i put in over 250 hours on fallout 3 and all its dlc..this one so far just over 80 and i cant bring myself to play it anymore at this point..every time i try to play some bug or glitch pops up and breaks the immersion..i just shake my head in disgust and put something else in..

Sorry, got tired and had to make a random comment! (But there are indeed random wasteland tracks from fallout 2 in NV, like when approaching the NCR tent next to Primm.)

Now to the topic (must have an excuse for this post), i agree that the main quest line in FNV was less linear than FO3 but still i didn't feel too confined. And regarding the side quests, which i consder almost equally important, i didn't feel this way at all.

FNV has many improvements, hands down, but i felt the lack of the sandbox feeling FO3 had, overshadowed them. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_world feeling, includes free-roaming choices, locations random encounters etc.

They didn't :shrug:
They hired guys that worked on FO2, the canceled FO3, and Feargus worked on maps in the Hub. (There may be others that worked on either, but the principle designers of Fallout, left Interplay before FO2 shipped... or was even half done). They do not work at Obsidian.

Subjective. I own the CE of Oblivion and FO:NV ~Personally I don't consider Oblivion on par with FO3, and I don't consider FO3 on par with FO:NV ~Priorities in an RPG will differ from player to player, but the series is [IMO] better represented by FO:NV than FO3... By a long way indeed.

"No reason"...What exactly do you mean here?
Raising your PC's esteem in the eyes of any faction does just that :shrug: ~were you expecting something else? (IE. some kind of "you're our friend" gift?).
I do not understand that expectation. Raising their opinion of your PC just makes them like him a bit more; If that has no value to you for the PC you are playing then its sensibly not worth it.
(But its not going to be like Oblivion, and have your PC become the leader of the Guild for doing their quests... The Legion is not going to make you Caesar)... These are the very things in Oblivion I disliked the most ~aside from leveled loot, enemies, and a realization that nothing mattered, and one's progress was moot.

I feel much the same ~in as much as they can do this using the FO3 format.

Not sure why you needed to include your hours spent on fallout 3. But since you have, I'll do the same and include my opinion. I've put more then 500 hours into Fallout 3 on one character alone, not mentioning other characters. And I seem to be getting bored with Fallout New Vegas after 100 hours. Not sure why though, but it's getting boring to keep playing. The vast majority of things are discovered and looted. There isn't enough enemies to keep cycle killing like in Fallout 3. I probably spent over 200 hours in Fallout 3 being a wasteland janitor by removing all the nasty critters and raiders from areas. It's true though, something about the game doesn't quite make it fun anymore past a certain amount. I guess like before I'll have to create my own quests and wait for dlc. :celebration:

If they put some mini-battles , with the Legion against the NCR, or the Khans against the NCR, or the Fiends against the NCR, or the Powder Ganger against the NCR...... thats gonna be cool

i thought this had devolved into a fo3 vs fnv thread so i added my input..

I watched worse post (FO3 VS FO2 VS FO1)

I prefer deathclaw omelets myself.

Only the story doesn't match because in FO2 I never killed Rose her chicken. I just set it free to see what happened next.

New Vegas gives you quite a few choices, and you can pick any number of motivations for going with any of them. Fallout 3 gives you (almost literally) no choices until the final act. That is the definition of a linear narrative, and I can't imagine a better example of being railroaded.

To demonstrate a great example of some Fallout 3 railroading: When daddy kills himself (...for some reason, it doesn't make much sense), you have no way to try to stop it or intercede in any way despite the fact that there are only three enemy soldiers and only a glass wall barring your way. You can't do anything because the plot says so. You then have to escort a bunch of ungrateful scientists through the sewers because the plot says so.

No matter what, you have to get the GECK with the intent of breaking it (I can't facepalm enough at that notion) for a water chip, with no option of using it for its actual intended purpose. No matter what, a single grenade tossed at you somehow paralyzes you even if you spot it early and hide behind a wall. Oh, and it doesn't damage the precious McGuffin- er, GECK. This is pure railroading, I'm surprised John Henry didn't show up and start singing.

New Vegas does have some elements of railroading, but they aren't anywhere near as prevalent and are mostly focused on the first act. Like Fallout 3, New Vegas has a definite ending that you have to do if you want to complete the game, the difference is how you get to that final spot. If I do the NCR quests, get to one I don't like and want to shift gears... I can shoot the Colonel right in the face. If Caesar's attitude, cruelty, and poor fashion sense start to chafe my nerves too much I can go in with an incinerator and turn him extra crispy. There are several ways to end almost every mission offered and unlike in Fallout 3 the plot actually makes sense.



