I am not saying
you would necessarily like it - I am saying there are legitimate reasons to prefer it to Fallout 3 because it makes several subtantial improvements in major areas. If you don't care about those major areas, then obviously you won't care about the improvements - but to say "New Vegas is just like Fallout 3 you guys I swear" is proveably false.
All I can really do is explain why
I think it's better than Fallout 3:
- Greatly improved factions - both "setting consistency" wise, and the way the gameplay mechanics interact with them.
- Greatly improved quest design - the "improved factions" aspect ties into this. Quests for different factions can be mutually exclusive - some solely by completing them, others based on
how you complete them. Then there's the skill checks which lead to alternate paths - most quests have
at least a few different ways to be solved, based on your character build. And as I said -
how you solve a quest can be just as important as
if you solve it. Why? Faction mechanics - getting rid of an opposing faction using diplomacy won't piss them off - shooting them in the face will.
- Improved combat. No "greatly" adjective there, but it
is better - the "nerfed" perks and the "nerfing" of VATS help - being in VATS no longer makes you basically invincible. "True ironsights" makes non-VATS combat a much more useful option. The improved implementation of Damage Threshhold along with the different ammo types used to combat enemy DT also helps. It's hardly a tactical gameplay wonderland, but it is
better. Granted, if you thought combat in FO3 was terrible and beyond redemption, then those changes probably won't matter to you; but if you're in the same camp as me, and simply thought combat in FO3 was
mediocre, then the improvements in New Vegas go a long way toward making it more tolerable.
- Improved writing/setting consistenty. It's not "lol better because Obsidiab's name is on the box", it's better
because it's better. The setting is better, the characters and companions are better, the factions are better. Maybe for you it's just fluff; for me it's the main reason I play sandbox RPGs. For example, Ultima VII - shitty, shitty combat, but everything else is so good, it's still my favorite RPG.
People seem to love to claim that "the gameplay is exactly the same" because
combat is largely the same, but are quest design and faction mechanics suddenly not part of the gameplay? Are they just "lol fluff"?
As for your issues:
terrible console shooter gameplay
As I said earlier - if you
hated FO3's combat, you'll still hate New Vegas', despite the improvements.
Define "terrible", I guess? It's the same "enemy AI" you see in most action RPGs, so yes I guess by your standards it's "terrible".
Yes, but I've never bitched about quest compasses in other games, so I'm not going to start now.
I've never understood your problem with this - your "radar"'s range is based on your Perception stat. It's supposed to reflect how well your character perceives the world around him. Is this a bad thing?
I'm not exactly sure what your complaint here is. Stats aren't as important as in a pure RPG, but they never
are in action RPGs. They're still pretty important, though, and certainly influence how you play the game. And skills are just as important to your success - let me know how well your low Endurance/Perception/Agility/Weapon Skill character does against Radscorpions and Deathclaws.
inconsistent setting and writing
Yes, this is - for the most part - no longer an issue. Whether New Vegas is "consistent" with Fallout 1 and/or Fallout 2 is an entirely different debate, but it is, at least, consistent within
itself, with the glaring exception of the stupid, stupid Ghouls in Space quest. Even Tabitha is consistent within the setting established - not because the setting is "for lolz", but because of the "night kin insanity" plot thread. Tabitha and Space Ghouls aside, the overall atmosphere of the game is actually quite dark and depressing, and the great thing is, there's so much fucking content in the game, that Tabitha and the "space ghouls" make up
maybe 1% of it.
The visual design has never struck me as particularly good or particularly awful, so I guess I can't answer this.
As I said at the beginning, the point of this post isn't to convince
you that
you would like the game. I don't say "lol just play it" because
I think you would like it, but rather because some of your criticisms look ignorant to people who
have played the game. Honestly, based on the kind of game you enjoy, you probably
wouldn't like New Vegas. However - there are perfectly valid reasons to enjoy the game that have nothing to do with being an "Obsidian fanboy" and/or "being a hypocrite" - don't assume people disliked FO3 for the same reasons
you did.