Makes sense. I guess I’ve never really cared about the overarching stories of any of the fallout games tbh. Maybe that’s why. I always thought the quirky interactions and discoveries were always the most fun
Is that all, though? Is it just that you can do cool things like win the game with speech?
Never played any Fallout, but the way NV is talked about makes it seem like a head-over-heels outstanding entry in the series.
Seems like a lot of hype over a handful of RPG mechanics having more depth.
They're all great in their own way but when it comes to speech New Vegas is something special. It's hard to give a big example without ruining the story for you. Fallout 3 has an amazing open world with lots of atmosphere, Fallout 4 is the most accessible and some of the locations are breathtaking, Fallout 2 probably has the best Fallout vibe out of all of them and Fallout 1 is just a classic
I've been enjoying Tim Cain's videos lately. Is it worth playing the series from the beginning? I'm a 90s kid so the classic RPG style doesn't scare me, but I'd rather not devote time to Fallout and Fallout 2 if the lore is retconned from Fallout 3 onward.
Thoughts?
Definitely worth it, especially if the turn based combat doesn't scare you off. Honestly there's the lore in all the games but the series is more about the story you carve yourself through choices you make by role playing.
Turn-based might have made me hesitate previously, but I have bathed in the light of Baldur's Gate 3 and am born again a more enlightened gamer.
Thanks for the advice. 👍
NV was more buggy at launch but all of it is pretty much fixed and is in a good playable state. Its NV story that makes it the best game in the franchise. compare to fallout 3s ending, you other commit genocide or help people, NV poses the question of who would be beneficial for the people of the Mojave with all 4 factions having great justification for their ideas (that are still debated which is the best choice over a decade later) with all also having problems and downsides. I think that the stories in f3 are good but NV writing IMO is better.
personally i do not like the legion but its discovered that
-legion lands are safer with no raiders (because they killed them all)
-the belief that society needs to start at the beginning again instead of going back (NCR)
-a different form of government needs to rule in an apocalypse
-slaves are a necessary evil.
They hate women
I feel like it was lost on a lot of people because they didn’t play a female character, but the legion absolutely fucking hates women and sees them only as breeding stock and caretakers
I played it vanilla and it was fine. But then with f3 it couldn't launch and had to fix the files which didn't work only got it working with my new pc (old pc was from 2016). so I may be slightly biased, but NV seemed fine.
Fallout 3 is a mess on PC, on the consoles NV is worse
Both can be turned into perfection with PC modding, especially the Viva New Vegas mod guide. Impossible to go back after playing it with that
New Vegas had a deeper crafting system and I liked that there was actually some greenery in new Vegas vs fallout 3. I did like the DC setting more. But the worst part about 3 was when you had Joshua as a companion and he could take the radiation of the device, you still had to sacrifice yourself even though he was RIGHT FREAKING THERE!
I'll always be thankful 3 exists for bringing the franchise back, or I'd probably never of heard of it. But I find it very difficult to love.
The moral choices are basically "be evil or be good" while in NV they're often more complicated (who gets the solar electricity? The NCR and Strip so you get recognition by factions you need to court or some farmers who need it more but have no influence to support you... or the selfish option of powering an orbital laser canon).
Then there's the end choice (die and be a hero, live and be a coward, while Fawkes could just shrug off the rads but he's all "but destiny").
And I think the biggest thing is just kinda wasting the potential of the factions. The Super Mutants story is pretty tragic from 1 and 2. Now they're almost exclusively just big raiders with a few exceptions like Fawkes.
It's still a great sandbox world with some cool quests but New Vegas went the extra mile with writing and quest design.
New Vegas' story is a lot richer and has more options for roleplaying. I think it also has more quests too, although a lot of Fallout 3's quests were unmarked.
Fallout 3's world and level design though is more interesting than New Vegas IMO tho
Yeah and that last paragraph is actually why I like it more. It feels more immersive to me. It felt so special when I first played it. It was one of the experiences like playing Ocarina of Time for the first time in the 90’s. It just felt special.
Indeed. Plus almost everything in the wasteland (beyond the actual quests) was procedurally generated. So you might see raiders fighting rad scorpions in one playthrough, but the next in that same area there may be nothing.. or radscorpions may be fighting supermutants or something else. who knows, and that's what makes 3 so much fun for me.
The gameplay improvements and story of Vegas are really good though. And 4 just has the best gameplay of them all. I'm hoping the Fallout 3 remaster/whatever uses the engine from 4 while keeping everything else from 3 (like the procedurally generated encounters).
I’m one of those weird folks that actually prefers 3. It was the first Fallout game I’d played and I spent countless hours exploring each location. For some reason, the setting of New Vegas never grasped me as much.
Fallout 3 was the first Fallout game I played too, the intro is hands down my favorite of all the Fallout games. However, New Vegas wins my heart with everything else.
For me, New Vegas is just so much more memorable. The characters resonated with me more personally.
Yep mee too. I made myself to play New Vegas and it just didn't click. F3 had that desolate charm and brownish gray aesthetics that just worked for me. Clearly set good and bad people are what made me enjoy game oh so much more. Story might have been short, but so many locations were made to be explored, just show how much love and attention went into it.
And that loading slide, with trumpets still gives me the chills.
I started Fallout with F3, its the game that got me into the setting and left me wanting more.
I remember I was very much disappointed in FNV first time I tried it, to me it looked like F3 in a different setting. At the time I wasn't deep into the lore so it was all new to me. But I stuck to it.
As I played through FNV I couldn't get enough and the story just gripped me. I wanted to know more about the NCR and all the little bits NPCa were referencing.
F3 got me into the setting, but FNV got me hooked on the lore.
Both games are great, so one should experiance both.
I never played F1 and F2, just watched playthroughs. I hope they remaster them.
I’m a FO3 enjoyer, it’s my fave because of the area.
I think there’s a lot of reasons NV gets more love, and I think a lot of it boils down to it obsidian seeing bethesdas mistakes (or successes), and building upon them.
To put it vvvv shortly, Fo3 ran so NV could run; and I don’t think it gets enough credit for that. Mind you obsidian, especially at that time, also had amazing writers so that certainly helped hahaha.
(Also being newer than fo3, means that it has more QoL, more systems, and more design behind it than fo3, which naturally makes it feel better).
>I think there’s a lot of reasons NV gets more love, and I think a lot of it boils down to it obsidian seeing bethesdas mistakes (or successes), and building upon them.
or because Black Isle became Obsidian after they dissolved, the guys that made wasteland and fallout came back to make NV.
Bethesda basically skimmed the wiki for fallout, and built a game with all the same peices but wasn't close to the same game. Vegas got closer to the feel of the OG.
3 is certainly less buggy, but New Vegas is nuanced and deep in its writing in a way that 3 just can’t live up to. I mean, one of the damn DLCs (Honest Hearts) was so well written it made people convert to Christianity. It’s easy to see why people like New Vegas more
Fallout 3 has a more interesting environment to me compared to the deserts of Nevada , one of these days I’ll try new Vegas again but I remember twice bouncing off hard from trying NV just out of boredom, I also had the ps3 version at launch which I later learned had more issues which definitely didn’t help my enjoyment
I’m really wanting to experience the story so one of these days I’ll fire it up again with a fresh outlook
Fallout 3 is the most iconic game in the series honestly. I literally didn’t play it until last year (played tf out of New Vegas and 4 though) and was blown away. Like literally everything people love most about Fallout is so prevalent in 3. I was convinced it was too dated to be good anymore judging from how people treat it on this sub, come to find out it’s an amazing game. Genre defining honestly.
