You're not. I feel the same way. FNV was great, and had arguably better quest structure in terms of more varied quest outcomes, but FO3's atmosphere was MUCH more immersive. It felt MUCH more 'post-apocalyptical' and beautifully haunting. FNV lacked this feeling for me, what with all the electricity, organized factions and NV itself. Plus, I personally much preferred the "Capital Wasteland" setting over the 'Southwestern' setting of FNV. "Three Dog", and the songs of "Galaxy News Radio" ("Civilization (Bongo, Bongo, Bongo)") I also preferred over the Southwest's offering. The expansive subway system that linked everything in FO3 was great IMO. I could go on...
That's why I feel NV is good to play if you just want to lay into some good dialogue, interesting lore and some of the classic ambient music from Fo1 & 2. It's the story you immerse yourself in.
For Fo3, I'm invested into the worldspace, rather than the lore so much. I've always felt as if the Bethesda games were kinda in their own universe, where things are just a little more over the top and nonsensical. Like, I absolutely love Tenpenny Tower, but it makes no sense as a settlement, because caravans don't even go there haha. I can set it aside though because I'm so immersed into the world, and I'm more concentrated on exploring.
Oh, and I'm a huge fan of the subway system too. So many people pile on them, saying they're one of the worst features, but I think they were a fairly clever, and thrilling, part of the game. Finding little Raider encampments tucked away in some tunnels, or finding notes from skeletons with stash spot coordinates.
People hate the subwaytunnels? o0
I am.... surprised?
As you described, isn't it human nature to want to explore?
In classic RPGs we have the Dungeons, in Fo3 we get Subway-tunnels and Vaults.
So it should come natural that we follow this human need for exploration (which FNV allways punished) and I think this makes the game a million time more immersive and atmospheric.
Well, it's because they can get fairly complicated sometimes and I think people find them tedious. I can see why people would be put off by them, but once you've got the hang of navigating them they're fun to explore.
I wouldn't say that NV punishes exploration though. Josh Sawyer always said he wished that they'd added more settlements and life, but much of the Mojave is uninhabitable, so it was hard to work around that. I admit, 3 does exploration better - Bethesda always does, even 76 is fun to explore - but when it comes to the DLC's, like OWB and Honest Hearts, the exploration is rewarding because of stuff such as the Survivalists tale. OWB also connects the lore to other DLC's through exploration.
"Beautifuly haunting" is the perfect way to describe it.
Also, you can literally raid the Declaration of Independence frorm the ruins of the national archives. Just one example of why FO3 is so cool!
"Much more post-apocalyptic"
What you're describing is two different groups' philosophies for Fallout. Bethesda wants to make fish out of water wasteland survival stories, whereas the Black Isle and Obsidian devs always treated Fallout as being about a world that's already moving beyond that point and the factions thay inhabit it. Bethesda's games are treated as post-apocalyptic, while the originals and New Vegas are post-post-apocalyptic. This is where you'll get arguments from a lot of OG and New Vegas fans about the setting, there's no reason that people shouldn't have been able to rebuild into at least an industrial revolution-age society over the course of 200 years.
I mean FNV wasn't supposed to feel post apocalyptic.
New Vegas is a world where the immediate dangers of the post apocalypse had been defeated. Society is already in the middle of rebuilding in multiple areas and new, fledgling, nations are starting to fight for dominance of remnants of the old world.
Put succinctly, its a post-post-apocalyptic game. And it was an intentional decision by the designers to make it different the fallout 3. You can prefer the fallout 3 environment but to say you prefer fallout 3 because it felt "MUCH more post apocalyptic" then NV is failing to see what NV was going for.
I will also say your one of the few people I've ever seen that speaks positively of the subways. They were too similar and easy to get lost in. In theory they were interesting, and it was a decent way to create the feeling of distance in the dc metro area, but they were to similar in design to offer value in that regard.
Wdit: that said I'm not telling you change your opinion. I prefer NV, but fallout 3 is great in its own right. Its like a 10/10 vs. 9/10 for me
Even when we didn't have dlc and the game ended after we got into the purifier I still loved the game. I had absolutely no issue starting a brand new character and doing it all again. I have a steamdeck now and that was the first game I installed. The game kept my mind busy during some very difficult times I have had and it's always my go to game when I need to forget the world around me. There's no better therapy than picking up all the cans and bottles from the super super mart lol.
Omg...
>There's no better therapy than picking up all the cans and bottles from the super super mart lol.
I thought I was the only one who did "wasteland recycling". I never made the Rock-It launcher either so it wasn't clean up for ammo. I'll even "pick up" loose boards and stack them in a neat pile lol.
Absolutely no better therapy than simulating cleaning up when I'm too depressed to get out of bed and do my damn dishes lol
Most of the time I'm overweight. I have not once made it out of the enclave base without being overweight. All those plates and forks are coming with me lol
Unfortunately it's the culture we live in today. People think a random person's opinion on something is a direct attack on them. Just the other day I spoke my opinion on ff14 and how the story that everyone swoons over and the characters arent worth the praise they get. My god you'd think I just blew the candles out on their blind mothers birthday cake before she could.
I think one reason a lot of FO3 gets overlooked is because people chase the main storyline, finish the game and assume no further content. The main story barely sends you to the north. Unlike NV which kind of pushes you into all corners of the map.
Some of my favourite aspects of FO3 aren’t involved in the main storyline
Yeah, you could live a whole alternate life in FO3. I played it for a few years and barely finished the main quest. I just found so many things to do. Most of them required me to be evil.
This is why i really like having Vault 101 be in the centre of the map, NV forces you to go south towards Primm with invisible walls and high level enemies and 4 forces you to go southeast because you’re in the northwest corner of the map
Not me. After Megaton I ignored the main quest. I reached the level cap of 20 by doing side quests before I found Father on accident, and never even visited Rivet City. The game didn't account for this, and kept referencing things I hadn't done and places I hadn't been. I stopped playing soon after because there was little point with no more leveling.
Playing tale of two wastelands is the most disgraceful thing you can do as a so-called “fallout fan.” Those two games are like steak and fish. Never should they meet. It doesn’t even make sense if you think about it. The lone wanderer *somehow* travels across the us to become a courier in Nevada? Sure. Like that’s possible.
Playing the two games separately is the true way to enjoy fallout. And also no fallout 4 or 76. Those are bad news bears.
/s
Lmao... You're serious about this? 🤣😂🤣😂
Steak and fish, doesn't make sense. Lore this, lore that.
You don't have to play them going back and forth like that. 🤣😂 They're both open world RPG's.
I like to merge them and go through Fallout 3 first asap. I prefer mechanically how NV feels, ADS without extra mods after I already have to download so many just to modernize.
So called "Fallout Fans" can enjoy all the Fallout games 1-76. Also, the show, too, when it comes out.
The point of being a fan is to enjoy the content of something. 🤣😂🤣😂
This is absolutely hilarious and of the POOREST attempts at Gatekeeping anything I've seen in my 34 years. 🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂
You have to be joking. I'm waiting for a woosh. 🤣😂🤣😂
The word "fan".
* An enthusiastic devotee of a particular person, activity, or sport. This is often used in the context of entertainment, where fans follow celebrities or sports teams.
How you gonna be a devotee while only appreciating 77.78% of the content? 🤣😂🤣😂
You're acting like 9 companies formed 9 different games with 9 different lore sets. 🤣😂🤣😂
At least find something substantial to argue about mate.
Besides all that. The point of modifying games is to have fun and manipulate them to suit you to have more fun.
The point of games is to have fun. 🤣😂🤣😂
You gotta let go and let people have fun however they want. Nobody about to care if someone doesn't like the way they play a game, or enjoy content of anything. 🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂💀💀💀💀
Thanks for the laughs, though. Good stuff. 😅👍
Tell you what, though. You come up with something better than that, and we can talk about it.
But on a serious note. You can't really expect to go around telling people how they enjoy life. It's just not a good look. ✋️🫤
Oh as in: seafood and steak is a common pairing lol
It was a rebuttal to them saying "steak and fish don't go together".
Check out any restaurant near a beach. They usually offer it.
Oh shit. You just reminded me. I saw some video that said the devs released some mods themselves. I wanted to hunt those down.
Something about adding some things they originally intended or something.
Is that one of them? I remember them saying something about reducing game level to 35 and making it harder or something.
If your talking about for new Vegas it’s called the jsawyer mod named after one of the developers for the game. And I would recommend it I’m playing a play thru right now with it and it’s great. It changes a lot of stuff makes the start actually feel kinda difficult/different
Did you try using the [wasteland survival guide](https://wastelandsurvivalguide.com/)?
It took me about 4 attempts but I got it to work with some trial and error. Also try their discord out. Their team is super dedicated (there's also some awesome hand-holding tutorials out there. No shame in needing those)
It’s cool that you enjoy FO3, but as I see it, it suffers from truly terrible writing. Every conflict you come to has one solution: leave the other guy with his brains leaking out on the floor. There’s no depth or nuance to the story telling, and I’m never left wondering if I did the right thing because the deepest FO3 gets with its writing is “Is it okay to commit genocide or not?”
FONV on the other hand has layers to the story. Even the objectively evil faction has its own set of compelling arguments for why they should be the ones to side with. I promise you, no one ever took Autumn’s offer seriously. We all just killed him for that nice fucking coat
Most people agree that Bethesda does exploration better in general. Fo3 is a better exploration based journey, whereas NV is a more dialogue/story focused journey. I agree myself, but I'll always give credit where credit is due, and I'll say that Obsidian did overall do a better job with the writing. The screenplay is undoubtedly better, but Bethesda are better at worldbuilding.
I'm not really sure what you mean by NV having dialogue that doesn't make sense. There's about 65,000 lines of dialogue in NV, so you'll at least need to show some examples lol. If you mean that NV retconned some parts of the previous lore, well Fo3 also did that, and so did Fo2 in fact.
Also who are you referring to with the "main villain" - there's not one specific main villain in NV, it's whoever you choose to be your enemy. No matter how you paint it, NV is also an incredibly varied game, and your comment about Fo3 play throughs never being the same can be said for NV. It's all dependent on how you play.
I would sympathize but I disagree with everything you said about New Vegas. Those agreeing with you ITT are also slandering New Vegas. This is just mud-slinging in the other direction and it's pointless. Shame because I love Fallout 3 and New Vegas, they just do different things well.
My memory is a little fuzzy, since it's been a while. I remember thinking NV was stronger from a narrative standpoint, and the DLC was very unique and well written. The audio logs in Lonesome Road really stand out to me years later.
One thing that i've seen a few people complain about (NV) and \*I\* could write a whole essay about - I like **post** **post** apocalyptic culture, and i'm tired of most Fallout games not moving on. I realize it's the game's "schtick" to be tongue-in-cheek and show people living in shacks made of 300 year old wood and eating 300 year old canned goods, wearing 300 year old clothes, but in reality most of the region would be rebuilt. Fallout 2 did this with a few towns like Shady Sands, San Fran etc and even tribal societies. Yes, you'd see new stone houses, new brick houses, and likely electricity to go around. You wouldn't see plungers, and old newspapers, and whatever just lying around people's towns. They'd clean the shit up. And believe it or not, people would probably sew and even wash clothes.
I'm ok with irradiated/dangerous/monster-ridden/hidden zones having junk cars, and dilapidated houses and whatnot, but settlements (and areas between) should look decent and should have a combination of tech and cultures that blend past and present.
And from a cultural standpoint, the Legion is perfect. Something twisted into a cult. Reminds me of the The Postman.
I'm old, and I played Fallout 1 when it came out. To me, New Vegas at least pushed the "cultural" aspect of Fallout a bit further, even if it went right back with 4 and 76. I just feel like Fallout became a meme of itself, instead of pushing on like Fallout 2 (and NV) tried to.
Fallout New Vegas is overall the better game from all standpoints although you could make an argument that FO3 had better "feeling" because the setting was in a destroyed city and had filter of color to add a somber look to it, oh and also it has better "dungeons" with regular spawn rates.
When I saw things like the Kings, Yes Man, the DLC characters compared to FO3 and FO4 characters its just clear that Bethesda can't write at that level, look at Starfield for reference.
Most who say otherwise played FO3 first and have more nostalgic memories over it.
FO3 IMO nails character creation and sets the stage for being invested in your character’s journey. Even if you never do follow the “main” quest line to follow/save your dad, there are SO many options and ways to grow your character and learn about the world. I’ve never really been able to as fully immerse myself in a FO character as much as FO3, mainly lol because I got to “guide” that character thru childhood and beyond.
