• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Fallout 3, Fallout 4, Fallout New Vegas. Which do you prefer and why?

Corrik

Member
I played Fallout 4 recently and liked it a lot. Was thinking about trying out Fallout 3 next on X1X.

Which one is the best of the 3 though and why? I am interested in hearing comparisons of them.
 
Last edited:

DunDunDunpachi

Patient MembeR
New Vegas. In terms of exploration, talking to NPCs, sidequests, and interaction between the factions it felt the most similar to the old Fallout 1, 2, and Brotherhood.
 

radewagon

Member
I like Fallout 4 the most cause I'm not a hater.
- Settlement building is fun
- The graphics are the most refined and the environments are really diverse
- The storyline is clever
- The companions are interesting and helpful
- The Power Armor feels like something special instead of just it being armor with good stats
- Weapon customization is well implemented
 

nowhat

Member
- The storyline is clever
Yeah, I guess getting the exact same cutscene at the end no matter what faction you choose to side with is "clever"... I also must applaud Bethesda for taking the BioWare conversation wheel, and making it worse - no small feat.

My vote goes to New Vegas. The way the player can affect the story and ending is unparalleled in modern Fallout games, it can be argued compared to any Bethesda game even.
 

radewagon

Member
Yeah, I guess getting the exact same cutscene at the end no matter what faction you choose to side with is "clever"

I dunno, Last of Us had a pretty great story even though I had no control over the outcome.

I'm just playin', though, with my hater comment. I can see the arguments for both schools of thought. I just happen to care very little for the strengths of games like New Vegas when compared to more streamlined experiences like FO4. For example, in Fallout 4, you could mostly ignore VATS. It turned it into less of an RPG hybrid and more into a straight FPS in terms of gunplay. I happen to like this even though it homogenizes the series and strips it of something that was quite unique.
 

Kreydo

Member
Fallout New Vegas is by far the best one, but I like the 3 of them for different reason...

I liked Fallout 3 for his whole atmosphere, it's dark, the wasteland and his capital resonate with the despair of humanity, the game got some very good scripted quest. Also the begining of the game in the Vault is for me the best tutorial/intro ever made for a Fallout.
I didn't liked his shooter/VATS gameplay, the boring subway part, the whole lack of polish.

I liked Fallout New Vegas because it's simply the best : his writing, the freedom you have during quest, their originality, the level design, the size of the map, the number of different place, the faction system etc... Everything in this game is better than Fallout 3 or 4! and it's still a RPG with a 'working' shooter gameplay.
I didn't liked the slow begining of the game, the lack of technical polish.

I liked Fallout 4 for his generosity and how easy it can be modded... because Fallout 4 is a disapointing RPG (you notice it very quickly) but a decent shooter, I choosed to change/mod it into an adventure survival game... Then I could enjoy it like a sandbox/Stalker-like. Obviously something got lost in that Fallout and without the modding the game is by far the less good of the trio.
I didn't liked the RPG aspect reduced to dust, the forced 'save the world' main quest, the whole 'Disneywasteland' feeling.

To be honest I have now very low expectation for next Bethesda RPG, we can see that Bethesda is toning down all the RPG, gravity, in deph of his game to appeal to the mainstream crowd or console users... Game filled with repetitive content like shooting, building, fetch quest gathering that miss the essential and the basics of a good RPG adventure.
Hopefully modding do some damage control for the people with higher gaming expectation, but until when?...

Anyway OP I suggest you to do all of them, but if you are limited in time... do yourself a favor and play Fallout New Vegas with some graphics and gameplay mods.
 
Last edited:

nowhat

Member
I didn't liked the slow begining of the game, the lack of technical polish.
As much as I love the game (and I do), this is so much an understatement. I got a used 360 last gen, fully well knowing it was modded and banned (so unable to get patches too) - I figured, if I only care about single player, what's the difference?

NV was one of the games that proved there certainly can be a difference. It wasn't until I got the GOTY edition with all the DLC and patches that I was able to complete it.
 
Last edited:

Grinchy

Banned
They all have their own strengths and weaknesses.

Obviously New Vegas is the best at branching storylines and choices that almost feel like they matter along with better shooting mechanics than 3. Fallout 3 had more to do and a world that felt more vast and was a great introduction to the new style for the series. Fallout 4 has the best shooting mechanics of them all and the best areas to help the quests feel more substantial. Fallout 4 also had the absolute worst feeling of choices mattering due to the linearity of the storyline and the completely fake dialog options that all lead to the same place no matter what you choose.
 
