Opinions on Fallout: New Vegas

#1 Posted by Portalfan4351 (9 posts) -

What are your opinions on Fallout: New Vegas?

I know it has been out for years, but I started playing again recently after beating Fallout 3: GOTY and I just got so bored. It just wasn't that fun, or even remotely interesting like Fallout 3 was.

So what do you guys think of it?

#2 Posted by Ariabed (1103 posts) -

For some reason I never bothered with new Vegas I don't know why because I absolutely loved fallout3 and still do, the GOTY edition is huge. Usually when I really like the first game I will buy the second installment upon release with no questioned asked, on this rare occasion I didn't.

#3 Posted by Behardy24 (3770 posts) -

I love it. One of my favorite Western RPGs out there and I enjoy it much more than Fallout 3.

#4 Posted by thereal25 (401 posts) -

Initially I must admit it was somewhat of a letdown after the brilliant fallout 3.

But after I really gave it a chance - it turned out to be pretty good.

I recommend playing the goty edition on hard, hardcore mode.

#5 Edited by Tokeism (2332 posts) -

I found it to better then Fallout 3 + DLC, not by much though

#6 Posted by Planeforger (15627 posts) -

I'd say it's definitely better than Fallout 3.

It was great to be back in the world of Fallout, as opposed to whatever the heck Bethesda tried to do with the setting.

#7 Posted by Jacanuk (4328 posts) -

What are your opinions on Fallout: New Vegas?

I know it has been out for years, but I started playing again recently after beating Fallout 3: GOTY and I just got so bored. It just wasn't that fun, or even remotely interesting like Fallout 3 was.

So what do you guys think of it?

Fallout 3 and Fallout New Vegas are two of the best story-driven open world RPG games out there and even though New Vegas feels a lot smaller and not as deep as 3, its still a very good game..

But if you just got through 3 it might be too soon to play it since it is pretty much the same as 3

#8 Posted by Bigboi500 (29599 posts) -

One of my favorite games last gen. Love it.

#9 Posted by sukraj (22566 posts) -

I could never get into the Fallout games they we'ren't my type of games.

#10 Posted by illmatic87 (15206 posts) -

I think it's the definitive Fallout experience last gen.

A nice faction system, Improved writing, excellent fleshed out companions, no annoying subways, numerous ways to complete tasks/quests, some extra features like hardcore mode, weapon mods and it felt more balanced.

#11 Posted by marcheegsr (2572 posts) -

I enjoyed Fallout 3 more. New vegas had better guns but it was too buggy for me.

#12 Edited by maynardburger (187 posts) -

I think if you played it right after Fallout 3, you might have been experiencing a bit of burn-out.

#13 Posted by Helder_Novais (11 posts) -

I'm not very into the Fallout series, but New Vegas really needs vehicles that you can actually drive. I read that it can't because of the physics, but how could people make vehicle mods for it then? It would be awesome to drive around the Post-Apocalyptic Nevada.

#14 Posted by Fistan87 (23 posts) -

A must play for rpg fan i'd say. Not many good rpgs come out anyways. I miss the old blackisle's time. I cant believe i was whining back then about icewind dale 2. Another generic rpg ? come on bi. ( And now we crave for them :(( )

#15 Posted by Portalfan4351 (9 posts) -

I'd say it's definitely better than Fallout 3.

It was great to be back in the world of Fallout, as opposed to whatever the heck Bethesda tried to do with the setting.

Umm, Fallout 3 was still in the same canon as Fallout, Fallout 2, and Fallout NV, but it was just on the other end of the spectrum. I've beat FNV once, but it took a long time because it just wasn't was interesting. What did you find wrong about F3?

#16 Posted by phbz (88 posts) -

I started by dismissing the game entirely. Then a friend offered me the game and I "had" to play it. It started kind of odd, but ended up growing on me and soon I just couldn´t get enough of it.

Sadly, when I was about 100h into the game it became broken to a point where it became impossible to do anything without it crashing. Fallout 3 also was a buggy experience but nothing as catastrophic as with Vegas. So, long story short, I won´t be buying Fallout 4 unless there´s a good feedback when it comes to bugs.

Sad story, I know.

#17 Posted by speedfreak48t5p (7404 posts) -

New Vegas is a masterpiece and absolutely destroys Fallout 3.