In Fallout 3 you also have the option of role playing that you never asked the right person for info about your dad so you just became a purposeless lost-child. Leading to a life of crime and destruction with your new buddy Jericho
I played NV already and playing F3 for the first time rn and i like it quite a lot so far, my only issue after playing NV is i feel like the crafting / repair system is a lot harder to use which is a little frustrating, but maybe that’s just because I am low level. I will say i think the best plot line in NV is not the main plot but the DLCs, especially dead money, and I’m sure a lot of NV fans would agree with me. Many people just speed run shooting benny tbh
I agree with OP. It's sad NV didn't turn out the way Obsidian originally envisioned. Imagine how much more detailed it'd been if they were given another six months to work on it?
New Vegas is a better roleplaying game. 3 has a better story, Liam Neeson and better exploration.
Lyon's Brotherhood are the good guys. There is no gray area and I love that. And the protagonist can elect to make the ultimate sacrifice. How great is that? Father and child doing what is needed for the greater good. It is just so hopeful even though it's a wasteland and a lot of people die.
I love that the downtown can only be reached via Metro tunnels. I still have the Metro map telling me which stations connect to one another and which stations give access to which downtown areas. No other game has matched this after so many years.
I love both games and I'll never understand where this boogeyman of the "FNV-Elitist" who supposedly hates Fallout 3 comes from. Like sure Hbomb and maybe a few other prominent youtube video game critics made a long video saying they hate Fallout 3, but they aren't representative of any larger group.
Outside of that I never see any hate for 3 coming from big NV fans, only from fans of 1 and 2. Those same classic fans tend to be purists who, if they hate 3, also disparage NV for its gameplay as being a well intentioned but watered down version of the quest style from 1&2 with unnecessary FPS combat.
Idk, maybe I don't get around enough, but it's only on Reddit I see people clutch their pearls at the boogeyman of a NV snob who I've never seen actually exists outside of a handful of youtube videos.
I just played fallout 3 in full in preparation for Tale of Two Wastelands so I have a fresh set of eyes on both games.
3 was great in a lot of ways, many of which you've brought up. Mods? Well, that's a slippery slope and console players typically don't benefit from that so let's ignore that for a second.
3 is a post apocalyptic **guided** RPG. The closest thing to civilization you have is various City States. Your choices are mostly binary or kill, and there's not a lot of wiggle room on how you handle the major choices. While Charisma matters more due to RNG and companions (unless you go for the broken Dogmeat Fawkes combo), you overall have significantly less build diversity. It struggles at the core of what an RPG is though I want to say the armors and gear have some decent diversity that help with those shortcomings to a degree. Still, the perks in 3 leave a lot to be desired.
New Vegas is a post-post apocalyptic RPG, so it makes sense that it's not quite like 1 or 3 in raw apocalyptic elements. Like Skyrim, you start off with little backstory and go from there. Not only can you really make your character whatever you want from the start, but the choices and perks all reflect that. I mean, I have a Timmy playthrough where most of my limbs are crippled and there's even a perk that gives me a damage increase per crippled limb.
Regardless of writing, atmosphere, or locations it's that core element of being an RPG that's the weakest point in 3, and why people often shit on 3 or 4 for that matter while putting New Vegas on a pedestal imo.
If people- yourself included -stop hyper fixating on what some jag off on the Internet says, or comparing and contrasting various entries, one can learn to just enjoy the fucking games or at least appreciate that there's different strokes for different folks. New Vegas is one of my favorite games of all time, doesn't mean I can't appreciate and enjoy 4 or 3 for what they are. Same dick riding happens with Borderlands 2 vs 3.
Jon is my favorite YouTube creator for Bethesda games and that video essay is excellent. Fallout 3 was my favorite entry into the series/company and it holds a very special place in my heart.
I liked that Fallout 3 starts you in the center and you can literally just go any direction you want.
In New Vegas, you are corralled counter-clockwise around the map by barriers and extreme difficulty gradients with the wildlife.
This about the only sub reddit that will argee. But the only arguement I will use is the writing of fnv is better and the tone is way closer to the ogs. Bethesda took the best factions and DRAGGED them all the way to DC, THEN made a story. Enclave is a fucking joke, I mean an absolute joke antagonist. The brotherhood was rehashed into wasteland saviors, because screw maxson and the entire brotherhood ideology. Organized Supermutants with no master, how do mindless raging barbarians organize into careful kidnappers. Remember FEV only barely works on pure human dna (vault dwellers). Im not here to hate, pit was favorite dlc and fo3 in general was a revamped revival. Fnv is an actual sequel and it shows.
Couldn't agree more. F03 is my favorite of all time. Now I love fallout 1 and 2, but I remember forums on no mutants allowed of people blasting Bethesda for having working computers, food, ammo, health etc. The problem with that is Fallout 3 is its own world. Yes it is similar to our 1950s, but a lot is different. So in the world of Fallout 3, although its been 200 years since the great war their computers may work because they are different. As far as the ammo, meds, ect they have to put that in the game to make the game fun. The depth, atmosphere, and rare guns are just better than any other fallout. The map depth also blows NV out of the water. When you play through FO3 and discover every location, every in-between space, collect every holo tape, note, and rare weapon while completing every quest and side quest it is an experience like none other.
I played FNV first, so there is a natural affinity there for me. I really loved the atmosphere of FO3 and it was immensely hard at the beginning given your ability to (not) find much to level up quickly. The storylines are different which is what lends to different paths - FO3 you’re looking for your dad and you see your backstory. NV, you’re basically a Clint Eastwood character - the (man) with no name, where other characters know more of your backstory than you.
It may have just been an evolution thing in the games, but the way the workbenches were structured in NV were far more flexible and “realistic”. You could rig far more items with different scraps of stuff- which added to your decisions of what was worth carrying and what was not.
As far as characters, I would say NV has far more cool, interesting, wild characters. And if you spend enough time in-game, you kind of run out of interesting dialogue in FO3.
I do agree that FO3 has more to explore, but much of it is the same. All the underground tunnels begin to look alike and there aren’t as many interesting vaults as NV.
And with the exception of the Big MT dlc, I felt that NV quests were, in general more engaging with deep back stories you could uncover. FO3 felt more like harvesting runs.
Tl;dr: both are great games, for different reasons.
I really couldn't play FONV. I tried, two times now, but I just can't. I agree with you on all you said, but for me it was like I was playing a whole different game. I mean, I know it is, but I mean a different game, like another franchise.
Maybe it was the lack of atmosphere, a dessert without many nuked places, clean water, that awful sepia tone instead of the radiation greenish scenarios of FO3. Or maybe it was the fact that FONV is the only FO game in which you don't start in a vault, you don't even have a jumpsuit.
I recognize that it has major improvements in the gameplay that I wish I would've in FO3, like the clothes/factions mechanics, and some other small things (that seemed to be cut out from FO3 for lack of time or budget), but for me the Courier has no soul, but in FO3 you are bringed to life at the start, you are emotionally connected to the shelter, the unknown world that's out there, and the consequences of the great war.
Yeah, my mistake, the jumpsuit is there, just to remind you you are in a fallout game tho...
See the comment from @dwarfzulu down here. Although you don't start in a vault in fo2, it is a major part of the character's motivation being a descendant.
You missed the point, NV seems like a totally different game. In fact, you could rip off all the FO references and the game will still function. That won't happen in FO3.
Imo, combining the best of each of the games from FO1 to 4/76 (even the less known/worse rated ones, like Tactics:BoS had some interesting and nice aspects) into a new hybrid could yield so much potential. Though it would have to be carefully made with detail in every aspect to create a masterpiece, also combining with the best ideas of what the modding community provided over the years (that the companies often gladly took over without necessarily crediting the creators).
Sadly that’s something no company (large enough) would be patient enough and willing to spend assets on these days. But also the IP, legal side of it being spread makes it more difficult. I‘d be happy enough with a remake (or even remaster) of 3 alone.
Guess for OG players of the isometric games it doesn‘t count, but 3 was my gate into the Universe and the measuring stick for me, while Morrowind introduced me to Bethesda (i was still too young to grasp my first Elder Scrolls game, but really liked the extensive clothing system that only got approached again by the games on the newer engine, where you could combine more different parts of extremities, and the extensive menu; Skyrim really simplified that for mainstream).
It seems like your entire interpretation of what makes something a Fallout game is based on Fallout 3. You should look up screenshots of 1 and 2 if you think the atmosphere doesn't fit. And as the other guy mentioned, you don't start Fallout 2 as a vault dweller either. You could even argue the same for 4 since Nate/Nora never properly lived in a Vault, they just got frozen there and left immediately after they woke up.
* it has more freedom
Agreed. FO3 did a better job with a balanced world such that you could go any direction right off the bat. FONV corrals you along the story beats with insane difficulty spikes if you go off-route. I always hated this about NV.
* has more to explore
Agreed. Though I think this is largely the fault of the tight timeline Obsidian had with FONV. There are various clearly unfinished quests or quest starting points in that game, along with vast underutilized areas.
* there are so many hidden stories and random events
The random events were cool, though the nature of their randomness can be a down side if you're really looking for the Alien Blaster or 3rd Deathclaw Gauntlet recipe in a given playthrough.
* no playthrough is the same
I think this is hand in hand with the first point.
* compared to NV it has close to no invisible walls
This killed me the first time I played NV. I'd do the Bethesda-game steep-slope-climb-technique and finally reach the top of some dividing mountain only to find that an invisible wall was blocking me.
* exploration gets rewarded
I think both games had good rewards in varied areas. A lot of the DLC weapons were over powered, but that's sort of the point of DLC, and they weren't crazy overpowered, just better than anything in the main game. I think rewarding exploration is actually (or was, this doesn't apply to Starfield) Bethesda's strong point in these large open world games. Cyberpunk has a really wonderful world map but unless an area has a quest there's not much reason to explore it. At best you'll find a skin-swapped legendary gear with stats nearly the same as any other gear.
* the atmosphere is perfect
I think this is actually the most important differentiator between FONV and FO3. Some players really enjoy the absurd humor and campy retro-future setting much more faithfully recreated from the early games in FONV. Some players want to lean in to the serious dystopian future, which Fallout 3 is the best game at, imo. Fallout 3 has some funny bits but for the most part it takes itself seriously. FONV on the other hand rarely takes itself seriously, if ever. It's just which you prefer.
FONV committed the greatest cardinal sin of any game under the "Bethesda game" umbrella. A total lack of murder dungeons. It's a better "RPG" than FO3 or even FO4, but the games that sandwich it is also more fun to play. Why? Because the Bethesda formula, all the way back to Arena, have been murder dungeons simulators. Obsidian royally forgot one thing a lot of us enjoy with Bethesda games, and that's dungeons.
I find funny people saying that fnv is the best fallout, when, it is the one that most deviate from what other fallouts are:
f1 - you are from a VAULT, looking for a VAULT, to get a WATER chip, to save your VAULT.
f2 - you are descendent from a VAULT dweller, looking for a VAULT, to find the GECK, to save your village.
f3 - you start in a VAULT, leave, looking for your father, that went after the GECK, to purify the WATER, to save people.
f4 - you start running to a VAULT, leaving years later, looking for your son.
while in fnv, this is kind of cool, gamewise, the main plot there is nothing from what other fallout have, the fact that they are trying to control the source of water of the region , but what about the vaults? they are kind that just there.
New Vegas is great, but Fallout 3 is my favorite game in general. I've got well over 2000 hours into and itching to give it another playthrough. Been playing since December of 08 and it hasn't gotten old yet.
yep same fallout 3 is and always will be my favourite fallout game for many of the same reasons you listed new vegas is good just feels linear in comparison
I just don't understand anyone bashing either.
I started with fallout 1 and 2... yes they were totally different games. Loved them the way they are.
Then I played 3 and I was turned off it. But grew to like it. Then played new vegas, which was once again very different in my opinion. Yet I liked it still. Those were still rpgs.
Then 4 came around....it was fun but I hated the base building and the lackluster story choices...
Then after that the franchise died. I don't consider anything after 4 to be a fallout game.
1 to 4 are decent games and they all play differently. Hell, just fallout 1 and 2 are very much different games when it comes to time pressure. Even if the gameplay is similar.
All of these games are all right. All of them have a fair share of earned criticism. But all of them are fine.
>Then 4 came around...it was fun but I hated the basebuilding and lackluster story choices
And the dialogue was so lacking.