Last edited:

Kreydo

Member
NV was one of the games that proved there certainly can be a difference. It wasn't until I got the GOTY edition with all the DLC and patches that I was able to complete it.
I agree with you, even though I didn't played a Bethesda RPG on console since Oblivion (on 360 I stopped after 10 hours and baught a PC ^^). Then I decided to play Behtesda game on PC only and to always wait at least 8 month for modding to comes to start the game properly.
I think I would have never finished any Bethesda RPG without modding (stopped Skyrim after 16 hours, on my first 2011 run). I know many people don't bother with modding etc and it's marginal. But it's night and day for a Bethesda RPG to be modded or not.
 
Last edited:

Snoopycat

Banned
I go with NV even though it was buggy as hell and crashed constantly on the 360. I'm surprised that Bethesda never did a remaster of them. I mean they've remastered/ported the shit out of Skyrim, so it's a shame that F3, NV never got a bump.
 
I have not played 4.

New Vegas is, design-wise, better than 3 in every single conceivable metric. It had better story, better characters, better map, better quests, better loot and the list goes on.

Fallout 3 is painfully mediocre while New Vegas is a masterclass in terms of how it was crafted. I played NV on PC and never had any crashes or bugs so that helped.

OP: if you want more of an RPG get New Vegas and if you want more of a shooter get 4. From what I understand 4 is just a strictly better 3 outside of the nostalgia.
 
Last edited:

bati

Member
FNV for systems, perks, balance, quest branching, unique items. FO4 for landscape, some key gameplay elements (Blitz stealth melee is tons of fun), new Survival mode (better balanced than vanilla FNV), significantly upgraded looks compared to its predecessors.
 

Roni

Member
In terms of an RPG, New Vegas, hands down. The amount of variety in terms of endings, possible alignments and dialogue options is unmatched. You can really make a difference in New Vegas. Probably the best game ever in terms of storyline agency.

Gameplay wise, it's 4. They focused on that for the game and the result is something on a different level than 3 and New Vegas could be at the time.

Which is why I think Obsidian should get a chance to make another Fallout using the new gameplay.

Bethesda is really good at world building and content design. If they could use those strengths in tandem with Obsidian's writing and get someone like Mikami to design the gameplay, they would have a killer game.
 

Fox Mulder

Member
I still personally like Fallout 3 more for the location and a map that encourages more exploration. I think New Vegas gets put a bit too highly on a pedestal, but it's still great.

I hated the simple story and mechanics of Fallout 4. The dialogue system was horrible compared to either of the last gen games and the story never grabbed me. I didn't really care to build settlements, as that's not why I play these games.
 
Last edited:
3, for me. Just thought it was a great game. I liked New Vegas, too, but it was even more of a buggy mess than 3.

4 was ok, but I had no interest in the building shite.
 
I go with NV even though it was buggy as hell and crashed constantly on the 360. I'm surprised that Bethesda never did a remaster of them. I mean they've remastered/ported the shit out of Skyrim, so it's a shame that F3, NV never got a bump.

I loved New Vegas but some of it's bugs were freaking game breaking around it's launch. On my first playthrough I had both the NCR and Great Khans quest lines bug out near their end game and couldn't complete them.

NCR bugged out and wouldn't let me progress unless I killed off Brotherhood of Steel (even though I passed the speech check to let them live), Great Khans bugged out during the negotiation mission where the Great Khan leaders were supposed to meet and I flat out couldn't progress it.
 
Last edited:

gioGAF

Member
I go back and forth between New Vegas and 3 (probably New Vegas overall). Fallout 4 didn't do much for me, it was a huge misstep as far as I'm concerned. The whole legendary system cheapens weapons for me, and I also prefer the modification system of prior games rather than the cobble shit out of garbage approach. I prefer to find that "awesome" weapon through exploration and not grind the shit out of some legendary mob for a random drop then scour the map for garbage to improve it. In 3/New Vegas there were important items, so you didn't need to pick up every bit of trash you came across, just the good stuff.

I don't like what they did with the story, I much prefer picking my own character with an open background and motivation. Seems kind of stupid to do side quests when your child is missing, yet the game has no urgency. Base building was a ridiculous waste of time, so many things they could have spent more time on and improved instead of implementing it.

