labrat Posted December 31, 2011 Posted December 31, 2011 With the GOTY edition of FO:NV coming out in Feb (10th in Europe) is it worth splashing out on FO3 for £10? Is there mod incompatibility between the two? or will playing with FO3 transfer across to NV?
Guest Loogie Posted December 31, 2011 Posted December 31, 2011 There's no mod compatibility between the two, and with New Vegas having a vastly better story and gameplay mechanics, in addition to Sexout being for NV, I wouldn't spend 10 pounds on Fallout 3 if your choice was to get one or the other. Steam is currently having a sale on both games, and if I'm not mistaken you'll be able to get them for a cheaper than you could hope to get in a store. NV's upcoming ultimate edition is just the game with all the DLCs, and will probably run $60; you can get all that content on Steam right now for closer to $20.
labrat Posted December 31, 2011 Author Posted December 31, 2011 Ta Loogie. I noticed that Sexout seemed to be NV only, but that Sexus had both FO3 and NV variants. I take it that there are many improving and adult mods available for both. Loda's FO3 board looks very active still. What are the big differences? I can get FO3 for under £10 now from Am@zon, and frankly I'd rather own it than rent it for $5 from Ste@m, (they're like unwanted house-guests you can't get rid of). At this price I'm inclined to just go for it and then if not totally disillusioned, or enmeshed in Skyrim's Radiant Questing system, I'll check out the NV GOTY price. With Skyrim now available for under £15 in local stores (£20 for the console kiddies) I don't suppose that it will be much more expensive.
Kodiak Posted December 31, 2011 Posted December 31, 2011 At this price I'm inclined to just go for it and then if not totally disillusioned' date=' or enmeshed in Skyrim's Radiant Questing system, I'll check out the NV GOTY price. [/quote'] If that is how you are thinking about it, I'd avoid FO3 completely because it may spoil your appitite for FONV. New Vegas is considerably better then FO3 in about every aspect. Most of the modding support has since migrated from FO3 to NV as a result. Just for the sake of Sexout and Project Nevada, I suggest just committing to NV and maybe touch upon FO3 later on for shits and giggles.
Symon Posted December 31, 2011 Posted December 31, 2011 I have to differ with Loogie here. As long as it is the GOTY edition, (which IIRC is patched up to v1.7, which is essential), go for it. Well worth a tenner. My reasons? Firstly, No Steam. Secondly, although the FO:NV main quest is better, the world is far smaller and Nessa assures me the DLC is dire and hopeless. The FO3 DLC is quite good. In any event, the FO3 main quest is far better than Oblivions. Thirdly, the Mothership Zeta Crew mod is excellent. Fourthly, there are several excellent mods for FO3, such as DCInteriors and BusWorld. The sex mods may be there for FO:NV but the quests seem in short supply! Modding seem to be unpopular these days, for both of them. Finally, my suspicion is that FO3 is more stable. A few things to note:- Do NOT under any circumstances follow the advice about esmifying esps! This was a poor workround for the hopeless 1.5 patch. The 1.6 patch rendered this obsolete but you will still find mods that have esmified esps or advice that you should do it (and make your game less stable). Use Wrye Flash to make those esps, esps as they should be. Watch out for the unofficial patch. The broken steel part is broken and causes a few crashes. Let me know if you need a non-broken version. You will want to tweak the combat system. Like FO:NV, it doesn't know if it wants to be a FPS or combat like FO and FO2. Decide which you want and get mods for your chosen play style.