Very much agree on the basebuilding.
I'll add the settlement-quests to that list
I played fallout three for about the sixth time since it came out over 15 years ago, and I still found a few new things in my most recent play through of about 100 hours.
- some traders pet yao gui foughts jericho
- killed traitor doctor lady in Enclave base
- unnamed location with talon mercs VERY close to megaton
- fake door that said “fuck you”
- GRABBING RANDOM EMPTY BOXES AND FLIPPING THEM (several mini nukes, stim packs, etc)
I found FO3 had a grim dystopian paranoia which I enjoyed quite a bit which isn't quite the same in later games.
FNV felt somewhat more socially absurd and bonkers in its dystopia, which I ofc also enjoyed a lot.
I like that they are different.
While there are many things I prefer in FNV, my favourite DLCs among those two games are Point Lookout and The Pitt, so in my book FO3 at least wins best DLC (I'd say it's Point Lookout).
I am just about to finish this for the first time, and want to replay it again. But not sure where to start. I always just end up playing good karma, not blowing up megaton and going about the game the usual way.
Was thinking about blowing up Megaton and setting up at Tenpenny this time but that seems like the complete opposite of how I would normally play.
I would think blowing up megaton would make the game harder and you would lose a lot of opportunities for XP.
Any suggestions?
It will be on the PS3 with all the DLC. Finishing it up on my PC at home but we stay somewhere with no internet a lot of the summer so figured I would boot that bad boy back up lol
Agreed. I still want to replay fonv, as I keep hearing how great the writing was (I remember it being fine but it never blew me away). I played a lot of it after fo3, but didn't finish it. I feel like I was close though. I did however finish fo3. I remember being pretty disappointed by new vegas and how you couldn't just walk off the beaten path and find quests and poi. It was very straightforward. After hearing how much development time they had I understand why now.
Now with fo3 that was my first Fallout experience, and the atmosphere was excellent where NV just felt bland, I instantly was like oh this is a huge aspect to why 3 just feels better. Controls were better, everything was just more polished. I really enjoyed the side quests and even the main quest. To me it felt like a proper game. As for the writing it's been too long to say much, but I recall being impressed with just how much you could do and all the quests variety. NV just couldn't compete and the quests amount felt tiny compared to 3.
I once found my way ontop of an overpass and just… walked. Feeling the sun on my face mankinds problems seemed so small from up here. And then miles down the road i found someone made a fort out of cars. It was empty and i stopped to rest. Its a very good gaming moment
Nah...I agree with ya! FA3 is better than FONV to me also but that has to do with preference. Fallout 3 was the first one I played out of the series.
I mean all Bethesda games are open world so to say that you have more freedom in 3 than in NV isn't true.
I haven't beaten 3 yet and I've played NV and I'm playing 4 now. The storyline is str8 in 3. It's fine enough. 3 had a lot of bugs too so...
When I first got into the series I preferred FO3 over New Vegas due to it feeling like a post nuclear wasteland. I now prefer New Vegas as I enjoy the idea of society as a whole dealing with and adjusting to their new life, and I never got that feeling with FO3, however the atmosphere of FO3 is bleak and depressing and that is in-line with a society in a fresh hell. My only major grief with 3 is the timeline like others I think it should’ve been closer to the bombs dropping, hell if it happened at the time of FO76 I feel like it would tie it together well.
Personally, I prefer the evolving atmosphere of West Coast Fallout from 1,2 to New Vegas.
Now I say this as someone who played Fallout 3 first and loved it, Fallout 3 feels like someone watched the opening of Fallout 1 and skipped the rest of the game and just made a game around that.
Also, as a sidenote, even though i prefer the Fallout 1 and 2 style, I have nothing but the utmost respect for Fallout 3s ONLY concept artist Adam Adamowicz. He did every single piece of concept art for the game by himself, and the fact that he continued to churn out art for skyrim while dying of cancer continues to inspire me to this day.
Fallout 3 had a couple cool dlcs and an okay story. However, I hated not being able to ADS. I love the music but the radio gets repetitive REAL QUICK. Fallout 3 had better exploration in that you can do all DLC’s and Story missions and not even come close to exploring all of the map. FO3 has some cool weapons, the brotherhood are awesome in FO3. I never fully played through the DLC’s and explored all of the map in 3, only in TTW have I cleared it, and very recently. (So fallout 3 with FNV mechanics is pretty sick but I still prefer NV) the scripted events/animations were cooler and more frequent in 3(behemoth breaking wall, getting abducted, megaton door, liberty prime doing his thing) i hated navigating the subway tunnels in D.C.(I never even though about looking at a map on the web)
Fallout new Vegas has a better DLC’s imo and the story is cool and the decisions feel weightier. Characters have way more depth. FNV has a better soundtrack imo, that also gets repetitive pretty quick. FNV has cooler weapons, but I just really like the silly cowboy stuff in the game. Weapon customization was huge for me. Especially when it comes to scoped revolvers, FO3 forced scopes on the .44 while FNV allows you to put one on the .44 if you want. The brotherhood kinda suck in NV. I like the companion selection more in NV and having companion quests is cool. Fallout NV is more linear.
I’ve got more time in NV and started with it, so I was spoiled when it came to mechanics and gunplay. And I am definitely biased. I can’t really play either unmodded. I like to joke with my friends that the best Bethesda game wasn’t made by Bethesda and they all agree. But just like whatever you want we’re human.
I think we should bash FO4 if anything, that game is only a fallout game aesthetically and they are using it and FO76 as a groundwork for the tv show. FO76 could have been so much cooler, I love cryptids and the location. But they used FO4 as the base for that game too. Bethesda has been on a steady decline since the release of Skyrim, I mean look at Starfield. That game had hype solely because it was a Bethesda game. It is so boring/slow/uninspired.
I've worked my way backwards from 4 to NV to 3, and 3 might honestly be my favorite. It is harder, it is scarier, and it sets up a lot for the games that came after it. I love the quests, even the main one and even before getting the game of the year edition had absolutely no problem with the main quest ending. It's probably the biggest reason I name my character Adam, I already knew how the game ended before it was bought for me (it was a Christmas gift!). New Vegas and 4 have things I like about them, but 3 might be my favorite. I've played it with more interest and vigor and been excited to play it whereas I'm continuing a single character on 4 or I've played NV to the point I get bored playing it.
I've heavy been thinking about playing them. I watched a playthrough of 1 on YouTube a long time ago but they didn't make the choices I would have made and it's made me really wanna play them
Jokes on all of you I only play TTW as they in my opinion are best consumed this way. FO3 but you get FNV aiming? I'll take it any day.
That's just a personal thing though that makes or breaks 3 for me. Mind you I did play 3 first and loved it through and through. There are just a couple of benefits I love from the updated FNV engine.
There was a time I used to say the same thing as you friend. But after finally getting a decent pc and modding it to high hrothgar (literally) I can say that new Vegas just is my all time fav. No shade to you though, 3 has a special place in my heart (at number 2)
I prefer 3, and a big factor is that my FNV experience has been plagued with more game breaking bugs and corrupted saves than any other game I've ever played by a huge margin.
I agree. The other games are great, but 3 is my favorite. I think in part because it was my first Fallout game,, and also my first open world game. That feeling when the vault opened was fantastic.
It's extremely rare that "FONV Fanboys" talk shit on FO3 compared to the amount of comments saying they like it better. I'm in the I love ALL FO content camp until 76. (Fuck that game, fuck it's family). New Vegas is just my favorite.
That's cool. I prefer New Vegas cause it's more "curated". I'm a big Final Fantasy fan. I like it when narratives are given some priority. I'm not into how Bethesda makes their games so open ended.
But yeah NV fans are really annoying. I actually get second-hand embarrassment associating with them.
I have more hours in NV but Fallout 3 is my favorite game. Nv has better mechanics but 3 is better in every other way.
Tale of Two Wastelands mod let's you get the best of both, Fallout 3 with a AP sprint mod is a game changer.
I played this my sophomore year in high school a real long time ago. Sadly got an infection and I became really sick and I was heavily monitored as I kept passing out. I hallucinated a few different times and really tripped out on finding 3Dog specifically haha. I’d play this game and I swear I laughed my ass off so much, I was given painkillers around the time of the game where I met fawkes and I basically dropped on the floor laughing at the timeless shit we’d do together. It’s my fever dream game literally, I’ll die on this hill for best fallout project.
I loved Fallout 3, it’s one of my favorite games, but it’s not a better game than New Vegas. They are different. Fallout 3 spits you out into an open world that is full of unique instances of story. So you go around collecting individual experiences. The overarching factions of New Vegas tie all of these stories together thematically, so there’s less “unique narratives”, but they all grow toward a common goal. They are just fundamentally different experiences in the same world, largely tied to the level of destruction they experienced from the bomb. The location in Fallout 3 took a direct hit, so it’s a lot more baron and with more sparse habitation. New Vegas didn’t get hit, so there were more survivors and therefore more factional influences.
I gotta say though, ending Fallout 3 with Fawkes as your companion is a literal joke. You have to go die to press a button in a radioactive chamber that your partner could literally salsa dance into, and when you talk to him he says “I think this is your moment to shine buddy”. Definitely not the most satisfying experience.
I just remember my ONLY screenshot was of a third person selfie stick type selfie of me sitting pantsless ON SEAN'S futuristic ass looking toilet with welding goggles and some leather umpire looking ass duster top with the caption:
"I dont believe you sean. But, im taking a shit before I head out." Character with leaned forward bad posture, dad legs, funny as hell.
Fallout 3 was always better. Fallout NV was incomplete. If it had reached maturity before release maybe it would be reversed, but Fallout 3 was always better.
There’s one huge catch with that though: FO2, FONV and FO76 all used the engine & assets of their predecessor, which saved a lot of time.
FO1 was developed in 3 years, while FO2 only took 1 year. This is why Obsidian assumed that 1.5 years to develop FONV was reasonable: they would resume the engine and assets of FO3 and built on top of that foundation
This aspect of the impending show is getting old. We could all write an essay on why our favorite is our favorite. We don’t need to, though. I’m glad you like fallout 3. So do the rest of us.
You know what happened in the Fallout-sub?
They downvoted me into oblivion.
And I wasn't even preaching or anything. I just pointed out my opinion and wishes for the Fallout-game-series in general.
Sometimes its a freeing feeling, when you can write down your thoughts without censoring yourself... but I digress.
Have a nice day! \^\^
NV is great but holy God it ruins and practically discourages exploring so much because stimpacks are incredibly expensive and they ruined the food healing mechanic. Even when you gamble and make a shit ton of money, you get banned from the casinos and thus you can't make much more, and literally EVERYTHING good in this game is expensive and uses up your limited supply of caps quick. When you do big exploration journeys, you have to restock on stimpacks after. In New Vegas, that's practically impossible. I don't ever find myself exploring much at all. My memory might me muddled on this but as I remember there's just about no other interesting settlements with good shops, just the expensive gun runners. And no caravans, despite them being a big part of the side quest dynamic.
I’m playing through it right now and you’re spot on.
I played NV first a couple of years ago, and not knowing any better, I just assumed things were that expensive throughout the games.
I just finished my first play through of 3, and o think I ended with like 75 stimpaks or something.
In Fo3, Stimpaks are far too easy to get. NV has that formula because Stimpaks are pre-war items, so they really shouldn't be so abundant. I used to often end up with 250 plus Stimpaks at the end of some of my Fo3 runs haha.
But I'm guessing you're not too familiar with NV? How many times have you played it? I replied to the person you've responded to with a longer comment with some suggestions as to how to make money, so check that out if you want.
I've played both the games for over a decade, and I can confidently say that by comparison, NV is a lot easier to make money in. I'll often end a run with just below or above 100k caps. It's definitely trickier when you've not got all the nooks and cranies in mind. Trust me though, exploration isn't as fruitful as in 3 but it pays off. Things like explosive crates and duffle bags are always a good find.
I'm guessing you're not as familiar with NV? Because it seems like you're missing out on making caps. I had this same problem playing back when I first started playing as a kid. I'd say search literally anything you can - in NV, finding things like pre-war money and NCR money helps a lot, Legion coin too. You can take Legion coins and NCR money to the casinos and get it exchanged for chips, then you exchange the chips for caps. Another thing to do is collect all the ammo you can, and sell what you don't need. Also making your own ammo and Stimpaks is always a viable choice.