Overall, Fallout 4 adds more busy work to the Fallout series for no reason other than to pad run time. It is not more enjoyable than previous entries, just more annoying and it didn't have to be.

Edit: Can't wait for the remasters of 3 and NV
 
Last edited:

BadManEd

Neo Member
Fallout 4 for me, really enjoyed the settlement building, also in my opinion the story was great, different npc's to travel with were fun for the most part. Fallout 3 also great, unfortunately I never played new Vegas.
 

younGrandon

Neo Member
Fallout 4 is the technical best of the three. New Vegas was actually kind of boring
I thought the same about New Vegas, but I have accepted that this is because the mechanics were too similar to Fallout3. Story wise, New Vegas is far superior. Today, I would tell people to just skip Fallout3.
 
Last edited:

Spheyr

Banned
I thought the same about New Vegas, but I have accepted that this is because the mechanics were too similar to Fallout3. Story wise, New Vegas is far superior. Today, I would tell people to just skip Fallout3.
I liked Fallout 3 better than New Vegas, storywise
 

younGrandon

Neo Member
I liked Fallout 3 better than New Vegas, storywise

Can I ask why. Even as a person who didn't enjoy New Vegas as much, I realized the story to just be more entertaining.

I think people like the story of New Vegas because it is one that revolves around someone who did not have a clear tie to the Vaults. New Vegas is a story about someone whom had to grow in the fallout, instead of a person who was just introduced to the struggle.
 
Last edited:
I like Fallout 4 the most cause I'm not a hater.
- Settlement building is fun
- The graphics are the most refined and the environments are really diverse
- The storyline is clever
- The companions are interesting and helpful
- The Power Armor feels like something special instead of just it being armor with good stats
- Weapon customization is well implemented
I agree on all of this except the storyline thing
What I also like was that every single item in a game has a use. No useless junk.
It also doesnt have a stupid green/yellow filter on the screen like FV3/NewVegas did.
combat in general has improved quite a bit
edit: also, that stupid weapon deterioration mechanic has been scrapped.
 
Last edited:

nowhat

Member
that stupid weapon deterioration mechanic has been scrapped
I actually have to disagree here. Generally I dislike weapon durability (or "weapon fragility", as a certain pundit put it) systems, especially when they're so extreme you are actively trying not to use a particular weapon (yes, looking at you BotW). But it was never so over the top in FO3/NV. As a matter of fact, I found it kind of fitting - in a nuclear wasteland, you cannot expect items to be in mint condition and remain so. Sure, being at the lowest level of a hostile vault and your favourite weapon suddenly calling it quits can be infuriating, but "realistic" (within the context of the game) too. As a matter of fact, I kind of hoped what with the next generation and all, we would have seen the weapons deteriorate visually in FO4. First a few blemishes here and there, then more dirt, then some duct tape applied and by the time the weapon is unusable, the barrel is so bent firing it would be suicide at any rate.

Don't get me wrong, one of the additions to FO4 I really liked was the weapon/armour modding. But it kind of leads one to pick one or few weapons and make them OP as fuck. It makes the game more of a loot-shooter instead of a post-apocalyptic survival experience. Which isn't a bad thing in itself, I just don't find it very "fallout-y".
 
Last edited:

Iggzy

Member
New Vegas because it was a Fallout game.
The only good thing I can say about Fallout 4 it has good shooting, anything else dumbed down, story was terrible, I don't know who looked at shit story of Fallout 3 "find you dad" and went "lets make our next game where you have find your son instead of dad", sidequests in comparison to NV are goddawful, and I know why dialogs were dumbed down - because almost all of them were voiced, so people who cannot read can still enjoy this crap.
 
New Vegas. Didn't play it directly after launch so most of the really big issues had already been fixed. In terms of companions, factions and questlines it's miles above the rest. It also had a few awesome expansion packs that improved upon the sometimes bland location of the vanilla game.
 

voidenberg

Member
My opinion? Fallout 4 is a great game. I don't get why it has so many haters.

Probably because it's more far cry than fallout.

I don't hate fallout 4. I have over 600 hours of playtime. It's a fun game, but a mediocre rpg.
New vegas and fallout 4 are trying to achieve different things.
 
