Current Events > Fallout 4 was better than Fallout 3

(+) Yeah! (+)

Fallout 3 was already the dumb, streamlined RPG with bad writing (with next to no agency in any of the quests or storylines) that people seem to think started with Fallout 4. But the difference is Fallout 4 has better gunplay, dungeons and quests so overall it's the better game.

It's weird how this sentiment seems to have changed after all of this Bethesda backlash lately.

The only difference is that back during Fallout 3 people didn't know any better because WRPG's weren't as popular as they are now. It's funny how the No Mutants Allowed community ended up being right in the long term despite being mocked over this a decade ago.

Neither games are as good as New Vegas or Fallout 2 anyway.
---

They're both butt
---

Inb4 someone says New Vegas was "empty" compared to Fallout 3 when infact most of Fallout 3 was trudging across empty wasteland
---

NV > making a fallout game out of used heron needles > 4 > 3

Vyrulisse posted...

Inb4 someone says New Vegas was "empty" compared to Fallout 3 when infact most of Fallout 3 was trudging across empty wasteland

Most of Fallout 3 was going through boring subway tunnels and shooting ghouls.
---

Darmik posted...

Vyrulisse posted...

Inb4 someone says New Vegas was "empty" compared to Fallout 3 when infact most of Fallout 3 was trudging across empty wasteland

Most of Fallout 3 was going through boring subway tunnels and shooting ghouls.

That too. It was kinda cool at first but then there were more... and more... knee high rubble made you have to take some labyrinth of subway tunnels to get to the other side. Awful design.
---

Fallout 3 had a lot more content and was open world
New Vegas forced you to Primm right away and then on a fetch quest

Fallout 3l et you go whereever you wanted

Vyrulisse posted...

Inb4 someone says New Vegas was "empty" compared to Fallout 3 when infact most of Fallout 3 was trudging across empty wasteland

fallout NV was a fallout 3 reskin, the only reason it was better is because obsidian was able to focus on the only thing they're good at and didn't have to actually make a game.

and yes, it was empty as fuck. instead of empty greenish wasteland it was empty orange wasteland.
---

3 was awesome
---

hotcegaI posted...

Fallout 3 had a lot more content and was open world
New Vegas forced you to Primm right away and then on a fetch quest

Fallout 3l et you go whereever you wanted

$.0001 BethBucks has been deposited into your account, thanks for your continued shil-support of our Skyrim port fund!

monkmith posted...

Vyrulisse posted...

Inb4 someone says New Vegas was "empty" compared to Fallout 3 when infact most of Fallout 3 was trudging across empty wasteland

fallout NV was a fallout 3 reskin, the only reason it was better is because obsidian was able to focus on the only thing they're good at and didn't have to actually make a game.

and yes, it was empty as fuck. instead of empty greenish wasteland it was empty orange wasteland.

New Vegas was packed with things to explore and visit and most of all they MADE SENSE. The world felt cohesive and not like various theme park attractions plopped onto a map.
---

YoullCowards posted...

$.0001 BethBucks has been deposited into your account, thanks for your continued shil-support of our Skyrim port fund!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQDz4Ypq2og" data-time="

Support it!

yes i was being sarcastic

hotcegaI posted...

Fallout 3 had a lot more content and was open world
New Vegas forced you to Primm right away and then on a fetch quest

Fallout 3l et you go whereever you wanted

A lot more content than 4? I don't really remember that at all.

Fallout 3 had that whole thing where areas were linked with subway tunnels. It's probably the most awful open world for any Bethesda title.
---

the advertising for 76 really shows that Bethesda just doesn't get the series at all

like nukes were treated with dead seriousness before. now they're just toys
---

Settlement building sucked, and I would have loved to shove a mini nuke up Preston Garvey's ass.
---

MakoReizei posted...

the advertising for 76 really shows that Bethesda just doesn't get the series at all

like nukes were treated with dead seriousness before. now they're just toys

Yeah that commercial was cringe.
---

FO3 feels ancient, lmao. I can't go back and play it after New veGOATas. FO4 has its problems, but it still feels modern in its gunplay. Too bad its campaign and quests mostly suck. FO3 updated to FO4 standards would be pretty sweet, though. I'd love to play The Pitt again.
---

MakoReizei posted...

the advertising for 76 really shows that Bethesda just doesn't get the series at all

like nukes were treated with dead seriousness before. now they're just toys

This goes all the way back to the nuclear explosions from cars in Fallout 3.