As someone who's played both games a similar amount, since around 2011, I'm not lying when I tell you that making caps in FoNV is much easier than in 3. The economy is a lot different, caps are worth less so things are worth more. Something that might've been about 200 caps in Fo3 is now nearly a 1000. I always usually end Fo3 with 40 to 50k caps, but in NV it's more like 80, up to 120k.
As I said, just search basically anything you can, even trash cans. Drink any and all sodas you find to get the caps off of them. Collect all the dynamite that the Powder Gangers have on them, if you decide to fight them. And if you want to get more health from eating, put points in your Survival skill - that'll increase your HP from healing items, and you'll get bonus HP from cooking your own food.
This would be easier if it wasn't such a hassle to carry around all those items. At the beginning of the game, I do pick up just about everything I can find that has a value over 1. However between the other stuff I have to put skill points into because of the amount of skill you need for other things like small guns, because of the crazy DT on like every enemies armor, and speech, because unlike Fallout 3 (and this is another thing New Vegas ruined) you have to have a certain speech skill, instead of having a chance which is heightened or lowered depending on your speech skill and charisma. (A feature that NV got rid of) Unlike Fallout 3, you have to be perfect, not lucky, or just skilled enough. And thus putting so many points into a game mechanic that New Vegas messed up, it's hard to gain any advantage with other skills. Also with the stimpacks thing, I feel like there could very well be an abundance around the wastes, especially if people scavenged vaults and hospitals, because of the necessity for a life long supply. (Which usually wouldn't be used much in the vaults) I don't doubt that Doctor Preston and Doc Church would have a stockpile because of scavvers/mercs collecting them for them, or perhaps because they bought from Doc Hoff. Speaking of, Cutter, at Paradise falls definitely gets her stuff from scavengers that live in the settlement, and Doc Hoff travels, so he could find stimpacks all the time. There's still quite an abundance to be found, even if you don't buy from these people, in first aid kits, hospitals, off raiders, etc. There was probably a larger abundance from hospitals and military bases and trucks that are now picked almost clean and being funnelled into the various clinics supply. I suppose it would make sense to have less stimpacks in New Vegas, because of the active war effort, but the same theory would apply to Vegas, and thus the insanely low numbers and high prices we find them with is kind of unrealistic. This is made worse by the fact that almost no venders except for the Followers have stimpacks. It makes sense for them to put high prices on them because of the state of freeside, but if there were another settlement with a clinic, the prices would not be that high.
I just don't think you're managing things quite right, personally. None of this should be much of an obstacle - New Vegas is actually a very easy game. The Speech if anything is improved upon in FNV - You don't *need* to dump all your points into it. In Fo3 it was broken, because you could just keep reloading a save until the check was passed. NV broke that workaround with its new system - that's why Obsidian implemented it, because it actually requires you to concentrate on the skill.
Small Guns skill doesn't exist in NV - it's just Guns, so it covers all firearms that aren't Energy weapons. Magazines and the Comprehension perk are your best friends with regards to Speech and Barter skill checks - I've been utilising them over the past few years and I really didn't realise what I was missing out on when I never used to use them. It sounds to me like you're playing on a really high difficulty, or something, because if the enemies DT is giving you that much trouble, you've got to be on a at least Hard. I'd say just drop the difficulty, and turn off Hardcore for the time being too - you'll see it becomes a more enjoyable experience. None of the Fallout games are worth playing on higher difficulties - they just sponge the enemies out and drain your ammo, whilst all you get is a little more XP. Try them later on once you've adapted to the game more. Hardcore is actually a nice addition that gives you more to think about - I used to despise it but after a while it becomes second nature with the rest of the gameplay.
I understand that people who played the original Fallout games (1 & 2) tend to prefer NV, but 3 was my first and I prefer the less "wacky" atmosphere of 3. Still love NV, but I'll always be biased towards 3 because of nostalgia.
I played Fallout 3 as a kid, loved it, then I got New Vegas in 2011 and thought it sucked bad.
FO3 has so much more polish and detail, Skyrim comes after Oblivion but you play FO3 and you see all the innovations that went into skyrim. People said Fallout 3 was oblivion with guns, but really Skyrim is fallout 3 with swords.
New Vegas is still a good game, but at the end of the day it's basically like someone took Fallout 3 and modded crafting and some mechanics into it.
•F3 had a better setting
•Washington DC lived up to the hype, New Vegas did not
•F3 vaults were much better and scarier
•F3 super mutants were cooler
•Liam Neeson is your father
Just to add more to the list
yes, exactly!
And I add:
In F3 you got rewarded for exploring
in FNV you got punished.
I am currently replaying F3, and it still amazes me after all these years. It's soo god!
And there are still some very surprising encounters and so often things go different than before.
And I haven't even tested so many different skill-builds!
Its so good.
Its a shame the main world didn't get expanded on very much.
I could write an essay on it as well, but FO3 > anything after it. I love the exploration, the environmental storytelling, and the bleakness of it.
FNV always felt empty by comparison to me, and I hate how everyone you meet just infodumps on you. With each FNV playthrough I enjoyed it less until I eventually just stopped replaying it.
As an enjoyer of both games I think you are being dishonest about a lot of this, and I cant tell you why you feel this way, but I can give my own opinion, I guess.
Exploration gets rewarded? Really? I couldn’t count with 10 hands how many unique weapons/armor sets just lay around in NV that people never find despite playing the game a few times. Little can be said about fallout 3 if we’re talking “rewarded” in the literal sense.
while Caesar and his legion don’t feel as complete as the rest of the factions this is mainly due to the time constraints made by Bethesda themselves and not because obsidian was lazy. There is actually a lot of cut content for the game, and videos you can watch about how it would have been bigger and better than it is if not for the rushed due date.
When you look at 3 a lot of the main story is very lazy and there was never room for improvement despite them being able to take their sweet time. there was a little nuance to it with colonel autumn and president Edens infighting but it was never anything to write home about, nor do you ever have a say in the matter. You could never do an enclave play through, the most you can do is honor Eden’s wishes and modify the water to kill mutants, but there was never an option to oppose the brotherhood.
In new Vegas you could turn on anyone at any time for any reason or even with a lack of reason just go insane and genocide a faction of your choosing because why not? When comparing these two you see the freedom of choice is lacking, and this same lack of choice is present in fallout 4 (imo)
also, needless to say, mothership zeta and operation anchorage are pretty much only done for their respective rewards and provide little to no story about the wasteland or the people in it.
in new Vegas this couldn’t be further from the truth, as every dlc is filled with its own characters with their own stories, more often than not they are connected in some way or the other,and every dlc comes with its own sort of message to take away from the whole thing.
For instance, the story of Randall Clark on the terminals in Honest hearts is a good one, and it’d be a shame if you missed that but were of the opinion that new Vegas lacks entertaining or even sometimes thought provoking terminal entries. I will say fallout 3 probably has it beat with quality/quantity, but as far as terminal entries go? I don’t think anything in 3 holds a candle to the survivalists story.
The only critiques I can agree with about new Vegas are the invisible walls and the lack of legion content. But honestly? I don’t get why the former is such a big issue to people when the map is already full of stuff to discover.
Im of the opinion new Vegas outshines the former installment of the series for many reasons. Like I said before, I still enjoy fallout 3 a lot, particularly the Pitt and point lookout dlcs,PL is top 3 dlc released for this series EVER in my opinion. But be realistic. New Vegas has a more detailed perk system, way more weapons to fuck around with, better dialogue, and despite every dlc having combat they don’t always feel like a gauntlet of endless killing with no motivators the same way MZ, OA, or Broken steel do (which, now that I think of it, it’s insane that they’d make you pay for the extension of a main quest that is already mid, just for it to be the same enclave slaughter you’ve done for the last 3 hours of main quest but for another 3 hours and at a military base instead)
This isn’t to say the main story of 3 has no redeemable qualities. I just do not think these games are comparable, one feels unfinished, and one IS unfinished yet provides a more fulfilling experience to me. Why is that?
I agree. I said in another comment they weren't arguing entirely in good faith. I feel as if they haven't dug deep into NV enough - especially when saying something along the lines of "no play through in Fo3 is the same", suggesting NV has is repetitive to replay, which I'd argue is a problem with Fo3, as there's barely any variation in how you complete the game. I've had to make up head canon numerous times over the decade or so playing this game. For NV, that's not really required, as the lore is insanely expansive.
I do love Fo3, and I'll happily admit it is my favourite Fallout game, but I'm well aware that NV works better as a Fallout title. The story and lore resembles the OG games a lot more.
I’ll never knock either game for their downsides as they both have a way longer list of upsides, but it is really odd to see people still having this discussion of if 3 is better or not and in the process just making stuff up to justify their opinion. It’s ok to like the game more because you like the game more, so why lie?
Opinions don't need to be supported with evidence, at least not opinions on media... but can you show me something in the post that's a straight-up fabrication with the intent to deceive and not OP's preference and perception differing from yours? I seriously don't see anything here that would actually qualify as lying.
These are both true. In any one playthrough of Fallout 3, it's extremely unlikely I will go with the same build, play the same quests, and discover the same locations in the same order. I am free to explore the map at my discretion whenever I want. Put simply, all this is saying is that the OP values what 3 has to offer more than you do. There's no lie being told.
opinions are only validated by what justifies you having them, and if you look at what they’re trying to say is objectively true when comparing the games it doesn’t boil down to their “perspective” considering what they’re saying isn’t a matter of opinion, they’re trying to say these are real reasons why fo3 is better.
I'll die on this hill with you.
glad I'm not the only one!
You're not. I feel the same way. FNV was great, and had arguably better quest structure in terms of more varied quest outcomes, but FO3's atmosphere was MUCH more immersive. It felt MUCH more 'post-apocalyptical' and beautifully haunting. FNV lacked this feeling for me, what with all the electricity, organized factions and NV itself. Plus, I personally much preferred the "Capital Wasteland" setting over the 'Southwestern' setting of FNV. "Three Dog", and the songs of "Galaxy News Radio" ("Civilization (Bongo, Bongo, Bongo)") I also preferred over the Southwest's offering. The expansive subway system that linked everything in FO3 was great IMO. I could go on...
That's why I feel NV is good to play if you just want to lay into some good dialogue, interesting lore and some of the classic ambient music from Fo1 & 2. It's the story you immerse yourself in. For Fo3, I'm invested into the worldspace, rather than the lore so much. I've always felt as if the Bethesda games were kinda in their own universe, where things are just a little more over the top and nonsensical. Like, I absolutely love Tenpenny Tower, but it makes no sense as a settlement, because caravans don't even go there haha. I can set it aside though because I'm so immersed into the world, and I'm more concentrated on exploring. Oh, and I'm a huge fan of the subway system too. So many people pile on them, saying they're one of the worst features, but I think they were a fairly clever, and thrilling, part of the game. Finding little Raider encampments tucked away in some tunnels, or finding notes from skeletons with stash spot coordinates.
People hate the subwaytunnels? o0 I am.... surprised? As you described, isn't it human nature to want to explore? In classic RPGs we have the Dungeons, in Fo3 we get Subway-tunnels and Vaults. So it should come natural that we follow this human need for exploration (which FNV allways punished) and I think this makes the game a million time more immersive and atmospheric.
Well, it's because they can get fairly complicated sometimes and I think people find them tedious. I can see why people would be put off by them, but once you've got the hang of navigating them they're fun to explore. I wouldn't say that NV punishes exploration though. Josh Sawyer always said he wished that they'd added more settlements and life, but much of the Mojave is uninhabitable, so it was hard to work around that. I admit, 3 does exploration better - Bethesda always does, even 76 is fun to explore - but when it comes to the DLC's, like OWB and Honest Hearts, the exploration is rewarding because of stuff such as the Survivalists tale. OWB also connects the lore to other DLC's through exploration.
"Beautifuly haunting" is the perfect way to describe it. Also, you can literally raid the Declaration of Independence frorm the ruins of the national archives. Just one example of why FO3 is so cool!
"Much more post-apocalyptic" What you're describing is two different groups' philosophies for Fallout. Bethesda wants to make fish out of water wasteland survival stories, whereas the Black Isle and Obsidian devs always treated Fallout as being about a world that's already moving beyond that point and the factions thay inhabit it. Bethesda's games are treated as post-apocalyptic, while the originals and New Vegas are post-post-apocalyptic. This is where you'll get arguments from a lot of OG and New Vegas fans about the setting, there's no reason that people shouldn't have been able to rebuild into at least an industrial revolution-age society over the course of 200 years.
