Basically, do you think it would have been a better idea to release all of the new features and quests as a series of DLC updates to FO3 or do you prefer the fact that it's an all new game?

consider the game takes place on thr other side of the country it just seams missplaced, also the more I can get away mister daddy lover and play the rough tough merc I can in NV the better.

I'm sorry, but to me playing a small chunk of content for a week and then waiting a couple more months just to do the same thing is much worse that waiting for a new game. The game is too different to call for that anyway.

I bought the GOTY of FO3 and would be pissed if they'd release another DLC or even patch for the game

It kind of has to be a whole new game considering that a DLC set on the West Coast while being in the Capital Wasteland makes no sense whatsoever and I personally feel the Capital Wasteland's story is over, I'm ready to move on to newer, better things. (Also I heard that making a trip from the East Coast to the West would be damn near impossible considering the sorry state of the Mid-West and the fact that there are mile wide radioactive tornadoes abounding, a trip through that doesn't sound very fun/possible.) :tops:

What?

Of course it's better that it's a new game! Does it even matter though?

No. NO. En. Oh.

Seriously. Fallout 3's story, writing, setting, etc has gotten old and boring. I don't care if it is the same engine/graphics, I just want a new game. Plus, Vegas seems much more alive than anything in Fallout 3.

I thought I was at L4D forums for a second there.

I liked fallout 3 but I'd have to say I agree with you FTW. I really think this game will far surpass FO3 and I don't quite understand this poll at all, it seems a joke.

No way I'm not taking the risk of another Mothership zeta, seriously though I think they need to move on from fallout 3, the lone wanderers story is done

Oh, don't get me wrong, I loved Fallout 3. But, two years later and hundreds of hours of gameplay, it's gotten quite stale.

Poor Mr Axe.

I just don't think there is much reason to bring the new features to fallout 3.
Most people are done with that game.
So it wouldn't be very profitable IMO.

But this was a rather creative new thread.
Finally something different instead of the regular "Factions" "House" and "Weapons" threads.

Also I think there may be a strong possibility of an angry mob if Bethesda wanted to release more DLC considering all the people that waited to get the GOTY edition only to have that thrown back in their faces with release of more content. :facepalm:

Besides all the content, story, and other new things added to Fallout New Vegas warrant a new game and change of scenery. :tops:

You know people, if you have nothing to contribute to a thread, move on. I deleted more than half the posts, I think the OP is trying to generate a reasonable discussion.

:stare: some of you should check your PM boxes in a bit.

NVM

Don't worry about it amigo, At least your thinking of stuff for us to discuss since we're all drained out of good topic discussions at this point. :tops:

Yeah, it was really just an idea. I wonder who voted yes besides me though. :fallout:

I don't think this is a good idea, and its not as simple as one might think. I'm with the others in that I want a new game, not more DLC's to the existing game. We don't know how many changes have been made between Fo3 and FNV, but we do know that many optimization changes were made, we know there is a new dialogue system and many changes to the weapons. As such it may not even be possible to directly place the Fo3 content into the FNV engine - in fact I'm sure there would be problems that Bethesda would have to spend time correcting.

So while it's technically possible, it's not simple which means its not cheap, and Bethesda would need a Strong financial reason to port Fo3 content into the FNV engine. I don't think the sales would be there to justify it. It's a mute point anyway, FNV is done and nearing production, any such ideas are well-past the hour in which they could matter.

I'm all for new, especially after the Mafia II DLC debacle, I'm not interested in bits n bobs, I want a complete package and then expansion packs.

I would rather have New Vegas.Improved gameplay,factions,more items,new story,new wasteland,new locations,weapon mods,new characters....I would rather have all this than some extra DLC for FO3 that wouldn't last long compared to a whole brand new game.

New game.

I don't think any amount of DLC would revive Fallout 3 for me anymore (this even despite my general dislike of the whole concept of DLC). Time to move on.

snitches get bit.....no its stitches....

A new game. Really Fallout 3 was finished when the final product was released in my opinion; the DLC didn't really add anything worthwhile to the game, and in some cases broke it. With a brand new game Obsidian was able to start from scratch and tell a new story, a story that they wanted to tell, rather than simply adding to the one created by Bethesda. A new game with a new story is always preferable to a few couple hour long DLCs.

New game all the way. Fallout 3 was fun to be sure, but I think everything that can be done with it (for good, bad, or otherwise) has been done and it's time for Bethesda to sit back and examine the...fallout (pun fully intended)...from it and think on how to handle the next one. Taking some tips from New Vegas while they're at it. I'm not saying I didn't like Fallout 3 by any stretch, but it's hard not to say there was some obvious evidence it was their first stumbling step into "someone else's world."

I'd rather prefer FO:NV. I just don't think I could get back into FO3 even with DLC.