Yes, except some aspects are inferior. There is absolutely no survival aspect, and minimal crafting options at best.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well basicly this.
But Fallout 3 had great places to explore and has a lot of fun to do (I like Fallout 3 more then NV). Also Fallput 3 has one epic feature NV doesnt have( rarely encountered): Nuclear cars!!!!
Also a friend of me plays Fallout 3 on win7 so you should be able to play it...
Comment has been collapsed.
Keep in mind that FONV currently has more modders actively working on it.
Comment has been collapsed.
same here, 3 is way better in my opinion. Story is a lot better. put about 100+ hours into it on my xbox. but graphic wise and gameplay wise they are very similiar.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm good
clean water
I'm evil
clean water
Yeah, I'm one of those people who won't call the story good. I'm not saying it is bad, but you end in the same spot no matter what.
Comment has been collapsed.
you could poison the water and kill all civilization
Comment has been collapsed.
Well the story up to then is fantastic and you do have some choice at the end. Think about it, if you poisonened the water and killed everybody there would be nothing else to do, just an empty map.
Comment has been collapsed.
i never got the chance to play the older games because they were never released on the xbox. But i have great memories of fallout 3. its been a year since ive played the game but i can still remember where all the unique weapons are hidden and the location of all the bobbleheads. i must have 100%ed the game at least three times being good evil and neutral. Its just my opinion that three is better but everyone is gonna say something different.
Comment has been collapsed.
Basically the same gameplay, but different location and characters. I felt DC was more interesting to explore, but cared more for the characters and story in New Vegas.
Comment has been collapsed.
I dumped about 120-160hrs into both games. Fo3 plays better then NV on win7. I enjoyed NV's open world a bit more then 3's 90% subway exploration. NV's characters and their stories were also better IMO. Overall, the story and music, read radio, were enjoyed more with Fo3 then NV.
NV was an absolute pain in my ass to play. Constant crashing. I think it stems from taking on to many quests at once, about 15~ was the apparent limit.
Overall, gameplay, controlling the charector, interacting with people and such is just like NV. NV just has other things added to it.
Comment has been collapsed.
In terms of atmosphere (nuclear war, wasteland, the ruins of Washington D.C.) Fallout 3 was IMHO much more convincing, I remember I could start playing at, say, 8 p.m., just dive into it, then some time later notice it's getting bright in my room even though I was playing with the lights off - sunrise at ~5 a.m. ...WTF. Good times. However, I spent much more time playing NV + all DLCs (282 hrs).
Both storylines are fantastic, the gameplay in NV is a bit improved though - base game level cap at 30 with each of the four DLCs adding 5, Survival Mode, developing your character made harder (which is good, you have to put more time and attention into it) and a LOT more content. I have to admit though, the SHITLOAD of perks available in NV was a little confusing, it was pretty hard for me to finally choose one :) Threeeeee Daaawwwwg :D
Comment has been collapsed.
Same here - I enjoyed FO3 setting more.. but as stated above, I also disliked all the subways... and I explore every inch of these types of games... so there was a lot more than I would have liked.
That being said, I put a lot of hours into both games ~140 in FO3 and over 150 in FNV
Comment has been collapsed.
Have you played/finished Skyrim?
I'm asking you this because I tend to play in the same style as you just mentioned, and I did complete fallout but Skyrim was just too big for me.
I've got this urge to explore EVERYTHING I encounter & talk to every npc that I see, and because of that I haven't been able too properly play skyrim.
I've got houses filled with loot, and I store at least 1 of every item since i'm always afraid that I might need it for a quest.
So by the time I actually had a chance to progress trough the storyline (go up some mountain too meet some monks or something like that) I already maxed out most things such as armor weapons and whatnot and the game lost it's charm to me.
I've been wondering for a while now if there are other people that experience the same problem with the newer, larger games that are released nowadays.
Comment has been collapsed.
I've played and finished Skyrim, aye. It took me a long time to get done with the main quest, though - but that was mostly because there were so many other things to do. Many trips back and forth to the houses, though.
But I'm slowly starting to stop hoarding so much. And finish quests before starting new ones (that's one thing I had to do in Skyrim; tell myself "You're going to sit down, finish X quests, and then you can lol around for a bit"). It helps make the game more fun, but I do tend to get sidetracked a lot. It's one thing I've learned from watching Tobuscus play Skyrim (and Fallout:NV) - don't pick up bloody everything, and start finishing quests. :P
I also think finding stuff when you need them is more fun. Especially if you don't have to scroll through fifty barrels of random crap to see if you've got one already.
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks for your detailed reply, guess i'll have to start changing the way I play these open world games.
Games like NWN & Dragon age (first one) have gotten me used to checking every inch of the map for (semi) hidden loot up to the point where it kind of feels like having ingame OCD.
Comment has been collapsed.