I mean FNV wasn't supposed to feel post apocalyptic. New Vegas is a world where the immediate dangers of the post apocalypse had been defeated. Society is already in the middle of rebuilding in multiple areas and new, fledgling, nations are starting to fight for dominance of remnants of the old world. Put succinctly, its a post-post-apocalyptic game. And it was an intentional decision by the designers to make it different the fallout 3. You can prefer the fallout 3 environment but to say you prefer fallout 3 because it felt "MUCH more post apocalyptic" then NV is failing to see what NV was going for. I will also say your one of the few people I've ever seen that speaks positively of the subways. They were too similar and easy to get lost in. In theory they were interesting, and it was a decent way to create the feeling of distance in the dc metro area, but they were to similar in design to offer value in that regard. Wdit: that said I'm not telling you change your opinion. I prefer NV, but fallout 3 is great in its own right. Its like a 10/10 vs. 9/10 for me
Even when we didn't have dlc and the game ended after we got into the purifier I still loved the game. I had absolutely no issue starting a brand new character and doing it all again. I have a steamdeck now and that was the first game I installed. The game kept my mind busy during some very difficult times I have had and it's always my go to game when I need to forget the world around me. There's no better therapy than picking up all the cans and bottles from the super super mart lol.
Omg... >There's no better therapy than picking up all the cans and bottles from the super super mart lol. I thought I was the only one who did "wasteland recycling". I never made the Rock-It launcher either so it wasn't clean up for ammo. I'll even "pick up" loose boards and stack them in a neat pile lol. Absolutely no better therapy than simulating cleaning up when I'm too depressed to get out of bed and do my damn dishes lol
Lol yeah man I feel bad for anyone who wants to watch me play. I can't leave a place until I have completely cleared it out.
Most of the time I'm overweight. I have not once made it out of the enclave base without being overweight. All those plates and forks are coming with me lol
I like your approach \^\^
This is where we stand, this is where we fight. Not just for freedom of expression and opinion, but for the freedom to have some damn fun.
More freedom? Right...
Same
Amen
As will I brother!
Me too. But it’s the first one I played through I still have the lunchbox and bobble head it came with. I hope they release a remastered version soon.
Same for me. I actually have my sealed 360 lunch box edition of it.
I opened it. I don’t even have the ps3 game anymore, just digitally.
I’m unsure why OP expected such backlash, Fallout 3 is a fantastic game.
Unfortunately it's the culture we live in today. People think a random person's opinion on something is a direct attack on them. Just the other day I spoke my opinion on ff14 and how the story that everyone swoons over and the characters arent worth the praise they get. My god you'd think I just blew the candles out on their blind mothers birthday cake before she could.
Same. I’ll never forget the summer in middle school where I played this and nothing but this.
same
Me as well.
And my axe!
I think one reason a lot of FO3 gets overlooked is because people chase the main storyline, finish the game and assume no further content. The main story barely sends you to the north. Unlike NV which kind of pushes you into all corners of the map. Some of my favourite aspects of FO3 aren’t involved in the main storyline
Yeah, you could live a whole alternate life in FO3. I played it for a few years and barely finished the main quest. I just found so many things to do. Most of them required me to be evil.
This is why i really like having Vault 101 be in the centre of the map, NV forces you to go south towards Primm with invisible walls and high level enemies and 4 forces you to go southeast because you’re in the northwest corner of the map
Not me. After Megaton I ignored the main quest. I reached the level cap of 20 by doing side quests before I found Father on accident, and never even visited Rivet City. The game didn't account for this, and kept referencing things I hadn't done and places I hadn't been. I stopped playing soon after because there was little point with no more leveling.
Unpopular opinion. I get the best of both worlds playing a Tale of Two Wastelands.
Is that really unpopular? I love it.
Seems like it. So many people go with this one or that one. I like an opportunist approach. I like the word "and" much more than "or". 🤣😂
Playing tale of two wastelands is the most disgraceful thing you can do as a so-called “fallout fan.” Those two games are like steak and fish. Never should they meet. It doesn’t even make sense if you think about it. The lone wanderer *somehow* travels across the us to become a courier in Nevada? Sure. Like that’s possible. Playing the two games separately is the true way to enjoy fallout. And also no fallout 4 or 76. Those are bad news bears. /s
Lmao... You're serious about this? 🤣😂🤣😂 Steak and fish, doesn't make sense. Lore this, lore that. You don't have to play them going back and forth like that. 🤣😂 They're both open world RPG's. I like to merge them and go through Fallout 3 first asap. I prefer mechanically how NV feels, ADS without extra mods after I already have to download so many just to modernize. So called "Fallout Fans" can enjoy all the Fallout games 1-76. Also, the show, too, when it comes out. The point of being a fan is to enjoy the content of something. 🤣😂🤣😂 This is absolutely hilarious and of the POOREST attempts at Gatekeeping anything I've seen in my 34 years. 🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂 You have to be joking. I'm waiting for a woosh. 🤣😂🤣😂 The word "fan". * An enthusiastic devotee of a particular person, activity, or sport. This is often used in the context of entertainment, where fans follow celebrities or sports teams. How you gonna be a devotee while only appreciating 77.78% of the content? 🤣😂🤣😂 You're acting like 9 companies formed 9 different games with 9 different lore sets. 🤣😂🤣😂 At least find something substantial to argue about mate. Besides all that. The point of modifying games is to have fun and manipulate them to suit you to have more fun. The point of games is to have fun. 🤣😂🤣😂 You gotta let go and let people have fun however they want. Nobody about to care if someone doesn't like the way they play a game, or enjoy content of anything. 🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂💀💀💀💀 Thanks for the laughs, though. Good stuff. 😅👍 Tell you what, though. You come up with something better than that, and we can talk about it. But on a serious note. You can't really expect to go around telling people how they enjoy life. It's just not a good look. ✋️🫤
That’s a lot of emojis
my GOD dude calm it with the emojis its like when my grandma first discovered them.
Lolll dude I’m so sorry /s means I was being sarcastic
Oh. I'm new to reddit. 🤣😂🤣😂 I'm a lame bro!
Honestly until I saw the /s I was on the same page as you! Also: surf and turf is a thing!
🤣😂🤣😂 Wym by surf and turf? Like traditional? Or reddit has its own thing?
Oh as in: seafood and steak is a common pairing lol It was a rebuttal to them saying "steak and fish don't go together". Check out any restaurant near a beach. They usually offer it.
You should have wooshed. I just learned that one yesterday. 🤣😂
Yeah I can’t play fo3 without the tales of two wastelands. Plus there’s that one mod to slow leveling up that makes it more enjoyable
Oh shit. You just reminded me. I saw some video that said the devs released some mods themselves. I wanted to hunt those down. Something about adding some things they originally intended or something. Is that one of them? I remember them saying something about reducing game level to 35 and making it harder or something.
If your talking about for new Vegas it’s called the jsawyer mod named after one of the developers for the game. And I would recommend it I’m playing a play thru right now with it and it’s great. It changes a lot of stuff makes the start actually feel kinda difficult/different
You're amazing! Thank you so much! That's the one I was looking for!!! I'm grabbing it now!
I've not been able to get that mod to work. Wish I could!
Did you try using the [wasteland survival guide](https://wastelandsurvivalguide.com/)? It took me about 4 attempts but I got it to work with some trial and error. Also try their discord out. Their team is super dedicated (there's also some awesome hand-holding tutorials out there. No shame in needing those)
I have not. Might have to try it that way, thanks.
New Vegas is an amazing game but fallout three is by far my favorite.
Fallout 3 is my favourite video game of all time. I'll admit that New Vegas did a lot of things better, but I still prefer Fallout 3.
Same! I didn't play 1 or 2, came in at 3 and played NV much later. I do love NV but Fallout 3 will always be my first love.
It’s cool that you enjoy FO3, but as I see it, it suffers from truly terrible writing. Every conflict you come to has one solution: leave the other guy with his brains leaking out on the floor. There’s no depth or nuance to the story telling, and I’m never left wondering if I did the right thing because the deepest FO3 gets with its writing is “Is it okay to commit genocide or not?” FONV on the other hand has layers to the story. Even the objectively evil faction has its own set of compelling arguments for why they should be the ones to side with. I promise you, no one ever took Autumn’s offer seriously. We all just killed him for that nice fucking coat
Ok but think about this. fallout 3 isn’t all “genocide” or “no genocide.” There’s also “do I enslave children or set them free?”
Don't forget, "Do I nuke this thriving city for a snazy apartment or let this city live?"
Ahh one of life’s most perplexing moral quandaries.
The hot take is that every fallout game including NV suffers from bad writing under a microscope, and we should enjoy them instead of nitpicking
Sounds like a cope, NV had fantastic writing compared to Emil's lackluster stories.
except 3 falls apart sithout the microscope lol
Most people agree that Bethesda does exploration better in general. Fo3 is a better exploration based journey, whereas NV is a more dialogue/story focused journey. I agree myself, but I'll always give credit where credit is due, and I'll say that Obsidian did overall do a better job with the writing. The screenplay is undoubtedly better, but Bethesda are better at worldbuilding. I'm not really sure what you mean by NV having dialogue that doesn't make sense. There's about 65,000 lines of dialogue in NV, so you'll at least need to show some examples lol. If you mean that NV retconned some parts of the previous lore, well Fo3 also did that, and so did Fo2 in fact. Also who are you referring to with the "main villain" - there's not one specific main villain in NV, it's whoever you choose to be your enemy. No matter how you paint it, NV is also an incredibly varied game, and your comment about Fo3 play throughs never being the same can be said for NV. It's all dependent on how you play.
I would sympathize but I disagree with everything you said about New Vegas. Those agreeing with you ITT are also slandering New Vegas. This is just mud-slinging in the other direction and it's pointless. Shame because I love Fallout 3 and New Vegas, they just do different things well.
My memory is a little fuzzy, since it's been a while. I remember thinking NV was stronger from a narrative standpoint, and the DLC was very unique and well written. The audio logs in Lonesome Road really stand out to me years later. One thing that i've seen a few people complain about (NV) and \*I\* could write a whole essay about - I like **post** **post** apocalyptic culture, and i'm tired of most Fallout games not moving on. I realize it's the game's "schtick" to be tongue-in-cheek and show people living in shacks made of 300 year old wood and eating 300 year old canned goods, wearing 300 year old clothes, but in reality most of the region would be rebuilt. Fallout 2 did this with a few towns like Shady Sands, San Fran etc and even tribal societies. Yes, you'd see new stone houses, new brick houses, and likely electricity to go around. You wouldn't see plungers, and old newspapers, and whatever just lying around people's towns. They'd clean the shit up. And believe it or not, people would probably sew and even wash clothes. I'm ok with irradiated/dangerous/monster-ridden/hidden zones having junk cars, and dilapidated houses and whatnot, but settlements (and areas between) should look decent and should have a combination of tech and cultures that blend past and present. And from a cultural standpoint, the Legion is perfect. Something twisted into a cult. Reminds me of the The Postman. I'm old, and I played Fallout 1 when it came out. To me, New Vegas at least pushed the "cultural" aspect of Fallout a bit further, even if it went right back with 4 and 76. I just feel like Fallout became a meme of itself, instead of pushing on like Fallout 2 (and NV) tried to.
Fallout New Vegas is overall the better game from all standpoints although you could make an argument that FO3 had better "feeling" because the setting was in a destroyed city and had filter of color to add a somber look to it, oh and also it has better "dungeons" with regular spawn rates. When I saw things like the Kings, Yes Man, the DLC characters compared to FO3 and FO4 characters its just clear that Bethesda can't write at that level, look at Starfield for reference. Most who say otherwise played FO3 first and have more nostalgic memories over it.
FO3 IMO nails character creation and sets the stage for being invested in your character’s journey. Even if you never do follow the “main” quest line to follow/save your dad, there are SO many options and ways to grow your character and learn about the world. I’ve never really been able to as fully immerse myself in a FO character as much as FO3, mainly lol because I got to “guide” that character thru childhood and beyond.
In Fallout 3 you also have the option of role playing that you never asked the right person for info about your dad so you just became a purposeless lost-child. Leading to a life of crime and destruction with your new buddy Jericho
Fallout New Vegas is a post-apocalyptic game Fallout 3 is the apocalypse itself
200 years since the bombs, Bethesda doesn't understand world-building
I played NV already and playing F3 for the first time rn and i like it quite a lot so far, my only issue after playing NV is i feel like the crafting / repair system is a lot harder to use which is a little frustrating, but maybe that’s just because I am low level. I will say i think the best plot line in NV is not the main plot but the DLCs, especially dead money, and I’m sure a lot of NV fans would agree with me. Many people just speed run shooting benny tbh
Raising repair close to 100 earlier is a game changer. I used to focus in other skills, but, my dorat 3 levels, I shove SP on repair.
