Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

my take on the new fallouts

Konjad

Patron
Joined
Nov 3, 2007
Messages
3,930
Location
Strap Yourselves In Codex Year of the Donut Codex+ Now Streaming! Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2 Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
Vegas fanboys on 'dex are saying Vegas is better than Fallout 4. I have played all three of the modern fallouts (3, nv, and 4) and they are all great games, but in different ways.

Story is crap in all three. Some feel the story is better in Vegas because you have way more choices in how you get to the set piece at the end. And there are way more choices on how to do the quests. But what difference does that make if the main story is a boring conventional battle? So if you want a great story, look outside of the modern fallouts. Try bioshock, or Dragon age origins, or Mass effect or Witcher 3. Those all have much better stories than any of these modern fallouts.

as for setting, almost everyone, even fans of Vegas, will admit that Vegas is a bit bland. It is a desert. They use the desert setting as an excuse for how boring the setting is. I don't find that excuse acceptable. There are tons of map markers that you can travel to that have a boarded up building and nothing else to see. The "city" of Vegas has only a few buildings you can enter, and every block of the city is a new load screen. The color pallette of the game is as bland and colorless as the desert where it is set. The characters are ugly looking. If you want a fantastic environment to explore that is beautiful and varied, do fallout 4. If you want an interesting and detailed post apoc environment to explore, go to fallout 3. If you want to wander around in a western village and gamble while dealing with a rash of monster-sitings, do fallout new vegas.

As for characters, i thought house was rather interesting, and i don't think he is evil or good. He is grey. The Caesar, however, is a cliche. Other characters really don't stand out to me. Other than the robot that is helping House. I liked him. And Boone, but for the wrong reasons.

I think Vegas does have better faction system (much better) than any of the other fallout games. You don't have karma in Vegas, you have faction reputation. And i think this is much more realistic than karma (though i happen to love karma in fallout 3. It does not exist in fallout 4 ). Some of the factions are quite interesting. I haven't played the game for a while, so i don't know the names. I thought the elvis impersonators intersting. I found the casino families and the casinos interesting. I hated ncr and Caesar, but liked what they did with BOS in Vegas. There are a ton of other factions of various interest. You are sure to find a faction that you like in FNV. Fallout 3 factions (human groups) are not nearly as intresting. Fallout 4 has interesting factions, but i don't think they are handled as well as they are in Vegas.

Though it is personal opinion, i thought Dead Money was the best dlc i have ever played. i loved the weird environment and having to think up different strategies. I loved the choice in the end. i thought it fantastic. And you get a great pay day at the end of the dlc. Made a ton of money of the old casino, and got a great weapon. Vegas dlc is one of its strong points. I did hate the reservation dlc, and the one where you go to the nuked out former area the courier had been in.

And Vegas is a better rpg than fallout 4 (significantly), but not Fallout 3. I think Fallout 3 and Vegas are both good rpgs because they have skill checks, and your build does matter in how you finish a quest. The dialogue system in both is far more extensive than Fallout 4. So if you are just looking at the rpg of the game, 3 and vegas are equal. In my opinion.

What is a better fallout game? All the fanboys will pick one of the three. In the end, it is all a matter of how you look at it. Vegas has more of the feel of the old fallout games, whereas fallout 3 and 4 have a Bethesda open world feel to it. If you are a big fan of the oldest FAllouts, Vegas is going to be more of a fallout game for you since it was made by Obsidian (at that time there were developers from the original game in the studio) and has that feel to it. Supposedly the lore is much closer. I don't know or care about the lore. Even if we go environment, Vegas is more old fallout than 3 and 4 because the earlier games have cities and civilizations and less radiated wasteland. So a very good case can be made for Vegas being more of a fallout game. But Fallout 3 is more radiated and more ruined than either of the other two modern fallouts. The Vega setting is too much like a western town for my taste.

as for the courier not having a motive to stay in Vegas, this is pure hogwash. His motive: revenge. Some guy shot him in the head and buried him. Would you leave an area where someone got away with almost killing you? And i preferred the setup in Vegas to any of the other fallout games, including the old games. Why? You are a blank slate. Your character has no backstory except you being a courier that got shot in the head. Ypu can make up any story for your character that you want and not have it clash with the main story. Fallouts 1 through 3 made you somebody from a vault. Fallou t 4 puts you in a vault before putting you in the game. Vegas is the only one that leaves your back story totally up to you. I find this a big plus for the game. Fallout 4 sins the most when it comes to back story. It marries you off and gives you a kid and a job. I ignore all this crap when i play Fallout 4 because i want to make my own story.

In the end, all three are great games. And if you don't like something about one of them, most likely there is a mod that will fix it for you.
 

Ash

Arcane
Joined
Oct 16, 2015
Messages
6,226
Stopped reading a few paragraphs in. What a steaming pile of shit. Your analysis of New Vegas's individual elements is retarded. People don't prefer its story purely because there's more options, but also because quality of writing. Additionally, how systems play into dialogue, e.g skill requirements instead of dice rolls. Not to mention greater faithfulness to the lore and spirit.

Your mention of New Vegas being "just a desert" is objectively false, and is usually what FO3 tards say. There is WAY more geographic/locational and aesthetic variety in NV than there is in FO3.