The problem is that the game has moral dilemmas, but they don't feel like they're intended. The game has a karma system and radio announcer that tell you the 'right' answer to these moral problems, which really ruins any moral ambiguity that might have been present.

Its always going to be like this with video games. Its a matter of opinion, and we like different things. In my opinion FNV is a great game and I really like the changes from F3. And I havent had any serious bugs apart from the reload issue, which doesnt really concern me because Im partial to other weapons. In about 100 game hours Ive had something like 5 CTD, and that is not bad at all these days.

I still love F3 very much and feel no need to declare either better than the other.

Im eagerly awaiting Fallout 4 on a new and improved engine combining the best of both games. That will be awesome.

To be honest, I like FO:NV as much as FO3. And I liked FO3 a lot.
I personally think that the developers have put way to much useless locations in the game. They could have been less useless if they had put a little bit of background information in the locations. For example:

Today I was just walking about through the remains of the Mojave Desert, looking for interesting locations. And after a couple of seconds I found a map marker with the name "Tribal Camp" And to my opinion, that sounded rather interesting. But after fighting about 20 Cazadores and a couple of Radscorps, I found 4 or 5 tents which were basically empty and a couple of bodies. A big disappointment, as I was expecting a nice little village full of people who could barely speak proper English. (ha, funny I just accused someone of speaking bad English). And even after looking around for a while, I couldn't find a note or some kind of holotape that could tell me what happened here. This was just one of the millions of mystery sites of the Mojave.

And the game tends to crash an awful amount of times, and the glitches are very unpredictable and annoying. Like companions that die for no reason or get stuck somewhere making you go to Vault 22 and use the elevator just to get them back. And the so called 'special reward' for completing the game on hardcoe modus wasn't really that great after all.

But the game also has good things, like the variety in melee and unarmed weaponry (Knock-Knock= insane destruction), special kinds of ammo, the capability to modify weapons, so that certain kinds of game styles aren't so limited anymore ( For example, the only suppressed gun in FO3 was the silenced 10mm, if I'm correct. And now, a lot of normal guns have the ability to be silenced), The unique versions of the weapons actually look different than the normal versions of it. And gambling away your caps in New Vegas is pretty fun. And I felt that I had more freedom in making decisions in the side quests and the main storyline, because -most of the time- my reward for completing the quests remained the same, regardless if I turned the bad guy in or not. Which was not the case in FO3. But don’t get me wrong, because as mentioned before, FO3 had some pleasant and surprising twists in the main storyline, most of the locations had a decent story to back it up, companions didn't die for no reason and there were a lot more locations that were safe to use as a safehouse for the player without anyone just walking through the place you are trying to call your home But it didn't matter how evil your character was, you would always end up killing the enclave fighting alongside the Brotherhood, something which I found annoying.

I think the main reason FO:NV was made (apart from the fact that it was probably going to sell very well), is to show the good ol' diehard Fallout fans which have been playing the series of games since the very beginning that the old kind of Fallout-style can still be created in combination with modern gaming. And although I haven't played the first fallouts, this one made me quite interested in the older Fallouts.

But that’s just my opinion ^^

I like it, but I prefer Fallout 3, overall. I'm done with New Vegas after about 50 hours. My first Fallout 3 character lasted me over 100 hours and I vastly prefered Fallout's exploration aspect and Fallout 3's atmosphere. I've known the exploration aspect wasn't going to be as satisfying in New Vegas since March since Obsidian was developing it, so I wasn't disappointed with New Vegas' take on it, but I don't like it and I actually enjoyed Fallout 3's main quest more than I enjoyed that of New Vegas, so I suppose I am a bit disappointed, overall. I was prepared to try to accept a watered-down exploration aspect for quite a while, but the rest of the game didn't make up for the lack of exploration, in my opinion. I'm really just waiting for TES V and New Vegas was just an uncomfortably empty, although still enjoyable, pit stop, in my opinion. :shrug:

Yup. Though. There were others that worked on FO1 that now work on F:NV like. Actually there was ONE of the designers that was the technical designer for F1 and designed all the maps for the orginal Fallout was Lead World Designer on New Vegas

Also New Vegas story and setting were obectivly better. It wasn't a "chosen one/only you can do it" kind of story but resolved around a local conflict of different factions that is very well explained and detailed on a design standpoint. As a story alone it was the best and most unconventional as of now in the Fallout setting.