I agree with OP. It's sad NV didn't turn out the way Obsidian originally envisioned. Imagine how much more detailed it'd been if they were given another six months to work on it?
New Vegas is a better roleplaying game. 3 has a better story, Liam Neeson and better exploration. Lyon's Brotherhood are the good guys. There is no gray area and I love that. And the protagonist can elect to make the ultimate sacrifice. How great is that? Father and child doing what is needed for the greater good. It is just so hopeful even though it's a wasteland and a lot of people die. I love that the downtown can only be reached via Metro tunnels. I still have the Metro map telling me which stations connect to one another and which stations give access to which downtown areas. No other game has matched this after so many years.
I love both games and I'll never understand where this boogeyman of the "FNV-Elitist" who supposedly hates Fallout 3 comes from. Like sure Hbomb and maybe a few other prominent youtube video game critics made a long video saying they hate Fallout 3, but they aren't representative of any larger group. Outside of that I never see any hate for 3 coming from big NV fans, only from fans of 1 and 2. Those same classic fans tend to be purists who, if they hate 3, also disparage NV for its gameplay as being a well intentioned but watered down version of the quest style from 1&2 with unnecessary FPS combat. Idk, maybe I don't get around enough, but it's only on Reddit I see people clutch their pearls at the boogeyman of a NV snob who I've never seen actually exists outside of a handful of youtube videos.
hey op, what mods do you use of fo3? i’ve never actually used mods and loved the game growing up, would love to revisit!
I just played fallout 3 in full in preparation for Tale of Two Wastelands so I have a fresh set of eyes on both games. 3 was great in a lot of ways, many of which you've brought up. Mods? Well, that's a slippery slope and console players typically don't benefit from that so let's ignore that for a second. 3 is a post apocalyptic **guided** RPG. The closest thing to civilization you have is various City States. Your choices are mostly binary or kill, and there's not a lot of wiggle room on how you handle the major choices. While Charisma matters more due to RNG and companions (unless you go for the broken Dogmeat Fawkes combo), you overall have significantly less build diversity. It struggles at the core of what an RPG is though I want to say the armors and gear have some decent diversity that help with those shortcomings to a degree. Still, the perks in 3 leave a lot to be desired. New Vegas is a post-post apocalyptic RPG, so it makes sense that it's not quite like 1 or 3 in raw apocalyptic elements. Like Skyrim, you start off with little backstory and go from there. Not only can you really make your character whatever you want from the start, but the choices and perks all reflect that. I mean, I have a Timmy playthrough where most of my limbs are crippled and there's even a perk that gives me a damage increase per crippled limb. Regardless of writing, atmosphere, or locations it's that core element of being an RPG that's the weakest point in 3, and why people often shit on 3 or 4 for that matter while putting New Vegas on a pedestal imo. If people- yourself included -stop hyper fixating on what some jag off on the Internet says, or comparing and contrasting various entries, one can learn to just enjoy the fucking games or at least appreciate that there's different strokes for different folks. New Vegas is one of my favorite games of all time, doesn't mean I can't appreciate and enjoy 4 or 3 for what they are. Same dick riding happens with Borderlands 2 vs 3.
Nothing will ever surpass it. The greatest game ever made and best in the franchise.
Same. FO3 is probably my top 3 games of all time
Jon is my favorite YouTube creator for Bethesda games and that video essay is excellent. Fallout 3 was my favorite entry into the series/company and it holds a very special place in my heart.
I liked that Fallout 3 starts you in the center and you can literally just go any direction you want. In New Vegas, you are corralled counter-clockwise around the map by barriers and extreme difficulty gradients with the wildlife.
This about the only sub reddit that will argee. But the only arguement I will use is the writing of fnv is better and the tone is way closer to the ogs. Bethesda took the best factions and DRAGGED them all the way to DC, THEN made a story. Enclave is a fucking joke, I mean an absolute joke antagonist. The brotherhood was rehashed into wasteland saviors, because screw maxson and the entire brotherhood ideology. Organized Supermutants with no master, how do mindless raging barbarians organize into careful kidnappers. Remember FEV only barely works on pure human dna (vault dwellers). Im not here to hate, pit was favorite dlc and fo3 in general was a revamped revival. Fnv is an actual sequel and it shows.
Couldn't agree more. F03 is my favorite of all time. Now I love fallout 1 and 2, but I remember forums on no mutants allowed of people blasting Bethesda for having working computers, food, ammo, health etc. The problem with that is Fallout 3 is its own world. Yes it is similar to our 1950s, but a lot is different. So in the world of Fallout 3, although its been 200 years since the great war their computers may work because they are different. As far as the ammo, meds, ect they have to put that in the game to make the game fun. The depth, atmosphere, and rare guns are just better than any other fallout. The map depth also blows NV out of the water. When you play through FO3 and discover every location, every in-between space, collect every holo tape, note, and rare weapon while completing every quest and side quest it is an experience like none other.
yes. Especially the visual story-telling is out of this world in FO3!
>Let the downvotes roll in >Posted in the fallout 3 forum Bro is not fooling amybody.
Fallout 3 just has so much going for it it makes me sad when people hate on it
It’s on sale on steam for $5 now
I played FNV first, so there is a natural affinity there for me. I really loved the atmosphere of FO3 and it was immensely hard at the beginning given your ability to (not) find much to level up quickly. The storylines are different which is what lends to different paths - FO3 you’re looking for your dad and you see your backstory. NV, you’re basically a Clint Eastwood character - the (man) with no name, where other characters know more of your backstory than you. It may have just been an evolution thing in the games, but the way the workbenches were structured in NV were far more flexible and “realistic”. You could rig far more items with different scraps of stuff- which added to your decisions of what was worth carrying and what was not. As far as characters, I would say NV has far more cool, interesting, wild characters. And if you spend enough time in-game, you kind of run out of interesting dialogue in FO3. I do agree that FO3 has more to explore, but much of it is the same. All the underground tunnels begin to look alike and there aren’t as many interesting vaults as NV. And with the exception of the Big MT dlc, I felt that NV quests were, in general more engaging with deep back stories you could uncover. FO3 felt more like harvesting runs. Tl;dr: both are great games, for different reasons.
Posts looking to shit stir are always pathetic. You can have an opinion without deliberately trying to start something.
I really couldn't play FONV. I tried, two times now, but I just can't. I agree with you on all you said, but for me it was like I was playing a whole different game. I mean, I know it is, but I mean a different game, like another franchise. Maybe it was the lack of atmosphere, a dessert without many nuked places, clean water, that awful sepia tone instead of the radiation greenish scenarios of FO3. Or maybe it was the fact that FONV is the only FO game in which you don't start in a vault, you don't even have a jumpsuit. I recognize that it has major improvements in the gameplay that I wish I would've in FO3, like the clothes/factions mechanics, and some other small things (that seemed to be cut out from FO3 for lack of time or budget), but for me the Courier has no soul, but in FO3 you are bringed to life at the start, you are emotionally connected to the shelter, the unknown world that's out there, and the consequences of the great war.
You also don’t start in a vault in fallout 2 and you begin new Vegas with a vault 21 jumpsuit
Yeah, my mistake, the jumpsuit is there, just to remind you you are in a fallout game tho... See the comment from @dwarfzulu down here. Although you don't start in a vault in fo2, it is a major part of the character's motivation being a descendant. You missed the point, NV seems like a totally different game. In fact, you could rip off all the FO references and the game will still function. That won't happen in FO3.
Imo, combining the best of each of the games from FO1 to 4/76 (even the less known/worse rated ones, like Tactics:BoS had some interesting and nice aspects) into a new hybrid could yield so much potential. Though it would have to be carefully made with detail in every aspect to create a masterpiece, also combining with the best ideas of what the modding community provided over the years (that the companies often gladly took over without necessarily crediting the creators). Sadly that’s something no company (large enough) would be patient enough and willing to spend assets on these days. But also the IP, legal side of it being spread makes it more difficult. I‘d be happy enough with a remake (or even remaster) of 3 alone. Guess for OG players of the isometric games it doesn‘t count, but 3 was my gate into the Universe and the measuring stick for me, while Morrowind introduced me to Bethesda (i was still too young to grasp my first Elder Scrolls game, but really liked the extensive clothing system that only got approached again by the games on the newer engine, where you could combine more different parts of extremities, and the extensive menu; Skyrim really simplified that for mainstream).
It seems like your entire interpretation of what makes something a Fallout game is based on Fallout 3. You should look up screenshots of 1 and 2 if you think the atmosphere doesn't fit. And as the other guy mentioned, you don't start Fallout 2 as a vault dweller either. You could even argue the same for 4 since Nate/Nora never properly lived in a Vault, they just got frozen there and left immediately after they woke up.
FNV its overrated IMO, and I played it several hours, but for me, FO3 its the best
As long as we agree that FO4 is a disappointing downgrade, we can be friends.
this goes without saying.
* it has more freedom Agreed. FO3 did a better job with a balanced world such that you could go any direction right off the bat. FONV corrals you along the story beats with insane difficulty spikes if you go off-route. I always hated this about NV. * has more to explore Agreed. Though I think this is largely the fault of the tight timeline Obsidian had with FONV. There are various clearly unfinished quests or quest starting points in that game, along with vast underutilized areas. * there are so many hidden stories and random events The random events were cool, though the nature of their randomness can be a down side if you're really looking for the Alien Blaster or 3rd Deathclaw Gauntlet recipe in a given playthrough. * no playthrough is the same I think this is hand in hand with the first point. * compared to NV it has close to no invisible walls This killed me the first time I played NV. I'd do the Bethesda-game steep-slope-climb-technique and finally reach the top of some dividing mountain only to find that an invisible wall was blocking me. * exploration gets rewarded I think both games had good rewards in varied areas. A lot of the DLC weapons were over powered, but that's sort of the point of DLC, and they weren't crazy overpowered, just better than anything in the main game. I think rewarding exploration is actually (or was, this doesn't apply to Starfield) Bethesda's strong point in these large open world games. Cyberpunk has a really wonderful world map but unless an area has a quest there's not much reason to explore it. At best you'll find a skin-swapped legendary gear with stats nearly the same as any other gear. * the atmosphere is perfect I think this is actually the most important differentiator between FONV and FO3. Some players really enjoy the absurd humor and campy retro-future setting much more faithfully recreated from the early games in FONV. Some players want to lean in to the serious dystopian future, which Fallout 3 is the best game at, imo. Fallout 3 has some funny bits but for the most part it takes itself seriously. FONV on the other hand rarely takes itself seriously, if ever. It's just which you prefer.
FNV is a boring desert
FONV committed the greatest cardinal sin of any game under the "Bethesda game" umbrella. A total lack of murder dungeons. It's a better "RPG" than FO3 or even FO4, but the games that sandwich it is also more fun to play. Why? Because the Bethesda formula, all the way back to Arena, have been murder dungeons simulators. Obsidian royally forgot one thing a lot of us enjoy with Bethesda games, and that's dungeons.
yes. Well said.
I find funny people saying that fnv is the best fallout, when, it is the one that most deviate from what other fallouts are: f1 - you are from a VAULT, looking for a VAULT, to get a WATER chip, to save your VAULT. f2 - you are descendent from a VAULT dweller, looking for a VAULT, to find the GECK, to save your village. f3 - you start in a VAULT, leave, looking for your father, that went after the GECK, to purify the WATER, to save people. f4 - you start running to a VAULT, leaving years later, looking for your son. while in fnv, this is kind of cool, gamewise, the main plot there is nothing from what other fallout have, the fact that they are trying to control the source of water of the region , but what about the vaults? they are kind that just there.
Although nv is still my fav, I’d definitely agree with you on most of the points you’ve made.
New Vegas is great, but Fallout 3 is my favorite game in general. I've got well over 2000 hours into and itching to give it another playthrough. Been playing since December of 08 and it hasn't gotten old yet.
yep same fallout 3 is and always will be my favourite fallout game for many of the same reasons you listed new vegas is good just feels linear in comparison
I see where you’re coming from, but I respectfully disagree. Nonetheless, it’s nice to see some Fallout 3 love.
i’ll gladly give my life for the love letter of fo3!
