Fallout 3 vs Fallout New Vegas, grudge match!

[Maximilian]

I actually preferred fallout 3, it just seemed bigger and i preferred the storyline more. Both are great and well worth playing but imo 3 > vegas.

What about you guys?

 

[ParadoxDenmark]

Fallout 1 and 2

They were just so much better in every single way.

 

[Maximilian]

Fallout 1 and 2

They were just so much better in every single way.

Heh yeah i debated adding an option for them on the poll but i dont want this to be an old fallout vs new fallout thread just new fallout vs new fallout.

 

[Raduque]

I thought I liked them both equally, but I'm going to have to vote for New Vegas. FO3 is great, but I love NVs setting, weapons, companions and storyline more.

 

[DaveSimmons]

I thought I liked them both equally, but I'm going to have to vote for New Vegas. FO3 is great, but I love NVs setting, weapons, companions and storyline more.

Yep. Set Veronica to ranged attack and listen to her response

Companions in FO3 were boring, aside from the sequence where you meet and recruit Fawkes.

The main quest in FONV wasn't spectacular but it was better than FO3. Both had some good sidequests, but FONV wins just for Vault 11.

 

[wuliheron]

Fallout 3 had it all except for iron sights and the green graphics get to you after awhile. It was the biggest bang for your buck, great humor, and challenging.

New Vegas lost the green graphics and added iron sights, but its just not the biggest bang for your buck, the humor isn't as good, and has no real challenge.

In fallout 3 you have to work to find anything of value and work to get to anywhere to buy and sell stuff. With New Vegas I can just run down the road the entire length of the map in one big U turn and collect enough snowglobes and other stuff without a single serious fight to be set for life. No comparison. However, I really, really, really, like the iron sights.

 

[HybridSquirrel]

if new vegas had a graphics upgrade, I would've picked it. but the story in FO3 way way more in depth imo.

 

[Vadatajs]

Fallout 3. Though I like the survival mechanic/campfires in NV; the setting, storyline and soundtrack totally kills it for me.

Also, with the bobbleheads, there was a point to seeking them out. Not so with snowglobes, especially if you killed Mr. House before figuring out how to sell them. All they do is weigh you down, and they can't be removed because they're quest items.

That and those f_cking cazadores.

 

[Cerb]

Fallout 3 had it all except for iron sights and the green graphics get to you after awhile. It was the biggest bang for your buck, great humor, and challenging.

New Vegas lost the green graphics and added iron sights (...) However, I really, really, really, like the iron sights.

Luckily, there are mods to handle at least both of those aspects, for the prior version.

Not voting, as I got FO3 recently enough that I haven't felt anywhere close to exhausting its content. I had to avoid it for a week and a half after Vault 106, though. I've read some books that could freak me out like that, but never expected such from a video game.

 

[DucatiMonster696]

Fallout 3. Though I like the survival mechanic/campfires in NV; the setting, storyline and soundtrack totally kills it for me.

Also, with the bobbleheads, there was a point to seeking them out. Not so with snowglobes, especially if you killed Mr. House before figuring out how to sell them. All they do is weigh you down, and they can't be removed because they're quest items.

That and those f_cking cazadores.

I'll agree on cazadores being a pain in the ass. However there is a kick ass personal underground hideout mod that takes those snow globes out of your inventory and puts them on display.

 

[spaceman]

nv.sotry is better imo
world is denser
more humor (lolz)
factions add way more depth

 

[PhatoseAlpha]

Snow Globes do not weigh you down. They don't actually count as carried weight.


Anyway, between the 2 it's not even a contest. Vegas is better on every level. More depth to the game mechanics, more interesting equipment, better locations, better companions. Better story too, but most games have better then the LOLWUT? plot of Fallout 3.

 

[zerocool84]

if new vegas had a graphics upgrade, I would've picked it. but the story in FO3 way way more in depth imo.

Story? Fallout 3 practically has any story to begin with.

 

[Bateluer]

New Vegas was considerably better. Not just just because it would run under a 64 bit OS, unlike FO3. Never successfully got that game to work under Vista 64 or Win7 64, had to play through it on my back up machine, an X2 4000 and Rdeon 4350.

 

[zinfamous]

New Vegas was considerably better. Not just just because it would run under a 64 bit OS, unlike FO3. Never successfully got that game to work under Vista 64 or Win7 64, had to play through it on my back up machine, an X2 4000 and Rdeon 4350.

still waiting for a bigger price drop before I pick it up--but this is really disconcerting.

I wonder if the steam version has this problem, or is easily fixed, at least?

I remember KT's painful and somewhat uncommon difficulties with the steam version recently.

 

[zerocool84]

New Vegas was considerably better. Not just just because it would run under a 64 bit OS, unlike FO3. Never successfully got that game to work under Vista 64 or Win7 64, had to play through it on my back up machine, an X2 4000 and Rdeon 4350.

Well Bethesda doesn't know how to create anything that isn't buggy. DLC and games have all been horribly buggy. It's really sad and they know they can pump out crappy buggy products because people will buy it.

 

[Jumpem]

Fallout 1 and 2

They were just so much better in every single way.

This.

 

[wuliheron]

Luckily, there are mods to handle at least both of those aspects, for the prior version.

Not voting, as I got FO3 recently enough that I haven't felt anywhere close to exhausting its content. I had to avoid it for a week and a half after Vault 106, though. I've read some books that could freak me out like that, but never expected such from a video game.

Yeah, I'd go so far as to say New Vegas is really just a collection of Fallout 3 mods. Too bad the mods are so difficult to apply. I'd say if you really love Fallout 3 or want an easier game to play New Vegas is a good alternative.

 

[Sulaco]

New Vegas was considerably better. Not just just because it would run under a 64 bit OS, unlike FO3. Never successfully got that game to work under Vista 64 or Win7 64, had to play through it on my back up machine, an X2 4000 and Rdeon 4350.

I'd say there's a problem on your end, can't blame that on the game or the OS.

I've logged 75 or so hours on FO 3 on the system in my signature, running Windows 7 Pro x64.

 

[StinkyPinky]

I liked both a lot. Probably pick Fallout 3 if I had to pick one.

My rankings...

Fallout 2
Fallout 1
Fallout 3
Fallout New Vegas


ALL are good games though. Enjoyed them all.

 

[HybridSquirrel]

Story? Fallout 3 practically has any story to begin with.

better than the shit stain story line of New Vegas.

 

[zerocool84]

better than the shit stain story line of New Vegas.

Well both are horribly bad but compare to any decent game Fallout 3/NV they both have bad storylines, bad voice acting, bad graphics, lazy "dungeon" design, and both buggy to no end.

 

[sandorski]

They're both great, still prefer 3 more though.

 

[NoSoup4You]

Fallout 3, only because New Vegas felt like a full priced expansion pack. Dragon Age's expansion - Awakenings - was as much a full game as is New Vegas.

Also, for 2010 the graphics and animations in New Vegas are totally unacceptable for a full priced game. $19.99? I'm fine with it. But not $50...

 

[GoodRevrnd]

NV main story may have had a pretty lousy ending, but FO3 had virtually no story, and it didn't really make a lot of sense with FO canon either. The only thing 3 had going for it was that some of the towns were a fair bit richer than what NV offered.