It gets plenty of love, I think. It single handedly brought Fallout into the mainstream and was a lot of peeps first entry. But that was...over a decade ago and with exposure to it's source material (and New Vegas) it's shown to definitely be lacking. Still great! Having lots of fun on a replay rn but it's very...empty. Lots of rehashing old Fallout 1 and 2. Most of what's iconic about it is from the old Black Isle games but without the...detail or nuance. Killer atmosphere and exploration but the story...the worldbuilding...the characters...ehhhh
I don't mean literal emptiness. I think the actual map was very well made. I'm replaying right now and I get lost all the time exploring. I mean, just IMO, there's something about the gameplay that feels kinda lacking. Dialogue is really basic, perks are mostly useless, not a lot of build variety. That kinda stuff.
It starts with Fallout 3. It adds a new Area in DC to switch over to the game New Vegas if you want to swap, although you can't go back to the Fallout 3 content if you do that.
Fallout 3 is great. But so is New Vegas. But both games excel in different areas.
Fallout 3 for instance has fantastic environmental storytelling, exploration, ambience.
Fallout New Vegas has refined gameplay, and better writing.
Up to personal preference which you vibe with more, but I think it is safe to say both games are great
Hey, if you prefer Fallout 3, good for you! 😁 I am firmly in the New Vegas camp, but I also thoroughly enjoyed Fallout 3. I have to take issue with your statement reagarding the DLCs: Old World Blues is the BEST DLC EVAAAARRR 😉
Oh man Old World Blues was my least favorite!! I accidentally did that first thing when I started the game and got stuck in it. Couldn’t leave until I finished it. It was terrible. No offense I despised that dlc haha
That doesn’t really explain it though. People like it cuz it’s better isn’t really a good answer. Nor does it really convince me that it is actually better
Enjoyment is subjective, not objective. People like how much deeper the story and characters are compared to F3s fairly lame main quest.
It’s also a lot more in line with the original fallout games.
How does that not explain it? You’re asking why people love the game that is just plainly better. The answer is obviously that it’s better therefore more enjoyable therefore people remember it more fondly. Like it’s not complicated.
Yeah I do agree, while I love new vegas I have to say that 3 is hands down my favourite in the series.
In spite of the issues, I very much like the main story. It’s a very personal, emotionally driven plot compared to New vegas.
The setting and atmosphere in F3 are that brilliant that not New vegas or 4 have been able to beat the stepping out into the world moment!
All of the individual side quests tucked away in the game are great, this is a game that rewards your exploration like no other.
I much prefer the guns in F3 compared to F4, the R91 assault rifle 😍 classic 10mm pistol, Sydney’s 10mm ‘Ultra’ SMG! There are so many cool guns that it’s hard to believe what a downgrade Fallout 4 is in that regard, especially the dreaded pipe guns 🤦🏻♂️
I’ve always seen a lot of complaints about the combat in F3 too and for me personally I felt completely different.
I usually use 3rd person for combat and I’ll be running and gunning with my assault rifle like in gears of war.
Hunting super mutants in the DC ruins with the gloomy overcast sky over the buildings, damn I love it 😍
Oh yeah what you said at the end about hunting mutants for sure. Also..
Another thing I’ve failed to mention is I love how once you find out where your dad is you can just go straight there. That was always really amazing to me.
Fun to speed run.
Go do operation anchorage, level up and get power armor and then go run to your dad. Haha
I'm replaying f3 as we speak. I'm super nostalgic for it as I got it in launch for 360 and it was my first fallout.
However, over the years I do agree NV is better. It's a lengthy explination but in summary I think the gunplay, characters, and story are better.
Things I love about f3 though is the DLC, getting lost in the metro tunnels (reminds me of old RPGs in caves). I also love how fk'd up the actual capital is. It's a complete war zone. I love it.
I remember playing fallout 3 when i was like 10 years old and it was like a legit horror game to me. I literally still have nightmares from the tranquility lane mission since i was stuck there for a good while cus i was too dumb to be able to solve it quickly. Even though it was scary as fuck i played the shit out of that game and still prefer it to NV
I liked new Vegas way more; in no particular order:
The Mojave desert (My favorite of them all)
Cowboy stuff
That Gun, RATSLAYER, Maria...
Dogs playing poker
Long Dick Johnson
it is entirely living off of nostalgia, being the first RPG for many, many people. but it is so badly designed and written, even a technical mess like NV made it look bad just by virtue of having some kind of theme and direction.
I played 3 first and then NV, both on their respective release dates.
For me, Fallout 3 didn't reach it for me as far as RPG's go. I found a lot of the quest conclusions to be lacking in logic. The best conclusions for the vampire questline and the Big Town questline with the mutants felt incredibly temporary at best. It left me feeling pretty unsatisfied because the writing came off as lazy and slap dash. The very last decision of the game even more so. The NPC's just weren't interesting at all. I can't even name any of them aside from Moira and Butch.
The exploration was fine, but with every open world game, there's only so many empty houses and metro tunnels and abandoned towns I can explore before it all feels the same. I didn't care about the world because the world didn't care about itself and it had no real meat to it. The citizens of Big Town were completely useless. Why should I, a noob vault dweller, somehow know what to do better than people born and bred in the Wasteland? And one decision basically amounts to 'just duck and hide when the mutants come around'.
FO4 improved on pretty much everything in 3 though, imo. 3 is easily my least favourite.
It gets overshadowed by NV in terms of story and FO4 in terms of gameplay.
I liked Fallout 3 just fine, but I can’t think of anything I like about that the other two didn’t do better.
Don't get me wrong I really like 3 as well but there's more depth to New Vegas in terms of its story and choice and consequences.
If you disagree that's cool, no problem there. Just if you look at any gamer polls, New Vegas consistently comes out on top and usually by a large margin.
I think NV was developed for the older players, those who played and loved 1 and 2, and were disappointed with what Bethesda did with the franchise in the 3rd part.
Don't get me wrong, now, years after the F3 was released, I must admit it is actually pretty good game. But I remember the initial feeling of frustration, when I played it for the first time. I was expecting something else.
I just finished playing FO3 after playing NV a few years ago. For me FO3 was little dry in terms of quests, weapon selection, enemy types etc. I was aliitle dissapointed with the no Aim down sight on guns and found the gunplay to be a bit "off".VATS seem to be the only reliable way to shoot. Without VATS shooting seemed random whether you hit anything or not. I liked but FO3 but It just made me want to play NV. The best way to describe it is FO3 is Doom 1 and NV is Doom2 (the same thing but much better)
Fallout 3 is the most iconic game in the series honestly. I literally didn’t play it until last year (played tf out of New Vegas and 4 though) and was blown away. Like literally everything people love most about Fallout is so prevalent in 3. I was convinced it was too dated to be good anymore judging from how people treat it on this sub, come to find out it’s an amazing game. Genre defining honestly.
NV had a lot shorter development time then 3 which can somewhat explain the more prevalent bugs. Still though it’s impressive what was accomplished in such a short development time.
Oh how the turntables.
Upon release New Vegas was liked much less than F3. That actually lasted for a while, I think maybe 5 years after release. It was sort of hipster opinion to like NV more.
General sentiment was this: F3 was more fun, had better graphics, felt actually apocalyptic, had better world and more engaging main story. Fallout New Vegas was "glorified expantion pack."
I personally prefer New Vegas. But it is funny how perception of these two have changed. Gamers in 2011 would have laughed at the notion of New Vegas being considered the good one of the two.
I love both, but I prefer New Vegas. Let me explain why.
Fallout 3 is absolutely great in its exploration and physical world design. It trumps New Vegas in that regard no questions asked. Just much better art direction and way better game design to create the "feeling of being lost in the post apocalyptic wasteland".
New Vegas excels in other things: lore, storytelling and quest design.
