Fallout 3 or Fallout New Vegas?

[deleted]

Until recently, Fallout 3 won it for me. However, I decided to repurchase NV after trading it in, and got all the DLC, and it's made a massive difference for me, I've loved playing through it.

My comparision, including DLC.


Story - I've got to say I enjoy NV more now, especially with the DLC. 3's DLC didn't really connect too much with each other or the main game, apart from Broken steel. Don't get me wrong, I liked it, but NV's DLC is better to me. Loved the freaky science world of Old World Blues, the Think Tank was great, also, with Wild Wasteland on it makes it so much better! Found Dead Money and Honest Hearts to be interesting in their own way, adding different things to the experience, especially meeting characters you've heard talked about in the main game like Joshua Graham and Father Elijah. The main story line was also better, more coherent, which was no mean feat considering the amount of options you had.

Graphics/How the gameworld looked - I've got to say that I did like the look of Fallout 3 more, but that could be as I'm more familiar with it. The actual place, New Vegas was great looking though.

Gameplay - Almost the same, but I've noticed NV to be more buggy, like getting stuck in VATS, scripted things not happening, etc. Also, I don't like that you can't continue after the end quest in NV at all, at least 3 dealt with that in the first DLC. Don't like that they put in little things like anti cheat measures at the casinos, if I want to bend the rules in a game I've bought I should be able to. Not that I have(Made all my money from the Sierra Madre, and Big MT!)
Prefer the perks every two levels which makes you more careful about what you choose, and also like the traits you can pick, especially Wild Wasteland.

Creatures/Characters - Don't like things like the Cazadors at all, horrible addition to the game, too hard at lower levels, too easy at higher ones. Wouldn't mind but often they pop up at places common for low level characters. Most of the rest of creatures are ok though. I miss fighting the Enclave from Fallout 3, I liked being able to fight enemies like them. Power armoured enemies are too rare now. Though I do like all the factions and the repuation for settlements and the like. Some great characters in the game like Caesar, Mr House, the Veteran Rangers, Victor, most of the casino characters, etc.


Overall I'd say it goes to NV, as despite some faults, it has the better story and characters, and the gameplay/graphics aren't too much worse, not enough to matter anyway. If they'd been able to get full use out of the engine, which was Bethseda's rather than Obsidians, it could have been even better. Both great games in my eyes though, while NV is a winner, 3 is by no means a loser.

And then.....AND THEN THE CAGE COMES DOWN!

I would say I like them both equally, both have their pros and cons. Exploration was a lot more interesting in FALLOUT 3, I liked the darker grittier atmosphere better and it just sort of had a better flow, NEW VEGAS kind of tackles on here and there. Yet the gameplay is much more involving in NEW VEGAS and it feels more like an RPG than a violent FPS like F3 did.
I don't mean to impose, but I am the Ocean.

New Vegas is better than Fallout 3 in literally every way.



May Cthulhu penetrate you with his tentacley appendage.

They are both great games, but I prefer New Vegas. I first got into Fallout with the first one and I think this has a lot to do with why I prefer New Vegas. With 3 they did an excellent job of converting the RPG system and making it feel like you were still playing classic Fallout turn based combat and making it work in real time.

Fallout 3 always felt like it was almost a Fallout game to me and I think this was because of the shift in setting from the Western U.S. to the Eastern or maybe it was all because Obsidian had some of the people who had worked on Fallout 1 and 2 and they brought back a little more of what I loved about those first 2 games. It could even just be that I am from the Western U.S. and experiences places more familiar to me added a lot in those games.

Fallout New Vegas all the way! More factions, more choices, more consequences.

I think that while New Vegas is a great game, Fallout 3 is a better overall experience and the better game by a fairly wide margin. (For me, at least.)

Perhaps it's just personal opinion, apples-and-oranges, etc. But I found Fallout 3 to be a more enveloping, evocative, complex experience that really sucked me right into the world of the game and kept me glued to the screen. And even from a tonal and stylistic standpoint, I found it more stirring and interesting.

While I love New Vegas, Fallout 3 is the one that I find myself replaying more and more, and having the most fun with.

And FURTHERMORE, this is my signature! SERIOUSLY! Did you think I was still talking about my point?

Fallout 3 is the better game. It has a phenomenal tutorial that invests the player in the not only the main character, but the world around them. The vault to start, then the entire wasteland. It has more far locations and ones that are much more interesting than in New Vegas. The capital wasteland is better conceived than the Mojave. Fallout 3 has heaps of atmosphere; New Vegas was vacant of that. FO3 had interesting and diverse missions and rewards the player for exploration.

New Vegas's landscape was bland and boring in comparison. The story itself is interesting- gaining the power of the Hoover Dam is a worthwhile goal in a post-apocalyptic desert- but it was just so poorly executed to be enjoyable. In concept, having different factions to back is intriguing and could add complexity to a game. Again though, the execution failed. The factions were all poorly conceived and none of them likeable. I love when people (or factions in this case) have shades of gray, but New Vegas asks you to pick between factions that offer nothing redeeming at all. And the courier getting shot in the head, then tracking down the man who did it left a lot to be desired. Once you find him (remember this is the entire draw of the story) the game plays it off as no big deal then you move on, almost as if the writers just lost interest at that point.

In all, poor writing and world creation shots New Vegas in the foot. The creators thought giving multiple ways to end the story gave it complexity, it doesn't. It waters down what could have been a good experience.

I highlighted many faults New Vegas had, however, I don't believe it is a bad game, just a let down from what Fallout 3 gave us. 7 or 8 out of 10.