Hi, I played Fallout 3 for quite a time and enjoyed it immensely.

So, how does New Vegas compare?
Will it just feel like an extension of Fallout 3 (like Bioshock 2 was for Bioshock)?

Are there problematic bugs?

Steam or hard purchase?

I'm trying to decide between this and Call of Duty: Black Ops for my Xmas holiday gaming.

With all honesty, Fallout 3 was an overall better game but New Vegas is a good addition. Its worth buying if your a real fan.

FAllout 3 i great i cant compare them!!
They are both awesome

Vegas is a far better roleplaying game than Fallout 3.
Only thing 3 excel at over Vegas is the exploration aspect.

Tons of new additions.
Damage Tolerance.
Faction reputation.
Weapon mods.
Iron sights.
Kill-cam.
The option to join three different factions for the main quest or just go independent.
Lots of weapons.
Etc etc.

More comparison...?

I liked Fallout 3 better, no doubt. The locations found throughout the DC area rarely had any flaws... most had at least a SMALL bit of backstory and explorable areas/allright loot.
Fairly few locations in New Vegas have an interesting backstory to them, and the orange tint makes me vomit.
I dunno, DC was just a much better enviroment for post-apocalyptia than Vegas... feels much better, and I'm sure many will agree.

Fallout 3's post apocalyptica centers around "Oh look! Bomb craters! Destroyed buildings! Tons of green tint everywhere which modern science has proved is caused by radiation!".
While New Vegas deals with post apocalyptica in a different manner, mainly the factions, people, their cultures, the laws, the wildlife etc.
Fallout 3 is more like a "The bombs were dropped ten years ago" and it's fairly cliché with the obvious things like raiders or towns made out of junk.
While New Vegas is more like a "We know the bombs were dropped a long time ago and this isn't about the direct aftermath but rather what the effects the anarchy had in the long run".

You like exploring? Desolate green tinted postapo-ruins? Dungeon crawling, loot grinding and being an indestructible demigod? Fallout 3 then.

You like an RPG game, better story, dialogues(writing overall) deep characters, morally-grey(mostly) factions and improved gameplay mechanics when compared to F3? New Vegas it is then.

So NV is in fact a better 'Fallout' game overall. Plus as Gabe above me said, the whole world feels MUCH more believable and consistent. It shows how should humanity continue on its track, instead of being stuck in the endless loophole of WOAH RUINS ERRYWERE WE MUST STAY THAT WAY.
The "Oooh and Aaaah" cool factor of Fallout 3 is impressive for the first time(as it was for me), but when I started thinking about it more deeply, I got kinda dissapointed to see how everything was so poorly assembled together with a nice enviroment glued on top of it - shinies and pretties if you wish.

Yeah but NV kinda fails in the Diablout 3 loot grinding-dungeon crawling aspect, but maybe it's just me. Not that I am complaining. :sadvaultboy:

Another FO3 Vs Fallout New Vegas thread.

New Vegas is a better Fallout game RPG.

Story is alot better
Characters and dialouge alot better
Return of Damage threshold
Reputation System
Everythings not Black and White.
More Factions/joinable factions
Mutiple Endings that let me know what happens.
Deserves that M-rating
Weapons mods
hardcoe Mode
Iron Sites.
Original Power Armours.
Blue sky and green plants.

For me is New Vegas over Fallout 3

Fallout 3 had fun exploration but failed massively in the areas above mentioned by other users.

Failout 3 is not a true Fallout Game, It may be a Apocolypse game, But it's not a 'true' "Fallout" game.

New Vegas on the other hand, Is.

Here's why..


Failout 3's setting brought back the Enclave after we killed them in the first game, They unexplainibly downgraded their armor, They some how go all the way across from Navvaro to D.C.

The bombs look like they just blew the city up, The Story was awful (By ripping it off.), And the characters were unbelievable.

New Vegas? New Vegas brought the setting near the Original games, Made an original story, Brought back 'True' Power Armor, Had decent Character stories, Had great additions to the game (hardcoe Mode, Companion Quests, And they readded Damage Threshold), They also added multiple Faction you can join, and spy missions, Alot more quests in the game, And best of all, They have REAL Brotherhood. (Ones that arn't "SAVE THA PLANET GAIZ")

The ability to play hardcoe Mode is also a major update from FO3 to FONV...

If you want t play to level 30 and do the majority of missions from some of the major factions, FONV you will easily rack up around 80 hours or so of gameplay, playing at a normal, non grinding pace and with all the different combinations of ending slides and the fact that you can't build a "super" character, which means you have to specialize in a handful of skills, the replay potential is considerable.

Oh don't get me wrong, I did love New Vegas for all the new things it brought, and I do know that fractions of Fallout 3 were fairly cliche...
It's all preference I suppose, in my case I enjoyed scouring the ruins of a large city rife with mutants, in contrast to Vegas, where everything was relatively well reconstructed...
What can you do? :shrug:

Cheers for the tips guys, your comments certainly help.

The "recycled" presence of the Enclave and the Brotherhood, wasn't so bad. The Enclave were remnants of the US government, so it would make sense that their presence was already established in the DC area, the capital of the US. The Brotherhood in DC were sort of an "offshoot" from the tech chasing BoS of the West. The only faction that was really mucked up for me was the Super Mutants, who if you went by the FO1 and FO2 canon, were supposed to be localized to the vats in Mariposa. Yes, it's conceivable that similar FEV experiments were being done at Vault 87, but really the Super Mutants were "The Master's" creation, making the presence in the DC area a bit bewildering.

Your welcome and welcome to the forum. As for Bugs there are some. I have not had that many and they have been fixed and I play on PC.

They are there just to fill the Generic dumb brutish orc savage no. 21 :ninja:

It was said in the game they were'nt, That they traveled from the West Coast to D.C. by Autumn or Eden, The BoS in FO3 was complete [censored].

Except that it doesn't "make sense" because the Enclave moved out west to the Oil Rig. The US government basically moved the capital to the Oil rig. So there would NOT be any Enclave in the DC area. The BoS WALKED all the way from there bases in the West to DC blissfully skipping any tech they would have found in between it seems. They then suddenly became shining white knights of the wastes, because the gamesas writers needed a goody goody faction to force you to join.

To add: Box version uses steam as well, so if you like having the box in hand, more reason to get that version. If you see it as just clutter, more reason to get the steam version.

Yeah, when it comes to Fallout I'm very elitist about it.
Fallout 3 was a great game.
I have had tons of fun with it as a "game".
As a "Fallout game" on the other hand it really falls short for me, guess it's my own fault for having too high hopes that it was going to be like the prequels.

Let me just say this:

What made Fallout 3 "better" for me was the exploration and location.
That is all. The dialog, references, storyline, characters, weapons etc. were endlessly better in New Vegas. But for being a sandbox, New Vegas lacked that feel of exploration...
I can agree with you though, Fallout 3 is VERY good as a game, but as a Fallout game, NV wins.

Fully agree. :]

As others have said, Fallout 3 has better random exploration and dungeon crawling, New Vegas has better... Well, pretty much everything else.

I think the OP`s question has already been answered so if you want to continue comparing the two games, use http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1146863-fallout-nv-vs-fallout-3/