Top
130°

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.

Read Full Story >>
hardcoregamer.com
The story is too old to be commented.
-Foxtrot962d ago (Edited 962d ago )

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.

-Foxtrot962d ago (Edited 962d ago )

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.

Blacktric962d ago (Edited 962d ago )

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

Is there a point arguing against delusion? Come on.

Omegasyde962d ago

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!

mistajeff961d ago

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.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 961d ago
KRUSSIDULL962d ago

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

MrSwankSinatra962d ago

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.

Omegasyde962d ago

@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_962d ago

Fallout 3 had a better atmosphere.

Neoninja962d ago

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.

ToastyMcNibbles962d ago (Edited 962d ago )

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.

Show all comments (29)
The story is too old to be commented.