Hey guys, I'm writing a fanfic to try and tie together the FO1, 2, and NV storylines. Check out some details below:

Intro:

Six years is an odd number. Long enough to forget the pain of war, but not long enough to learn to live in peace.

The Mojave was good for the NCR. It brought in water, power, and more than a little greed. With Caesar gone, they're talking about taking all of Arizona now.

The Mojave was good for me, too. Taught me a lot. How to play Caravan, for instance, and why I shouldn't. Also taught me how to walk, talk, and shoot my way out of trouble.

Sometimes, though, I get into a little bit too much trouble.

--

Characters:

--

More to come, soon as I can open a blog. =)

zaMNal

Mongolia385 Posts

June 20 2012 06:01 GMT

#123

Atmosphere: F3 > NV
F3 is "epic", NV is not

DLC: F3 < NV
Best F3 DLC = Worst NV DLC

Exploration: F3 > NV
Exploring dull world of NV (no DLC) is boring unless doing quest

Gameplay: F3 < NV
NV every gameplay aspect is improved, game more balanced

Variety: F3 > NV
More things to keep you interested (location variety, enemy variety and such)

Me overall F3 3:2 NV. Both good. Go F3 first.

sam!zdat

United States5559 Posts

June 21 2012 16:22 GMT

#124

But "epic" is just code for besthesda style random dungeons and mobs. F3 has no coherency

Shady Sands

United States4021 Posts

June 22 2012 02:08 GMT

#125

On June 22 2012 01:22 sam!zdat wrote:
But "epic" is just code for besthesda style random dungeons and mobs. F3 has no coherency

Nah, I think he meant that F3's villain was much more apocalyptic than NV's was. That has always been a hallmark of Fallout--the master wanted to mutate everyone; Enclave wanted to kill all mutants; F3 wanted to poison the entire water supply... the Legion wants to have a nice parade in downtown New Vegas. Wait, what?

Though I agree, NV was overall a much better game, and having random dungeons in F3 really did detract from the coherency.

sam!zdat

United States5559 Posts

June 22 2012 02:46 GMT

#126

Ok, fair enough - good point about the villain.

Really, though, the answer to the op's question is "Wasteland 2"

Shady Sands

United States4021 Posts

June 22 2012 03:42 GMT

#127

On June 22 2012 11:46 sam!zdat wrote:
Ok, fair enough - good point about the villain.

Really, though, the answer to the op's question is "Wasteland 2"

Well actually you might want to check out my fanfic once you get a chance. You'll like it, I promise

Perscienter

957 Posts

July 07 2012 15:16 GMT

#128

Fallout 1 is good, but not mind-blowing.

It doesn't use a good font-type like it should. It takes longer to read than necessary. I understand that they wanted to emulate an 80s/90s terminal font type, but especially these are quite clearly readable. You can't leave out the point on the i for instance and have varying widths. That especially applies to a game, which uses a lot of fictional language.

Just compare these two:+ Show Spoiler +

Fallout (wrong):

Jagged Alliance 2 (right):
NPCs join you for loot, but then don't do any looting. Might happen in other levels, though.
There seems to be more about hit percentages than is shown, because they don't match a posteriori. Maybe deductions are applied afterwards, I don't know. I didn't read the manual thoroughly yet.
Reliance on pseudo-random-number-generators (PRNGs) is so-so.
Lots of dialogue loops hurt the atmosphere.
Lots of unnecessary break-ups of the dialogues cost you time.
Mouse cursor is sometimes imprecise.
If you make a game, think of it in 20 years. In what resolution would it then run?
Quest items can only be sold or traded one at a time.

So in fact it's a bit unordered. Nevertheless it's great.

Goetzinho ftw

Germany115 Posts

July 07 2012 15:21 GMT

#129

New Vegas is of course better than FO3, they fixed alot of bad things about FO3. But I personally don't liked the Vegas scenario, so for me FO3 was the better game.

And FO1 and FO2 are clearly was worse than both. Videogames are not like Movies - newer Games are most of the time better than older games - just because of improved Technology.

Tuthur

France985 Posts

July 07 2012 16:41 GMT

#130

This is the worst OP I've ever seen, where are the real Fallout games in your polls? I don't see them. Do a bit of research next time please.

superstartran

United States4013 Posts

July 07 2012 16:49 GMT

#131

On July 08 2012 00:21 Goetzinho ftw wrote:
New Vegas is of course better than FO3, they fixed alot of bad things about FO3. But I personally don't liked the Vegas scenario, so for me FO3 was the better game.

And FO1 and FO2 are clearly was worse than both. Videogames are not like Movies - newer Games are most of the time better than older games - just because of improved Technology.

What in the hell?

Fallout 1+2 are better than 3 in almost every imaginable way, from storyline, gameplay, and mechanics, not to mention lore consistency and atmosphere. Not only is Fallout 3 completely unrealistic (how is the Brotherhood of Steel there, why the fuck are Mutants on the East coast, etc.) from a storyline standpoint, it also has just doesn't have an atmosphere that makes any sense at all. D.C. looks like it just got nuked, when in reality it has been hundreds of years. Grass should be growing, most of the old buildings should be gone (due to decay),

Newer games are not better than older games most of the time; in reality, most older games are better especially when comparing them to more recent games due to the fact that most games today are released in an incomplete matter.

Mindcrime

United States6899 Posts

July 07 2012 16:56 GMT

#132

On June 22 2012 11:08 Shady Sands wrote:
Nah, I think he meant that F3's villain was much more apocalyptic than NV's was. That has always been a hallmark of Fallout--the master wanted to mutate everyone; Enclave wanted to kill all mutants; F3 wanted to poison the entire water supply... the Legion wants to have a nice parade in downtown New Vegas. Wait, what?

Yes, the Enclave in F3 wanted to poison he entire water supply... in one small area... that already had irradiated water.

k

Compared to the F3 Enclave, Caesar's Legion was both more ambitious and less cartoonish.

TheYango

United States47024 Posts

July 07 2012 17:01 GMT

#133

On July 08 2012 00:21 Goetzinho ftw wrote:
And FO1 and FO2 are clearly was worse than both. Videogames are not like Movies - newer Games are most of the time better than older games - just because of improved Technology.

Wait, your only argument is "FO1 and FO2 are worse because they're old"--on a site that was solely dedicated to competitive BW for the better part of a decade?

You're obviously flame-baiting.

ChinaWhite

United Kingdom239 Posts

July 07 2012 17:19 GMT

#134

New Vegas is infinitely better than Fallout 3. Frankly, it's ridiculous to suggest otherwise.

TSBspartacus

England1046 Posts

July 18 2012 07:52 GMT

#135

On July 08 2012 01:56 Mindcrime wrote:

Show nested quote +

The enclave were way more than poisoning the water. They had a goal of wiping out all mutant life whatsoever. Basically ethnic cleansing. And you get to choose at the end

killy666

France204 Posts

July 18 2012 08:26 GMT

#136

If i wanted to post a proper answer, i'd say Fallout1.

But all in all, i preferred Fallout3 personally. New Vegas is cool better on some aspects, but i definitely enjoyed the setting and story of Fallout 3 more.

TigerKarl

1757 Posts

July 21 2012 03:28 GMT

#137

Both Fallout 3 and New Vegas are strong video games, especially in terms of atmosphere and depth. You won't regret playing either one of them. Personally i preferred New Vegas because the setting was more interesting for me.

mikedebo

Canada4341 Posts

July 21 2012 13:21 GMT

#138

I agree with the folks in here who say Fallout 1 is the best. It doesn't have nearly as much stuff in it as the other games (old and new), but it's still humungous and maintains a consistent mood throughout.

Fallout 2 was massive, but it leaned farther towards the "quirky" side. It felt like the designers had tongues firmly in cheek throughout the whole dev process, which I didn't particularly like.

3 and New Vegas... well, I played them for a bit. I think I'm just too old to understand/appreciate newer games, so I don't feel like I contribute anything meaningful to a discussion about them

yokohama

United States1116 Posts

July 21 2012 18:25 GMT

#139

I really like the world of Fallout 3 better than Vegas, but what NV upgraded gameplay wise I think NV is the better game. I just wish the strip wasn't so underwhelming. I'm about to go try hardcore mode, I need to take a break from Skyrim