Ive played and finished fallout 3 and ive played most of the story on fallout new vegas. my question is which do you guys think is better in terms of the game play and material? please dont take issues such as glitches/bugs into account for this poll.

the thing about fallout NV is that i really could not get into it from the start. in fallout 3 you start in a vault for like the first hour or so, then you move onto the capital wasteland and the story starts to unravel, but in new vegas, you get woken up by the doc then do a quick customization and in 2 minutes your out into the wasteland. in terms of first impressions fallout 3 has my vote

New Vegas had a lot of little things that were pretty cool like the true iron sights, hardcoe mode, just stuff like that. but on top of the little things that made it better there were little things that made it worst. i personally dont like how you can get those skill books that increase one of your stats by +10 for a few minutes. im not saying they are useless, but its like you increase your stat, do what you need to do then its done. in fallout 3 you take a chem with a positive and negative effect, which (to me) is a more tactical choice.

for some reason every time i play new vegas it seems to be like fallout 3, but made by a new team of developers. for some reason it felt like one of my favorite games had been ripped off by another company and made into something slightly less amazing. anyone else get that feeling? i just couldnt get immersed into the new vegas game for some reason, or alteast not like i did with fallout 3

with fallout 3 i was instantly mesmerized into the world and it felt so cool, but with new vegas i broke everything down in terms of good and bad.

im not saying i hate new vegas, its a relatively good game, but compared to its predecessor i just feel like its missing something, but i cant quite place my finger on it

i just want to hear some of your opinions on it, so please vote and please explain to me what you think. please dont flame my opinions

Fallout: New Vegas for me. The content is of a much higher quality than Fallout 3's.
I mean, I love Fallout 3 to bits, but it had it's flaws.
I'm feeling the same way about New Vegas, except the flaws are the bugs instead of the design like in Fallout 3.

NV, no contest. While Fo3 was awesome, it just didn't "feel" like a Fallout.

In FO3 I find that exploration is more fun and worthwhile, while in New Vegas the quests/dialogue/characters are better written, but the level design is lacking somewhat (invisible walls outside, sparsely cluttered interiors, etc.)

i dont know about that now. no contest? i cant say that so lightly. to me its the opposite, it kina feels like fallout 3 is the original while NV was made by a different team just trying to copy most of it.



yea thats actually true for me too i can agree with that completely

Too early for me to decide, I'll only know the answer to that after I play it for 300 hours like I did F3.

I can't vote yet, since I haven't played New Vegas enough yet. I love both games so far. To comment on your "birthing experiance" in both games, I believe it was different in NV because so it's not the been there done that, then people would be complaining it's just Fallout 3 and nothing new. Some times it's good to just get out. How many times do we have to do the tuturial? Fallout 3 was the same like Oblivion, so I am glad NV was different and I just basically got out. I was sort of dreading the dungeon tuturial, and was so glad I didn't have it. Was a bit shocked, so it was nice to be in the real world so soon.

It sounds like you didn't play Fallout 1 or 2. From what I have been reading on the forums, is that NV is more like Fallout than Fallout 3 did. To me, I see NV as Fallout, while Fallout 3 for the longest time felt like Oblivion with guns. I love Fallout 3, I love New Vegas, right now I can't pick between the 2 since I haven't played NV enough to comment yet.

But if I had to choose, I say NV since I am having more fun in the begining than I did with Fallout 3. Then again, I didn't know what to expect from Fallout 3, since I didn't know anything about Fallout universe, so maybe it's not a fair comparison since to me NV is a natural transition now.

I never completed FO3 or even began any of the DLC. I played as far as escaping the simulation, and finding the dad.

FO:NV is better than FO3 IMO so far (so far as Primm anyway); although FO3 is a lot more polished, and a lot more commercial.

FO:NV seems about the closest sequel we can expect to ever get from a major studio. As such I like it a lot so far.

ah yes that i completely agree with also, the tutorial was a hassle when starting a new game. although im taking into account first impressions more i think. as if you JUST started both games. but yes i was thinkin about that point too

I said NV cause i feel it took all the things i liked from FO3 and improved upon them. That said I have a soft spot for FO3 since it's the game that brought me into the Fallout universe =)

I'm going to give it to NV. You can tell the original people are working on their own material and are really comfortable with the game world.