And then I stopped reading there, because
rating_shit.png


So if you want a great story, look outside of the modern fallouts. Try bioshock, or Dragon age origins, or Mass effect

:0-13:
 
Last edited:

Sykar

Arcane
Joined
Dec 2, 2014
Messages
11,297
Location
Turn right after Alpha Centauri
Vegas fanboys on 'dex are saying Vegas is better than Fallout 4. I have played all three of the modern fallouts (3, nv, and 4) and they are all great games, but in different ways.

Story is crap in all three. Some feel the story is better in Vegas because you have way more choices in how you get to the set piece at the end. And there are way more choices on how to do the quests. But what difference does that make if the main story is a boring conventional battle? So if you want a great story, look outside of the modern fallouts. Try bioshock, or Dragon age origins, or Mass effect or Witcher 3. Those all have much better stories than any of these modern fallouts.

as for setting, almost everyone, even fans of Vegas, will admit that Vegas is a bit bland. It is a desert. They use the desert setting as an excuse for how boring the setting is. I don't find that excuse acceptable. There are tons of map markers that you can travel to that have a boarded up building and nothing else to see. The "city" of Vegas has only a few buildings you can enter, and every block of the city is a new load screen. The color pallette of the game is as bland and colorless as the desert where it is set. The characters are ugly looking. If you want a fantastic environment to explore that is beautiful and varied, do fallout 4. If you want an interesting and detailed post apoc environment to explore, go to fallout 3. If you want to wander around in a western village and gamble while dealing with a rash of monster-sitings, do fallout new vegas.

As for characters, i thought house was rather interesting, and i don't think he is evil or good. He is grey. The Caesar, however, is a cliche. Other characters really don't stand out to me. Other than the robot that is helping House. I liked him. And Boone, but for the wrong reasons.

I think Vegas does have better faction system (much better) than any of the other fallout games. You don't have karma in Vegas, you have faction reputation. And i think this is much more realistic than karma (though i happen to love karma in fallout 3. It does not exist in fallout 4 ). Some of the factions are quite interesting. I haven't played the game for a while, so i don't know the names. I thought the elvis impersonators intersting. I found the casino families and the casinos interesting. I hated ncr and Caesar, but liked what they did with BOS in Vegas. There are a ton of other factions of various interest. You are sure to find a faction that you like in FNV. Fallout 3 factions (human groups) are not nearly as intresting. Fallout 4 has interesting factions, but i don't think they are handled as well as they are in Vegas.

Though it is personal opinion, i thought Dead Money was the best dlc i have ever played. i loved the weird environment and having to think up different strategies. I loved the choice in the end. i thought it fantastic. And you get a great pay day at the end of the dlc. Made a ton of money of the old casino, and got a great weapon. Vegas dlc is one of its strong points. I did hate the reservation dlc, and the one where you go to the nuked out former area the courier had been in.

And Vegas is a better rpg than fallout 4 (significantly), but not Fallout 3. I think Fallout 3 and Vegas are both good rpgs because they have skill checks, and your build does matter in how you finish a quest. The dialogue system in both is far more extensive than Fallout 4. So if you are just looking at the rpg of the game, 3 and vegas are equal. In my opinion.

What is a better fallout game? All the fanboys will pick one of the three. In the end, it is all a matter of how you look at it. Vegas has more of the feel of the old fallout games, whereas fallout 3 and 4 have a Bethesda open world feel to it. If you are a big fan of the oldest FAllouts, Vegas is going to be more of a fallout game for you since it was made by Obsidian (at that time there were developers from the original game in the studio) and has that feel to it. Supposedly the lore is much closer. I don't know or care about the lore. Even if we go environment, Vegas is more old fallout than 3 and 4 because the earlier games have cities and civilizations and less radiated wasteland. So a very good case can be made for Vegas being more of a fallout game. But Fallout 3 is more radiated and more ruined than either of the other two modern fallouts. The Vega setting is too much like a western town for my taste.

as for the courier not having a motive to stay in Vegas, this is pure hogwash. His motive: revenge. Some guy shot him in the head and buried him. Would you leave an area where someone got away with almost killing you? And i preferred the setup in Vegas to any of the other fallout games, including the old games. Why? You are a blank slate. Your character has no backstory except you being a courier that got shot in the head. Ypu can make up any story for your character that you want and not have it clash with the main story. Fallouts 1 through 3 made you somebody from a vault. Fallou t 4 puts you in a vault before putting you in the game. Vegas is the only one that leaves your back story totally up to you. I find this a big plus for the game. Fallout 4 sins the most when it comes to back story. It marries you off and gives you a kid and a job. I ignore all this crap when i play Fallout 4 because i want to make my own story.

In the end, all three are great games. And if you don't like something about one of them, most likely there is a mod that will fix it for you.

:shitandpiss:
 

FeelTheRads

Arcane
Joined
Apr 18, 2008
Messages
13,716
Also there is no mod to replace the PipBoy with an UI for human beings so you have to use that consoletard subhuman garbage. Therefore you're also liar.
 
Unwanted

Janise

Unwanted
Joined
May 14, 2017
Messages
727
they say dont judge a book by its cover
but i sai y no
C6oegBv.png
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom