hi, i have been off the NV forums for a while and i decided i would come back with this. it seems there is a huge divide on the forums between the people who loved NV and the ones who hated it. i have to say that although i did really love NV, i do have to say that Fallout 3 gave me a much better experience. Fallout 3 had something that NV didnt, a feeling of freedom. while NV was open world, it felt that the world was just there for decoration as i made my way city to city, i would always fight fiends outside vegas, cazadores in the hills, and scorpions and ants in the dry lakes. i think this stems heavily from the fact that random encounters are as far as i can tell, fully removed from NV.it also seemed as if although were places to visit out in the Mojave, it seemed as if most of them had no purpose other then to hide a star cap and leave some ammo. in fallout 3, i felt that no matter where i went, i would find something useful, cool, or interesting.

My next problem with NV is the story, while i admit that the story is very much better then fallout 3s and more open, it just wasnt as fun. 3 had fun and exiting moments like the escape from raven rock and Tranquility lane. although in FNV you could choose which faction to join, there missions were mostly just the same objective under a different name.
during my time with fallout 3, i NEVER wanted to stop playing, no other games could appease me, i just needed more fallout. during my time with fallout New Vegas it seemed like i needed to take breaks to keep from getting bored. listen i am in no way saying i dont like Fallout New Vegas, cause believe me i love it, but it didnt feel like a full sequel ( no i am not one of those people who say "it shuda ben d el c").

Fallout New Vegas added tons of much needed features, but it just didn't have the same effect Fallout 3 did. hopefully with Fallout 4 they will learn from there mistakes and keep the improvements to make a game even more stunning then its predecessors.

Couldn't agree more Fallout NV was stunning. Story was awesome,dialogue is superb, weapon mods , better over all. Except for one thing...setting and the atmosphere it just doesn't even come close to Fallout 3.

I disagree (someone has to right?). The setting I felt was more conducive to the feeling of a Nuclear survival RPG. The Dry empty wastelands of the Mojave have an ominous feel to them, and the denizens of those wastes felt right at home. Crafting was handled much better this time around, and being able to harvest plants, meat, recycle rounds and cells, just added to the immersion (granted I mod now with Arwens Realism mod for more immersion). The capital wasteland was amazing, but I felt that areas, specifically the capital area, were much too busy. There were too many things crammed into one area, and too much recycling used of textures (really, the subway system of DC svcked in FO3, got sick of the same walls and doors). It happens still in NV but to a lesser degree.

I like having mutiple endinds to my stories, and NV delievered on that where FO3 gave us 2 choices with the same outcome. Water gets purified no matter what. NV really stratles the moral lines right and wrong where FO3 was very cut and dry, you were either good or bad.

Don't mistake my words, I love fallout three, but certain things detract from my weighted opinion between the two. DLC in the first game I felt were too "over-the-top." It was hard to have suspension of disbelief in Mothership Zeta and at times Broken Steel. While on the other hand, Honest Hearts did alot for expanding the lore of game and gave us a beautiful new area to explorer and cool new lootz to collect.

That's my thoughts! I love them both though, fantastic games!

On the pointless exploration thing: Agree, I'd actually rather have a map node system for the locations, so that once I go near the edge of Goodsprings I get to choose whether to travel to NCRCF or Primm and so on.
I just find it boring to walk across the wasteland, nothing new happens and there's nothing to see.
And I don't want anything to see.
I just want to get to the next place to do more quests, nothing else.

Yea, because having a sandbox like Fallout 3 would just ruin the game. :shakehead:

If I want to sightsee I'd do that IRL, when I'm in Fallout I don't want to loot through some awesomesauce bunker for überloot, I want quests and dialogue, choices and consequence. So the sandbox element is hardly an improvement to Fallout IMO. (So it did ruin the game for me.)

You're just weird then. Why not have both?

Pointless exploration? Exploration is a HUGE part of the game, for a whole lot of us. Star Trek transporter-room travel between each new quest town, without being able to go explore anything else? Please shoot me. I don't think you're going to get a lot of agreement on that one. It would utterly kill the open world immersion which is one of the single coolest and most important parts of the modern Fallout games.

But.... they really do need to work a lot harder to make that exploration more interesting, because as many people have noted, NV did a really crappy job of rewarding you with interesting, different and RANDOM (very important element there, devs please take note!) experiences out in the wasteland, anywhere away from the concentrated quest nodes. FO3 was indeed much better at that.

This. F3 has something that FNV doesnt it makes me come back to it...

I love post-apocalyptic stories and settings. Guess why my name is Dune?