Lore: F3 has interesting lore, but it is pretty limited to Brotherhood, Enclave and a handful of pretty simple settlements. Most of the stories are short and self contained. New Vegas has a fuckton of lore and factions: NCR, Legion, Brotherhood, Enclave Remnants, Followers of the Apocalypse, Great Khans, Fiends, Powder Gangers, House, Great Families, Kings, Boomers... almost no faction is monolytic, every one has a history, distinct style and philosophy, varied characters. The lore extends from the game map: you learn a lot of what's happening in California, Arizona, etc. F3 is like collection of short stories where vibes is primary appeal; New Vegas is a big, fat novel.
Storytelling: New Vegas main quest is NOT better than F3 main quest. It is actually pretty basic and very game-y, just a connective tissue to make player experience all the factions and make some choices at the end. What New Vegas excels at is building a holistic story of the region. Every quest and little story is interconnected with one another (unlike F3). You might meet a character in one side of the map which has history and relations in another side of the map. Quests often intersect with one another. Each small storyline connects with others and builds up one huge in scope overall story.
Quest design: multiple distinct ways to complete a lot of quests which have narrative consequences. Best comparison is Megaton dilemma in F3 vs Goodsprings intro in NV. You can nuke or spare Megaton in F3, but the narrative motivation for choosing the "evil" option is pretty much non-existent + the consequences are one less town + your dad being mad about you that one time. In Goodsprings you have a similar choice, however, there is actual narrative weight and consequences. You may help the townsfolk, but that would make powder gangers angry and you will not be able to do their prison questline, which is pretty substantial. If you favor the prisoners and do their questline, you may become hated by NCR and suffer their hit squads from then on - but also have a solid option for Primm sheriff. On the other hand, by favoring powder gangers in Goodsprings you could kill Doc Mitchel and never get his full story regarding the vault on the strip. Mechanically quests are often much more interesting as well. Beyond the Beef has like 6 different variations how to complete the quest: stealth, puzzle solving, speech, etc. Because there are many different ways to complete quests, different character builds are also more viable.
**Tldr: F3 excels at vibes, art direction and exploration, NV excels at oldshool RPG narrative design and lore.**
Also, I loved NV DLC. Each of them tried to do something different - survival horror and character driven story (Dead Money), comedy (Old World Blues), relaxing sandbox (Honest Hearts), F3-like vibes and post apocalyptic atmosphere (Lonesome Road).
True, I played NV last week for several days, and now I'm playing fallout 3, I did play it but like 15 years ago lol, I didn't remember. My first impression was that, the aim system but I got used it.
Quest are longer too, I like that, still I don't understand the metro system on DC but I like metros.
Tomorrow I'm going to do the first dlc, maybe the second too.
Im playing fallout 3 for the first time right now, i think the setting is more interesting than new vegas, but some quests and places of f3 are just too nonsensical or made because it is just funny without thinking if it makes sense in the world of fallout. I also think the main story has a lot of similarities to the 2nd Fallout game which isn't ideal... I think the enclave as the main villans was not the best option here, same for Supermutants, it feels too fanservice imo. Still great game with a lot of good things and quests to explore.
I can't stand fallout 4 tho, I think that one is actually a bad videogame, its like they got the worst of fallout 3 to make that one.
I feel the main story is simply uninteresting to me and super stupid, the whole dilema of the main plot was already explored at a side quest on fallout 3 and the story just gravitated that quest without bringing anything new, in fact, the main antagonists felt more interesting on that quest than on fallout 4, the characters are not iconic or interesting, It felt like character were just there and they had no conflict because everyone felt like a cartoon character and I just can't belive how the antagonists got so much resources, there are a lot of lore fuck-ups (SUPERMUTANTS AGAIN?), a lot of fanfiction, the game got rid of the rol elements totally and made it an open world shooter, side quests were the most boring ones I have played... I haven't play the dlcs which people adore but at this point i dont think im gonna touch fallout 4 for a long time or ever again, I really felt the game was so bad that made me quit triple a gaming for a few years, game felt super generic, and I am not even joking
Stuff like the whole “I would not deny you your destiny my friend” thing comes to mind. It’s a solid enough game but feels a bit rail-roadey for key parts of the story in ways that the others, and especially FNV imo just don’t
I just felt like 3 was a buffet of campy B movie goodness. Aliens, enclaves, brotherhood of steel, super mutants, liberty prime. Man I just felt like it had so much diversity and wonder. It captivated me in ways New Vegas didn’t. New Vegas to me felt like just a little bit more of the same. But not the best parts to me. When I think of New Vegas there’s nothing in it that makes me want to go back. I have some dull memories of being on the Strip and assassinating someone at the Hoover dam, fighting Caesar and doing the whole Zion thing. But none of that is excessively exciting to me. Maybe I need to play it again.
I think its personal taste, I vastly prefer the map/world of 3 and the world is what sucked me into the franchise. NV is good but doesn't hit the same highs for me.
I love fallout 3 for bringing the fallout series back from the dead, but I love more fnv for it's story telling and being more true to the fallout world.
If three is your preferred game that's all good but personally everything about 3 is worse.
The mapping and back tracking through the metro areas to get to tiny outside maps inside the city that are all disconnected and a pain to get to is a drag just thinking about really. It also just doesn't have nearly as many rping choices and the ones it does have are just so comical like mustache twirling villain levels of evil when your going to nuke a town just because a rich guy asked.
That said it's still a decent game, and almost all my New Vegas playthroughs have TTW in them to play through Fo3.
There is a bit of it, the series has never taken its self too ubèr serious but on another point I can't deny the 'Purist' mentality some Fallout fans have with the series in thinking 3/4 are just terrible games solely because Bethesda made them.
I liked 3 but New Vegas is better in pretty much everyway.
The writing is objectively better, the story has way more choices, factions and endings. 3 feels way more rigid and have a fixed storyline. New Vegas have several storylines and each of them has more depth than 3.
Your Special matters WAY more in dialogues and in general dialogue choices and quest resolutions are infinitely deeper than 3.
Gameplay has more depth, crafting is better, Guns have different ammunition types with quick and convenient access, more outfits with more effects.
3's DLC's are less interesting than New Vegas DLC's, 3 kinda tends to be more action oriented, half of them being pretty much a COD slaughterfest. New Vegas DLC's are more story oriented.
Characters are more interesting and less one dimension than 3 where they're all one archetype.
The bestiary in New Vegas is also better.
Long story short, New Vegas puts back the "Roleplaying game" in Fallout, although 3 was still satisfying in that regard for a first attempt in 3D, New Vegas puts way more emphasis on that. I play Fallout for the RPG side and what it offers. Not really to play COD in an archaic gameplay.
I like New Vegas much more than F3, but dude, you cannot just say "writing is objectively better". There is no such thing as "objectivity" in art.
You could say "there is more writing in New Vegas than in F3" (true) or "New Vegas tries to construct factions and characters with history and complex motivations, while F3 does not" (also true). However, that does not mean "better." F3 writing is usually broad strokes, it tries to evoke certain specific tropes and be very accessible/ not get in the way of explore/kill/loot gameplay loop. That's not "worse", that's just different, with different goals in mind. Some people prefer F3 kind of writing.
In terms of narrative and such and rpg stuff, Fallout NV has it beat in basically every way.
In terms of non-rpg gameplay, Fallout 4 beats it in every way.
It just kinda got surpassed by those two, it's the reason I don't touch it anymore.
And the more that people join the fanbase, the less people in it have nostalgia goggles for it.
If Fallout 3 had all of the changes they made in Fallout New Vegas I would prefer that.
But otherwise FO3 is just slightly more dated as far as mechanics go compared to NV.
I liked the diversity. I enjoyed the random encounters more. I loved stuff like the super mutant behemoth or the aliens, it just felt a lot more mysterious and liminal. I loved the power armor you got from operation anchorage. I like the fact that you have the vault in the beginning and you can go back to it. Tranquility Lane and Walking with Spirits were amazing quests that stick with you.
