New Vegas has ruined fallout 3 for me

BOS_Warlord

First time out of the vault
I used to love fallout 3, (keep in mind I haven't played 1 or 2)

New vegas completely ruined fallout 3 for me. I tried to play 3 again, I sold it and continued new Vegas. Anybody else share this?
 
New Vegas will probably ruin FO4 for you too.

And I'm on the same boat. Not that I ever loved FO3 that much to begin with and probably would have never played it again anyway, but NV completely sealed the deal.
 
If fallout 4 is as big as skyrim and has either

NCR territory
A brotherhood that isn't weak
Takes place in new York or Detroit
Has a winter wasteland dlc or otherwise

And is developed by obsidian or that team

I'm all in
 
Ruined Fallout 3? Ruined Gaming is more like it. New Vegas made me get bored with Fallout 3, Skyrim, Oblivion . . you name it.
 
no FO3 isnt a bad game, its even a great game its just not a Fallout game. NV did a great job of taking the exploration and immersiveness of FO3 and adding the story and dark humor that made FO1 and 2 great. But yeah once i played NV i was never able to play FO3 again. I've thought about try a replay but just cant get past megaton. on well back to NV
 
^ my thoughts

I like a few elements of the 3rd game, the capital wasteland is kinda cool, but the game seemed to linear. I mean, you coulda been evil,but the fake brotherhood still wins in the end. If you could have joined the outcasts, brotherhood of fail, enclave or talon it would have been cool. God bless Liam Neeson for his job, but the whole James project purity bullshit was kinda preachy. May as well have added captain planet
 
Mjolnir said:
Ruined Fallout 3? Ruined Gaming is more like it. New Vegas made me get bored with Fallout 3, Skyrim, Oblivion . . you name it.

Agreed. I got skyrim, and then it was several months until I actually started a proper play-through. It never interested me like New Vegas did.
 
A brotherhood that isn't weak

Off topic I know but the reason why the BOS is weak is because of its own failing policies and agenda.

Doing a 180 in a new Fallout game would be rather out of place as its the BOS own nature that is against itself.

I think in the following Fallouts we will slowly see the BOS fade away.
 
Going back to play Fallout 3 it just doesn't feel the same. It was my first Fallout but after playing the others it just feels lacking. It is still a great game. However it is not as good as some of the other Fallout games.
 
Biggest thing that killed it for me was my PS3 dying twice losing my saves of characters at level 10/11 with the survivors guide being almost completed, and after having found a ton of books and getting the int bobblehead before level 3. I just have no desire to do save/reloads ad infinitum to make speech checks, among other things obviously.

That and seeing what can be done with mods with both of the games kind of ruins the experience. Anybody know if you can play Fallout 3 on a PC that runs Oblivion well?
 
Anybody know if you can play Fallout 3 on a PC that runs Oblivion well?

Shouldn't have any problems. My old laptop played Oblivion at Medium/High and Fallout 3 at Low/Medium.

As for the topic, yes NV is simply superior in so many ways. The Capital Wasteland was neat, but those who bitch and moan about invisible walls in NV seem to forget about how utterly tedious navigating Washington DC was, what with being stopped by a two meters high wall of debris and being forced to yet again take a ghoul-infested metro every five friggin minute. I fast-traveled rather than submit myself to that stuff.
 
Ilosar said:
Anybody know if you can play Fallout 3 on a PC that runs Oblivion well?

Shouldn't have any problems. My old laptop played Oblivion at Medium/High and Fallout 3 at Low/Medium.

As for the topic, yes NV is simply superior in so many ways. The Capital Wasteland was neat, but those who bitch and moan about invisible walls in NV seem to forget about how utterly tedious navigating Washington DC was, what with being stopped by a two meters high wall of debris and being forced to yet again take a ghoul-infested metro every five friggin minute. I fast-traveled rather than submit myself to that stuff.

Yeah, at least in NV you can climb hills. Ghouls were annoying in 3. I had the goty edition, ran into a reaver at level 6. And it's not like I strayed into a bad area, I was doing the arefu quest. Thing took me 7 minutes to kill, 7! Thank god I managed to cripple its leg so it couldn't charge and slaughter me. But good god! In NV you don't run into anything that can slaughter you at a low level unless you stray into the desert.
 
BOS_Warlord said:
If fallout 4 is as big as skyrim and has either

NCR territory
A brotherhood that isn't weak
Takes place in new York or Detroit
Has a winter wasteland dlc or otherwise

And is developed by obsidian or that team

I'm all in

I think it should have a weather system. And I completely agree with everything else. New York would be the perfect setting. A destroyed Statue of Liberty where escaped slaves live.
 
SouthboundSoul said:
BOS_Warlord said:
If fallout 4 is as big as skyrim and has either

NCR territory
A brotherhood that isn't weak
Takes place in new York or Detroit
Has a winter wasteland dlc or otherwise

And is developed by obsidian or that team

I'm all in

I think it should have a weather system. And I completely agree with everything else. New York would be the perfect setting. A destroyed Statue of Liberty where escaped slaves live.


But that wouldn't make sense. Nuclear weapons destroy everything. Heres an example.

[spoiler:713c0183cf]
hist_us_20_ww2_hiroshima_pic_trees.jpg
[/spoiler:713c0183cf]
 
White Knight said:
SouthboundSoul said:
BOS_Warlord said:
If fallout 4 is as big as skyrim and has either

NCR territory
A brotherhood that isn't weak
Takes place in new York or Detroit
Has a winter wasteland dlc or otherwise

And is developed by obsidian or that team

I'm all in

I think it should have a weather system. And I completely agree with everything else. New York would be the perfect setting. A destroyed Statue of Liberty where escaped slaves live.


But that wouldn't make sense. Nuclear weapons destroy everything. Heres an example.

[spoiler:e2fe3ee40c]
hist_us_20_ww2_hiroshima_pic_trees.jpg
[/spoiler:e2fe3ee40c]

Do any of the Fallout games make sense? It's science FICTION, not science fact. We couldn't live after all that devastation. Even 200 years after. Fallout and Nuclear waste stays in the atmosphere for hundreds of years. Also a lot of Pre war buildings in Fallout New Vegas and even the original Fallout games are still there.

Also do people turn into Blood thirsty ghouls after they are exposed to radiation?
 
In the original Fallouts most buildings are barely habitable ruins, there is a reason why Los Angeles is called The Boneyard. In New Vegas a good chunk of the region survived because of House's defenses and because The Mojave is mostly desert and they wouldn't care about attacking it that heavily. Having major cities survive with barely destroyed buildings makes the whole Post Apocalyptic thing fall apart compeltely, why did people abandon their houses if they seem to be in perfectly habitable condition? why would a statue that is falling apart and is easily seen from afar that you need to take a boat and have no real way of gettign any crops grown or fresha water be the place escaped slaves would use to live? also we have survived disasters, for more than 200 years. crying Science Fiction! is not a net to fall back whenever you can't make a cohesive story.
 
Who cares if the statue of liberty is standing or lying on her ass? New York could be fun. Kind of sick of cities though.
 
I wouldn't mind seeing a partially destroyed city, as long as it doesn't end up like D.C. where you've got just enough space to get to the next subway station. That said, I'd much prefer to be somewhere that has been so utterly devastated that life is just coming back to it.
 
Back
Top