Fallout 4

A lot of people say random encounters and exploration. But I found exploration much better in New Vegas.

Anyone ever been to that big ass ravine (crescent canyon) down in the southern part of the map? Not a whole lot of good gear down there, but it was interesting to explore for me. I am biased as I live in the area. In fact, just a few days ago I explored one of Fallout New Vegas' locations I have never been to. Devil's throat. edit: I should say I explored this in real life. Really cool area of Nevada I have never been to.

I am optimistic for Fallout 4, because I think they will take some cues from NV, and implement some of the stuff Obsidian put in (hopefully).

Zack said:

See, people always point to that as being in Fallout 3's favor... but I think New Vegas had superior worldbuilding, in addition to everything else. Fallout 3 is a bunch of isolated locations connected by those god-awful metro stations. The Mojave Wasteland is cohesive, and I loved every inch of it.

I dunno. I wasn't crazy about Fallout 3, and I loved New Vegas. I honestly can't think of anything I preferred about 3.

Click to expand...

Nv definitely had supeeior worldbuilding. Maybe why I didn't like fallout3 as much was since bethesda took another established world, whereas with TES it was their own, they knew it well and built it over the years, and could inject lore details, proper immersion, and - what I see as - the subtlety. Fallout 3 indeed felt disjointed; people say its because it's supposed to feel more like an episodic sort of things - each side quest is like the monster of the week on a tv show - and I agree, but it still feels more disjointed to me compared to NV and especially TES.

cybrxkhan said:

Nv definitely had supeeior worldbuilding. Maybe why I didn't like fallout3 as much was since bethesda took another established world, whereas with TES it was their own, they knew it well and built it over the years, and could inject lore details, proper immersion, and - what I see as - the subtlety. Fallout 3 indeed felt disjointed; people say its because it's supposed to feel more like an episodic sort of things - each side quest is like the monster of the week on a tv show - and I agree, but it still feels more disjointed to me compared to NV and especially TES.

Click to expand...

...I thought you said you preferred Fallout 3 and its worldbuilding?

Zack said:

...I thought you said you preferred Fallout 3 and its worldbuilding?

Click to expand...

I was talking abut TES and bethesda vs bioware because another poster was talking about it above. Overall I still for the most part prefe fallout to, say, dragon age.

Ah, ok. I prefer Bioware, personally. I feel like Bethesda makes good sandboxes, whereas Bioware (and Obsidian) makes good RPGs, if that makes sense.

edit: Christ, that sounded pretentious. There's nothing wrong with preferring Bethesda games!

Square Enix (ignoring FF14 for convenience) > all

SouthernKing said:

Square Enix (ignoring FF14 for convenience) > all

Click to expand...

No way. Deus Ex: HR was decent, but it's no Mass Effect or New Vegas. Unless you're not talking about games from this decade.

Zack said:

No way. Deus Ex: HR was decent, but it's no Mass Effect or New Vegas. Unless you're not talking about games from this decade.

Click to expand...

Sort of. I'll admit that the FFs after 12 weren't particularly great (although 15 looks awesome, if only from the trailer). But for the 90s and 00s, what I said holds true.
I'll also say that New Vegas was my second favorite RPG of all time (after FF10, which also happens my favorite game of all time)

Fallout: New Vegas was more fun to explore than Fallout 3. That and that alone is why I like F:NV over F3. Everything else is incidental.