labrat Posted January 1, 2012 Author Posted January 1, 2012 Ta Kodiak. Looking at the various sites that host FO3 SS, it looks like FO3 can be modded into acceptable shape and beyond, so I won't let it put me off NV. Cheers Symon, very useful, you've persuaded me. It is the GOTY. The only little hassle I forsee is downloading and applying a Windows LIVE disabler. If I run into problems with the unofficial patch I'll give you a shout. A big world with some good mods and Steam Free sounds great. I usually end up modding stuff anyway, so don't mind getting creative if it's not as developed as NV in some areas. Happy New Year to One'n'All
Symon Posted January 1, 2012 Posted January 1, 2012 IIRC, the Windows live isn't mandatory. I had to get round it anyway as I run Win2000, which the game will run fine on, so long as you apply the unofficial WinXP dll wrapper to the game. Of course, Win2000 might be why I find the game very stable. I can let you have my custom combat mod if you aren't into FPS. It actually makes combat much easier, as VATS is very turn based. I don't play FPS games at all. I prefer exploring and doing things to killing things, so it doesn't matter to me that I'm pretty lethal to come against in combat. In any event, it's a decent guide to how you make VATS function like true turn based combat.
Guest Loogie Posted January 1, 2012 Posted January 1, 2012 Nessa assures me the DLC is dire and hopeless. That really depends. If you're into RPGs and story' date=' the NV DLC is head and shoulders above Fallout 3. If you're just looking for nothing out of a game but moving targets, then the Fallout 3 DLC is what you're after. In any event, the FO3 main quest is far better than Oblivions. And has several plotholes big enough to drive a semi truck through. Fourthly, there are several excellent mods for FO3, such as DCInteriors and BusWorld. NVInteriors recently launched. The sex mods may be there for FO:NV but the quests seem in short supply! Modding seem to be unpopular these days, for both of them. And it's non-existent for Fallout 3. The Sexout mods that exist are very big on intertwining with the story instead of just being all about random fucking. Of course, there'd be me Sexout content if there were more Sexout modders; there's only so many of us and we have lives to lead outside of this. Sexus barely works last I heard. The big boys on the block on the Nexus are Animated Prostitution and Sexual Innuendo. SI is for NV only, so far as I know. Finally, my suspicion is that FO3 is more stable. I had far, far more crashes and straight up game-breaking bugs with Fallout 3 than I had in New Vegas. You can't post suspicions as fact.
Symon Posted January 1, 2012 Posted January 1, 2012 That really depends. If you're into RPGs and story' date=' the NV DLC is head and shoulders above Fallout 3. If you're just looking for nothing out of a game but moving targets, then the Fallout 3 DLC is what you're after.[/quote'] It must be down to interpretation. Nessa prefers roleplaying mods and doesn't rate the roleplaying in the FO:NV DLC at all. She seriously regrets wasting her money on the DLC. I had far' date=' far more crashes and straight up game-breaking bugs with Fallout 3 than I had in New Vegas. You can't post suspicions as fact.[/quote'] Do you convert all esmified esps back into esps? Not doing that will make the game very unstable? The hopeless 1.5 patch has much to answer for. I'm told that Nessa and her FO:NV has more crashes than my FO3, which has very few indeed. Naturally I have many mods, BUT, crucually, I clean them, flip esps to true esps, and use a fixed version of the unofficial patch. Not doing any of the above will get you crashes galore. In short, I reckon I could make your FO3 rock stable! (grin). I also trust Nessa's judgment that FO:NV isn't for me. Oh, and please be fair! I posted my suspicion as a suspicion yes????? (grin). That's why I used the word 'suspicion' rather than 'fact'. That said, I find it hard to believe FO:NV could be any MORE stable than FO3 on my rig!
Guest Loogie Posted January 1, 2012 Posted January 1, 2012 Not doing any of the above will get you crashes galore. In short' date=' I reckon I could make your FO3 rock stable! (grin). [/quote'] Thanks for the offer. I don't have any ESMified esps that I know of, but this is also the first time I've heard of this problem. I am going to have to decline, though - as a long time Fallout fan, Fallout 3 has about as much in common with Fallout as Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel for consoles. NV is the game I waited 12 years for.
Symon Posted January 1, 2012 Posted January 1, 2012 Yeah I know what you mean. FO3 out of the box is nothing like FO or FO2. That's why I made myself a cutom esp to 'fix the combat'. That is, make it more like FO in my eyes. Beth could have made a much better job of it. I still think FO:NV should have been a Tribunal/Bloodmoon/Shivering Isles style expansion to FO3, rather than a 'game to buy again'. It took some digging to get the info on the 1.5 patch and esmified esps. The Syndey Companion mod is a good example. To be fair that comes with a micro ESP to try to fix the issue. Best option is to espify the esp in Wrye Flash and discard the micro esp. Works flawlessly on 1.7 then. Anyone else reading this should look for 'odd' blue esps, listed down with the esms in Flash to see the issue. There are excellent odds those may be making your game unstable.
Guest Loogie Posted January 1, 2012 Posted January 1, 2012 I still think FO:NV should have been a Tribunal/Bloodmoon/Shivering Isles style expansion to FO3' date=' rather than a 'game to buy again'. [/quote'] I disagree. Not only is NV a fully-fledged game, it fixes the silly iron sights oversight by Bethesda. It also has an actual storyline, good writing, memorable characters, player choice means something and multiple ways to approach every quest - the hallmarks of a Fallout game. The only thing I like about Fallout 3, aside from a couple of very specific encounters, is that it enabled NV to get made.
Symon Posted January 1, 2012 Posted January 1, 2012 Ah, but my thought is that like the Morrowind expansions, they could have used FO:NV to fix oversights in FO3! My understanding is that nothing in the FO:NV engine couldn't have been patched into FO3! They did that In Tribunal for Morrowind, which is why so many morrowind mods require Tribunal, even though they use no assets from Tribunal. They need the Tribunal executable!
Guest Loogie Posted January 1, 2012 Posted January 1, 2012 My understanding is that nothing in the FO:NV engine couldn't have been patched into FO3! Yeah, but no patch in the world would fix bad writing, poor plot and lack of choice, which is what Fallout 3's main crimes are.
Kashked Posted January 1, 2012 Posted January 1, 2012 My understanding is that nothing in the FO:NV engine couldn't have been patched into FO3! Yeah' date=' but no patch in the world would fix bad writing, poor plot and lack of choice, which is what Fallout 3's main crimes are. [/quote'] I agree with you on certain points, the main story is linear, but I must say I still found it enjoyable. In my book FO3 is almost as good as FONV, but then again, it comes down to personal taste. What does make FONV stand head and shoulder over FO3 IMHO hoverever, is the mods.
Symon Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 Yeah, but no patch in the world would fix bad writing, poor plot and lack of choice, which is what Fallout 3's main crimes are. Binary patch to the esm! Of course, they'd have to want to patch it, and it's entirely possible Beth thought the main quest for FO3 flawless, which it certainly is not.
Guest Loogie Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 Main problem would be all the voice actors they'd have to re-employ. Fallout 3's plot inexplicably stole from the plot of the first two games while the original elements were silly. The only choice of any consequence was whether to blow up Megaton, and even then the consequences were almost meaningless.
Guest Donkey Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 Wasn't New Vegas made by the original people who made Fallout 1 and 2 ?? if so how is a patch alone gonna fix fallout 3 like Symon says in his post ?? If fallout 3 was really that good, then why did all of fose team immediately abandoned fallout 3 when new vegas was out ?? Fallout 3 is a good game by it's own but it has nothing in it that even remotely resembles anything that happened in fallout 1 and 2. In that case new vegas did it right.
Guest Loogie Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 New Vegas' dev team had a lot of the original creators on it. That's why NV's story revisits the consequences of how those games turned out. One of they very first quests in Fallout is saving Tandi of Shady Sands from the Khans. Tandi doesn't get saved, the NCR doesn't get founded. The Khans don't get their asses kicked, the psychological damage to the sole survivor doesn't form the Great Khans. As a trivia sidenote, the Khans, Shady Sands and Vipers were formed when the residents of Vault 15 disagreed with each other and splintered. Two hundred years later, they forget the beginnings of when they crawled out of a hole in the ground. In NV, you have a chance to forge a peace between the NCR and Khans. If you're a long time fan, you know you're bringing full circle, even if the NPCs and the Courier are ignorant to that. Every choice the player makes in a Fallout game echoes through the past and shapes the future. Based on that criteria alone, Fallout 3 is not a Fallout game.