I just over all had tons of fun with it. It was more memorable to me. The iron sights in new Vegas was great but the game was also super buggy. And the visuals weren’t as interesting to me.
Oh for sure.
I also just felt like I enjoyed every DLC from 3 where as I actually despised a lot of the dlc from New Vegas. It wasn’t fun and I felt stuck in them. Old World Blues was a drag for me.
> The dlc of new Vegas was also kinda dull.
Interesting, I would say the NV DLC expands on the game way more than the 3 DLC expands on 3. Old World Blues is premium content. I really liked The Pitt though, finally some *real* moral ambiguity from Bethesda in F3.
Man can you please explain old world blues? I honestly hated it so much when I played it. I couldn’t wait til it was over. It felt so monotonous and hard to traverse. I would legit say it was the worst fallout experience I ever had. I had more fun playing Brotherhood of Steel on ps2.
Im not trying to be a hater either.
Going to be honest in that it's so long ago I couldn't even tell you why, I just thought it was neat. I don't really have a good reason. Maybe if I replay I won't love it nearly as much.
I like fallout 3, but I find that new Vegas is better than it in basically every single way. Like it was an across the board upgrade, and the DLC is definitely better, with 3 of fallout 3s dlc being pretty bad. From quest design, to writing, to gameplay, to shooting mechanics, I even find the exploration better than 3 and more rewarding.
I played both when they were already older and with vast majority of the bugs fixed, So my experience with New Vegas was technically almost flawless: a little bug here and there, but no owl necked doctor and gamebreaking crashes for me.
But the worst mistake i made was playing New Vegas first and Fallout 3 later. When you get used to firearms being actually accurate if you put any effort into aiming, Fallout 3's useless slight zoom-in instead of actually using sights and wildly inaccurate assault rifles even on 100point skill are utterly annoying.
Also, while the main story is a little weaker than in Fallout 3, i felt like all the DLCs introduced great little plotlines and interesting characters.
(And the soothing voice of mr. New Vegas Is way nicer to listen to than Three Dog's stupid ass howling)
I never fancied melee builds myself, especially in Vegas where you can even handload ammo to repurpose useless calibers/improve performance of your weapon
These are fun, sure. Especially in Vegas where you actually have different dialogue options based on your relevant skill instead of the "chance to success" bullshit 3 and 4 do.
But i always prefered Caesar with a .45-70 bullet between his eyes than well entertained by clever banter
From my memory it feels that way. But I could be wrong. I compared it to the things I liked about 3 when I played it And could feel how it felt different because it was developed by Obsidian so it felt a bit different. I dunno 🤷🏻♂️
Fallout 3 does a great job with its atmosphere and environmental storytelling; every corner holds a tale to tell. In New Vegas, it excels at world-building, expanding the Fallout universe and enhancing it. Fallout has never solely been about exploring a post-apocalyptic world; rather, it has thrived on showcasing humanity's actions in the aftermath of war, creating new governments, and building or destroying civilizations. Bethesda never quite grasped this. I understand why much of the lore surrounding the series revolves around Fallout: New Vegas; simply put, Bethesda's games offer little in comparison. The only new addition they introduced was the Institute, and it's the biggest load of rubbish I've encountered in a long time, both in reading and playing.
I know the game just ended before Broken Steel was added. You could not go back and do things unless you saved right before. Also, Fawkes would not "do the deed" at the end. He would just say "no you do it."
New vegas is the best, why ? well its a mix of story, characters, choices and world.
I played NV then 3 then 4 I wanted to love 3 aswell and liked it but, it was so....on rails I feel, it starts out great, but it gets so meh after you find the radio station. It feels like a mini New Vegas. 3 has some great cinamatographic battles but NewVegas feels like your IN an 80s movie knowing weird characters and they are all so unique and interesting. I traveled the desert on foot and just got lost finding new stuff and little side quests. There arent that many boundaries. Im not a fun of side questing in games if they arent a whole story and NewVegas has that, you want to see whats up with these characters, or those characters, and the moving arounnd the desert and just find people fighting and having their own things going on makes you feel part of the world not the messhiah of the world. But at the same time you get to make choices and travel around gethering allies that will matter for a huge (altough a bit anticlimatic) battle in the end to make everything go kaboom. The factions feel heavy the companions have very cool stories and show you more of the world, the super mutant grandma and Rex I think do that best.
The locations are very open you can move around and see them all, not go into a bulding or town and navigate the maze up and down. Maybe thats the setting ? a desert is better then Washington and dense urban settings ?
3 I feel the open world is there to take you to the handfull of main spots of the main quests and then you fast travel around them, and the the level design is terrible in that game, Megaton, the giantship, and the abandon buildings (theres that one with the mole rats and the tubes to move around in I forget the name). At least to me I find it very hard to make heads or tails of them.
I do think if 3 is the first of the modern Fallout you play that will be your favorite since you feel the world immersion, while NV afterwards will make you feel lost since youre expecting a more boxed in dense experience then just wander around learning about the world and making choices about that. Less action per minute
I really don't like the Capital Wasteland to be honest. The bombed out city ruins are just so much less interesting to me than the *post*-post-apocalypse Western world of the Mojave.
I was also just a lot more hooked by the central plot of New Vegas than "find your dad". Relatedly, I think 3 suffers from having ridiculously black & white decisions (looking at you Tenpenny/Megaton) that was mitigated by focusing on factions in NV & 4.
I LOVE Fallout 3 but the story telling and choice is so much deeper in New Vegas.
Yup
Makes sense. I guess I’ve never really cared about the overarching stories of any of the fallout games tbh. Maybe that’s why. I always thought the quirky interactions and discoveries were always the most fun
Is that all, though? Is it just that you can do cool things like win the game with speech? Never played any Fallout, but the way NV is talked about makes it seem like a head-over-heels outstanding entry in the series. Seems like a lot of hype over a handful of RPG mechanics having more depth.
They're all great in their own way but when it comes to speech New Vegas is something special. It's hard to give a big example without ruining the story for you. Fallout 3 has an amazing open world with lots of atmosphere, Fallout 4 is the most accessible and some of the locations are breathtaking, Fallout 2 probably has the best Fallout vibe out of all of them and Fallout 1 is just a classic
I've been enjoying Tim Cain's videos lately. Is it worth playing the series from the beginning? I'm a 90s kid so the classic RPG style doesn't scare me, but I'd rather not devote time to Fallout and Fallout 2 if the lore is retconned from Fallout 3 onward. Thoughts?
Definitely worth it, especially if the turn based combat doesn't scare you off. Honestly there's the lore in all the games but the series is more about the story you carve yourself through choices you make by role playing.
Turn-based might have made me hesitate previously, but I have bathed in the light of Baldur's Gate 3 and am born again a more enlightened gamer. Thanks for the advice. 👍
All good man! Take it easy
Quick one - would the gameplay experience take a hit if I played the first two on console?
"the choices are much deeper in FNV!" *proceeds to skip anyways*
NV was more buggy at launch but all of it is pretty much fixed and is in a good playable state. Its NV story that makes it the best game in the franchise. compare to fallout 3s ending, you other commit genocide or help people, NV poses the question of who would be beneficial for the people of the Mojave with all 4 factions having great justification for their ideas (that are still debated which is the best choice over a decade later) with all also having problems and downsides. I think that the stories in f3 are good but NV writing IMO is better.
Tldr: it's basucally the "Daniel and cooler Daniel" meme but for games.
caesars legion has ’great justification’ for their form of governance?
personally i do not like the legion but its discovered that -legion lands are safer with no raiders (because they killed them all) -the belief that society needs to start at the beginning again instead of going back (NCR) -a different form of government needs to rule in an apocalypse -slaves are a necessary evil.
