FallOut 3 or New Vegas?

[WarpedAcorn]

So at the risk of basically starting a game vs. game thread, I'm starting a game vs. game thread.

Recently I've gotten the itch to play something RPGish with guns, and these 2 titles are at the top of my list. Were New Vegas a simple XPac, then it would be no big deal...but since its basically a different game I really have to pick one. And honestly, I'm having a difficult time.

Originally, I played through and beat FallOut 3 way back before it got any patches or DLC and the ending was a Game Over scenario. I know its gotten better since them with a few DLC's. However, I've also heard that New Vegas is a bit more immersive and has a lot of elements reminiscent of Fall Out 2. So really...what are the Pro's/Con's of the 2 titles?

[Rokkie]

i have only played new vegas, so i would suggest that imo

[Rumred]

I enjoyed both and each has things they do better or worse then the other. All and all tho story wise i enjoy Fallout 3 more but New Vegas i think has a overall better questing. That said nothing beats listening to John Henry Eden who grew up rural Kentucky :P.

[Valeron]

I personally enjoyed New Vegas a bit more. It was made by a different developer (Obsidian) who tends to have a bit better story development. However, Obsidian games actually have more bugs than Bethesda if that is even possible.

[chazus]

Fallout 3 is a bigger game. I liked New Vegas (for obvious reasons) but I wasn't entirely fond of the 'choosing sides' aspect of the game. There are a number of factions that will lock you out of completion by taking one side or another, or by making certain decisions. Fallout 3 lets you complete nearly everything, and also has I think 4 DLC as well, which is usually standard now, considering it's age and the prevalence of GOTY versions

[twiddler]

With mods, I enjoyed Fallout 3 just as much as New Vegas.

[Wilian]

New Vegas is miles beyond Fallout 3 in every way possible.

[Arrashi]

To compare them best:
Fallout 3 to fallout new vegas is like fallout 1 to fallout 2.
Both NV and 2 are better than previous ones, due to:
- More content.
- Better stories quests.
- More balanced/better perks/more interesting gameplay.
- Alot more enemies who are again more balanced and interesting (no more ghoul ravagers who can shrug off mininukes while dancing on plasma mines)
- (in case of NV) Much superior DLC. Fallout 3 has 5 dlc but only two are good, Point lookout is great ind Pitt is kinda cool if you liked mad max. Other ones suck.
New vegas have 4, but each of them shows far superior quality, especially old world blues.

In general both 3 and 1 are more "climatic" in a way of showing post nuclear war world. On the other hand in 2 and NV you already see world rebuilding. And "wild west" theme in NV may be a little tiresome depending on what you like.

Short story short: NV is alot better than 3, but 3 is also worth playing. Its just if you have to pick one, NV is the one to go.

[Marthenil]

I prefer new vegas simply because of aiming down the sights.

[mickybrighteyes]

Honestly I felt like thwy were teh same game almost... New Vegas having the more appealing map and FO3 having a better intro that hurled you into the map. (the growing up intro vs cutscene 'death' intro).

I prefer NV... but am biased cause I only have that one for PC, FO3 is on PS3 and thus much more limited.

[oplawlz]

I prefer fallout 3, but the differences are really thematic, at least for me. I also prefer the more open sandbox feel of 3, I felt kind of herded in NV. That said they're both great games, especially with mods.

[Mothhive]

Both are great games, but I preferred New Vegas. I liked the setting more and I think the characters were much more interesting. I also enjoyed the Wild Wasteland trait which added humorous references and encounters into the game for you to discover.

[shokter]

I'd give the edge to New Vegas. I enjoy 3, but the DC wasteland is sort of a warren of dead ends, tunnels, and super mutants; running around there gets old quicker.

[SidFwuff]

and has a lot of elements reminiscent of Fall Out 2. So really...what are the Pro's/Con's of the 2 titles?

If you're a fan of Fallout 2, New Vegas, without question. It's made by many of the people that did Fallout 2, and even has a 'Wild Wasteland' perk that serves no other purpose than to adds the random, wacky, (and arguably too much) in your face easter eggs and jokes.

While I didn't mind Fallout 3, I was a big fan of the Fallout 1 and 2, and I found it difficult to stop trying to fit Fallout 3 into the series. While it's true Bethesda did a great job at capturing the atmosphere and setting, the story I found...kind of forced.

On the other hand, there are many familiar faces and names in New Vegas, and it canonizes several events that were planned for the original Fallout 3 ("Van Buren"). Fallout 3 felt like a spinoff to me (much like Fallout Tactics did), while New Vegas felt like a 'proper' Fallout 3.

[Aleksej89]

Fallout 3 had undeniably better story and campaign.

New vegas had much better weapon customization and such stuff.

However both are much better if you install the unofficial (community made) patch for them.

[XDurionX]

Both of them, how is that even a question? F3 is a little more clunky and the NV DLC is waay better, so the latter is better as introduction.

[Theronus]

In my opinion, Fallout 3 story is a lot better. On the other hand, FNV introduces a lot of new engine features that you can't just live without.
So I think that if you mod accordingly, Fallout 3 will be way more interesting than FNV.

Also, F3's DLCs were very fun to play, at least for me. Especially Anchorage and Broken Steel.

[Luko]

I'm going to hijack this for a moment rather than make an entirely new thread for something that could be resolved in a reply or two.

I've tried to play through Fallout 3 several times now, never really making it past that 6-8 hour mark. I think it's the combat the kills it for me.

Anyway, I've seen a couple of you mention mods. I'm not really much of a modder, hell I even completed Oblivion/Skyrim vanilla with no mods at all, so I'm a little inexperienced in finding the best ones. Which would you suggest to make Fallout 3 more... I guess digestible? I really enjoy the concept and the story, I'd just like to enjoy the gameplay a little more. It's on my list of things to complete before summertime.

[Wilian]

Fallout 3 had undeniably better story and campaign.

On what planet? O.o

[Delaios]

Quests and factions (apart from Caesar's Legion*) are done better in New Vegas, but it's environment is a lot blander (it's in a desert). If you are mostly interested in exploring and don't care too much for story, I'd go with Fallout 3. New Vegas' map is far too flat and empty in my opinion and there aren't enough Super Mutants in it (and zero Behemoths). But both games offered lots of hours of gameplay and I've got both games along with their DLC's.

*Caesar's Legion is one of the most retarded factions I've ever seen in a game and they should have come up with something more believable. In the game world it's this large unstoppable army, when judging from the armor pretty much everything should be able to stop them. Half naked and relying heavily on melee and throwing spears and sleeping in tents in a post apocalyptic world where even simple raiders are armed. The whole faction just feels like the developers decided they had to have an evil faction in the game.