NV wasnt suppose to be this big nuclear wasteland though. Mr. House's defense and all that jazz. I explored every location in NV, I prob missed a lot in F3 because only way you would get to certain areas was via the subway. After awhile everywhere just looks to be the same gray mess. In NV, I could managed to pick up where I was in the game world just by looking at the landmarks.
Comment has been collapsed.
IMHO NV is equal or better than f3 at every aspect of the game
equal - bugs(i play bethesda games since morrowind - they always have scripting bugs); combat; i dont remember, but i think weapons/armours are very different
better - story; characters; immersion; more activities(crafting, survival); better skill use, at least at speech; different endings, depending on your actions; and of course badass looking (wont spoil which) armour :)
both games are great, but after i tried NV, i never thought of going back to f3
Comment has been collapsed.
No iron sights, weapon crafting that isn't really any good, no ammo crafting, no cooking, no iron sights, nothing to keep death claws from killing anyone anywhere for no reason.
Get New Vegas, same core gameplay but better in everyway that isn't the same.
Comment has been collapsed.
Mods, mods, mods , mods ,mods mods mods mods mods mos mods modsmodsmdmsodmsodmsmdsomd all hail the overseer/sdf
Comment has been collapsed.
Personally, i find the FO3 gameplay far more interesting. Youre encouraged to search the wastelands in FO3 and rewarded as such. FO:NV side quests are boring and monotonous.
Comment has been collapsed.
What about win7 and Fallout 3 - it is not optimized in fact. I mean, no lags or whatever, but I had a big problem with game freezing. It just stoped at some point (nearly 2-3mins of gameplay) and you had to restart it again. Googled it, changed few parameters in .INI file and not a single freeze after that. Also could not properly alt+tab, also googled the problem and it got solved. So not much problems running it on win7 actually.
Comment has been collapsed.
nah i got fallout 3 on pc (windows live so not steam) and it works fine on windows 7 there are ways to get it to work if it doesn't. And i enjoyed Fallout NV a little bit more because it bigger, but fallout 3 is filled up more but thats because its smaller
Comment has been collapsed.
My main complaint is that the game lacked ANY motivation. Take the water purifier as an instant. The brotherhood want to turn it on, chechk. BUT the bloody enclave wants to turn it on too, for no freaking reason, but the brotherhood can't allow it. This logic goes through the whole game.
Comment has been collapsed.
Don't take me wrong, I enjoyed the game, and all, but the story is definatelly the weakest point of the game, taking the previous installments into consideration too. Just the whole stuff felt off, President eden, the super mutants, the enclave returning after being nuked in california, Harold turned into a freakin' tree. 3Dog. The annoying girl from megaton(molly?). Random guy asking you to blow up the town just like that. Vampires. Lovecraftian dlc. They are definatelly fun and "cool" but the farthest thing I desire in my Fallout experience.
OH and some SPOILERS ABOVE!
Comment has been collapsed.
Fallout 3 does play similarly to New Vegas, but that comes that the cost of having Black Isle's influence. New Vegas has a much more interesting story, and a lot of subtleties that Fallout 3 didn't have.
Despite Fallout 3 not "being optimized" for Win7, I haven't had an issue with performance.
Comment has been collapsed.
Honestly IMO NV sux compared to Fallout 3. NV is still a good game but rubbish compared to Fallout 3, Fallout 3 had an epic map with lots to explore, funny jokes (atleast funnier then in NV), also it has more Nuclear Cars! AND Tunnel Snakes!!!
Also I found Fallout 3 more survivalish because you couldn't cook or ammo craft. Also food didn't grow back in Fallout 3 (which it does in NV), you had to do with the things that was available and not simply gather some materials and craft a whole bunch of ammo. Food doesnt heal overtime in Fallout 3 but instantly, thats another reason why Fallout 3 is better (thank god there is a mod for that in NV). Also in NV Ultimate Edition you get a Canteen, and that sinply removes the whole survival because so far I know it has unlimited water.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's not optimized? I haven't had any problems with it on Win 7, so go for it anyway. Yes, both of them are pretty much the same
Comment has been collapsed.
47,108 Comments - Last post 5 minutes ago by BlazeHaze
8 Comments - Last post 18 minutes ago by kudomonster
1,814 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by moronic
43 Comments - Last post 4 hours ago by BorschtLover
58 Comments - Last post 6 hours ago by SketCZ
85 Comments - Last post 6 hours ago by WaxWorm
16,299 Comments - Last post 10 hours ago by Carenard
9,537 Comments - Last post 1 minute ago by CurryKingWurst
1,599 Comments - Last post 6 minutes ago by quijote3000
153 Comments - Last post 22 minutes ago by Exodust
57 Comments - Last post 47 minutes ago by Fluffster
187 Comments - Last post 54 minutes ago by Fluffster
16,786 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by adam1224
26 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by Gamy7
Fallout 3 isnt optimized for win7...
SO... Is Fallout 3, basically, the same as New Vegas in therms of gameplay?
Comment has been collapsed.