I remember getting absolute torn apart here when I had the nerve to say that Bethesda didn't get Fallout right when hype for Fallout 4 was at its peak. It's funny how quick the tides can change.
---

Shotgunnova posted...

FO3 feels ancient, lmao. I can't go back and play it after New veGOATas. FO4 has its problems, but it still feels modern in its gunplay. Too bad its campaign and quests mostly suck. FO3 updated to FO4 standards would be pretty sweet, though. I'd love to play The Pitt again.

If you have Fallout 3 GOTY and New Vegas GOTY and are on PC try A Tale of Two Wastelands.

It makes Fallout 3 at least playable because it uses New Vegas' gameplay. Just turns Fallout 3 into a giant mod for New Vegas pretty much.
---

Vyrulisse posted...

monkmith posted...

Vyrulisse posted...

Inb4 someone says New Vegas was "empty" compared to Fallout 3 when infact most of Fallout 3 was trudging across empty wasteland

fallout NV was a fallout 3 reskin, the only reason it was better is because obsidian was able to focus on the only thing they're good at and didn't have to actually make a game.

and yes, it was empty as fuck. instead of empty greenish wasteland it was empty orange wasteland.

New Vegas was packed with things to explore and visit and most of all they MADE SENSE. The world felt cohesive and not like various theme park attractions plopped onto a map.

yes, obsidian is great at world building. its why bethesda should do the making of games and let obsidian do the making of plots.

that doesn't change the fact it was a hell of a lot of empty fucking desert. and the bloatflies, almost as bad as cliff racers...
---

I don't have 'em on PC. Every so often I consider it, but I know I've played 'em so much, I'm not going to put a ton of time into 'em anymore. =|
---

Joking aside I haven't played much of 4.
But Fallout 3 had one good thing for it: it came at a time when open world games were pretty new, especially for consoles.

It definitely has some good points. I really did like the subways. I liked the fact that it had respawning cells every few days. But ultimately it was more of "shoot things, level up" game. Some of the quests are good but it seems like NV did the whole "each faction/area is unique with its own story" better than how 3 did it.

fallout 4 looked better visually and was more stable and had interesting power armor mechanics but otherwise it was basically fallout 3 2.0. actually it was even worse, the shooting was garbage and the writing was garbage.
---

Fallout 3s emptiness worked cause it was the 1st in its new style. It felt good to explore anyway

If New Vegas was first then 3 would of been shitted on for being as empty as it was.
---

Lost_All_Senses posted...

Fallout 3s emptiness worked cause it was the 1st in its new style. It felt good to explore anyway

If New Vegas was first then 3 would of been shitted on for being as empty as it was.

I honestly don't understand this meme about New Vegas. It wasn't empty at all.
---

Shotgunnova posted...

I don't have 'em on PC. Every so often I consider it, but I know I've played 'em so much, I'm not going to put a ton of time into 'em anymore. =|

Get it.
You can get big booty bitches or big booby bitches
Surprinsgly sfw and not naked actually

Lost_All_Senses posted...

Fallout 3s emptiness worked cause it was the 1st in its new style. It felt good to explore anyway

If New Vegas was first then 3 would of been shitted on for being as empty as it was.

3 felt less empty because half the map was a city. it was empty but it looked like washington DC so people thought it was amazing.
---

Diarreah is better than cronic constipation. That's the comparison you've made with this topic.
---

Hexenherz posted...

fallout 4 looked better visually and was more stable and had interesting power armor mechanics but otherwise it was basically fallout 3 2.0. actually it was even worse, the shooting was garbage and the writing was garbage.

I don't know how you could possibly say the shooting was worse.

Again the writing in both games sucked. I think 3 was worse overall.

People forget that the ending was so bad you needed the DLC to fix it. The Brotherhood of Steel in 3 was also complete nonsense and shit on what they were all about (which overall was fixed in 4).

Like 3 was pretty awful 'here are some good guys and here are some bad guys' level crap which 4 overall did improve even though there were still a lot of issues.
---

I agree, OP. Fallout 4 is a better game than Fallout 3. Both pale in comparison to NV, though.
---

I think argument for/against fallout 3 being not as empty is that it had major hubs being behind loading areas
and a lot of it was cur off by travelling through tunnels

hotcegaI posted...

I think argument for/against fallout 3 being not as empty is that it had major hubs being behind loading areas
and a lot of it was cur off by travelling through tunnels

That's weird to me because that makes the game so much worse to actually travel through. It's basically designed for fast travel.
---

@Vyrulisse posted...