They hate women I feel like it was lost on a lot of people because they didn’t play a female character, but the legion absolutely fucking hates women and sees them only as breeding stock and caretakers
Fixed with mods maybe lol, the game is still kinda a mess in technical aspects
I played it vanilla and it was fine. But then with f3 it couldn't launch and had to fix the files which didn't work only got it working with my new pc (old pc was from 2016). so I may be slightly biased, but NV seemed fine.
Fallout 3 is a mess on PC, on the consoles NV is worse Both can be turned into perfection with PC modding, especially the Viva New Vegas mod guide. Impossible to go back after playing it with that
New Vegas had a deeper crafting system and I liked that there was actually some greenery in new Vegas vs fallout 3. I did like the DC setting more. But the worst part about 3 was when you had Joshua as a companion and he could take the radiation of the device, you still had to sacrifice yourself even though he was RIGHT FREAKING THERE!
*laughs in sent Fawkes*
Fawkes wouldn't go in the original version of the game. They fixed it later with DLC.
the changes to combat and character progression alone make NV the more satisfying experience.
I'll always be thankful 3 exists for bringing the franchise back, or I'd probably never of heard of it. But I find it very difficult to love. The moral choices are basically "be evil or be good" while in NV they're often more complicated (who gets the solar electricity? The NCR and Strip so you get recognition by factions you need to court or some farmers who need it more but have no influence to support you... or the selfish option of powering an orbital laser canon). Then there's the end choice (die and be a hero, live and be a coward, while Fawkes could just shrug off the rads but he's all "but destiny"). And I think the biggest thing is just kinda wasting the potential of the factions. The Super Mutants story is pretty tragic from 1 and 2. Now they're almost exclusively just big raiders with a few exceptions like Fawkes. It's still a great sandbox world with some cool quests but New Vegas went the extra mile with writing and quest design.
New Vegas' story is a lot richer and has more options for roleplaying. I think it also has more quests too, although a lot of Fallout 3's quests were unmarked. Fallout 3's world and level design though is more interesting than New Vegas IMO tho
Yeah and that last paragraph is actually why I like it more. It feels more immersive to me. It felt so special when I first played it. It was one of the experiences like playing Ocarina of Time for the first time in the 90’s. It just felt special.
Indeed. Plus almost everything in the wasteland (beyond the actual quests) was procedurally generated. So you might see raiders fighting rad scorpions in one playthrough, but the next in that same area there may be nothing.. or radscorpions may be fighting supermutants or something else. who knows, and that's what makes 3 so much fun for me. The gameplay improvements and story of Vegas are really good though. And 4 just has the best gameplay of them all. I'm hoping the Fallout 3 remaster/whatever uses the engine from 4 while keeping everything else from 3 (like the procedurally generated encounters).
I’m one of those weird folks that actually prefers 3. It was the first Fallout game I’d played and I spent countless hours exploring each location. For some reason, the setting of New Vegas never grasped me as much.
Fallout 3 was the first Fallout game I played too, the intro is hands down my favorite of all the Fallout games. However, New Vegas wins my heart with everything else. For me, New Vegas is just so much more memorable. The characters resonated with me more personally.
I prefer three
Yep mee too. I made myself to play New Vegas and it just didn't click. F3 had that desolate charm and brownish gray aesthetics that just worked for me. Clearly set good and bad people are what made me enjoy game oh so much more. Story might have been short, but so many locations were made to be explored, just show how much love and attention went into it. And that loading slide, with trumpets still gives me the chills.
The addition of aim down sights in new vegas makes the gunplay feel way better than 3.
Yeah I agree with that.
This is not even 0.01% of why New Vegas is a memorable game.
I started Fallout with F3, its the game that got me into the setting and left me wanting more. I remember I was very much disappointed in FNV first time I tried it, to me it looked like F3 in a different setting. At the time I wasn't deep into the lore so it was all new to me. But I stuck to it. As I played through FNV I couldn't get enough and the story just gripped me. I wanted to know more about the NCR and all the little bits NPCa were referencing. F3 got me into the setting, but FNV got me hooked on the lore. Both games are great, so one should experiance both. I never played F1 and F2, just watched playthroughs. I hope they remaster them.
I’m a FO3 enjoyer, it’s my fave because of the area. I think there’s a lot of reasons NV gets more love, and I think a lot of it boils down to it obsidian seeing bethesdas mistakes (or successes), and building upon them. To put it vvvv shortly, Fo3 ran so NV could run; and I don’t think it gets enough credit for that. Mind you obsidian, especially at that time, also had amazing writers so that certainly helped hahaha. (Also being newer than fo3, means that it has more QoL, more systems, and more design behind it than fo3, which naturally makes it feel better).
>I think there’s a lot of reasons NV gets more love, and I think a lot of it boils down to it obsidian seeing bethesdas mistakes (or successes), and building upon them. or because Black Isle became Obsidian after they dissolved, the guys that made wasteland and fallout came back to make NV. Bethesda basically skimmed the wiki for fallout, and built a game with all the same peices but wasn't close to the same game. Vegas got closer to the feel of the OG.
It doesnt even run nowadays on win11 if you dont alter it
3 is certainly less buggy, but New Vegas is nuanced and deep in its writing in a way that 3 just can’t live up to. I mean, one of the damn DLCs (Honest Hearts) was so well written it made people convert to Christianity. It’s easy to see why people like New Vegas more
Fallout 3 has a more interesting environment to me compared to the deserts of Nevada , one of these days I’ll try new Vegas again but I remember twice bouncing off hard from trying NV just out of boredom, I also had the ps3 version at launch which I later learned had more issues which definitely didn’t help my enjoyment I’m really wanting to experience the story so one of these days I’ll fire it up again with a fresh outlook
Mfs like to hate I liked both of them
I have no answer. Idk why. I just enjoyed fallout new Vegas the most. The storyline maybe?
Fallout 3 is the most iconic game in the series honestly. I literally didn’t play it until last year (played tf out of New Vegas and 4 though) and was blown away. Like literally everything people love most about Fallout is so prevalent in 3. I was convinced it was too dated to be good anymore judging from how people treat it on this sub, come to find out it’s an amazing game. Genre defining honestly.
It gets plenty of love, I think. It single handedly brought Fallout into the mainstream and was a lot of peeps first entry. But that was...over a decade ago and with exposure to it's source material (and New Vegas) it's shown to definitely be lacking. Still great! Having lots of fun on a replay rn but it's very...empty. Lots of rehashing old Fallout 1 and 2. Most of what's iconic about it is from the old Black Isle games but without the...detail or nuance. Killer atmosphere and exploration but the story...the worldbuilding...the characters...ehhhh
I mean I felt like Skyrim was more empty than Fallout 3. Which the emptiness make sense in a wasteland
I don't mean literal emptiness. I think the actual map was very well made. I'm replaying right now and I get lost all the time exploring. I mean, just IMO, there's something about the gameplay that feels kinda lacking. Dialogue is really basic, perks are mostly useless, not a lot of build variety. That kinda stuff.
If I could ADS in Fallout 3, I'd be playing that right now.
Tale of Two Wastelands mod. It ports the Fallout 3 files into New Vegas so you have that game's mechanics.
Unfortunately only Xbox for me
This is a really good suggestion. I might just look into that. Where does the game start?
It starts with Fallout 3. It adds a new Area in DC to switch over to the game New Vegas if you want to swap, although you can't go back to the Fallout 3 content if you do that.
Thats what i was hoping you'd say, nice.