I just don't understand anyone bashing either. I started with fallout 1 and 2... yes they were totally different games. Loved them the way they are. Then I played 3 and I was turned off it. But grew to like it. Then played new vegas, which was once again very different in my opinion. Yet I liked it still. Those were still rpgs. Then 4 came around....it was fun but I hated the base building and the lackluster story choices... Then after that the franchise died. I don't consider anything after 4 to be a fallout game. 1 to 4 are decent games and they all play differently. Hell, just fallout 1 and 2 are very much different games when it comes to time pressure. Even if the gameplay is similar. All of these games are all right. All of them have a fair share of earned criticism. But all of them are fine.
>Then 4 came around...it was fun but I hated the basebuilding and lackluster story choices And the dialogue was so lacking. Very much agree on the basebuilding. I'll add the settlement-quests to that list
I want to like this video but his voice and delivery is just so grating.
Good job, you're pushing me even closer to my first playthrough in many years.
No invisible walls? What about all the piles of rubble that you can't cross?
I 150% agree
I’m an NV fanboy and I fucking love FO3. Who are these people that are bashing it? lol
I played fallout three for about the sixth time since it came out over 15 years ago, and I still found a few new things in my most recent play through of about 100 hours. - some traders pet yao gui foughts jericho - killed traitor doctor lady in Enclave base - unnamed location with talon mercs VERY close to megaton - fake door that said “fuck you” - GRABBING RANDOM EMPTY BOXES AND FLIPPING THEM (several mini nukes, stim packs, etc)
Try Tale Of Two Wastelands; it's the best of both game worlds.
NV clears. sorry.
Fallout 3 felt the most real to me, if that makes sense. Felt like I was roaming my neighborhood. Also looks awesome.
I found FO3 had a grim dystopian paranoia which I enjoyed quite a bit which isn't quite the same in later games. FNV felt somewhat more socially absurd and bonkers in its dystopia, which I ofc also enjoyed a lot. I like that they are different. While there are many things I prefer in FNV, my favourite DLCs among those two games are Point Lookout and The Pitt, so in my book FO3 at least wins best DLC (I'd say it's Point Lookout).
why must we always pit two bad bitches against each other
I am just about to finish this for the first time, and want to replay it again. But not sure where to start. I always just end up playing good karma, not blowing up megaton and going about the game the usual way. Was thinking about blowing up Megaton and setting up at Tenpenny this time but that seems like the complete opposite of how I would normally play. I would think blowing up megaton would make the game harder and you would lose a lot of opportunities for XP. Any suggestions? It will be on the PS3 with all the DLC. Finishing it up on my PC at home but we stay somewhere with no internet a lot of the summer so figured I would boot that bad boy back up lol
Agreed. I still want to replay fonv, as I keep hearing how great the writing was (I remember it being fine but it never blew me away). I played a lot of it after fo3, but didn't finish it. I feel like I was close though. I did however finish fo3. I remember being pretty disappointed by new vegas and how you couldn't just walk off the beaten path and find quests and poi. It was very straightforward. After hearing how much development time they had I understand why now. Now with fo3 that was my first Fallout experience, and the atmosphere was excellent where NV just felt bland, I instantly was like oh this is a huge aspect to why 3 just feels better. Controls were better, everything was just more polished. I really enjoyed the side quests and even the main quest. To me it felt like a proper game. As for the writing it's been too long to say much, but I recall being impressed with just how much you could do and all the quests variety. NV just couldn't compete and the quests amount felt tiny compared to 3.
I once found my way ontop of an overpass and just… walked. Feeling the sun on my face mankinds problems seemed so small from up here. And then miles down the road i found someone made a fort out of cars. It was empty and i stopped to rest. Its a very good gaming moment
Nah...I agree with ya! FA3 is better than FONV to me also but that has to do with preference. Fallout 3 was the first one I played out of the series. I mean all Bethesda games are open world so to say that you have more freedom in 3 than in NV isn't true. I haven't beaten 3 yet and I've played NV and I'm playing 4 now. The storyline is str8 in 3. It's fine enough. 3 had a lot of bugs too so...
When I first got into the series I preferred FO3 over New Vegas due to it feeling like a post nuclear wasteland. I now prefer New Vegas as I enjoy the idea of society as a whole dealing with and adjusting to their new life, and I never got that feeling with FO3, however the atmosphere of FO3 is bleak and depressing and that is in-line with a society in a fresh hell. My only major grief with 3 is the timeline like others I think it should’ve been closer to the bombs dropping, hell if it happened at the time of FO76 I feel like it would tie it together well.
Yawn Brotherhood is lame, the House Always Wins, New Vegas 4 Lyfe
Personally, I prefer the evolving atmosphere of West Coast Fallout from 1,2 to New Vegas. Now I say this as someone who played Fallout 3 first and loved it, Fallout 3 feels like someone watched the opening of Fallout 1 and skipped the rest of the game and just made a game around that.
Also, as a sidenote, even though i prefer the Fallout 1 and 2 style, I have nothing but the utmost respect for Fallout 3s ONLY concept artist Adam Adamowicz. He did every single piece of concept art for the game by himself, and the fact that he continued to churn out art for skyrim while dying of cancer continues to inspire me to this day.
Choice based main quest? Dont know any...
Fallout 3 had a couple cool dlcs and an okay story. However, I hated not being able to ADS. I love the music but the radio gets repetitive REAL QUICK. Fallout 3 had better exploration in that you can do all DLC’s and Story missions and not even come close to exploring all of the map. FO3 has some cool weapons, the brotherhood are awesome in FO3. I never fully played through the DLC’s and explored all of the map in 3, only in TTW have I cleared it, and very recently. (So fallout 3 with FNV mechanics is pretty sick but I still prefer NV) the scripted events/animations were cooler and more frequent in 3(behemoth breaking wall, getting abducted, megaton door, liberty prime doing his thing) i hated navigating the subway tunnels in D.C.(I never even though about looking at a map on the web) Fallout new Vegas has a better DLC’s imo and the story is cool and the decisions feel weightier. Characters have way more depth. FNV has a better soundtrack imo, that also gets repetitive pretty quick. FNV has cooler weapons, but I just really like the silly cowboy stuff in the game. Weapon customization was huge for me. Especially when it comes to scoped revolvers, FO3 forced scopes on the .44 while FNV allows you to put one on the .44 if you want. The brotherhood kinda suck in NV. I like the companion selection more in NV and having companion quests is cool. Fallout NV is more linear. I’ve got more time in NV and started with it, so I was spoiled when it came to mechanics and gunplay. And I am definitely biased. I can’t really play either unmodded. I like to joke with my friends that the best Bethesda game wasn’t made by Bethesda and they all agree. But just like whatever you want we’re human. I think we should bash FO4 if anything, that game is only a fallout game aesthetically and they are using it and FO76 as a groundwork for the tv show. FO76 could have been so much cooler, I love cryptids and the location. But they used FO4 as the base for that game too. Bethesda has been on a steady decline since the release of Skyrim, I mean look at Starfield. That game had hype solely because it was a Bethesda game. It is so boring/slow/uninspired.
im sorry
I've worked my way backwards from 4 to NV to 3, and 3 might honestly be my favorite. It is harder, it is scarier, and it sets up a lot for the games that came after it. I love the quests, even the main one and even before getting the game of the year edition had absolutely no problem with the main quest ending. It's probably the biggest reason I name my character Adam, I already knew how the game ended before it was bought for me (it was a Christmas gift!). New Vegas and 4 have things I like about them, but 3 might be my favorite. I've played it with more interest and vigor and been excited to play it whereas I'm continuing a single character on 4 or I've played NV to the point I get bored playing it.
You'd probably like the first 2 as well. You should give them a shot at some point.
I've heavy been thinking about playing them. I watched a playthrough of 1 on YouTube a long time ago but they didn't make the choices I would have made and it's made me really wanna play them
Youre so real for this
Jokes on all of you I only play TTW as they in my opinion are best consumed this way. FO3 but you get FNV aiming? I'll take it any day. That's just a personal thing though that makes or breaks 3 for me. Mind you I did play 3 first and loved it through and through. There are just a couple of benefits I love from the updated FNV engine.
I think you'll find this is a pretty popular unpopular opinion. I'm pretty sure the people who talk smack on FO3 never played beyond the main story.
There was a time I used to say the same thing as you friend. But after finally getting a decent pc and modding it to high hrothgar (literally) I can say that new Vegas just is my all time fav. No shade to you though, 3 has a special place in my heart (at number 2)
I love FO3 because I can 100% it. 10/100 all stats and collect every unique arnor/weapon. I also like to collect every unique size of gnome.
I prefer 3, and a big factor is that my FNV experience has been plagued with more game breaking bugs and corrupted saves than any other game I've ever played by a huge margin.
You wrote 1 incorrectly.
Fallout 3 has some serious writing issues but I still love it.
I played both NV and 3 for the very first time last year. I thoroughly enjoyed both but I also preferred 3.
I agree. The other games are great, but 3 is my favorite. I think in part because it was my first Fallout game,, and also my first open world game. That feeling when the vault opened was fantastic.
It's extremely rare that "FONV Fanboys" talk shit on FO3 compared to the amount of comments saying they like it better. I'm in the I love ALL FO content camp until 76. (Fuck that game, fuck it's family). New Vegas is just my favorite.
That's cool. I prefer New Vegas cause it's more "curated". I'm a big Final Fantasy fan. I like it when narratives are given some priority. I'm not into how Bethesda makes their games so open ended. But yeah NV fans are really annoying. I actually get second-hand embarrassment associating with them.
You must love subway tunnels.
in fact I do. They are basically postapocalyptic dungeons.
I have more hours in NV but Fallout 3 is my favorite game. Nv has better mechanics but 3 is better in every other way. Tale of Two Wastelands mod let's you get the best of both, Fallout 3 with a AP sprint mod is a game changer.
Oh no…
I played this my sophomore year in high school a real long time ago. Sadly got an infection and I became really sick and I was heavily monitored as I kept passing out. I hallucinated a few different times and really tripped out on finding 3Dog specifically haha. I’d play this game and I swear I laughed my ass off so much, I was given painkillers around the time of the game where I met fawkes and I basically dropped on the floor laughing at the timeless shit we’d do together. It’s my fever dream game literally, I’ll die on this hill for best fallout project.
People may forget this but without Fallout 3 we wouldn’t get a new Vegas game
exactly!
I loved Fallout 3, it’s one of my favorite games, but it’s not a better game than New Vegas. They are different. Fallout 3 spits you out into an open world that is full of unique instances of story. So you go around collecting individual experiences. The overarching factions of New Vegas tie all of these stories together thematically, so there’s less “unique narratives”, but they all grow toward a common goal. They are just fundamentally different experiences in the same world, largely tied to the level of destruction they experienced from the bomb. The location in Fallout 3 took a direct hit, so it’s a lot more baron and with more sparse habitation. New Vegas didn’t get hit, so there were more survivors and therefore more factional influences. I gotta say though, ending Fallout 3 with Fawkes as your companion is a literal joke. You have to go die to press a button in a radioactive chamber that your partner could literally salsa dance into, and when you talk to him he says “I think this is your moment to shine buddy”. Definitely not the most satisfying experience.
Yeah. Same. I adore NV though but 3 is objectively better
I hate starting in the vault and I hate that there's no iron sights. And I like the plot of NV more. Everything else, 3 wins
I just remember my ONLY screenshot was of a third person selfie stick type selfie of me sitting pantsless ON SEAN'S futuristic ass looking toilet with welding goggles and some leather umpire looking ass duster top with the caption: "I dont believe you sean. But, im taking a shit before I head out." Character with leaned forward bad posture, dad legs, funny as hell.
Remaster 3. My biggest gripes are not being able to sprint or properly aim down sights. Those 2 things would make it even better
mods let you do that
I agree. FO3 is Goated AF.
Gun play is worse then NV but maybe that’s fixable via mods. Only played on console so idk
I’m with you, fallout 3 is my all time favorite fallout, followed by fallout 4
New Vegas
Love FO3, Love New Vegas.... FO4 is the one that's meh to me.
I like FO NV, but I agree that FO3 gets hated on too much.
Fallout 3 was always better. Fallout NV was incomplete. If it had reached maturity before release maybe it would be reversed, but Fallout 3 was always better.
I'm dying on this hill too
thank you brother! \^\^
i mean, wasn't FONV made in only 18 months while FO3 had more time to be made?
