Alright, so I am planning on returning to Fallout 3 after i get all the NV Trophies. And here is why...

I initially enjoyed Fallout: New Vegas, and essentially still do. The game fixed a lot of the problems I had with Fo3, such as making the game a bit more difficult, adding some factions to join, and improving the writing. However, i enjoyed my experience with Fo3 significantly better. If you have played F:NV to some length you will know that the main quest is relatively short, while there maybe many possible approaches to the main quest (as far as resolutions) the fact of its length leads to the most crippling (IMO) feature of the game. This requires a bit of explanation, so hold tight. The problem lies in immersion - in Fo3 the main quest is your guiding force (so to speak) but on your way you stumble across those in need or points of interest. For instance, as you travel towards Rivet city out pop Bryan crying that the monsters are after him - I instantly felt compelled to help. It seems that every side quest in Fallout 3 felt essential, and would be something the LW may stop his main questing for.

Now, in F:NV it started out that way, helping the good folks of good-springs with their gang problem, or getting some khans out of a tight spot. But before you know it you are in New Vegas and have spoken to MR. House - now the main quest begins drawing to a close (after you decide who's side your on). Then the side quests seem like you are just running errands for various factions. Sure, the companion side quest are fairly compelling - but I think most found a companion and stuck with them, or maybe just switched once. Anyway, the point is once i reach Benny - The courier is ready to make his decision on who to side with and after a few quests the main line is over. I just don't feel compelled to seek out the various factions and do their errands - I think that is where the immersion seemed to die for me.

I'm not sure if this made any sense...and really I am not trying to complain, F:NV was fun for a while and it made me appreciate Fo3 - who knows their may be a DLC that gets rid of the definite ending, which i see as a fix for this problem. If the courier is allowed to continue than he would likely be looking for work and seek out those factions to make some money...but for now he has found his answers and made a decision on the fate of the Mojave, no need to turn back for now.

I've still gotta hop back on FO3 for the last few trophies for the Platinum.

Okay, have fun with a generic main quest that is laughably written and unimaginative, and I'll see you back here when you realize...

Anyway, less rudely, the main quest is hardly short. The main quest is designed to force you to stumble upon some side quests, especially ones to improve your relations with the NCR/Legion/The Strip/etc. This is pretty good game design imo, and these quests have a purpose. Such as the helping the Brotherhood so that you can form a truce with the NCR, or getting the Boomers to help with the battle. Meanwhile in 3, we have quests like Reilly's Rangers, where you save these guys and they don't even come to your aid when you fight the Enclave. The major side quests in this game all have an effect on the outcome of the game.

Choices and Consequences are a great thing, and Fallout 3 has so much less in that aspect than NV.

Why on earth would he go back to the minor faction and make money after he became the ruler of mojave?

(At least that is one ending)

I will also be going back to Fallout 3 soon(ish), but for a different reason than you. I've played NV for about 40 hours now, and now that I've done much of what there is to do, there simply isn't much left. Fallout 3 has tons of re playability. I'm always finding something new to do. But I've found NV to be lacking for some reason. Just not as much to do. I still have ~10 side quests to do, I have to finish the main quest, and I've got about 50 locations to discover/explore. But once I'm done with all that, I don't see much reason to keep playing.

I explained the best I could in my earlier thread, but I'm just not getting the same enjoyment and sense of "what's over the next hill" that I got with Fallout 3.

EDIT: After taking a quick look at the wiki, I have quite a few more quests to do than I thought. That's good, I guess.

It is rather hard to explain, i'm just glad to see i'm not drowning in fanboydom

What about the different endings for most quests? Or the fact that there's 4 different possible campaigns? I think the game has way more re playability than Fallout 3.

In 3, nearly every character you make turns out the same.

Oh cool, another "farewell" thread! I assure you we will ALL feel the tremendous loss of your departure from the Mojave, New Vegas area. :facepalm:

I don't understand the point of these threads, what do you want us to say? You don't like FO:NV as much as you liked FO3... sorry to hear that, bye. :fallout:

Well, you could have taken the time to read my post - I wanted to express my reasoning for finding some disappointment in F:NV in a civilized manner for others to view and perhaps voice their opinions as well. However, it would seem (according to you at least) this board is a part of the dictatorship and things are not to be questioned, please i am sorry for wasting your rather valuable time.

HAHAHHAHA OP FTW!!!

Anyway... I agree with Fallout3 made sence in the fact that the side quests were not just random "Hey you!" Why help the NCR trade when your the sole ruler of the land? Why cant you just tell some dude to do it?

But F:NV had alot more replayability. So many options with the factions.
:run: :dmc:

I love the factions, i just wish the side quests had a little more urgency. "Come Fly with Me" was compelling, taking a note to some scientist for an old lady, not so much

Nobody held you at gunpoint and forced you to read the "Reason I'm going back to Fo3" thread. :facepalm:

I definitely agree that the quests have MUCH more versatility. But I just don't care. I'm not sure how to explain it.

not sure i could have said it much better, that is the problem - i just really don't feel compelled

Um, lol? I simply said I don't understand what you expect people to say or rather, what do you want from this thread? FYI, I did read your post... I've also read the last 507 posts like it. Everyone wants to express the same opinion about why FO3 was better than FO:NV or why FO:NV svcks or why Obsidian/Bethesda made a crappy game full of bugs, etc. Plenty of threads that aren't full yet that state basically the same opinion you've stated here... gets a bit monotonous after awhile. :violin:

However, you've subjected yourself to the forum AKA "dictatorship" so you can't exactly be surprised and appalled that someone (like me) would come in and say "Enough is enough already, sheesh!", so I apologize that I've finally "voiced my opinion" and you were the unfortunate generic thread to have to hear it. :swear:

Carry on. :user:

Fallout 3 is more personal.

It goes from losing your father, and breaking out of the vault leaving your best friend to search for him.

to, finding your father and realizing he is pursing the dream of your dying mother.

to, having the dream realized but him dying to a tyranical organization seeking to use your parent's dream for power

to, erridicating said organization and realizing their dream (thought in a mornic and utterly supid "why can't the ghoul who is immune to radition do it" manner).

It is definitely more focused and definitly more personal.

Fallout NV is far more laid back. There is no pressing issue. No imminent "Invasion Counter of when Legion will attack." There is no personal investment in the story. Who cares if NCR wins or dies, what does it matter to a lone courier on the road?

But, NV is definitely a better game. But it doesn't hold your hand as much. You need to become personally motivated to your ends instead of the game forcing you to.

Not everyone likes open-ended games, nor the moral grayness of NV.

in NV almost no one is good. Everyone is flawed with all too human weakness. Hands down NV has much much much better (and more developed) companions and NPCs that FO3.

in FO3 everything is black and white. There are good and there are evil. There is next to no grayness in between. Which makes it a easy story to like because you have these shinning happy/sad endings that is easy.

NV is more like RL, everything is far inbetween. Possibly that is why some people can enjoy it and others not. People play games often for escapism/entertainment, and I can see why people find NV neither.

Love it when people rush through the MQ and whine about the game not being "Long enough", not knowing they missed 100+ quests and many of them have a impact on the game ending.

thanks for your approval cynictheangry cyricthemad

I certainly appreciate you giving the whole issue some thought and responding. I can certainly see what you are saying about there not being simply good and evil, and I do enjoy that aspect of the game. However I do disagree about their not being a "pressing issue" you just got shot in the head and your package stolen, what else do you have better to do then find out what happened? Along the way i help out Primm and the ghouls, but really there is not much else pressing to take care of.

There is less replayability in FONV? How?!? You can actually do the main quest about 5 different ways and so on..

FO3 was so a great game, but when compared to the superb writing/style of FO:NV (minus the atrocious bugs) it comes up very, very short.

FO3 had an obscenely lame main quest.

"Go find your dad"

"Why?"

"Ya know...cause he's your dad...you know, you spent 30 minutes with him, isn't that totally enough time to form a deep emotional bond?"

"Whatever, I've got a town to blow up"


Versus New Vegas:

"Go find the guy who shot you in the face, left you for dead and buried you in a shallow grave"

"BENNY MUST DIE"

FO3 has only one strong suit when compared to New Vegas, FO3 had more to explore, a lot of the non-quest locations for NV are fairly simple, where as a lot of detail was put into the non-quest stuff in FO3.

New Vegas, however, has a TON more story and compelling interaction with the NPCs.

Also, I omitted the amazing laziness that came with FO3 just transplanting all the factions from FO2 to the East Coast with virtually nothing unique to add. I thought it was lame as hell even at the time, by the time 2277 has rolled around the BoS and Enclave shouldn't have been major factions, but they were because the writers lacked the creativity that they COULD have exercised to really create something new and cool on the East Coast.

When you get to the Strip and encounter Benny, and then talk to House and get an invitation from Caesar, it becomes pretty obvious Mr. House and Caesar are way ahead of Benny and the guy is completely screwed.

I think Obsidian really set the game up nicely. Unlike games like Mass Effect and FO3, where you have to break character to do side quests (yeah, sorry Dad. I know I risked my life escaping the vault to find you, but now I'm really just more interested in exploring this cave in the middle of nowhere, 2 days out of my way), once you get to New Vegas, Obsidian actually successfully WRITES you a reason to start to do side quests. You want to get to know the Mojave. You know you could end up with some pull, or rule it all yourself. You'd bet your bottom cap Benny will be waiting for you in a prison because Mr. House planned for that and Caesar is clearly not an idiot. I really enjoyed the opportunity I was given to legitimately roleplay in this game, as opposed to all other Bethesda games which are basically just single player MMORPGs and all about the grind.

I don't play the game for the Main Quest. In fact, I would be perfectly happy if there was no main quest. There simply isn't enough of something to keep me playing, and, like I said, I really don't know what that something is. It's just lacking.

Except that there's five paths to the ending, so simply seeing "the ending" doesn't mean much, since there's five major differences between the endings, plus all the lesser differences that come from completing some quests in a certain way, much like the original Fallout games.



...New Vegas has significantly more sidequests as well.

Thank you, I'm aware of that.

It's ridiculous how much I have to say this. It's not just the amount quests/locations that make the game.

The game simply doesn't have the level of detail that Fallout 3 had, and it starts to detract from the world. After the quests, there isn't much to do in NV, while exploring in Fallout 3 yields rewards and interesting locations. I've discovered 2/3 of the locations in NV, and done 2/3 of the quests. The locations and quests simply aren't as engaging as Fallout 3's. Are there more? Definitely. Are they better? I don't think so.

EDIT: Not to mention New Vegas doesn't have any of the little things Fallout 3 had, the little details that made environments fun to turn inside out. You can read my thread if you want examples.