I like Fallout 4 the most cause I'm not a hater.
- Settlement building is fun
- The graphics are the most refined and the environments are really diverse
- The storyline is clever
- The companions are interesting and helpful
- The Power Armor feels like something special instead of just it being armor with good stats
- Weapon customization is well implemented

This literally encapsulates my opinion also. I didn't like the gambling aspect of New Vegas and honestly not being a vault dweller was kind of cool but poorly implemented in my opinion. Fallout 3 was a great game but Fallout 4 just had some magic that made me want to continue playing. The customisation elements just went beyond anything I've played and I spent countless hours building and developing settlements.
 
edit: also, that stupid weapon deterioration mechanic has been scrapped.
yeah I was glad that was removed too. To bad its back for F76

I like them all about the same. All a little bit different. F3 has good environmental story telling like F4, also a lot of random encounters. FNV is more like a rpg
F3 (with all the dlc) doesn't end when you finish the story, FNV does (even with all DLC).

You might want to go F3 next then FNV.
 
Last edited:

Spukc

always chasing the next thrill
3 was the most immersive one to me
Nv was boring
4 was just a worse 3

So

3
4
New vegas
 
I actually have to disagree here. Generally I dislike weapon durability (or "weapon fragility", as a certain pundit put it) systems, especially when they're so extreme you are actively trying not to use a particular weapon (yes, looking at you BotW). But it was never so over the top in FO3/NV. As a matter of fact, I found it kind of fitting - in a nuclear wasteland, you cannot expect items to be in mint condition and remain so. Sure, being at the lowest level of a hostile vault and your favourite weapon suddenly calling it quits can be infuriating, but "realistic" (within the context of the game) too. As a matter of fact, I kind of hoped what with the next generation and all, we would have seen the weapons deteriorate visually in FO4. First a few blemishes here and there, then more dirt, then some duct tape applied and by the time the weapon is unusable, the barrel is so bent firing it would be suicide at any rate.

Don't get me wrong, one of the additions to FO4 I really liked was the weapon/armour modding. But it kind of leads one to pick one or few weapons and make them OP as fuck. It makes the game more of a loot-shooter instead of a post-apocalyptic survival experience. Which isn't a bad thing in itself, I just don't find it very "fallout-y".
I see where you’re coming from. In the weapons breaking gave me the “I’m in a wasteland, I need to scrounge for resources for survival” feeling, but quickly after it just became tedious. I like realism, but not at the expense of fun.
 
Last edited:
I echo some saying fallout 3 has a great setting and atmosphere. Make's it fun to explore. New vegas is good for it's writing and rpg elements, but I feel like it was trying to do too much in a little amount of time. I don't blame them, but they were too ambitious with it. Like too many factions and sidequests.
 
Fallout New Vegas because it's a role playing game with actual role playing in it. Closest thing to a modern day Morrowind and I think it makes a lot of sense that the community that largely loves Bethesda's older titles like Daggerfall and Morrowind really seem to love FNV.

My opinion? Fallout 4 is a great game. I don't get why it has so many haters.
Because it has the name Fallout in it and it's kind of fucked up to hijack a beloved RPG series (F2 is oftenly refered to as the #1 role playing game among hardcore RPG communities) and turn it into a Borderlands-tier loot shooter with a dialog wheel justifying the RPG genre descriptor.

Also the blatant disregard they have for the lore doesn't help. It seems like they only bought the IP for the quirky tone and the marketability of the vault boy.
726.jpg
 
Last edited:

Astrates

Member
I know Fallout New Vegas is objectively better than Fallout 3 but personally for me 3 was a better experience.

Theres just something about the map, the music and vaults that make it truly special.
 

GurrenSwagann

Neo Member
Fallout 3: It was the first time I had played and sunk hours into a game of that type, so it was somewhat of a novelty to me. I found the quests enjoyable, but the overwhelming green and grey color pallet did start to get a bit too samey after a while. I found the main plot kind of sucky, but the side quests like Oasis and some of the vaults cool as hell.

Fallout New Vegas: I love the grimy western aesthetic. I found it much more immersive, and the wealth of sidequests with interesting characters and locations made for a much better experience. The ability to finally aim down the sights was a godsend.

Fallout 4: Not a fan of the Dreamworks-like cartoony style at all, and I think enough has already been said about the dialogue and choices. The gameplay is a lot smoother and settlement building is... interesting? But I don't think it was worth trading off character stuff for.

So New Vegas is my pick.
 
Top Bottom