FO3 was still quite good though. It's just that NV feels a little more authentic to the Fallout universe.

I think part of that has to do with the setting though. FO3 went out east and that sort of takes away from it.

yea its true that they changed the setting heavily in fallout 3. i can understand where ur coming from with that. make sense if you put it like that

I have to agree with this. Like I said I love NV but there are some places where it came up short compared to FO3

I miss the voice of John Henry Eden, I miss the patriotic whistle tunes on Enclave radio, I miss the Thomas Jefferson Memorial, and I miss the Citadel of the BoS, but I have to say I prefer "Fallout: New Vegas" now. It still needs some extensive updates to truly measure up to "Fallout 3," but it has greater potential, superior atmosphere, and far better crafting.

I'd have to say NV and add that I don't think it was a tough decision at all... the developers did exactly what I would have liked them to do, keep the core game play the same and just tweaked/added improvements. There's a lot of people out there that claimed NV was just "One big expansion", ok let's say that it is, look back at the 5 DLC packs for F3, That's 50 bucks of content that comes nowhere close to the size of NV, for $60 you're getting so much more.
In the end, I believe the devs did an amazing job creating a brand new experience, while at the same time, keeping it very similar to GOTY F3.

New Vegas is better. The setting is much more consistent and interesting, the overall writing is much better and voiceacting is much improved. General gameplay is basically the same, but the small improvements to it make it, too, better than Fallout 3. Simply put, Fallout: New Vegas is better in every possible aspect. I would've hoped they'd tweak the gameplay more, though, it's starting to feel stale as it is the 3rd game in a row with the exact same general design.

I think that's exactly what the answer is going to be derived from. Those who started w/ Fo3 are going to prefer it, while those who started with earlier ones (like myself) are more likely to prefer NV.

Nothing wrong with either opinion, I'm just biased

More like Fallout 3 tried to copy Fallout 1 and 2, failed in many areas, and Obsidian cleaned things up by making New Vegas closer to its roots.

Personally, I found FO3 to be more fulfilling simply because it was my first FO experience. I couldn't stop playing it and ended up with like 200+ hours with countless different characters. However, FO:NV was just as enjoyable. It has all the same enjoyable exploration, incredible playthrough value, and great quests. I have nothing against NV at all, in fact, I think it is a great sequel and Obsidian did an excellent job. FO3 just captured me more because it was my first experience and I was blown away.

Fallout new vegas is better.
but i would consider it like a big brother or big sister to a sibling then a complete stranger. It's got similar makes but vegas is leaner, tougher, more realistic.
Fallout new vegas is kinda like a really good expansion to fallout 3.

This. FO NV feels more like the true sequel to the series.

The atmosphere and setting of FO3 appeal more to me than New Vegas (have never cared much for the Wild West genre).
And I'll take exploration over quests any time. There are some great sights to see in New Vegas, but why go exploring when you can bet your ass a quest is gonna send you there anyway?

Also I'm a bit worried about replayability of New Vegas. The game kind of forces you to take the same route for the first ten hours or so, and that will get boring after a couple of playthroughs. In Fallout 3 once you were out of the vault you could just go do whatever you felt like doing. (a NG+ like in Mass Effect might be a good idea for New Vegas,no?)

NV is a great game and has made some great improvements over FO3 (especially what they did with the factions), but for me in the end exploration, scavenging and replayability will be the deciding factors. So, Fallout 3 for me.

What stops you from doing that in New Vegas?

Nothing, aside from tough mobs of enemies (as there should be.)

Replayability will be better than Fallout 3, especially due to the multiple solutions to quests that you can achieve.

While I agree with you about replayability. The comment about exploration makes no since... tough mobs of enemies make a whole world of difference (it makes it where you cant explore). I understand and like the fact there are tougher creatures but the fans of oblivion/FO3 (lik me) are not use to not being able to go anywhere we want.

So far I'm liking Fallout: New Vegas more but not by much. I like the Mojave Desert setting, I like the bright lights of New Vegas and I love the fact that I'm being a lot more cautious exploring than I did in Fallout 3 because you can stumble upon some pretty tough enemies out there.

I'm really curious what kind of DLC will be coming our way... :nerd: