Sequel Showdown: Fallout 3 vs. Fallout: New Vegas

Hardcore Gamer: This past week, the teaser site “thesurvivor2299.com” updated to reveal new information. Based on the information, it is clear the site is either a countdown to the announcement of Fallout 4 or an extremely elaborate internet hoax. Either way, a new Fallout game is all but inevitable, so let's take a look back at the last two Fallout games and see how they stack up against each other.

[MrSwankSinatra]

Fallout 3 is better.

[-Foxtrot]

Yup

Fallout New Vegas felt it was lacking and I know people liked the factions but it really created more problems...if you did a certain mission before another one it could mess up the entire quest line for that faction. You could argue it's the entire point of multiple replays but in these types of games I like sticking to one save file and playing the entire game shaping my character and coillection as much good loot as I can. I don't want to be punished because I accidently did a certain mission for one faction and now can't do a quest for the other one to get a good reward.

The multiple endings had that problem, again choice is good but you have to allow a way for us to get gear/weapons in all endings someway or another. Some ways might be harder if you do one faction faction ending while in another the weapon/gear might just be given to you. So hopefully we won't see much of that in Fallout 3

I do want them to bring back a perk for each level, they took it out of NV because they thought people were becoming over powered in Fallout 3 but then again it's their job to make sure that dosen't happen. If they make it so the early perks arn't as powerful and make them better the more your progress then it wouldn't be a problem but I do think you should be allowed in the very end once you've worked your arse off to get everything to the max level. You could do it in F3 with the SPECIAL if you got a perk in the DLC THEN go collect the bobble heads to raise it to 10.

Vegas it's self was pretty small, I thought more of the city would of survived but the main problem was the loading times since you went back and forth alot and couldn't go the section you wanted, you had to go outside of Vegas. Don't see why once you've loading the area EVERYTHING in the city/town whatever is free to explore, you have the entire map to explore without a loading screen so why not smaller areas.

Finally Fallout NV had roughly the same content but the size of Fallout 3 was better. Some people say it's the same but theres a bigger invisible wall in NV which takes a chunk of the border. I never understood why aswell you couldn't climb over mountains in NV, invisible walls were a b****, you could do it sometimes in Fallout 3 but in NV it was a lot worse.

[-Foxtrot]

Please challenge me if your going to disagree....what I speak is the truth

You choose a side/faction in NV and you could end up ticking off the wrong faction locking yourselfs out of missions.

EDIT: Below

"Is there a point arguing against delusion? Come on."

LOL...how is that post delusional

No...not arguing is just laziness.

[Blacktric]

"Please challenge me if your going to disagree....what I speak is the truth"

Is there a point arguing against delusion? Come on.

[Omegasyde]

Ok I disagree with your points and here is why:

"Finally Fallout NV had roughly the same content but the size of Fallout 3 was better."

False. Fallout NV had more sidequest sand more "land marks" You also had way more choices and cooler perks. I will agree that the atmosphere was cooler in Fallout 3 (and I live in Las Vegas). Also the Invisible walls were in Fallout 3, where in New Vegas - the designers mostly made terrain you couldn't climb - Which to me made more sense (vegas in a valley afterall).
Also New Vegas had way more weapons and equipment to choose from, but this was expected as it was somewhat of a sequel.

".if you did a certain mission before another one it could mess up the entire quest line for that faction. You could argue it's the entire point of multiple replays but in these types of games I like sticking to one save file and playing the entire game shaping my character and coillection as much good loot as I can"

That's the whole point of Choice. Choose one way or the other. I only beat new vegas once, and I was evil as they come - yet still picked the ending where I killed Ceasar. In Fallout 3, you had pretty much one story, Go find dad. You have a few options like blow up the nuke etc. but not nearly as much in New Vegas.

My opinion
Story <--- Fallout 3
Gameplay <---- New Vegas
Atmosphere <----Fallout 3
Ending and endgame <----- New Vegas
Customization, choices, and side quests <---New vegas
Better Bad guys <----- New Vegas
DLC <--- Fallout 3
Bugs/glitches/gamefreezes <---- Tie!

[mistajeff]

Play the open freeside mod on PC. It restores freeside to how it was supposed to be before they gutted a lot of random activity so the game could run on console.

Also, bear a couple things in mind. Fallout 3 handled the fallout lore in an extremely sloppy way. The GECK isn't some magic box that transforms the land around where it's set off. The tribals in fallout 2 THOUGHT it did that because, well, they're tribals. It's a box with seeds, instructions, and a cold fusion reactor. The presence and actions of the factions in 3 make no sense after fallout 2. And an AI? There's some pretty detailed explanations in the fallout bible about exactly why the creators of the fallout universe opted not to include AI because it doesn't fit the 50s brand of retro sci-fi they wanted. Human brains in robot bodies? Sure. But not AI.

