I’ve finished playing New Vegas, and I would like to talk about the game relative to my Fallout 3 experiences. The truth is I don’t game much, and Fallout 3 is a game I’ve actually played three times (more than any other game) and I was really looking forward to New Vegas. I have to say though that I’m pretty disappointed.

First of all, New vegas is a lot like a very large downloadable content for Fallout 3 in that it uses basically the same engine and play is similar. That is a good thing for me. Fallout 3 was let down by quality control issues (program bugs) which caused frequent freezing an occasional slowdown of the action on the PS3 at least. Still, it was quirky, fun, and interesting. I liked the story, I liked having a “house” and being part of the world. I liked learning about the world of Fallout 3 prior to the war and afterward. I like the heroic aspect of helping the wasteland get back on its feet and being a force for good.

New Vegas had a few new and interesting aspects -- the crafting, the gunsmithing and modification of the weapons, and the idea of the factions. The trouble is that both in the content of the game and in its execution, it failed to achieve anything like its potential.

First, in the intervening time, the Fallout 3 bugs have not been fixed, indeed I found more freezes in my PS3 than in Fallout 3, and the periodic slowdowns were more severe. Additionally, I found numerous in game bugs involving doors that refuse to open even though they should (the door to the Strip for instance), quests that failed for no reason (monorail exploding even though the bomb was disarmed if you saw the NCR officer first), and followers who either attack your allies or just stop following you for no real reason. These bugs made the game more tedious for me than fun, having to concentrate on overcoming the bugs rather than playing the game.

Then there was the content of the game. There was little chance for heroics in the game because all the factions were pretty low on the good vs. evil scale. The NCR, Mr. House, and Yes Man are all willing to do pretty much anything to “win”. And whatever path you take you end up doing things inconsistent with being a hero. You can’t have a good base of operations either. There is the Topps and Lucky 38 casino, but they’re not really very accessible for returning to after missions, even if you’re allied with the right faction. The closest I found was the Novac hotel room which I found unsatisfying.

Furthermore, there is very little information about “the world” in and around New Vegas unless you ally yourself with Mr. House, and even then you only get a short story. All those little easter eggs in Fallout 3 about how the war happened and how the world worked prior to the war are missing in New Vegas. The quests are typically uninteresting and involve more factional politics than heroics or excitement. And to add insult to injury, completing the main quest once again ends the game.

Lastly the game guide purchased separately is, in my opinion, inferior to the Fallout 3 guide primarily because it lacks an index. It also lacks small maps of the regions in the region guide which are very useful orientation features.

Having played Fallout 3 three times and New Vegas once, I’m more inclined to play Fallout 3 again than I am to play New Vegas a second time. I'm glad they got another game out, but I think it's buggy and lacks the engaging story of the original.

I found the F.NV story was better than fallout 3s. You wernt forced into being a white knight like in fallout 3 and the whole, no one faction is totally good, is much more realistic and better. I mean, theres a way of thinking that CL is actually doing the Mojave good, or that the republic is bad and too beauracratic[spelling]. Makes for a much more intresting game, much more than just, those are the bad guys, now go and kill em

Engaging story of fallout 3?

We obviously have played different games.

This again? So, you didn't like it? Too bad, so sad... for you . Plenty of us liked it.

So you dont like it because the factions were gray instead of black and white like bethsda made them in 3. Your problem, much better in NV imo.
The game ending is your fault, there was a warning. And this ending has detpth, dont get me started on the [censored] that was BS.
Didnt find anything about the world in 3.
And the politics between factions ads deth, thats life, or would you rather they force you to join the guys who have suddenly became paragons of good, like 3 did.

I knew the game was going to end, I just thought it was a bad idea which they "fixed" in the DLC in Fallout 3. The story was not so much a plot but the collection of terminals, notes, and holotapes within the game giving you world information. I liked them in Fallout 3 and found them interesting. I thought they added to the game. The truth is the bugs in NV finally were annoying me so badly I finished the main quest just to make it stop. As a software engineer, I found the quality level of NV pretty appalling.

I know lots of people aren't into the heroics. Otherwise there wouldn't have been so much positive press for the Oblivion addon where you become a Chaos god (which I also didn't like for much the same reasons). But even if you like being a dirty rotten bastard (in game), it's hard to like the game's bugs. I know how difficult it can be to shake the bugs out of a complex program, but I know from experience that it's possible to do a lot better than this. If our software had this many bugs, our aircraft would be falling out of the sky.