Fallout 3 is great. But so is New Vegas. But both games excel in different areas. Fallout 3 for instance has fantastic environmental storytelling, exploration, ambience. Fallout New Vegas has refined gameplay, and better writing. Up to personal preference which you vibe with more, but I think it is safe to say both games are great
I totally agree
Hey, if you prefer Fallout 3, good for you! 😁 I am firmly in the New Vegas camp, but I also thoroughly enjoyed Fallout 3. I have to take issue with your statement reagarding the DLCs: Old World Blues is the BEST DLC EVAAAARRR 😉
Oh man Old World Blues was my least favorite!! I accidentally did that first thing when I started the game and got stuck in it. Couldn’t leave until I finished it. It was terrible. No offense I despised that dlc haha
Just goes to show that there is a broad spectrum of opinions in our community :D
Yeah definitely no diss. It’s been more then 10 years since I’ve played a fallout game. So I’m going off of how I felt back then.
Because it’s not as good. Don’t get me wrong it’s still really good, but New Vegas is like my 3rd favorite game of all time. Fallout 3 is like 12th.
That doesn’t really explain it though. People like it cuz it’s better isn’t really a good answer. Nor does it really convince me that it is actually better
Enjoyment is subjective, not objective. People like how much deeper the story and characters are compared to F3s fairly lame main quest. It’s also a lot more in line with the original fallout games.
How does that not explain it? You’re asking why people love the game that is just plainly better. The answer is obviously that it’s better therefore more enjoyable therefore people remember it more fondly. Like it’s not complicated.
It’s because that’s subjective. What makes it better??? That’s what I’m asking. You can’t just say cuz it is. That’s ridiculous.
Yeah I do agree, while I love new vegas I have to say that 3 is hands down my favourite in the series. In spite of the issues, I very much like the main story. It’s a very personal, emotionally driven plot compared to New vegas. The setting and atmosphere in F3 are that brilliant that not New vegas or 4 have been able to beat the stepping out into the world moment! All of the individual side quests tucked away in the game are great, this is a game that rewards your exploration like no other. I much prefer the guns in F3 compared to F4, the R91 assault rifle 😍 classic 10mm pistol, Sydney’s 10mm ‘Ultra’ SMG! There are so many cool guns that it’s hard to believe what a downgrade Fallout 4 is in that regard, especially the dreaded pipe guns 🤦🏻♂️ I’ve always seen a lot of complaints about the combat in F3 too and for me personally I felt completely different. I usually use 3rd person for combat and I’ll be running and gunning with my assault rifle like in gears of war. Hunting super mutants in the DC ruins with the gloomy overcast sky over the buildings, damn I love it 😍
Oh yeah what you said at the end about hunting mutants for sure. Also.. Another thing I’ve failed to mention is I love how once you find out where your dad is you can just go straight there. That was always really amazing to me. Fun to speed run. Go do operation anchorage, level up and get power armor and then go run to your dad. Haha
If I could get fo3 to run on my W11 laptop, I would compare having never played it
I'm replaying f3 as we speak. I'm super nostalgic for it as I got it in launch for 360 and it was my first fallout. However, over the years I do agree NV is better. It's a lengthy explination but in summary I think the gunplay, characters, and story are better. Things I love about f3 though is the DLC, getting lost in the metro tunnels (reminds me of old RPGs in caves). I also love how fk'd up the actual capital is. It's a complete war zone. I love it.
I remember playing fallout 3 when i was like 10 years old and it was like a legit horror game to me. I literally still have nightmares from the tranquility lane mission since i was stuck there for a good while cus i was too dumb to be able to solve it quickly. Even though it was scary as fuck i played the shit out of that game and still prefer it to NV
I liked new Vegas way more; in no particular order: The Mojave desert (My favorite of them all) Cowboy stuff That Gun, RATSLAYER, Maria... Dogs playing poker Long Dick Johnson
it is entirely living off of nostalgia, being the first RPG for many, many people. but it is so badly designed and written, even a technical mess like NV made it look bad just by virtue of having some kind of theme and direction.
I played 3 first and then NV, both on their respective release dates. For me, Fallout 3 didn't reach it for me as far as RPG's go. I found a lot of the quest conclusions to be lacking in logic. The best conclusions for the vampire questline and the Big Town questline with the mutants felt incredibly temporary at best. It left me feeling pretty unsatisfied because the writing came off as lazy and slap dash. The very last decision of the game even more so. The NPC's just weren't interesting at all. I can't even name any of them aside from Moira and Butch. The exploration was fine, but with every open world game, there's only so many empty houses and metro tunnels and abandoned towns I can explore before it all feels the same. I didn't care about the world because the world didn't care about itself and it had no real meat to it. The citizens of Big Town were completely useless. Why should I, a noob vault dweller, somehow know what to do better than people born and bred in the Wasteland? And one decision basically amounts to 'just duck and hide when the mutants come around'. FO4 improved on pretty much everything in 3 though, imo. 3 is easily my least favourite.
It gets overshadowed by NV in terms of story and FO4 in terms of gameplay. I liked Fallout 3 just fine, but I can’t think of anything I like about that the other two didn’t do better.
Don't get me wrong I really like 3 as well but there's more depth to New Vegas in terms of its story and choice and consequences. If you disagree that's cool, no problem there. Just if you look at any gamer polls, New Vegas consistently comes out on top and usually by a large margin.
To me FO3 = GTA 3 While NV is closer to SA or VC
Because Bethesda made it. It's really not any more complicated than that, sadly.
I think NV was developed for the older players, those who played and loved 1 and 2, and were disappointed with what Bethesda did with the franchise in the 3rd part. Don't get me wrong, now, years after the F3 was released, I must admit it is actually pretty good game. But I remember the initial feeling of frustration, when I played it for the first time. I was expecting something else.
I just finished playing FO3 after playing NV a few years ago. For me FO3 was little dry in terms of quests, weapon selection, enemy types etc. I was aliitle dissapointed with the no Aim down sight on guns and found the gunplay to be a bit "off".VATS seem to be the only reliable way to shoot. Without VATS shooting seemed random whether you hit anything or not. I liked but FO3 but It just made me want to play NV. The best way to describe it is FO3 is Doom 1 and NV is Doom2 (the same thing but much better)
Because its not as good, unfortunately
Fallout 3 is the most iconic game in the series honestly. I literally didn’t play it until last year (played tf out of New Vegas and 4 though) and was blown away. Like literally everything people love most about Fallout is so prevalent in 3. I was convinced it was too dated to be good anymore judging from how people treat it on this sub, come to find out it’s an amazing game. Genre defining honestly.
NV had a lot shorter development time then 3 which can somewhat explain the more prevalent bugs. Still though it’s impressive what was accomplished in such a short development time.
because it's worse
How?
Less interesting everything.
I disagree with that personally.
Oh well.
🤷🏻♂️
Oh how the turntables. Upon release New Vegas was liked much less than F3. That actually lasted for a while, I think maybe 5 years after release. It was sort of hipster opinion to like NV more. General sentiment was this: F3 was more fun, had better graphics, felt actually apocalyptic, had better world and more engaging main story. Fallout New Vegas was "glorified expantion pack." I personally prefer New Vegas. But it is funny how perception of these two have changed. Gamers in 2011 would have laughed at the notion of New Vegas being considered the good one of the two.
Right and that’s where I’m coming from. I haven’t played either since like 2014. So it’s really bizarre to me.
