i gave away two copies of FO3, one was the first edition when it came out, and i bought the goty and gave it away so i had to buy it on xbox and just download it in order to play it again.
losangeles5's forum posts
malcolm mcdowell's voice acting was unforgettable to me, as president eden, it was classic listening to his monologues, all the talk about how he was elected by the appropriate people and how the enclave is gonna offer counseling and support to everyone in the wasteland, to me that was something i'll never forget, and crusing around listening to the old 50's tunes while fighting supermutants in the dc ruins, that experience to me is unmatched in any game i ever played, the atmosphere the first time i played it was really unique and more immersive than any game i've ever played to date, FO3 had a lot of areas i would of liked different but it had enough going for it to really overshadow the flaws it had...i never played a game for so long, it took me a year of playing to explore the entire map, hundreds of hours.I'd say Fallout 3. New Vegas was better in some ways like a larger variety of weaponry and a much more personal relationship with NPC's (thanks to Obsidian's eye for detail and personalities), but Fallout 3 overall was better. The Capital Wasteland was much more fun to explore and a much better location, Liam Neeson might have been the only great voice acted character (whereas NV had several super awesome voice actors like Zack Levi and Felicia Day), but he honestly is SO much cooler and better then all them (no offense to those guys, I love them). The introduction made more sense, the narrative had a more defined three act structure (something Extra Credits criticized on NV), it felt more like a true post apocalypse, and it really set the stage for the franchise in modern gaming years after the last classic Fallout title.
NV was great, but it was buggier, Vegas was boring compared to DC, it was much more awkward in animations and such (mostly because it came out later I guess and still those issues were there), and it didn't improve a whole lot.
Both games rule however.
SPYDER0416
when you compare it to FO3 and say its superior to it in every way, you must not of played FO3 very much, or you just don't like fighting human enemies or maybe you don't like complex indoor and outdoor locations or exploring, maybe the map was too complicated for you to navigate, but NV had very few human enemies to fight, it had no city areas to sneak around and explore, no good battlezeones, no secret bases etc etc, no super mutants, no enclave, no formidable human opponents in cool areas to fight, powder gangers and CL standing around tents with melee weapons? thats a joke. it wasn't a good open world game compared to FO3...it had no random encounters, no random enemy spawns, its a static world when it comes to enemies to fight, there was no point in cruising around the map, most areas had nothing happening ever, not even periodicaly..you think most people are gonna like it better even though its missing all that? just cause it has a few more weapons and gambling? there is a reason new vegas never had the popularity FO3 had...it just doesn't have the appeal of that FO3 had, its lacking too many important elements, some of which i mentioned.I moved on to Fallout New Vegas. Have never looked back. I still have to go back & complete some of the DLCs in the future. New Vegas is a completely superior game in every single area though. Im really surprised this isnt the majority opinion. Some of you must take off your nostalgia goggles.
brucecambell
[QUOTE="brucecambell"]
[QUOTE="losangeles5"]
there isn't a question, more people prefer FO3 and nostalgia has nothing to do with it...if anything more nostaligia is with those who prefer NV since obsidian has lots of people who were involved in the first two fallout games from black isle studios...you think NV beats out FO3 in every area? not even close...NV is empty desert with hardly any buildings, no secret bases, no good battlezones, hardly any human enemies who actually shoot at you, nothing was random, no factions patrolled the map, the same 3 bark scoprions are gonna spawn at the BoS bunker every time, most of the enemies were creatures and sniping deathclaws and scorpions isn't very fun. FO3 had tons of cool areas to explore and sneak around. the entire DC area was a battlezone with tons of stuff to explore. FO3 had like 100 times more buildings, lots of huge inside and outside areas to sneak around, lots of nooks and crannies...new vegas was a static world when it came to enemies to fight. NV did have a lot of good weapons but without many human enemies to fight it didn't matter if you had lots of weapons. nothing to shoot except geckos, scorpions, cazedores and deathclaws..the powder gangers just threw dynamite and stood around a camground area, same with ceasers legion, all melle fighters pretty much, and they just stood around a few tents, the ncr stood around some tents, none of the towns in NV were that fun...nipton, you show up, ceasers legion leaves and thats it for nipton, boulder city, you show up, go talk to the khans and thats it for boulder city..primm was the only decent town with action, and not a lot of it at that, once you deal with the powder gangers, no more reason to go there again, most of NV is just empty areas with a some tents and a few shacks, the city area was like 1/10 if that of the size of the city area in FO3 with no enemies to fight and no good locations to sneak around and explore.
losangeles5
Use paragraphs or nobody will read your stuff. Just a tip. If you dont break apart your words then it just becomes a messy wall of text.
