Members DayTrippinBalls Posted October 7, 2012 Members Share Posted October 7, 2012 I felt more a part of the environment and story in Fallout 3. I didn't dislike NV (other than Vegas itself), but had a lot more suspenseful fun in the ruins of Washington, D.C. than anywhere in NV. Hardly anything in NV was as memorable as the hospital rescue of the Rangers in FO3. Few things were as riveting as hearing the heavy footfalls of mutants heading your way while inside a building. I did really enjoy the DLC of NV. Even Dead Money, which was the least liked, provided a bit of that walking through the streets and going in and out of buildings suspense that was more prominent in FO3. Best part of NV was the vast assortment of weapons and the addition of mods for them. DLC for FNV was pretty good all-around. Really was a good value and way better than the F3 DLC(minus Anchorage). The environments of F3 felt more detailed and better built(The Vampire hangout, The Mall, Rivet City). After the Dunwich building quest in F3, few things in the gaming world can scare me as much as that place. I also spent a good amount of time with companions in FNV(ED-E & Veronica), which made the Mojave seemed less scary b/c my followers usually alerted me to any nearby danger before i even saw a red indicator so i could choose to fight the herd of Radscorps or save the 1 Stimpak i had left. In F3, i spent the entire game on my own, relying on a keen eye and accurate shooting to save my dopey ass. Nothing like a sewer full of Ghouls to test those skills/perks you've been building up. That game left me with a twitchy trigger finger and a need to crouch everywhere in every game after it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Soundstorm Posted October 7, 2012 Author Members Share Posted October 7, 2012 That game left me with a twitchy trigger finger and a need to crouch everywhere in every game after it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Edge11 Posted October 7, 2012 Members Share Posted October 7, 2012 I got 3 yesterday and all ready logged like 9 hours. Such a sick game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DVaz Posted October 7, 2012 Members Share Posted October 7, 2012 I dunno, like I said, I think the atmosphere in 3 was better. I agree with people saying it was more post-apocalyptic and savage, and I liked that more. But the environment and story in both are well connected. In 3, you've got the wasteland, very scattered people and the total collapse of civilisation and the plot is about taking desperate measures to try and drag us out of hell. The mojave is more civilised and populated, less desolate and threatening, and the plot is about what kind of society do you choose, because they're in a position to do so. Caesar & the legion were far better bad guys (if you believe they were, and that you can ask that question is an automatic win for them) than mcdowell and the enclave, and the dialogue with most main characters, caesar especially, was far superior to 3. In that regard, 3 is the cartoonish one. NV is hardly intellectual, but it at least presented more thought, and more options. Another (small) reason NV is better: until youre a modestly high level, you do actually have to run for your life from deathclaws. They went down WAY too easy in 3. I'd like to see the legendary deathclaw let loose in the airforce base. It'd probably clear the place. beyond that, lots of mechanics improvements, better and wide fabrication, wider range of better weapons, DT, improved stealth, slower powering up in levelling (you can be basically invincible at lvl 15 in 3, not so in NV), far more quests, varied characters with credible differing interests and it all adds up to a better game. imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members BrendanO Posted October 7, 2012 Members Share Posted October 7, 2012 The thing about 3 being all grim-and-gritty, is that the original games weren't. They had a healthy and robust sense of humor about them. So when you take that away, you lose a good deal of the character the games possess. 3 lost it's spirit, and instead of fun, it was just... pompous. It was a funeral dirge when it should have been a polka. Bethesda simply got Fallout 3 wrong. The tone, atmosphere, pacing, characters. It was all flat and dead. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying a a post-apocalyptic RPG has to be funny, or anything, but if you're going to call it Fallout, you'd better be prepared to have random encounters with Monty Python characters and super-intelligent scorpions who want to kill a talking plant because it taught you how to beat the scorpion at chess. Fallout without humor is a car without seats. It still works, but nobody wants to drive it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members z28talon Posted October 7, 2012 Members Share Posted October 7, 2012 In F3, i spent the entire game on my own, relying on a keen eye and accurate shooting to save my dopey ass. Nothing like a sewer full of Ghouls to test those skills/perks you've been building up. That game left me with a twitchy trigger finger and a need to crouch everywhere in every game after it. I remember the Chryslus Building that was full of Mutants. Walked in and heard them stomping around. Walked right back out the first time. Then went back later and discovered how large and multi-floored that Mutant nest was. Twitchy trigger finger for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DVaz Posted October 7, 2012 Members Share Posted October 7, 2012 The thing about 3 being all grim-and-gritty, is that the original games weren't. They had a healthy and robust sense of humor about them. So when you take that away, you lose a good deal of the character the games possess. 3 lost it's spirit, and instead of fun, it was just... pompous. It was a funeral dirge when it should have been a polka. Bethesda simply got Fallout 3 wrong. The tone, atmosphere, pacing, characters. It was all flat and dead. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying a a post-apocalyptic RPG has to be funny, or anything, but if you're going to call it Fallout, you'd better be prepared to have random encounters with Monty Python characters and super-intelligent scorpions who want to kill a talking plant because it taught you how to beat the scorpion at chess. Fallout without humor is a car without seats. It still works, but nobody wants to drive it. Perhaps. But 3 was my introduction to the series. Also, I'll see your fallout 3 has no humour with Liberty Prime. I've never laughed as much at a game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ShaneV2 Posted October 7, 2012 Members Share Posted October 7, 2012 The thing about 3 being all grim-and-gritty, is that the original games weren't. They had a healthy and robust sense of humor about them. So when you take that away, you lose a good deal of the character the games possess. 3 lost it's spirit, and instead of fun, it was just... pompous. It was a funeral dirge when it should have been a polka. Bethesda simply got Fallout 3 wrong. The tone, atmosphere, pacing, characters. It was all flat and dead. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying a a post-apocalyptic RPG has to be funny, or anything, but if you're going to call it Fallout, you'd better be prepared to have random encounters with Monty Python characters and super-intelligent scorpions who want to kill a talking plant because it taught you how to beat the scorpion at chess. Fallout without humor is a car without seats. It still works, but nobody wants to drive it. BrendanO gets it. I was a huge fan of the original Fallout games so I liked NV much better. It was a return to the spirit of Fallout, probably because it was made by the people who made the first 2 whereas 3 was not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members decode6 Posted October 7, 2012 Members Share Posted October 7, 2012 New Vegas had, without giving too much away, callbacks from 1&2 including a few characters with familiar names. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members decode6 Posted October 7, 2012 Members Share Posted October 7, 2012 Perhaps. But 3 was my introduction to the series.Also, I'll see your fallout 3 has no humour with Liberty Prime. I've never laughed as much at a game. I did like the drunk Russian surrounded by whores. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DayTrippinBalls Posted October 7, 2012 Members Share Posted October 7, 2012 I remember the Chryslus Building that was full of Mutants. Walked in and heard them stomping around. Walked right back out the first time. Then went back later and discovered how large and multi-floored that Mutant nest was. Twitchy trigger finger for sure. Yup! Grayditch was awesome as a low level character too. Walked in ready to kick an Ants ass(the little ones just outside Megaton being my only previous experience), ran out of there wearing my ass as a hat. This {censored}er scared the hell out of me. It was at night when i found this place too.[video=youtube;5Hw2bmWCSMg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Hw2bmWCSMg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DayTrippinBalls Posted October 7, 2012 Members Share Posted October 7, 2012 I remember the Chryslus Building that was full of Mutants. Walked in and heard them stomping around. Walked right back out the first time. Then went back later and discovered how large and multi-floored that Mutant nest was. Twitchy trigger finger for sure. Yup! Grayditch was awesome as a low level character too. Walked in ready to kick an Ants ass(the little ones just outside Megaton being my only previous experience), ran out of there wearing my ass as a hat. This {censored}er scared the hell out of me. It was at night when i found this place too.[video=youtube;5Hw2bmWCSMg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Hw2bmWCSMg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rushtallica Posted October 7, 2012 Members Share Posted October 7, 2012 BrendanO gets it. I was a huge fan of the original Fallout games so I liked NV much better. It was a return to the spirit of Fallout, probably because it was made by the people who made the first 2 whereas 3 was not. I never played the originals, so I went into 3 without any specific expectations and think it's the better of the two, though I think NV is close and hope the next one will be great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members z28talon Posted October 8, 2012 Members Share Posted October 8, 2012 When I first encountered this Behemoth, I ran like crazy and ended up softening him up with a missile launcher and sniper. I did not want a close encounter. Thank god there weren't many of them in the game. The Feral Ghoul Reavers were the ones I feared about the most. Bullet sponges! Though the Deathclaws always put me on edge. First time I saw a Deathclaw early in the game, I took aim from a good distance and shot at it. The thing was hardly touched and came at me like a heatseeking missile. Cut to death scene and reload. I steered way clear of that area for a long time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members decode6 Posted October 8, 2012 Members Share Posted October 8, 2012 Deathclaws are easy after you get the poison dart gun and aim for legs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members meelosh123 Posted October 8, 2012 Members Share Posted October 8, 2012 Was a fanatic when 1 and 2 were out. Both NV and 3 offer memories that the other doesn't. Not counting the obvious item and perk improvements NV offers, it's hard to compare the two cuz they're such different games (if you're a fan, that is). 3's got a more focused story and NV turns into something more open-ended. The environment in 3 was more evocative for me, mainly because it felt so oppressive and hostile, as if DC was its own character. Not to say that NV didn't have some sick scenes. If you don't like one, I can't see how you'd like the other. If you can get into character and the spirit of the game, you probably won't have a problem having a blast with either game. That said, I wish both games were freakin better in every way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DayTrippinBalls Posted October 8, 2012 Members Share Posted October 8, 2012 Deathclaws are easy after you get the poison dart gun and aim for legs. that's just cheatin' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members tmdguitar Posted October 8, 2012 Members Share Posted October 8, 2012 it was fun, worth the play but i had really wished they would've improved on the overall game and length of play. even more-so i'm anxiously waiting on any news of fallout 4. if its going to use the the concept of skyrim. i'm gonna {censored} bricks upon bricks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members greatmutah Posted October 9, 2012 Members Share Posted October 9, 2012 I played hours upon hours of Fallout 3. Was hooked and absorbed like no other. When New Vegas first came out I picked it up and kind of brushed it off as more of the same. A few months later I came back to it and was pleasantly surprised to find an amazing game. The story was better, the characters were better and there were more shades of grey than the black and white approach of Fallout 3. Also, I liked the companion characters much more in NV and the various factions were awesome. Plus the gang known as The Kings kind of wins everything ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members JerEvil Posted October 9, 2012 Members Share Posted October 9, 2012 Add this to the list of games I own but have only played about 2 hours of Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.