Anyway, before I discovered Fallout 3, I was a hardcoe Command and Conquer gamer. Command and Conquer 3 Tiberium wars+ Kane's Wrath was as post-apocalyptic as you can get. I loved everything about, whether I was fighting for the Brotherhood of NOD and the wisdom of Kane against the ignorant GDI, or fighting as the Global Defense Initiative to rid the world of the poisonious tiberium crystals that was destroying the world.

And then Fallout 3 came out. What was great about Fallout 3 was it was a complete escape. Seeing the world destroyed and trying to survive in the wastes was a great adventure, it was amazing, no matter how many times I played I was discovered something new. And the Brotherhood of Steel....I didn't warm up to them at first, I thought they were kind of weird, but as I saw them protect the wastes and ask nothing in return of the people of the wasteland, they became an iconic symbol of uncommon valor to me.

I loved how this untamed and very volatile world held no restraints on me. I loved the fact the game never "ended" I LOVED THAT. The story never ended because war....war never changes.

It was epic, no doubt, trying to fulfill your father's dream of rebuilding the world with no reward in return. And the Brotherhood story with the father story shifted quite good.

Yeah, New Vegas has better guns, and perks, and crafting....but you know what.....I often forget New Vegas is a post-apocalyptic game, because frankly the game doesn't feel like it, everything seems like normal.
I often feel like I am not struggling like I do in Fallout 3.

I mean seriously,take away the strip and the game loses its luster. You can't say that about Fallout 3.

Okay? I like Fallout 3 a lot, but I can't play it like a Fallout game, i play it like an Action Adventure Shooter.

Of course not. The entire Mojave is an "Oasis of Green" instead a "depressing sea of brown." They need to be careful not to damage Fallout's setting too much because then they might have to change the name of the game.

The reason one of the devs gave for making New Vegas unnaffected by the atomic war is that they felt the environment of the last game was too depressing and that they wanted to see green vegetation instead of brown. I bull$#it you not. Did they forget they're making a Fallout game?

[censored] Obsidian.

i loved fallout 1 and 2 alot, hell i like 2 more then both 3 and NV, and for that style of game, the transportation node works. with the new games, alot of the fun is that every thing to see cant just be found by looking at a map, it takes adventure and exploration, something that really differentiates fallout from other game series. hell without exploration fallout wouldnt have been much better then the average shooter. whats the point of a wasteland if you only get to see the citys, and not the actual, you know, wasteland.

Palidin Dune- dont bash obsidian, without them there wouldn't be a fallout, i think they should play a part in the creation of the next game, but not have full reign in creating it. and plus, fallout 1 and 2 were great.

Lol life after atomic war is not suppose to be all friendly...

meh, the only reason I'm still playing New Vegas at this point is for the requiem for the capital wasteland mod. I find it fun to travel to the capital wasteland with endless weapon repair kits, better power armor, and NV weapons.

It really depresses me that you people think that Fallout 3 isn't the one who deviated from the Fallout universe. New Vegas actually is MORE Fallout than Fallout 3.

i know NV didnt live up to expectations, but you know, it wasnt that bad. i think that obsidian did alot of stuff right, they added a good degree of complexity. weapon mods, better dialogue, more options, factions, ect.
i think that Beth and them should work together on the next game.

MAKO- i for one realize that FNV is actually more similar in setting and story then F3, but that doesnt mean it isnt a flawed game, it just didnt feel as fallout'y even if it was more similar to the prior games. it didnt have the same feeling of hopelessness and mystery as the prior games.

I want to say something about Bethesda too, but I might get killed :spotted owl: :spotted owl: :spotted owl:

Fallout 3 atmostpere was totally wrong, I dont mind the warzone setting, but cmon, 200 after the wars, and everithing was destroyed,

NV got the right atmosphere, the same atmoshpere of the old games, rather then GREEN TINT IN YOUR FACE!



Did you forget that this the West Coast, where everything is more civilized?,
Did you forget that Fallout cannot stagnate in the Post Apocaliptic world forever?
Sorry if you first Fallout game was 3, but thats not an excuse to make you believe that the Fallout 3 Atmosphere was the right one, because it wasnt,
Its like that the bombs fell again,

I don't let previous games completely determine the future of an entire series. If that were the case, Command and Conquer 3 + Kane's Wrath expansion pack wouldn't have been the best RTS game ever made and I'm as hardcoe of C&C player as you can possibly get.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4bVznY3XX1s&feature=related you did it now.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tAlVKgl_zCQ

And people say the Dinosaurs are the biased bashers.

No need to add to the deviation.

I won't sit idly by and let people bash Obsidian on the grounds that they didn't do the world right to Fallout, which they did, much better than Bethesda did.

For Bethesda's defense it was the FIRST fallout game they made. People make mistakes. Just because they didn't hit the head on the nail the first time doenst mean you single them out.