Should I get Fallout 3 or New Vegas?

[Raritas 6,820]

Fallout 3 is the better game in my opinion. It's much more atmospheric than New Vegas, and it's world and quests are more interesting.

I felt New Vegas was too 'cheerful', in a way that society had almost rebuilt in certain places. 

However, I think there is more quests in New Vegas. I've completed almost every quest in 3 after 80 hours, whereas in New Vegas I've still got alot to do after about 60 or so. 

 

All together I've spent hundreds of hours on both games, they are two of my favourite games of all time. If you can, I highly recommend you getting both. They arn't too expensive anymore.

[TwiDash2.0 2]

I have to recommend New Vegas mostly because NVSE didn't have problems with mods.....but for some reason F3 wasn't compatible(my copy anyway) with most graphics or content modifications. But other than mods F3 has a better story.

[Sig Hoovestrong 837]

First off, I apologize if this is a duplicate/horribly generic thread, but I figured a new one would help more than digging up an old thread that may or may not have the same question as me.

 

Second off, I am a pc gamer, and I will be downloading more than a couple mods. (Though mostly designed to make the game look better, my Skyrim has ~70 mods installed)

 

Alright, so I have been looking up reviews for both games, however that hasn't been really effective since reviews tend to happen when a game is released, not long after there have been multiple patches. I have heard that  Fallout 3 is straight up amazing and fun to play, and I believe it. I have also heard that New Vegas is very fun, but it doesn't feel any better than 3, nor does it feel like anything more than a large dlc for 3. Would that even affect me since I never played 3? (Similarly, Skyrim was my first/only elder scrolls game, so I think it's amazing, but it was a disappointment to Oblivion players)  Secondly, I keep hearing about how insanely-terribly-awfully bug infested New Vegas is, but again, would this even affect my choice if there are patches (official or unofficial) for the title that fix many of those bugs?

 

In short, do the facts that I'm new to the series and have access to bug fixes mean that I should just go ahead and get New Vegas instead of 3?

Get both, and then get tale of two wastelands mod. Than can play all content on Fallout New Vegas with all DLC, and everything, and it capable with most mods from Fallout New Vegas nexus.

[Slaigh 117]

Thanks again everyone!

 

Alright, so I'm just going to break down and try Fallout 3 first. 

Emphasis on the first, as the fact that so many people like NV more, or say get both, I'm definitely going to have to get NV at some point soon after I "finish" Fallout 3!

[PoniesPlease 365]

Fallout 3, unless you've got a Windows 7 PC, in which I'd be careful - rumors abound that it isn't optimized for it, and doesn't even work in some cases. 

[Sir Hugsalot 8,621]

Let me put it this way.

 

Fallout 3- much more "apocalyptic" atmosphere, more ruins, much "rougher", I mean people in Fallout 3 tend to have really hard life from what I saw. Gameplay? For sure more complicated than in New Vegas (but still very easy for me), but I think there are a bit less weapons availible. 

 

Fallout: New Vegas- bigger world. One big wasteland and atmosphere that kinda reminds me of... western in apocalyptic world? Towns look less... ruined Mojave seems to be recovering much faster. This is all about atmosphere. Now to gameplay- almost the same as in New Vegas, but with weapon mods added, overall more weapons than in Fallout 3. On the other hand I think there are less skills and game is easier (anti materiel gun can take down Death Claw with one shot!).

 

 

I hope it helps, personally I prefer New Vegas, Fallout 3 is too... rough for me

[Winterbass 763]

Depends on what you're looking for.

 

For me, Fallout 3 was a game like none else. Sure, it had kinda the same basis as TES: Oblivion. But it has an entirely different mood. The wasteland was big and there are tons of things for you to explore and to see. Tons of monsters to kill and many unique weapons to pick up. You make your own stories, your own world. While there were quests, both marked and unmarked, the game gave you enough space to explore without any kind of quest attached to it. The game really had the "I do what the fuck I feel like doing" concept down.

 

Fallout: New Vegas is smaller, more story-driven. It's fun, there're a lot of things to do. It has more features than Fallout 3, more quests, more weapons, more characters. While that was great, with all the things you can do, I also felt like there wasn't much to explore. Nearly every location has some kind of quest attached to it, making you feel kind of forced to first search for the quest, before storming in and killing everything. Locations don't exist because they were simply remnants of the war, or encampments of survivors. They were there because they most likely have some kind of quest to them. 

 

Personally, I think they're both great depending on what you're looking for. For me, that's solid gameplay and atmosphere. Fallout 3 definitely does that better than New Vegas does. And we're just talking about the vanilla game here. Sure, both have their bugs. But that's nothing an unofficial mod patch can't fix. 

 

DLC is totally opinion, so it's up to you to decide which DLCs sound more interesting than the others.

 

BTW, both crash if you have a quad-core or higher. There's a text-file you'll need to edit to limit the game to using only two cores. If you do that, both games usually don't crash anymore.

Edited November 1, 2013 by Winterbass