With that said your opinions are entirely false & subjective. As someone who has played both games, my points still stands. read it again. I hold no bias. Everything you have stated is wrong with the only exception being no real random charcater parties roaming the lands.
F3 had like a 100 times more copy & paste with no real unique areas, the inside & the ousides were all the same, just as i had said before. How many times did you come across the same warehouse with dirty walls & white cracked paint? The entire game was one big copy & paste.
The game simply had no variety or real personality compared to New Vegas. All the factions, the areas, the people, the missions were unique, it had better writing, better dialogue choices, more to do. New Vegas was an improvement in every single area.
IM sorry for those who prefer F3 but at the end of the day its simply subjective to you that F3 is better. Anybody who can examines the game from an outside perspective, can see the NV simply is a superior game in any area.
of course its all subjective, its what a person wants in a game, however far more people prefer FO3, every poll i ever seen on the two games, its always FO3 on top, so sure some people prefer NV, but if its gonna be up for vote, FO3 wins out every time, sure NV is a good game still, but its like 1/10 the size of FO3 with far less to explore and far less humans enemies to kill and just not many good locations on the map. FO3 locations were all different areas, maybe the metro tunnels some some building interiors were similar, but it was a huge game so you're gonna have some of that, but in NV, its mostly just all desert thats looks the same, its pretty much all copy and paste, 3 huge dry lake beds? those 3 dry lake beds take up 1/3 of the map, and nothing is there except ants and scorpions, so i prefer some copy and paste buildings over emtpy dry lake beds. and as far as "branching story" in NV...the game still plays out the same, the only difference is if you side up with the boomers they fly the plane over the dam, big deal, or some other faction helps you at the final battle, so the branching story doesn't really make the game different, all it does it make the ending slides different but the game is over then so the branching quests aren't all that excting, all it is, is picking factions but the game plays exactly the same and not much in game really changes, so it sounds good but practially it makes no difference in the feel of the game. new vegas did have a good selection of weapons and a lot of dialogue, but it took 2 steps forward and 10 steps backwards.[QUOTE="losangeles5"]
there isn't a question, more people prefer FO3 and nostalgia has nothing to do with it...if anything more nostaligia is with those who prefer NV since obsidian has lots of people who were involved in the first two fallout games from black isle studios...you think NV beats out FO3 in every area? not even close...NV is empty desert with hardly any buildings, no secret bases, no good battlezones, hardly any human enemies who actually shoot at you, nothing was random, no factions patrolled the map, the same 3 bark scoprions are gonna spawn at the BoS bunker every time, most of the enemies were creatures and sniping deathclaws and scorpions isn't very fun. FO3 had tons of cool areas to explore and sneak around. the entire DC area was a battlezone with tons of stuff to explore. FO3 had like 100 times more buildings, lots of huge inside and outside areas to sneak around, lots of nooks and crannies...new vegas was a static world when it came to enemies to fight. NV did have a lot of good weapons but without many human enemies to fight it didn't matter if you had lots of weapons. nothing to shoot except geckos, scorpions, cazedores and deathclaws..the powder gangers just threw dynamite and stood around a camground area, same with ceasers legion, all melle fighters pretty much, and they just stood around a few tents, the ncr stood around some tents, none of the towns in NV were that fun...nipton, you show up, ceasers legion leaves and thats it for nipton, boulder city, you show up, go talk to the khans and thats it for boulder city..primm was the only decent town with action, and not a lot of it at that, once you deal with the powder gangers, no more reason to go there again, most of NV is just empty areas with a some tents and a few shacks, the city area was like 1/10 if that of the size of the city area in FO3 with no enemies to fight and no good locations to sneak around and explore.
brucecambell
Use paragraphs or nobody will read your stuff. Just a tip. If you dont break apart your words then it just becomes a messy wall of text.
With that said your opinions are entirely false & subjective. As someone who has played both games, my points still stands. read it again. I hold no bias. Everything you have stated is wrong with the only exception being no real random charcater parties roaming the lands.
