Fallout 3 vs. Fallout New Vegas

#1buraykiserPosted 9/13/2011 4:25:00 PM
I wanted to make this board to see from the community which game you think is better than the other. Remember to keep in mind the Dlc's,Perks,Items,Graphics,Gameplay,story, and etc.
Please help me I am trying to finally find out which one is superior!
#2onilink75Posted 9/13/2011 4:33:41 PM
FYI. There is already a topic on this subject on the front page of these boards. I would refer to that good sir.
---
GT: ClamDestroyer
#3HatchetHoundPosted 9/13/2011 4:36:07 PM
Fairness dictates that you should post this on the NV board as well.
---
I'm in a man's apartment and I'm addicted to spray paint.
That is ALL you need to KNOW!
#4onilink75Posted 9/13/2011 4:38:00 PM
^ grobble grobble grobble. :)
---
GT: ClamDestroyer
#5ace123678Posted 9/15/2011 8:33:55 AM
It really depends on which style of open-endedness you like.

This game is way more open, in the sense that the main story doesn't mean as much, but there are hours and hours of things you could do as soon as you step out of the vault.

NV was a lot more linear in it's gameplay, as a lot of it was story driven. Sure, there is stuff to do outside of the story, but it doesn't mean anywhere as much as it does in FO3.
---
Pokemon Black: Kyle, 3525-2296-9221
B/W record: 2-1
#6randomgeneratorPosted 9/18/2011 5:16:21 PM
Fallout 3 (unsurprisngly) feels a lot like Morrowind and Oblivion. It shares that special feeling that Bethesda's games have, not so much a videogame as a virtual alternate world you can lose yourself in for a while.

New Vegas felt much more like I was 'playing a videogame', it didn't have the same magic, so I wasn't surprised when I finally made it to Vegas and found a series of small compartmentalised areas seperated by loading screens.

NV made some improvements over FO3, but they were insignificant compared toi what was lost.
#7DarkRealityXPosted 9/19/2011 5:48:38 AM
Fallout 3 is more fun. New Vegas requires a bit more thought in decisions; it's more a traditional RPG in that regard (and it was made by the people who made the first two, albeit with the engine of FO3).

New Vegas is longer. There's no training dungeon, you're pretty much set loose straight away, but the first town serves to train you, if you want to stay. You don't have to. You do a lot more wandering in New Vegas. FO3 starts when you get out of the Vault and sort of limps along, letting you do whatever. New Vegas doesn't really start until you get to the Vegas Strip, but until then, it kinda shoves you in that direction. Stray too far and you will get killed, fast.

New Vegas has far more to do. While FO3 has people all around who will send you on fetch quests, New Vegas replaces them with whole factions, each with several quests.

The DLC for Fallout 3 is fun. The DLC for New Vegas generally sucks. The story is the same with each one. "Oh it's okay BUT...". FO3 has Zeta, which is kinda stupid, but still fun. The other four are solid. New Vegas has nothing as good as Zeta, let alone the other four.

Fallout 3 continues after you beat the main story if you have Broken Steel. New Vegas does not, and is not planned to do so with any DLC. (Note: There's an argument to be made that perhaps Fallout 3 should have ended with the main story.)

Which is better overall? They both have high and low points. But why decide? Play one and then play the other.

---
The needs of the many outweigh the wants of the few.
(Adapted from Mr Spock's quote)
#8The_404sPosted 9/19/2011 5:03:59 PM
I think Fallout 3 is better.

Fallout New Vegas could've been better. But it chose a lousey location, and they didn't put enough work into it.

First, who decided it'd be a good idea to place a post apocalyptic survival game in a place that has both always been a wasteland and hardly affected by the apocalypse? Honestly, change the name, a few words here and there, and it could've been advertised as a different game.

Second, exploration is very much pointless in this game. Unlike in Fallout 3, the locations are flat, boring. Some of them just useless. Boarded up with no other purpose than just being there.

In Fallout, exploration was rewarded. The loot was good enough, but the story and background of the areas was a great treat.
#9KljtPosted 9/21/2011 12:35:40 PM
I liked New Vegas better. I preferred the more open-ended style they were going for with the story and the factions. It's realism, strangely enough, appealed to me, as it felt like an actual world rather than a bunch of locations that were, more or less, unrelated to each other.
---
Jet ski across the Pacific Ocean (782 km)
Google Maps' way of getting you from China to Japan
#10kentuckybobPosted 9/23/2011 7:17:55 AM
New Vegas is better in nearly every way.

Ironsights, deeper characters, more intricate plot, TONNES more quests.. Major, minor, fetch, collect, escort... so many quests you wont know where to start...

Fallout 3 had something going that FNV didnt... the desolation, the feeling of survival... FNV didnt feel like a wasteland so much, just some guy walking around the desert.

If F3 had ironsights, then id be saying F3 was better right now.