#18 Edited by Planeforger (15627 posts) -

@portalfan4351: I wouldn't really call it the same canon.

I mean, Fallout 3 rehashed the storylines of the first two games (F1: a vault dweller is sent into the wasteland to help the vault purify their water, and ends up stopping the Master's super mutant army in the meantime, before being banished from his vault; F2: the chosen one needs a GECK to save his village, and ends up taking on the president and wiping out the Enclave, who are planning to kill everyone in the Wasteland; F3: a vault dweller is seeking a GECK from a super mutant-infested vault to purify everyone's water, gets banished, and ends up stopping the president and the Enclave from killing everyone in tbe Wasteland)...

...but although Bethesda used the same names for things, they got it all wrong. For example, Fallout's (yellow) super-mutants are typically superior to mankind in every way, including intelligence and capacity for speech (depending on the 'purity' of the test subject); while F3's super mutants are stupid green orcs who can barely string sentences together - let alone the fact that the Master never manufactured them outside of the West Coast!

Then you have the Brotherhood of Steel, who were cowardly bastards who never actually attempted to save the day in the older Fallout games, and who would more likely rescue a burning science lab than a burning orphanage...but in F3 they were simply faultless knights in shining armour who ultimately save the day.

What else...Fallout's ghouls were...originally failed test subjects of the Master? Well, in any case, they were just skinless intelligent humans who moved really, really slowly because of their mutations. In F3, they were mindless fast zombies. It's entirely inconsistent with the previous games.

Then there are all of these timeline inconsistencies, the fact that DC should have a few super-advanced Vault City-esque towns in it due to the sheer number of GECKs in the area, and the way nothing in DC makes sense in contrast to how the rest of the US has redeveloped after the war.

And so on and so on. I get the impression that Bethesda looked up Wikipedia summaries of the first games, but never actually played them.

#19 Edited by Glitter (353 posts) -

I won't bother with any of these games made by Bethesda. I read too much about bugs and them not fixing anything.

#20 Posted by Archangel3371 (15484 posts) -

I loved it, same with Fallout 3. I really enjoyed them both pretty much equally.

#21 Posted by bussinrounds (2121 posts) -

Fallout 3 is more of a spin off game. Made by different ppl who didn't really get the world, nor have the writers to pull off making a good Fallout game.

#22 Edited by HipHopBeats (2892 posts) -

@portalfan4351 said:

What are your opinions on Fallout: New Vegas?

I know it has been out for years, but I started playing again recently after beating Fallout 3: GOTY and I just got so bored. It just wasn't that fun, or even remotely interesting like Fallout 3 was.

So what do you guys think of it?

I find New Vegas boring to explore and difficult to maintain interest in. Fallout 3 GOTY had me hooked from jump. New Vegas world is very dull and bland. The story seems all over the place, doing fetch quests for NPC's I could care less about.

I will say New Vegas gameplay is much better than Fallout 3. I also like the idea of factions and seeing consequences of your decisions play out. It's not a game I will trade in or completely abandon, but for some reason, I just lost interest early on.

I dislike strategically placed enemies that you know you will encounter at certain places. Fallout 3's randomness and not knowing what could be around the corner was a big part of the fun factor for me.

Another turn for me is New Vegas 'gain more X but lose more Y' traits and getting perks every other level. It's a poor design choice to compensate for lack of difficulty by handicapping you.

People argue New Vegas maintains the Fallout legacy more than Fallout 3. For me, Fallout 3 is simply more fun. In the end, that's what gaming should be about. I'm hoping Fallout 4 has Fallout 3's random exploration with Fallout 3's / Skyrim's leveling system meshed with New Vegas gameplay and factions.

Despite my initial feelings about New Vegas, I do plan to give it yet another shot once I finish up some more interesting games in my backlog.

#23 Posted by Purrari (8 posts) -

I think Fallout 3 was the best, starting with the map. New Vegas weapons are cool but the story is not compared with F3 (at least in my opinion). They are plagued with bugs, I had to start over New Vegas because some kind of saving error on a mission, but I like them and I hope Fallout 4 comes soon.

#24 Posted by Ariabed (1103 posts) -

@glitter: I've never come across any game breaking bugs with any of their games on the 360. Just saying.