F3 had like a 100 times more copy & paste with no real unique areas, the inside & the ousides were all the same, just as i had said before. How many times did you come across the same warehouse with dirty walls & white cracked paint? The entire game was one big copy & paste.
The game simply had no variety or real personality compared to New Vegas. All the factions, the areas, the people, the missions were unique, it had better writing, better dialogue choices, more to do. New Vegas was an improvement in every single area.
IM sorry for those who prefer F3 but at the end of the day its simply subjective to you that F3 is better. Anybody who can examines the game from an outside perspective, can see the NV simply is a superior game in any area.
making the statement NV was an improvement over FO3 in every category is a joke and nobody buys that, and you're in a minority that actually believes that, no random encounters, no random spawns, its all the same stuff spawning, the locations were tents and shacks, very few buildings, no secret bases, thats like 100 steps backwards from FO3, very few humans enemies and the few human enemies mostly used melee weapons, no good battlezones, black mountain? the only place with supermutants to fight practically, a linear road up to the top no places to sneak around, compare that to the dc area with all the locations to fight supermutants, also no high tech enemies to fight except a few fiends, no factions patrolled the map, in FO3 the various factions were all over the place..slavers, hunters, enclave, outcasts, raiders, mercs, and they all patrolled most of the map...you're basically saying the game is better with all that stuff left out...ceasers legion main base is a lot of tents? ...well all i can say is those are some of the reasons new vegas is just a mediocre game and FO3 is legendary, and it is legendary, i am always finding people mentioning FO3 and comparing it to even current games, its the benchmark for most open world type games.[QUOTE="losangeles5"]
there isn't a question, more people prefer FO3 and nostalgia has nothing to do with it...if anything more nostaligia is with those who prefer NV since obsidian has lots of people who were involved in the first two fallout games from black isle studios...you think NV beats out FO3 in every area? not even close...NV is empty desert with hardly any buildings, no secret bases, no good battlezones, hardly any human enemies who actually shoot at you, nothing was random, no factions patrolled the map, the same 3 bark scoprions are gonna spawn at the BoS bunker every time, most of the enemies were creatures and sniping deathclaws and scorpions isn't very fun. FO3 had tons of cool areas to explore and sneak around. the entire DC area was a battlezone with tons of stuff to explore. FO3 had like 100 times more buildings, lots of huge inside and outside areas to sneak around, lots of nooks and crannies...new vegas was a static world when it came to enemies to fight. NV did have a lot of good weapons but without many human enemies to fight it didn't matter if you had lots of weapons. nothing to shoot except geckos, scorpions, cazedores and deathclaws..the powder gangers just threw dynamite and stood around a camground area, same with ceasers legion, all melle fighters pretty much, and they just stood around a few tents, the ncr stood around some tents, none of the towns in NV were that fun...nipton, you show up, ceasers legion leaves and thats it for nipton, boulder city, you show up, go talk to the khans and thats it for boulder city..primm was the only decent town with action, and not a lot of it at that, once you deal with the powder gangers, no more reason to go there again, most of NV is just empty areas with a some tents and a few shacks, the city area was like 1/10 if that of the size of the city area in FO3 with no enemies to fight and no good locations to sneak around and explore.
brucecambell
Use paragraphs or nobody will read your stuff. Just a tip. If you dont break apart your words then it just becomes a messy wall of text.
With that said your opinions are entirely false & subjective. As someone who has played both games, my points still stands. read it again. I hold no bias. Everything you have stated is wrong with the only exception being no real random charcater parties roaming the lands.
F3 had like a 100 times more copy & paste with no real unique areas, the inside & the ousides were all the same, just as i had said before. How many times did you come across the same warehouse with dirty walls & white cracked paint? The entire game was one big copy & paste.
The game simply had no variety or real personality compared to New Vegas. All the factions, the areas, the people, the missions were unique, it had better writing, better dialogue choices, more to do. New Vegas was an improvement in every single area.