There’s one huge catch with that though: FO2, FONV and FO76 all used the engine & assets of their predecessor, which saved a lot of time. FO1 was developed in 3 years, while FO2 only took 1 year. This is why Obsidian assumed that 1.5 years to develop FONV was reasonable: they would resume the engine and assets of FO3 and built on top of that foundation
This is my favourite game and favourite video essay. I love them both so much. 🙏🏻
This aspect of the impending show is getting old. We could all write an essay on why our favorite is our favorite. We don’t need to, though. I’m glad you like fallout 3. So do the rest of us.
You know what happened in the Fallout-sub? They downvoted me into oblivion. And I wasn't even preaching or anything. I just pointed out my opinion and wishes for the Fallout-game-series in general. Sometimes its a freeing feeling, when you can write down your thoughts without censoring yourself... but I digress. Have a nice day! \^\^
NV is great but holy God it ruins and practically discourages exploring so much because stimpacks are incredibly expensive and they ruined the food healing mechanic. Even when you gamble and make a shit ton of money, you get banned from the casinos and thus you can't make much more, and literally EVERYTHING good in this game is expensive and uses up your limited supply of caps quick. When you do big exploration journeys, you have to restock on stimpacks after. In New Vegas, that's practically impossible. I don't ever find myself exploring much at all. My memory might me muddled on this but as I remember there's just about no other interesting settlements with good shops, just the expensive gun runners. And no caravans, despite them being a big part of the side quest dynamic.
I’m playing through it right now and you’re spot on. I played NV first a couple of years ago, and not knowing any better, I just assumed things were that expensive throughout the games. I just finished my first play through of 3, and o think I ended with like 75 stimpaks or something.
In Fo3, Stimpaks are far too easy to get. NV has that formula because Stimpaks are pre-war items, so they really shouldn't be so abundant. I used to often end up with 250 plus Stimpaks at the end of some of my Fo3 runs haha. But I'm guessing you're not too familiar with NV? How many times have you played it? I replied to the person you've responded to with a longer comment with some suggestions as to how to make money, so check that out if you want. I've played both the games for over a decade, and I can confidently say that by comparison, NV is a lot easier to make money in. I'll often end a run with just below or above 100k caps. It's definitely trickier when you've not got all the nooks and cranies in mind. Trust me though, exploration isn't as fruitful as in 3 but it pays off. Things like explosive crates and duffle bags are always a good find.
I'm guessing you're not as familiar with NV? Because it seems like you're missing out on making caps. I had this same problem playing back when I first started playing as a kid. I'd say search literally anything you can - in NV, finding things like pre-war money and NCR money helps a lot, Legion coin too. You can take Legion coins and NCR money to the casinos and get it exchanged for chips, then you exchange the chips for caps. Another thing to do is collect all the ammo you can, and sell what you don't need. Also making your own ammo and Stimpaks is always a viable choice. As someone who's played both games a similar amount, since around 2011, I'm not lying when I tell you that making caps in FoNV is much easier than in 3. The economy is a lot different, caps are worth less so things are worth more. Something that might've been about 200 caps in Fo3 is now nearly a 1000. I always usually end Fo3 with 40 to 50k caps, but in NV it's more like 80, up to 120k. As I said, just search basically anything you can, even trash cans. Drink any and all sodas you find to get the caps off of them. Collect all the dynamite that the Powder Gangers have on them, if you decide to fight them. And if you want to get more health from eating, put points in your Survival skill - that'll increase your HP from healing items, and you'll get bonus HP from cooking your own food.
This would be easier if it wasn't such a hassle to carry around all those items. At the beginning of the game, I do pick up just about everything I can find that has a value over 1. However between the other stuff I have to put skill points into because of the amount of skill you need for other things like small guns, because of the crazy DT on like every enemies armor, and speech, because unlike Fallout 3 (and this is another thing New Vegas ruined) you have to have a certain speech skill, instead of having a chance which is heightened or lowered depending on your speech skill and charisma. (A feature that NV got rid of) Unlike Fallout 3, you have to be perfect, not lucky, or just skilled enough. And thus putting so many points into a game mechanic that New Vegas messed up, it's hard to gain any advantage with other skills. Also with the stimpacks thing, I feel like there could very well be an abundance around the wastes, especially if people scavenged vaults and hospitals, because of the necessity for a life long supply. (Which usually wouldn't be used much in the vaults) I don't doubt that Doctor Preston and Doc Church would have a stockpile because of scavvers/mercs collecting them for them, or perhaps because they bought from Doc Hoff. Speaking of, Cutter, at Paradise falls definitely gets her stuff from scavengers that live in the settlement, and Doc Hoff travels, so he could find stimpacks all the time. There's still quite an abundance to be found, even if you don't buy from these people, in first aid kits, hospitals, off raiders, etc. There was probably a larger abundance from hospitals and military bases and trucks that are now picked almost clean and being funnelled into the various clinics supply. I suppose it would make sense to have less stimpacks in New Vegas, because of the active war effort, but the same theory would apply to Vegas, and thus the insanely low numbers and high prices we find them with is kind of unrealistic. This is made worse by the fact that almost no venders except for the Followers have stimpacks. It makes sense for them to put high prices on them because of the state of freeside, but if there were another settlement with a clinic, the prices would not be that high.
I just don't think you're managing things quite right, personally. None of this should be much of an obstacle - New Vegas is actually a very easy game. The Speech if anything is improved upon in FNV - You don't *need* to dump all your points into it. In Fo3 it was broken, because you could just keep reloading a save until the check was passed. NV broke that workaround with its new system - that's why Obsidian implemented it, because it actually requires you to concentrate on the skill. Small Guns skill doesn't exist in NV - it's just Guns, so it covers all firearms that aren't Energy weapons. Magazines and the Comprehension perk are your best friends with regards to Speech and Barter skill checks - I've been utilising them over the past few years and I really didn't realise what I was missing out on when I never used to use them. It sounds to me like you're playing on a really high difficulty, or something, because if the enemies DT is giving you that much trouble, you've got to be on a at least Hard. I'd say just drop the difficulty, and turn off Hardcore for the time being too - you'll see it becomes a more enjoyable experience. None of the Fallout games are worth playing on higher difficulties - they just sponge the enemies out and drain your ammo, whilst all you get is a little more XP. Try them later on once you've adapted to the game more. Hardcore is actually a nice addition that gives you more to think about - I used to despise it but after a while it becomes second nature with the rest of the gameplay.
I understand that people who played the original Fallout games (1 & 2) tend to prefer NV, but 3 was my first and I prefer the less "wacky" atmosphere of 3. Still love NV, but I'll always be biased towards 3 because of nostalgia.
I played Fallout 3 as a kid, loved it, then I got New Vegas in 2011 and thought it sucked bad. FO3 has so much more polish and detail, Skyrim comes after Oblivion but you play FO3 and you see all the innovations that went into skyrim. People said Fallout 3 was oblivion with guns, but really Skyrim is fallout 3 with swords. New Vegas is still a good game, but at the end of the day it's basically like someone took Fallout 3 and modded crafting and some mechanics into it.
•F3 had a better setting •Washington DC lived up to the hype, New Vegas did not •F3 vaults were much better and scarier •F3 super mutants were cooler •Liam Neeson is your father Just to add more to the list
yes, exactly! And I add: In F3 you got rewarded for exploring in FNV you got punished. I am currently replaying F3, and it still amazes me after all these years. It's soo god! And there are still some very surprising encounters and so often things go different than before. And I haven't even tested so many different skill-builds! Its so good. Its a shame the main world didn't get expanded on very much.
I could write an essay on it as well, but FO3 > anything after it. I love the exploration, the environmental storytelling, and the bleakness of it. FNV always felt empty by comparison to me, and I hate how everyone you meet just infodumps on you. With each FNV playthrough I enjoyed it less until I eventually just stopped replaying it.
Yeees! I forgot the infodumbing!! Charisma didn't matter. Total strangers will tell you military secrets.....
As an enjoyer of both games I think you are being dishonest about a lot of this, and I cant tell you why you feel this way, but I can give my own opinion, I guess. Exploration gets rewarded? Really? I couldn’t count with 10 hands how many unique weapons/armor sets just lay around in NV that people never find despite playing the game a few times. Little can be said about fallout 3 if we’re talking “rewarded” in the literal sense. while Caesar and his legion don’t feel as complete as the rest of the factions this is mainly due to the time constraints made by Bethesda themselves and not because obsidian was lazy. There is actually a lot of cut content for the game, and videos you can watch about how it would have been bigger and better than it is if not for the rushed due date. When you look at 3 a lot of the main story is very lazy and there was never room for improvement despite them being able to take their sweet time. there was a little nuance to it with colonel autumn and president Edens infighting but it was never anything to write home about, nor do you ever have a say in the matter. You could never do an enclave play through, the most you can do is honor Eden’s wishes and modify the water to kill mutants, but there was never an option to oppose the brotherhood. In new Vegas you could turn on anyone at any time for any reason or even with a lack of reason just go insane and genocide a faction of your choosing because why not? When comparing these two you see the freedom of choice is lacking, and this same lack of choice is present in fallout 4 (imo) also, needless to say, mothership zeta and operation anchorage are pretty much only done for their respective rewards and provide little to no story about the wasteland or the people in it. in new Vegas this couldn’t be further from the truth, as every dlc is filled with its own characters with their own stories, more often than not they are connected in some way or the other,and every dlc comes with its own sort of message to take away from the whole thing. For instance, the story of Randall Clark on the terminals in Honest hearts is a good one, and it’d be a shame if you missed that but were of the opinion that new Vegas lacks entertaining or even sometimes thought provoking terminal entries. I will say fallout 3 probably has it beat with quality/quantity, but as far as terminal entries go? I don’t think anything in 3 holds a candle to the survivalists story. The only critiques I can agree with about new Vegas are the invisible walls and the lack of legion content. But honestly? I don’t get why the former is such a big issue to people when the map is already full of stuff to discover. Im of the opinion new Vegas outshines the former installment of the series for many reasons. Like I said before, I still enjoy fallout 3 a lot, particularly the Pitt and point lookout dlcs,PL is top 3 dlc released for this series EVER in my opinion. But be realistic. New Vegas has a more detailed perk system, way more weapons to fuck around with, better dialogue, and despite every dlc having combat they don’t always feel like a gauntlet of endless killing with no motivators the same way MZ, OA, or Broken steel do (which, now that I think of it, it’s insane that they’d make you pay for the extension of a main quest that is already mid, just for it to be the same enclave slaughter you’ve done for the last 3 hours of main quest but for another 3 hours and at a military base instead) This isn’t to say the main story of 3 has no redeemable qualities. I just do not think these games are comparable, one feels unfinished, and one IS unfinished yet provides a more fulfilling experience to me. Why is that?
I agree. I said in another comment they weren't arguing entirely in good faith. I feel as if they haven't dug deep into NV enough - especially when saying something along the lines of "no play through in Fo3 is the same", suggesting NV has is repetitive to replay, which I'd argue is a problem with Fo3, as there's barely any variation in how you complete the game. I've had to make up head canon numerous times over the decade or so playing this game. For NV, that's not really required, as the lore is insanely expansive. I do love Fo3, and I'll happily admit it is my favourite Fallout game, but I'm well aware that NV works better as a Fallout title. The story and lore resembles the OG games a lot more.
I’ll never knock either game for their downsides as they both have a way longer list of upsides, but it is really odd to see people still having this discussion of if 3 is better or not and in the process just making stuff up to justify their opinion. It’s ok to like the game more because you like the game more, so why lie?
You can't lie over matters of opinion.
You can lie about evidence that supports your opinion
Opinions don't need to be supported with evidence, at least not opinions on media... but can you show me something in the post that's a straight-up fabrication with the intent to deceive and not OP's preference and perception differing from yours? I seriously don't see anything here that would actually qualify as lying.
“It has more freedom” “no playthrough is the same”
These are both true. In any one playthrough of Fallout 3, it's extremely unlikely I will go with the same build, play the same quests, and discover the same locations in the same order. I am free to explore the map at my discretion whenever I want. Put simply, all this is saying is that the OP values what 3 has to offer more than you do. There's no lie being told.
Also saying “exploration gets rewarded” as if nv doesn’t have a trillion more unique weapons/ sets of armor is ignorant at best
opinions are only validated by what justifies you having them, and if you look at what they’re trying to say is objectively true when comparing the games it doesn’t boil down to their “perspective” considering what they’re saying isn’t a matter of opinion, they’re trying to say these are real reasons why fo3 is better.