I don't mind any of you liking NV. But I think it's a good concept let down by poor execution.

OP, I agree with everything you said, good post and good points.You should know though, you're going to have 3+ pages of people bashing Fallout 3 now. Instead of reading your post and accepting it as your opinion, people will try to force NV down your throat. :/

NV gives you it's meat and potatoes in its questing, FO3 gave you it in its world and atmosphere. Both games play the same, so no comment on gameplay. Combined they would make an awesome game.

Both games deserve high praise for what they did do right.

:thumbsup:

I think that this is a fair summary. There is no right or wrong answer - some will prefer FNV, some F3. In my mind, F3 will always have the edge simply because I experienced it first, so it will always occupy a special place in my heart. I loved everything about it. But, with my objective hat on (its blue), I can see that FNV is better game - more quests, better character dialogue/development/backstory, factions, hardcoe mode, ammo types, more weapons etc. I could go on. The similarities between them are really only engine/appearance based - they both develop in very different ways.

For me the difference is in the side quests. F3 side quests were epic adventures involving combat/exploration and a choice of numerous resolutions. In contrast FNV side quests are often repetitive fetch/courier quests mainly created for the purpose of increasing faction reputation. Sure, I can see how this is necessary as I can't see any obvious other way of modifying your standing within a faction. However, your days as a courier aren't over when the game starts, in fact they are only just beginning.

One thing is clear, though - both games were obviously created with a great deal of devotion and love. This shines through in every way possible.

Thankfully not everyone likes their Fallouts dumbed down.



It's there. You just didn't find it.

I enjoy NV, because there are for more consequences from your decisions. I like that the good/evil aspect is blurred and subjective. I love FO3 as well, but it was far too black and white in terms of good and evil. I agree with much of the OP, but I still prefer the enriching story of NV. In FO3, I could choose to be a "good guy" or a "bad guy," and that was about it. No matter which path I chose in FO3, the ending didn't change....

:thumbsup: :thumbsup:
This. The thread can be locked now.

While your viewpoint may apply comparing Fallout 3 to New Vegas, something to keep in mind is much of the crew behind NV were the same folks from Fallout 1 & 2, making the gray factions and choices more fitting from that perspective. Remember, every ending has you a hero to a different group of people in different ways - whether it be through diplomacy, stealth or violence. Even Cass points out that the Legion may be a bunch of evil SOBs, but many caravans would love them in charge of the roads because they do a better job protecting their people than the NCR. Things like that add depth and make the story more than just a wish fulfillment "good guy always wins" story like most so-called RPGs out there on the market today, because it becomes up to the player to make the decision whether one group truly is worse than another and in what ways.

Well... I have to call you wrong, outright, here. There is plenty of back story about the world, you just have to poke around outside the main quest a bit and actually pay attention to what is being said and why. Those "factional politics" make up a very healthy portion of the world around New Vegas, and not just the two-dimensional battle for the Dam. Trying not to push this into spoiler territory, but if you want some seriously good story, head over to Bitter Springs, to Hidden Valley, to Camp Forlorn Hope, and to Vault 11. Also keep in mind, again, that New Vegas is not a sequel to Fallout 3, it is a followup onto Fallout 1 and 2, with the story of the west coast region and all the fun that goes along with that. Much of the story was written with the idea that players already familiar with the older games will have a better grasp of what happened and why - and that humanity does recover from even the greatest tragedies and life goes on. 200 years is a long time to keep repeating the same story of how the bombs dropped because a few people in power somewhere got greedy and trigger happy.

I agreed with the lack of depth from bits of paper/terminals/holo tapes after my first play-through (70 hours) but somehow, in my next play-through I found an enormous number of story pieces. Not only did the vaults have excellent stories, but I found a burned down house with an awesome story, a shack, a faction, an office building. Little tidbits spread across the world to provide little back stories. There were many like this, where you read about what happened to the people that were once there. The world is just CRAMMED (see what I did there?) full of little nuggets, you just have to look for them, because it's easier than I would have ever guessed to miss locations.

I liked both games, but I liked NV a lot better. The idea that Fallout 3 had more detail to the game world is like saying the sun rises in the West, though. I can't fathom how anyone could come away with that sentiment. The setting in NV was much, much more fleshed-out and detailed than that of FO3 in my opinion. :blink:

As far as it being downloadable content. Really? Engines have been re-used for games over and over ever since I started gaming 26 years ago. This is nothing new, and I find the claims that it's a large DLC to be a little silly, to be honest.

The fact that there weren't many clear-cut good and evil factions has been a hallmark of the Fallout series since the beginning. Fallout 3 was the first to fall back on the (tiresome, IMO) "black hats vs. white hats" dynamic that has become a cliche in the games industry. I much prefer the shades of grey...especially in a Fallout game.

As far as indications of what happened before the war, you have to understand that FO3 was designed for people that were new to the Fallout series, and New Vegas continues lore and established story elements from 4 (5, partially) previous games. Of course they're not going to talk about the world before the war. They've already covered that in FO1, FO2, and Tactics. Citing this as a downside is pretty much a complaint that they don't re-iterate the same historical information in every game. I could see the benefits of doing that, but I also see why they wouldn't. There is a ton of general background information on the wiki if you're interested...much more than they could ever cram into in-game terminal text and such.

The part that makes me chuckle there - isn't Fallout 3 just built on top of the old Oblivion engine? Would that classify FO3 as simply a big DLC of TES:IV?

QFT.

I played All three Fallouts before NV, and to me Fallout 3 was such a radical departure from the originals that it was tough to love. NV was a return to form. As for the bugs or the engine, the previous poster was right, this is not the Fallout 3 engine, it is the Oblivion Engine. That is the source of nearly all the nasty bugs you complained about as well. Most of which were fixed in the recent update. Sorry if you're still having issues. I agree it was pretty appalling initially though, but that is just how Bethesda runs. All about deadlines.

Other than bugs, most of your opinions seem to be based on misunderstandings about the game however. There are plenty of heroic opportunities, even in side quests in Fallout NV, and more importantly as the post I quoted mentioned. There is a rich tapestry and history to the Vegas region, and it is told from many perspectives depending on which individual or faction you are talking to. Everything from the down and outers of Free-side, to the Lonely Guitar player by the road, to the Great Khans and the Boomers. If you want more backstory, I suggest you do some more exploring.

All and all, I believe we disagree.

Basically yes. And seeing how similiar those two games are, (and while not really true) the DLC notion is as much applicable as with FO3->FO:NV.


Personally I prefer New Vegas over the scattered and disjointed experience of Fallout 3. The similiarities of those two are huge - and a bit sad, I might say, as the base that Fallout 3 offers appears as highly limiting and unsupportive to what FO:NV (or Fallout in general) tries to achieve - but the key differences between the two titles set them well apart from each other for me to enjoy (though not without gripes).

Fallout 3 was the first game with Black and White morality in the series

The good guys (Brotherhood of Steel) VS the bad guys ( Enclave)

FO1 FO2 and NV was always more grey shade than black and white

Don't like how there is nothing badass in FNV; no Behemoths, no Enclave attacking you with their advanced technology, and BoS are hiding in a Bunker the entire game. I still feel all the Fallout games (3+FNV because I haven't played any others) have a small variety of weapons.

Legendary Deathclaw, thats all

also,

This the west coast, there is not Behemoths, The Enclave was nearly wiped out, and the remnant dont want to fight anymore, the same with the BOS,

1 Legendary Deathclaw =/= Several Behemoths.
The story could have been made any way. According to enough previous people, Enclave was pretty much beaten down already in FO2 yet they came back with many numbers in FO3.
West coast still has fire ants, super mutants, etc.

"Fallout: A Post Nuclear Role Playing Game" is the original and it has awesome story, but I am fairly sure that you mean "Fallout 3" and in my opinion its story was just stupid.

I've started playing New Vegas yesterday. Only played for about 3 hours. My first impressions are: MUCH better dialogue, one of the better I've seen in recent RPGs. That's all for now, I haven't done much. The main story also seems interesting but I have barely touched it so I can't really comment. Also - the reputation system is much better than a karma system.

Can't speak for fire ants, as I honestly don't remember if they were in the original games or not - but super mutants were created on the west coast, when the Master used the FEV to create his army (plotline of Fallout 1), so their existence is very easily explained... and a bit tougher to explain for FO3 itself. The Enclave was the remains of the old American government, so it being in many outposts across the States can be covered to some degree - their primary bases in the west were destroyed along with the leadership, but after almost 40 years it would not be unreasonable for an existing untouched base in the east to move to make itself the new headquarters.

I am sure if you were to ask folks who played the original games, there would be a fair consensus that New Vegas is the true Fallout 3, and Fallout 3 is the Joanie Loves Chachi of the universe.

If you want yourself some challenging fights, go in without a sniping weapon and take on: