Not only are you grossly oversimplifying the New Vegas storyline, but I couldn't disagree more about how Fallout 3's story is more "epic" than Vegas'. In New Vegas your decisions impact a massive amount of people outside of the Mojave Wasteland who belong to either the New California Republic or Caesar's Legion, we're talking several full states here (California, Nevada, New Mexico and Arizona to name a few). In Fallout 3 you impact the Capital Wasteland and only the Capital Wasteland, a region which doesn't even cover one entire state. Playing a role in shaping the fate of thousands if not millions of people certainly seems more "epic" than purifying some water for a couple hundred people at the most, at least to me.

When the original fallout came in to my life i thought it was one of the coolest games and concepts that i had ever come across. I played the original over and over again. Then, number two came along and it rocked harder than the first. Then there was Fallout: Tactics, which nobody really likes talking about but was still a cool game, just on a different tangent. Okay, it mucked with the story alittle, but it was bearable and had some cool new stuff and still sort of had that Fallout feel about it. Then you brought out Fallout 3, that ABOMINATION, but everyone loved it because it catered to the new generation of low-attention span players and then, all of a sudden, everyone was a huge Fallout fan and acted like they had been playing them for years. Grrr. Fallout 3 almost, ALMOST, ruined the Fallout series for me, almost. What posessed you to bring in level caps? What happened to the G.U.R.P.S system? The original games were almost essentially limitless with being able to go over 100 in your skill levels, you could probably play forever if you wanted or if it was possible. Granted it didn't make a HUGE difference but i think, if i remember correctly, it gave you a little more damage or greater accuracy at longer range with weapons plus other benefits in other skills(it's been a while since i played), but limited levels means limited fun. I was very disappointed.

Then the new one was announced and i was hearing cool new things about it. Would they bring back G.U.R.P.S? Would they make a game that could cater for almost unlimited growth and explansion? No, they wouldn't. They brought out a game that was "same same, but different" - SHAME ON YOU! Skill caps again, a poorly thought out and rushed story line that just wasn't as broad or forgiving than you made it out to be, a terrible ending no matter which way you do it - still being forced into narrow, crappy story lines... I actually prefered just mindlessly running around and having nothing to do with the storyline. This game had so much potential to make up for the mistakes of the last one, but all you really did was give it a shiny new coat of paint and a few new accessories

I will not be playing these games any more. You have ruined them, and don't think that i'm the only one that thinks this way. Some game play for some of these people could be salvaged if maybe you fixed up the skills system and made it possible to go over 100 in your skills with some kind of benefits for doing so, maybe in an add on or something, i don't know. You know what i'm talking about, it's not like it's a new concept, you did it in the original games. Those of us getting close to our thirties or so that were young when the originals came out and were huge fans are very annoyed. Were you thinking about the true fans or just the ones that played Fallout 3? I simply cannot understand why you have limited the game in such a way. You don't stop growing as a person in real life, so why should your game's character all of a sudden stop gaining experience? When you do these things it takes away from individual expression within the game and it svcks. And the story line, i think that was the worst of all. If the story was a little more interesting it might not have mattered so much that other things were sub-standard.

I really thought the creators would get it right this time, and i had myself believing that they would. But again i am let down, and my friends are let down, and you've let yourselves down by letting a chance slip by to make something truly great. I hope to god i've missed something that maybe someone could inform me about, maybe some DLC that i haven't read about yet, or something in the game that makes it better. I hope someone writes a scathing letter to me telling me i'm entirely mistaken, at least that way i would be able to play the games again.

Until then, no more Fallout for me.

People said the same thing when fallout 3 came out...

Fallout 1 and 2 were both great games. If you love them so much, THEN GO PLAY THEM. In the mean time, people are enjoying Fallout New Vegas. Wake up man. There not going to make any more Fallout 1+2 style games any more because its simply outdated and your going to have to get over it.

When the original fallout came in to my life i thought it was one of the coolest games and concepts that i (snip)

I think I may know where the OP may like a forum . Go to "No mutants allowed" OP . They seem to dislike Fallout 3 and NV there . I have heard that is what they think . I am not trolling ether. IF you want a group of people with similar ideals it might be a nice place to go to. Or maybe you already go to "No Mutants Allowed"

Maybe it's time to stop the 'They said that NMA is a child-eating society' bandwagon and visit the freaking site.

Not only are you grossly oversimplifying the New Vegas storyline, but I couldn't disagree more about how Fallout 3's story is more "epic" than Vegas'. In New Vegas your decisions impact a massive amount of people outside of the Mojave Wasteland who belong to either the New California Republic or Caesar's Legion, we're talking several full states here (California, Nevada, New Mexico and Arizona to name a few). In Fallout 3 you impact the Capital Wasteland and only the Capital Wasteland, a region which doesn't even cover one entire state. Playing a role in shaping the fate of thousands if not millions of people certainly seems more "epic" than purifying some water for a couple hundred people at the most, at least to me.

Anyway, on topic. I think you're being a bit harsh on Fallout 3 and New Vegas, OP. While they're certainly not perfect games I don't think Bethesda/Obsidian ruined the series forever; while I would have liked a top down, turn based Fallout game (or even top down, real time with pause) Fallout 3, and especially New Vegas are very enjoyable for what they try to do.

I . Go to "No mutants allowed" OP .

What posessed you to bring in level caps?

What happened to the G.U.R.P.S system?

a poorly thought out and rushed story line that just wasn't as broad or forgiving than you made it out to be, a terrible ending no matter which way you do it - still being forced into narrow, crappy story lines... I actually prefered just mindlessly running around and having nothing to do with the storyline. This game had so much potential to make up for the mistakes of the last one, but all you really did was give it a shiny new coat of paint and a few new accessories

On a Microcosmic level the FO Vegas writing is better but in the Macrocosmic level FO3's storyline was superior, ok you are trying to save the entire wasteland and purify the water for everyones benefit, Epic! I got shot in the head, lets chase those bad men down. mmmmmmm which was an overall better storyline???? Vegas does bring back that old FO feeling I'm sure but really FO3's Epic storyline is crap? ha ha ha ha ha

Guilty as charged Talonfire lol but I still think its more Epic, the DC Wasteland is larger than the New Vegas plus the water purifier could be exported in design to other areas of the country or the world, I disagree with your numbers though, thousands, millions???? what game are you playing????

The events in New Vegas will impact people all over the NCR and Caesar's Legion one way or another, the two groups aren't fighting over the Mojave for kicks and giggles. The NCR needs the territory for resources as they currently have a larger population than they can support; The NCR had over 700,000 citizens during the era of Fallout 2, and likely more now as they've expanded to other places. The NCR would also take a significant hit to its image if they lose to a group of slavers from the east, or one man and his robot army. Caesar's Legion is in the same boat; though they also need the territory to expand their influence as despite their size, they're still seen as unproven compared to their rivals in the NCR. It's all about the resources and politics.

The events of Fallout 3 are really only important to the people of the Capital Wasteland. It's not like the Brotherhood of Steel could recreate the water purifier in other places that have irradiated water either, a GECK is required and you can't exactly walk down to your local convenience store to buy one. Whether or not the Mojave or the Capital Wasteland is bigger is irrelevant in this case, what matters is the impact that the events will have and saying that Fallout 3 is more "epic" than New Vegas would be like saying that Lord of the Rings is more "epic" than Star Wars. Yeah, Lord of the Rings is epic for what it is, but when comparing the number of people and places in the fiction impacted by the events in the two stories Star Wars is clearly the more "epic" of the two. Or do you think that Middle-Earth has more people affected by Sauron than the Star Wars galaxy has people affected by the Empire?

Is New Vegas as good as Fallout 1? not even close, but its still a great game, not to mention leaps and bounds better then Fallout 3.

Pretty much this. It sometimes feels like I'm playing a modern version of Fallout 2.

Fo3's "epic" storyline is crap because it's dumb and contrived.

You can filter radiation from water with [censored] dirt and cloth, both of which are in common supply in FO3. A robot you're given as part of a housewarming gift can get purified water from condensation.

Your "father's" sacrifice is dumb and out of character ("I'm willing to sacrifice my only child and link to my beloved wife on the hope that maybe he'll/she'll be able to clear the purifier of creatures famous for treating power-armored soldiers as canned cram so that I might turn it on. [five minutes later] ZOMG, Can't let these other guys turn on the purifier! Yays sabotage!"), and the ending was full of retardation from the rad-immune companions to the fact that the game throws anti-radiation countermeasures at you, to the fact that Liberty Prime, while cool, basically turned the climix of the game into an interactive cutscene.

Compare New Vegas:

You're a courier, you're shot in the head and so you continue after the guy who did it either to get answers, to recover what was taken, or simple base revenge. When you get there, you're drawn into a power struggle to decide the fate of everyone in the southwest. Do you support the NCR, the government with good intentions but crushing bureaucracy and inefficiency? Perhaps Caesar, trading liberty in exchange for discipline or safety? Or do you support the enigmatic Mr. House, who wants to rebuild the world the way it was, with all its technology and social flaws? Or do you feel that your firm hand is the one the wasteland needs?

DC hasn't made much progress at all in 200 years. Given how nobody knows how to filter water, I'd be surprised if there was more than a hundred thousand people in DC. Out west we've got actual organized societies. The NCR as of Fallout 2 had 700,000 people, and they've only expanded since then. Caesar has 87 tribes underneath his banner, and is implied to be even larger than the NCR.

So yeah, I'd say that NV's plot is way more epic than Fo3's, if only because Fo3's plot only works if everyone is an idiot.