I mean I understand liking a more "epic" story like in F3 that focuses more on presenting over the top situations like the giant robo thing. But on the other hand it sacrificed it by not giving any logical background to it.


For example: Megaton. Why would they buy around a bomb? (Protection through demonstration of power. But then again that doesn't makes sense in wastes where there is no bigger conflict) Why wouldn't they protect the bomb at all (NO protection whatsoever. EVERYONE has access. There is even a "bomb" cult allowed to preach there)? Then the quest itself. Why was I chosen? Why didn't burke do it himself? Why wanted Tenpenny it away especially now (And no "Because of the sight" doesn't cut it". Also Why did Moira instantly turn into a ghoul. And why was she acting like everythings fine? There are thousands such things I can think of in FO3. In New Vegas the worst I experienced is Searchlight.

Sure your preference of story is subjective. The quality of its element is not. Thats why nobody thinks Michael Bay produces movies with good writing.

I think most FO3 fans have a problem with choices. Most players want an uber god character with maxed out skills that can handle anything. Well I'm pleased to see NV brought that back. Choice = dealing with advantages and maybe disadvantages or repercussions, that's what role playing and even life is all about.

Well, if the bomb hadn't exploded in 200 years, then why expect it to explode later? How could the people living at Megaton know that other people could cause the bomb to detonate? As to the "Why was I chosen" comment, why were you chosen in Fallout: New Vegas? What the made the Courier so special that the NCR had nobody better to use than him/her, that Caesar's Legion had nobody better to use, and that Yes Man and Mr. House wanted you to fulfill their goals? Out of the whole NCR and CL Armies, you were the best to use?

You insult me, sir/madam. I like Fallout 3 because of more in-depth exploration and a superior atmosphere. That is just my opinion, but I also feel New Vegas lacks this moral ambiguity that people keep praising it for. I also don't know who came up with the false theory that Fallout 3 doesn't contain choices, but it does.

It isn't the same. Why? Because in New Vegas they answer that question. Why does Caesar use you to destroy the bunker? He explains that he doesn't want the ideology of victory without bloodshed in circulation among his sycophantic army. Mr. House explains that he needs an able bodied human agent. Yes Man doesn't 'need' you, he's working for you.

I understand mods are people and community member as well. Express your opinion is what the forum is for; but sometimes an untimely post (that's how I would put it, since no way you would know the others is going your way and post around the same time) would make you looks like "parenting" the thread too much.

I guess what I am saying is....let the fire burn and they would turn into ashes..... bliviongate:

I thought FO3 was an incredible disappointment (though of course I expected a lot of the series going to hell based on what we saw prior to the game release) but feel New Vegas was a huge step in the right direction again.

What? That's not the point. Its still dangerous. That doesn't change. Survival instict takes care of asking about that. And they lived how long there?

And for all the other things. It was always explained why you do these things. Hell, you can in most of them ASK about it in dialouge. You are "just" a guy doing jobs. And rather big ones at that which in the end picks up by the factions. Also you were the (unfortunate) courier of the platinum chip which kinda explains Mr. House. And in the end you do not "save the entire Wateland" but instead just took part in a major conflict that would have happened without you (But everything with different results of course). It would have been nice if you had the option to say "[censored] That" and go back west though.

This..

If I were in Post Apacalytia, I would stay clear of ANY bomb, especially a HUGE ATOMIC BOMB!

I wish that was an option too. I'd like to know how things would have shaken out without any interference from me.

The bomb in Megaton was leaking radiation. Why would anyone with half a brain build a town around an object that makes people sick?

The Courier is special because the jobs he does is extremely dangerous. He's not some 16 year old with no experience that just wandered out of the vault. The Courier's job is to deliver high value items to important customers by going through dangerous territory. The Courier was obviously very good at his job, otherwise Mr. House wouldn't have hired him to carry his most prized possession. NCR and Legion want to use the Courier because he has access to Mr. House.

He could have been one....such is part of the freedom which NV offers.

I dont think that arguing about how the people of the wasteland want help of a stranger is a good idea, both the Lone Wanderer and The Courier have their flaws, i watched in both games that some people always ask helps from you. even if the dont know who you are