The atmosphere of 3 would make sense if the game took place before fallout 1, but how did any of these pockets of people survive for 200 years without learning how to farm? I can't figure out what anyone eats in fallout 3. They certainly can't survive on canned food over 200 years old, but that's all that's lying around. New Vegas has share croppers, farming communities and co-ops. In fallout 1 the first community you come across is a farming village. Fallout 3's world is aesthetically powerful, but ultimately lacks believability and character.

To each their own, both games are awesome and which is "better" is a matter of opinion (except in regards to reactivity). But the world of New Vegas is clearly more well thought out.

[KRUSSIDULL]

I think Fallout New Vegas was better overall thanks to http://fallout.wikia.com/wi...

[MrSwankSinatra]

i played new vegas on hardcore, and i wasn't worth it imo. you get no type of incentive after beating it, just a stupid trophy. i suppose you can argue it enhanced the gaming experience but for me it made my experience too long and redundant.

[Omegasyde]

@mrswank

It made the process longer. I thought it was cool at first because you had to carry water/food but it was not that much more challenging.

I would of preferred harder enemies that came out after sunset too.

[Nujabes_]

Fallout 3 had a better atmosphere.

[Neoninja]

Well I feel that Fallout 3 is better, but New Vegas is more like Fallout 1 and 2.
I do think the characters are better in New Vegas and it seemed more alive.
Other than that Fallout 3 takes it all the way.

[Mr7Beans]

Fo3 easily.

[ToastyMcNibbles]

Fallout 3 is the better overall experience but I do favor New Vegas for the improvements to gameplay and the way you can literally shape the world of New Vegas as you see fit with multiple endings and factions. I also enjoyed how all the DLC was connected from a narrative perspective.

[Summons75]

No competition, Fallout 3. New Vegas was and still is unplayable.

[BlackTar187]

Thats not true i played thru for a 4th time all of new vegas and its DLC less then 2 months ago.

[Summons75]

I started over ten character's multiple times over the years and have never seen past the tutorial, same with a bunch of friends.

[Demoa]

fallout 3

[Lolyta]

Did you guys know that Fallout 3 Copied Parasite Eve 1 / Vagrant story Targeting system , I Suggest you guys to play PE and then Judge fallout recent games targeting system , Shocker! I know

[sdozzo]

Shocker... haha gets me every time.

[porkChop]

I found the atmosphere to be better in Fallout 3. However, I felt that New Vegas was better written, had more interesting characters, more interesting locations, and better gameplay overall. New Vegas itself should have been way bigger though. Even combining Freeside and The Strip, it was still way too small for me.

[Omegasyde]

I agree. Freeside (freemont street) was way too small and very generic.
The Strip was cool - but the loading between the sections was annoying.
They did Hoover Dam well - but the area's outside the strip were not done that well -- There should of been more city scapes.

[BlackTar187]

Fallout new vegas all the way.

3 was glorious too.

My most anticipated game for next gen. Please give us a nugget of info to run with please

[R_aVe_N]

I would have to agree with you. Both games where broken, but I just enjoyed Fallout New Vegas more than Fallout 3. Fallout 3 was just way to easy with like 0 challage to it. New vegas hardcore mode was a really good way to make the game harder for those that like it, and still keep it easy for those that don't.

[martinezjesus1993]

I think its about what game came first. I wasn't a big gamer before 2008 but that X-mas i got Fallout 3 by mistake, I has asked for cod xD I put it In my ps3 and I never looked back, passed it so many times, put in over 300 hours, it had an amazing atmosphere. Fallout 3 has my vote but I think if New Vegas had come first, new Vegas would have been my favorite. All I want in fallout 4 is a combination of the two. The environment and the karma system from fallout 3, and the gameplay (ironsights, weapon mod, etc) from new vegas!

[josephayal]

New Vegas is boring and slow, Bethesda wouldn't hand off the next game in the series to a different company.

[SoulSercher620]

Fallout 3 is da sh!t.

[Jyndal]

I liked the feel of going back to the original setting of Fallout 1 & 2 with New Vegas, but there was something so damn epic about Fallout 3. Maybe the idea of it being in the burnt out remains of Washington D.C. or the whole "just out of the vault" storyline, but something made me like it more.

[ifritAlkhemyst]

Let's see. Do I want to play a Fallout game or do I want to play an Elder Scrolls mod? Do I want good writing or do I want bland writing? Do I desire meaningful consequence of my actions or do I desire blowing an entire town up and suffering no repercussions? Do I want my dungeons to have character or do I want them to look like cut and paste jobs?

Plenty more of these, folks. It's fairly obvious to me that New Vegas is better, but then again I bet most readers here haven't even played any of the original Fallouts so Fallout 3 was probably revelatory for them.

[Indo]

I love both Fallout 3 and Fallout NV, and both offer different experiences. But i seem to play NV more so than FO3, it seems to offer a funnier experience when experimenting with differ player types and has some badass weapons and customizations to play with too.