Fallout3 is amazing especially GOTY edition, the exploration, the random enemy encounters in the waste, lots to see and do, this thread has got me all hyped to start playing it again.

#25 Edited by harry_james_pot (10772 posts) -

It's a good game that did some things better than Fallout 3, but I found Fallout 3 much better and more enjoyable.

#26 Posted by Portalfan4351 (9 posts) -

@Planeforger The thing is, it explains all of that to you. The reason the Super Mutants are at the east is after the Master was killed they moved east and started making Mutants themselves. Which is also probably why they are stupid (But still yellow skinned), the Ghouls that you know are still in the game, as people like Gob from Megaton, or the entire Underworld City. There are also FERAL Ghouls that will try to kill you. Also, with this, the Outcasts say that they went east in search of Tech, but Elder Lyons, the most caring of all of the Brotherhood Elders, stayed to help. So everything you presented has reasons. And they may have just rehashed FO1 and FO2, but they did it in a way that it didn't FEEL like a retelling.

#27 Posted by speedfreak48t5p (7404 posts) -

@portalfan4351 said:

What are your opinions on Fallout: New Vegas?

I know it has been out for years, but I started playing again recently after beating Fallout 3: GOTY and I just got so bored. It just wasn't that fun, or even remotely interesting like Fallout 3 was.

So what do you guys think of it?

I find New Vegas boring to explore and difficult to maintain interest in. Fallout 3 GOTY had me hooked from jump. New Vegas world is very dull and bland. The story seems all over the place, doing fetch quests for NPC's I could care less about.

I will say New Vegas gameplay is much better than Fallout 3. I also like the idea of factions and seeing consequences of your decisions play out. It's not a game I will trade in or completely abandon, but for some reason, I just lost interest early on.

I dislike strategically placed enemies that you know you will encounter at certain places. Fallout 3's randomness and not knowing what could be around the corner was a big part of the fun factor for me.

Another turn for me is New Vegas 'gain more X but lose more Y' traits and getting perks every other level. It's a poor design choice to compensate for lack of difficulty by handicapping you.

People argue New Vegas maintains the Fallout legacy more than Fallout 3. For me, Fallout 3 is simply more fun. In the end, that's what gaming should be about. I'm hoping Fallout 4 has Fallout 3's random exploration with Fallout 3's / Skyrim's leveling system meshed with New Vegas gameplay and factions.

Despite my initial feelings about New Vegas, I do plan to give it yet another shot once I finish up some more interesting games in my backlog.

You can skip the traits entirely in New Vegas though.

#28 Edited by gamerguru100 (10572 posts) -

In terms of exploration, Fallout 3 beats it. Most locations in New Vegas seem to be useless. And it's 99% empty space, whereas Fallout 3 is "only" 97% empty space. :P Although I do like a lot of the weapons in New Vegas, like the Grenade Machine Gun, the Assault Carbine, and This Machine (aka M1 Garand). :3 Oh, and the Barrett .50Cal (Anti-Material Rifle). Headshots all day every day with that one. Plus you can aim down sights in New Vegas, which makes combat a little more realistic, and, well, I just need my iron sights, damn it. But then Fallout 3 has the Chinese Assault Rifle, and I freaking love the Chinese Assault Rifle. :P I can't choose between anymore. :P

#29 Posted by vl4d_l3nin (920 posts) -

As broken as it was, it was probably my favourite RPG of the last gen

#30 Edited by bussinrounds (2121 posts) -

@Fistan87 said:

A must play for rpg fan i'd say. Not many good rpgs come out anyways. I miss the old blackisle's time. I cant believe i was whining back then about icewind dale 2. Another generic rpg ? come on bi. ( And now we crave for them :(( )

I know it's been a REALLY rough decade or so, but things have actually been looking better recently with games that have been released like Might & Magic X, Blackguards, Grimrock, Xenonauts.. AND you have games coming up like Original Sin, Wasteland 2, Pillars of Eternity, Tides of Numenera, Age of Decadence, Dead State, UnderRail, Grimoire..

So yea, help is finally on the way bro and there's a lot more to offer in the genre than the mainstream bullshit of Bethesda's hiking/LARPing sims and Bioware's cinematic dating games.