicts firing at that gang (forgot the name) right before the NCR camp.

Again, I've seen random events in the wasteland and they've varied in different play throughs. There aren't that many off them and generally involve different factions/creatures fighting.

In a way it did come out before Fallout 3. The story looks like its made up of Van Buren elements