Kashked Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 New Vegas' dev team had a lot of the original creators on it. That's why NV's story revisits the consequences of how those games turned out. One of they very first quests in Fallout is saving Tandi of Shady Sands from the Khans. Tandi doesn't get saved' date=' the NCR doesn't get founded. The Khans don't get their asses kicked, the psychological damage to the sole survivor doesn't form the Great Khans. As a trivia sidenote, the Khans, Shady Sands and Vipers were formed when the residents of Vault 15 disagreed with each other and splintered. Two hundred years later, they forget the beginnings of when they crawled out of a hole in the ground. In NV, you have a chance to forge a peace between the NCR and Khans. If you're a long time fan, you know you're bringing full circle, even if the NPCs and the Courier are ignorant to that. Every choice the player makes in a Fallout game echoes through the past and shapes the future. Based on that criteria alone, Fallout 3 is not a Fallout game. [/quote'] Well, your reasoning there has a flaw, since F03 takes place on the other side of the continent, events from previous Fallout games would hardly have much impact on life in the DC Wasteland, neither would your choices have any effect on the classic Fallout-country in the american southwest. Basically your reasoning would mean that one could not possibly make a Fallout-game that did not take place in the southwest.
Guest Loogie Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 Well' date=' your reasoning there has a flaw, since F03 takes place on the other side of the continent, events from previous Fallout games would hardly have much impact on life in the DC Wasteland, neither would your choices have any effect on the classic Fallout-country in the american southwest. Basically your reasoning would mean that one could not possibly make a Fallout-game that did not take place in the southwest. [/quote'] No, my reasoning is one cannot make a game where you have no choices, or the choices have no meaning, and have the gall to claim it's Fallout.
Kashked Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 Well' date=' your reasoning there has a flaw, since F03 takes place on the other side of the continent, events from previous Fallout games would hardly have much impact on life in the DC Wasteland, neither would your choices have any effect on the classic Fallout-country in the american southwest. Basically your reasoning would mean that one could not possibly make a Fallout-game that did not take place in the southwest. [/quote'] No, my reasoning is one cannot make a game where you have no choices, or the choices have no meaning, and have the gall to claim it's Fallout. Well, then perhaps I misunderstood you, but it seemed your reasoning was that to be a Fallout game you had to tie in with the earlier stories, something that would be highly improbable and somewhat farfetched in an east coast setting.
Guest Loogie Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 I wrote what I did to illustrate that Fallout 1, 2 and New Vegas have well-written stories and the outcome is meaningful to future events. The capitol wasteland has nothing going for it to carry that story onward.
junkacc Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 My understanding is that nothing in the FO:NV engine couldn't have been patched into FO3! Yeah' date=' but no patch in the world would fix bad writing, poor plot and lack of choice, which is what Fallout 3's main crimes are. [/quote'] The bad writing, poor plot, and lack of choices apply more to Skyrim than FO3. Notwithstanding the CS release, noone will overcome that limitation. Although some people say NV should have been a DLC to FO3, I think it's better to regard them the other way around, despite the order of release -- FO3 as NV DLC. A more FPS orientated addon to the NV RPG.
Doctrine1-6 Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 Ladies and Gentlemen, please. The question asked was not, "Which is better, FO3 or FONV?", but "Is Fallout 3 worth 10 bucks?" And, as both of them are the premier FPS-RPGs of this decade, and both contended for and earned a plethora of Game of the Year awards, the answer is obviously and without question: Yes. EDIT: Err... previous decade. The effect of the statement is the same.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now