IM sorry for those who prefer F3 but at the end of the day its simply subjective to you that F3 is better. Anybody who can examines the game from an outside perspective, can see the NV simply is a superior game in any area.
of course its all subjective, its what a person wants in a game, however far more people prefer FO3, every poll i ever seen on the two games, its always FO3 on top, so sure some people prefer NV, but if its gonna be up for vote, FO3 wins out every time, sure NV is a good game still, but its like 1/10 the size of FO3 with far less to explore and far less humans enemies to kill and just not many good locations on the map. FO3 locations were all different areas, maybe the metro tunnels some some building interiors were similar, but it was a huge game so you're gonna have some of that, but in NV, its mostly just all desert thats looks the same, its pretty much all copy and paste, 3 huge dry lake beds? those 3 dry lake beds take up 1/3 of the map, and nothing is there except ants and scorpions, so i prefer some copy and paste buildings over emtpy dry lake beds.there isn't a question, more people prefer FO3 and nostalgia has nothing to do with it...if anything more nostaligia is with those who prefer NV since obsidian has lots of people who were involved in the first two fallout games from black isle studios...you think NV beats out FO3 in every area? not even close...NV is empty desert with hardly any buildings, no secret bases, no good battlezones, hardly any human enemies who actually shoot at you, nothing was random, no factions patrolled the map, the same 3 bark scoprions are gonna spawn at the BoS bunker every time, most of the enemies were creatures and sniping deathclaws and scorpions isn't very fun. FO3 had tons of cool areas to explore and sneak around. the entire DC area was a battlezone with tons of stuff to explore. FO3 had like 100 times more buildings, lots of huge inside and outside areas to sneak around, lots of nooks and crannies...new vegas was a static world when it came to enemies to fight. NV did have a lot of good weapons but without many human enemies to fight it didn't matter if you had lots of weapons. nothing to shoot except geckos, scorpions, cazedores and deathclaws..the powder gangers just threw dynamite and stood around a camground area, same with ceasers legion, all melle fighters pretty much, and they just stood around a few tents, the ncr stood around some tents, none of the towns in NV were that fun...nipton, you show up, ceasers legion leaves and thats it for nipton, boulder city, you show up, go talk to the khans and thats it for boulder city..primm was the only decent town with action, and not a lot of it at that, once you deal with the powder gangers, no more reason to go there again, most of NV is just empty areas with a some tents and a few shacks, the city area was like 1/10 if that of the size of the city area in FO3 with no enemies to fight and no good locations to sneak around and explore.There shouldnt even be a question. Take off your nostalgia goggles folks.
Fallout New Vegas exceeds F3 is very single area. The writing was clearly better & it even offered more missions & 40% more dialogue than F3
The personality of the world & charcaters, the charcaters & story, the world itself has more color, variety & personailty, the missions & level designs, the gameplay ( diffculty to Hardcore mode, weapons mods, followers, more weapons, etc ). There is not a single area that NV hasnt completely trumped F3.
I loved F3 at the time but it lacked any real personality or variety in its characters, missions or world. In every single area was copy & pasted a 1000 times. Every mission either took place in the same warehouse with dirty walls with white cracked paint, or some type of half cave/half vault with metal sheeted walls.
It all looked the same every where, you would even get lost as there was no way to tell where you were in each section. People dont wont to admit it but F3 had its faults.
brucecambell
FO3 is superior, and to the guys who think the reason new vegas isn't liked nearly as much is because of "bugs" thats not the reason people like FO3 better, new vegas is a static game environment, nothing random happens, it doesn't have many human enemies who shoot at you, its an empty world pretty much, very little to explore, no nooks and crannies to sneak around in, only one or two good battlezones maybe where the fiends are...now FO3 had like 100 times more good locations to sneak around, battle enemies and explore, 100 times more buildings, the inside and outside locations were complex and large with lots of hiding places and battle areas, like la enfant plaza, seward square, the mall, both sides of the capitol building, georgetown, chevy chase, dupont circle, takoma industrial, the areas around the statesman hotel etc. not to mention huge indoor locations like the capitol building, the roosovelt academy, LOB enterprise, red racer factory etc. FO3 had fun enemies to fight like the enclave, tons of supermutants, raiders, mercs, lots more factions that actually patrolled the entire map, like the outcasts or enclave, hunters, slavers, mercs etc..FO3 wasteland was a dangerous place to cruise around..NV had some kinda goofy cowboy/gangster theme which i didn't like and it didn't have that much going on..sniping deathclaws and geckos isn't that fun, its fine to have some creatures in a game but human enemies are always more fun to fight..and NV just didn't have enough buildings, towns/complex locations and nooks and crannies to explore and battle enemies in.
Log in to comment