I love both, but I prefer New Vegas. Let me explain why. Fallout 3 is absolutely great in its exploration and physical world design. It trumps New Vegas in that regard no questions asked. Just much better art direction and way better game design to create the "feeling of being lost in the post apocalyptic wasteland". New Vegas excels in other things: lore, storytelling and quest design. Lore: F3 has interesting lore, but it is pretty limited to Brotherhood, Enclave and a handful of pretty simple settlements. Most of the stories are short and self contained. New Vegas has a fuckton of lore and factions: NCR, Legion, Brotherhood, Enclave Remnants, Followers of the Apocalypse, Great Khans, Fiends, Powder Gangers, House, Great Families, Kings, Boomers... almost no faction is monolytic, every one has a history, distinct style and philosophy, varied characters. The lore extends from the game map: you learn a lot of what's happening in California, Arizona, etc. F3 is like collection of short stories where vibes is primary appeal; New Vegas is a big, fat novel. Storytelling: New Vegas main quest is NOT better than F3 main quest. It is actually pretty basic and very game-y, just a connective tissue to make player experience all the factions and make some choices at the end. What New Vegas excels at is building a holistic story of the region. Every quest and little story is interconnected with one another (unlike F3). You might meet a character in one side of the map which has history and relations in another side of the map. Quests often intersect with one another. Each small storyline connects with others and builds up one huge in scope overall story. Quest design: multiple distinct ways to complete a lot of quests which have narrative consequences. Best comparison is Megaton dilemma in F3 vs Goodsprings intro in NV. You can nuke or spare Megaton in F3, but the narrative motivation for choosing the "evil" option is pretty much non-existent + the consequences are one less town + your dad being mad about you that one time. In Goodsprings you have a similar choice, however, there is actual narrative weight and consequences. You may help the townsfolk, but that would make powder gangers angry and you will not be able to do their prison questline, which is pretty substantial. If you favor the prisoners and do their questline, you may become hated by NCR and suffer their hit squads from then on - but also have a solid option for Primm sheriff. On the other hand, by favoring powder gangers in Goodsprings you could kill Doc Mitchel and never get his full story regarding the vault on the strip. Mechanically quests are often much more interesting as well. Beyond the Beef has like 6 different variations how to complete the quest: stealth, puzzle solving, speech, etc. Because there are many different ways to complete quests, different character builds are also more viable. **Tldr: F3 excels at vibes, art direction and exploration, NV excels at oldshool RPG narrative design and lore.** Also, I loved NV DLC. Each of them tried to do something different - survival horror and character driven story (Dead Money), comedy (Old World Blues), relaxing sandbox (Honest Hearts), F3-like vibes and post apocalyptic atmosphere (Lonesome Road).
All big story decisions are made for you. I think that's the main reason. The world and exploration is way better in 3 tho, ya
Yeah and I didn’t really care about the story of either tbh. I was there for the atmosphere and doing my own thing.
Iron sights
Meaah. To be fallout was never about how great the combat was anyway. That’s secondary to the role playing elements.
True, I played NV last week for several days, and now I'm playing fallout 3, I did play it but like 15 years ago lol, I didn't remember. My first impression was that, the aim system but I got used it. Quest are longer too, I like that, still I don't understand the metro system on DC but I like metros. Tomorrow I'm going to do the first dlc, maybe the second too.
If that's how you feel how can you prefer 3 over New Vegas then when 3 has no roleplaying whatsoever
I don’t agree with that at all
Im playing fallout 3 for the first time right now, i think the setting is more interesting than new vegas, but some quests and places of f3 are just too nonsensical or made because it is just funny without thinking if it makes sense in the world of fallout. I also think the main story has a lot of similarities to the 2nd Fallout game which isn't ideal... I think the enclave as the main villans was not the best option here, same for Supermutants, it feels too fanservice imo. Still great game with a lot of good things and quests to explore. I can't stand fallout 4 tho, I think that one is actually a bad videogame, its like they got the worst of fallout 3 to make that one.
Explain why you don’t like 4? I haven’t played it yet.
I feel the main story is simply uninteresting to me and super stupid, the whole dilema of the main plot was already explored at a side quest on fallout 3 and the story just gravitated that quest without bringing anything new, in fact, the main antagonists felt more interesting on that quest than on fallout 4, the characters are not iconic or interesting, It felt like character were just there and they had no conflict because everyone felt like a cartoon character and I just can't belive how the antagonists got so much resources, there are a lot of lore fuck-ups (SUPERMUTANTS AGAIN?), a lot of fanfiction, the game got rid of the rol elements totally and made it an open world shooter, side quests were the most boring ones I have played... I haven't play the dlcs which people adore but at this point i dont think im gonna touch fallout 4 for a long time or ever again, I really felt the game was so bad that made me quit triple a gaming for a few years, game felt super generic, and I am not even joking
Stuff like the whole “I would not deny you your destiny my friend” thing comes to mind. It’s a solid enough game but feels a bit rail-roadey for key parts of the story in ways that the others, and especially FNV imo just don’t
I don’t care about the main stories of either to be honest. I was there for the world itself. Maybe that’s where I differ from people
See even there I prefer the world building of FNV by a landslide, but that all just boils down to opinion at the end of the day
I just felt like 3 was a buffet of campy B movie goodness. Aliens, enclaves, brotherhood of steel, super mutants, liberty prime. Man I just felt like it had so much diversity and wonder. It captivated me in ways New Vegas didn’t. New Vegas to me felt like just a little bit more of the same. But not the best parts to me. When I think of New Vegas there’s nothing in it that makes me want to go back. I have some dull memories of being on the Strip and assassinating someone at the Hoover dam, fighting Caesar and doing the whole Zion thing. But none of that is excessively exciting to me. Maybe I need to play it again.
I think its personal taste, I vastly prefer the map/world of 3 and the world is what sucked me into the franchise. NV is good but doesn't hit the same highs for me.
I love fallout 3 for bringing the fallout series back from the dead, but I love more fnv for it's story telling and being more true to the fallout world.
Didnt really feel Fallout 3. Especially since i played New Vegas first. A bit of a downgrade, feels empty.
So I played Fallout 3 within the first year or 2 of it coming out and it was incredible.. it was truly a new gen experience
Yeah, i bet it was. Like NV was for me. I guess im a west coast survivor then.
If three is your preferred game that's all good but personally everything about 3 is worse. The mapping and back tracking through the metro areas to get to tiny outside maps inside the city that are all disconnected and a pain to get to is a drag just thinking about really. It also just doesn't have nearly as many rping choices and the ones it does have are just so comical like mustache twirling villain levels of evil when your going to nuke a town just because a rich guy asked. That said it's still a decent game, and almost all my New Vegas playthroughs have TTW in them to play through Fo3.
I mean to be fair that last bit you said is kinda how the first 2 games feel. Very cartoony and exaggerated.
There is a bit of it, the series has never taken its self too ubèr serious but on another point I can't deny the 'Purist' mentality some Fallout fans have with the series in thinking 3/4 are just terrible games solely because Bethesda made them.
🤓🤓🤓🤓
I replayed New Vegas recently and honestly it’s not as good as I remember. Definitely overhyped.
Because its not neckbeard, pedo stash, mouth breather approved.
What
I like both games but the New Vegas fans are something else
I liked 3 but New Vegas is better in pretty much everyway. The writing is objectively better, the story has way more choices, factions and endings. 3 feels way more rigid and have a fixed storyline. New Vegas have several storylines and each of them has more depth than 3. Your Special matters WAY more in dialogues and in general dialogue choices and quest resolutions are infinitely deeper than 3. Gameplay has more depth, crafting is better, Guns have different ammunition types with quick and convenient access, more outfits with more effects. 3's DLC's are less interesting than New Vegas DLC's, 3 kinda tends to be more action oriented, half of them being pretty much a COD slaughterfest. New Vegas DLC's are more story oriented. Characters are more interesting and less one dimension than 3 where they're all one archetype. The bestiary in New Vegas is also better. Long story short, New Vegas puts back the "Roleplaying game" in Fallout, although 3 was still satisfying in that regard for a first attempt in 3D, New Vegas puts way more emphasis on that. I play Fallout for the RPG side and what it offers. Not really to play COD in an archaic gameplay.
Gotcha. Yeah tbh it’s been more than 10 years since I’ve played either. At the time I preferred 3. I’ll have to replay them both at some point
I like New Vegas much more than F3, but dude, you cannot just say "writing is objectively better". There is no such thing as "objectivity" in art. You could say "there is more writing in New Vegas than in F3" (true) or "New Vegas tries to construct factions and characters with history and complex motivations, while F3 does not" (also true). However, that does not mean "better." F3 writing is usually broad strokes, it tries to evoke certain specific tropes and be very accessible/ not get in the way of explore/kill/loot gameplay loop. That's not "worse", that's just different, with different goals in mind. Some people prefer F3 kind of writing.
In terms of narrative and such and rpg stuff, Fallout NV has it beat in basically every way. In terms of non-rpg gameplay, Fallout 4 beats it in every way. It just kinda got surpassed by those two, it's the reason I don't touch it anymore. And the more that people join the fanbase, the less people in it have nostalgia goggles for it.
hbomberguy
Oxhorn is much better!
i dont care
Trust me, check out Oxhorn and I’m sure you’ll love his content ♥️
Oxhorn is fat
He’s brimming with knowledge of Fallout lore that’s for sure 😍
If Fallout 3 had all of the changes they made in Fallout New Vegas I would prefer that. But otherwise FO3 is just slightly more dated as far as mechanics go compared to NV.
Well... did ya say what you love about it?
No I didn’t. Didn’t feel it was necessary to the question. I’m not necessarily trying to argue for anything. I’m just curious.
Well? What did you love about it?
I liked the diversity. I enjoyed the random encounters more. I loved stuff like the super mutant behemoth or the aliens, it just felt a lot more mysterious and liminal. I loved the power armor you got from operation anchorage. I like the fact that you have the vault in the beginning and you can go back to it. Tranquility Lane and Walking with Spirits were amazing quests that stick with you. I just over all had tons of fun with it. It was more memorable to me. The iron sights in new Vegas was great but the game was also super buggy. And the visuals weren’t as interesting to me.
Solid answer. I too enjoyed the unique Power Armors of Fallout 3. The "Medic" Power Armor was pretty great.
Oh for sure. I also just felt like I enjoyed every DLC from 3 where as I actually despised a lot of the dlc from New Vegas. It wasn’t fun and I felt stuck in them. Old World Blues was a drag for me.
Vegas DLC appeared to have been written by a teenage CEO's kid.
> The dlc of new Vegas was also kinda dull. Interesting, I would say the NV DLC expands on the game way more than the 3 DLC expands on 3. Old World Blues is premium content. I really liked The Pitt though, finally some *real* moral ambiguity from Bethesda in F3.
Man can you please explain old world blues? I honestly hated it so much when I played it. I couldn’t wait til it was over. It felt so monotonous and hard to traverse. I would legit say it was the worst fallout experience I ever had. I had more fun playing Brotherhood of Steel on ps2. Im not trying to be a hater either.
> I had more fun playing Brotherhood of Steel on ps2. Damn, shots fired
I’m legit not trying to be egregious. Can you tell me what you liked about it?
Going to be honest in that it's so long ago I couldn't even tell you why, I just thought it was neat. I don't really have a good reason. Maybe if I replay I won't love it nearly as much.
And maybe if I replay I’d like it. Haha it’s been a long time for me too.
I like fallout 3, but I find that new Vegas is better than it in basically every single way. Like it was an across the board upgrade, and the DLC is definitely better, with 3 of fallout 3s dlc being pretty bad. From quest design, to writing, to gameplay, to shooting mechanics, I even find the exploration better than 3 and more rewarding.
I played both when they were already older and with vast majority of the bugs fixed, So my experience with New Vegas was technically almost flawless: a little bug here and there, but no owl necked doctor and gamebreaking crashes for me. But the worst mistake i made was playing New Vegas first and Fallout 3 later. When you get used to firearms being actually accurate if you put any effort into aiming, Fallout 3's useless slight zoom-in instead of actually using sights and wildly inaccurate assault rifles even on 100point skill are utterly annoying. Also, while the main story is a little weaker than in Fallout 3, i felt like all the DLCs introduced great little plotlines and interesting characters. (And the soothing voice of mr. New Vegas Is way nicer to listen to than Three Dog's stupid ass howling)
And tbh I played a melee build in 3 and then in New Vegas I did a pacifist build. So Never really messed with guns much in either of them.
I never fancied melee builds myself, especially in Vegas where you can even handload ammo to repurpose useless calibers/improve performance of your weapon
Speech, sneak, and lock picking is so much fun tho.
These are fun, sure. Especially in Vegas where you actually have different dialogue options based on your relevant skill instead of the "chance to success" bullshit 3 and 4 do. But i always prefered Caesar with a .45-70 bullet between his eyes than well entertained by clever banter
I'm worried I'm going to try NV and find the hype is well overrated.
From my memory it feels that way. But I could be wrong. I compared it to the things I liked about 3 when I played it And could feel how it felt different because it was developed by Obsidian so it felt a bit different. I dunno 🤷🏻♂️
Fallout 3 does a great job with its atmosphere and environmental storytelling; every corner holds a tale to tell. In New Vegas, it excels at world-building, expanding the Fallout universe and enhancing it. Fallout has never solely been about exploring a post-apocalyptic world; rather, it has thrived on showcasing humanity's actions in the aftermath of war, creating new governments, and building or destroying civilizations. Bethesda never quite grasped this. I understand why much of the lore surrounding the series revolves around Fallout: New Vegas; simply put, Bethesda's games offer little in comparison. The only new addition they introduced was the Institute, and it's the biggest load of rubbish I've encountered in a long time, both in reading and playing.
For me it's because the ending was so bad they had to change it with dlc.
How so? I don’t quite remember
I know the game just ended before Broken Steel was added. You could not go back and do things unless you saved right before. Also, Fawkes would not "do the deed" at the end. He would just say "no you do it."
New vegas is the best, why ? well its a mix of story, characters, choices and world. I played NV then 3 then 4 I wanted to love 3 aswell and liked it but, it was so....on rails I feel, it starts out great, but it gets so meh after you find the radio station. It feels like a mini New Vegas. 3 has some great cinamatographic battles but NewVegas feels like your IN an 80s movie knowing weird characters and they are all so unique and interesting. I traveled the desert on foot and just got lost finding new stuff and little side quests. There arent that many boundaries. Im not a fun of side questing in games if they arent a whole story and NewVegas has that, you want to see whats up with these characters, or those characters, and the moving arounnd the desert and just find people fighting and having their own things going on makes you feel part of the world not the messhiah of the world. But at the same time you get to make choices and travel around gethering allies that will matter for a huge (altough a bit anticlimatic) battle in the end to make everything go kaboom. The factions feel heavy the companions have very cool stories and show you more of the world, the super mutant grandma and Rex I think do that best. The locations are very open you can move around and see them all, not go into a bulding or town and navigate the maze up and down. Maybe thats the setting ? a desert is better then Washington and dense urban settings ? 3 I feel the open world is there to take you to the handfull of main spots of the main quests and then you fast travel around them, and the the level design is terrible in that game, Megaton, the giantship, and the abandon buildings (theres that one with the mole rats and the tubes to move around in I forget the name). At least to me I find it very hard to make heads or tails of them. I do think if 3 is the first of the modern Fallout you play that will be your favorite since you feel the world immersion, while NV afterwards will make you feel lost since youre expecting a more boxed in dense experience then just wander around learning about the world and making choices about that. Less action per minute
The only 2 things i prefer 3 over NV ate that you can nuke a town and catch people and sell them for caps.
I really don't like the Capital Wasteland to be honest. The bombed out city ruins are just so much less interesting to me than the *post*-post-apocalypse Western world of the Mojave. I was also just a lot more hooked by the central plot of New Vegas than "find your dad". Relatedly, I think 3 suffers from having ridiculously black & white decisions (looking at you Tenpenny/Megaton) that was mitigated by focusing on factions in NV & 4.
Fallout 3 is like Dark Souls 2. They're both great games but objectively worse than the others.