Inb4 someone says New Vegas was "empty" compared to Fallout 3 when infact most of Fallout 3 was trudging across empty wasteland

Lies. Fallout 3 was trudging through a billion subway tunnels because someone at Bethesda fucking loves subway tunnels.
---

Darmik posted...

That's weird to me because that makes the game so much worse to actually travel through. It's basically designed for fast travel.

True but when you go into a loading screen like Rivet City, you're just in Rivet City. And it seems huge.

The loading screens in most settlements in NV were buildings, not hubs

hotcegaI posted...

Darmik posted...

That's weird to me because that makes the game so much worse to actually travel through. It's basically designed for fast travel.

True but when you go into a loading screen like Rivet City, you're just in Rivet City. And it seems huge.

The loading screens in most settlements in NV were buildings, not hubs

Except New Vegas itself, which was fucking annoying because it was divided for console requirements. Granted, you can mod it into one big area and not a sub divided annoyance so...
---

Vyrulisse posted...

Lost_All_Senses posted...

Fallout 3s emptiness worked cause it was the 1st in its new style. It felt good to explore anyway

If New Vegas was first then 3 would of been shitted on for being as empty as it was.

I honestly don't understand this meme about New Vegas. It wasn't empty at all.

I said the opposite. Im acknowledging that 3 was the empty one.
---

I think the whole 'settlements/interiors divided by loading screens' is aging bad. Fallout 4 felt more dated than expected because of it. It's pretty sad that you can't have an interior house without a window.

If it's still an issue for Starfield and Elder Scrolls 6 Bethesda are gonna have a bad time.
---

Fuck it. I still like 3 and 4 even though they fail at player agency. Hopefully the evisceration over 76 will force BGS to focus on what everyone likes in Fallout to win back favor for the next mainline game.
---

Darmik posted...

I think the whole 'settlements/interiors divided by loading screens' is aging bad. Fallout 4 felt more dated than expected because of it. It's pretty sad that you can't have an interior house without a window.

If it's still an issue for Starfield and Elder Scrolls 6 Bethesda are gonna have a bad time.

Yeah, it's time they move on from GTA San Andreas style interiors.
---

Darmik posted...

Fallout 4 felt more dated than expected because of it. It's pretty sad that you can't have an interior house without a window.

There were a few that actually had windows. The Brotherhood police station had a few.
---

RiderofHogs posted...

Darmik posted...

Fallout 4 felt more dated than expected because of it. It's pretty sad that you can't have an interior house without a window.

There were a few that actually had windows. The Brotherhood police station had a few.

That's even weirder. I wonder if it's because they don't need to worry about NPC's passing by like in a settlement?
---

It's true that a lot of the problems in 4 started with 3, but i think most people's complaint is more that they they didn't improve in fallout 4. people were more charitable with the issues in 3 for a number of reasons, it being bethesda's first attempt at fallout, it being the first time fallout was made into a 3d real time action rpg etc. but by the time fallout 4 came out, not only had the RPG and open world genres progressed immensely over the decade between releases, but fallout itself had a release in new vegas that fixed many of the issues people had with 3 and proved that the full classic fallout experience could indeed fit into the fallout 3 formula. fallout 4 was step back not only from it's competition at the time, but from the previous release in the series, and that made it's flaws all the more apparent. Plus, i'd argue it was still even a step back compared to three in some areas, especially the role playing aspects and the lack of actual settlements.
---

Frolex posted...

It's true that a lot of the problems in 4 started with 3, but i think most people's complaint is more that they they didn't improve in fallout 4. people were more charitable with the issues in 3 for a number of reasons, it being bethesda's first attempt at fallout, it being the first time fallout was made into a 3d real time action rpg etc. but by the time fallout 4 came out, not only had the RPG and open world genres progressed immensely over the decade between releases, but fallout itself had a release in new vegas that fixed many of the issues people had with 3 and proved that the full classic fallout experience could indeed fit into the fallout 3 formula. fallout 4 was step back not only from it's competition at the time, but from the previous release in the series, and that made it's flaws all the more apparent. Plus, i'd argue it was still even a step back compared to three in some areas, especially the role playing aspects and the lack of actual settlements.

Bethesda has never made anything like New Vegas. It just isn't who they are. I doubt Starfield or Elder Scrolls 6 will be any different. They're not a studio who makes WRPG's that lets you control the story. They give a pretty free open world and offer a variety of linear stories within it. This is how they've always functioned.

This is why I don't really understand when people say the role playing in 4 was worse. It was just the same with voice acting. Those options that lead to nothing were all in 3. The lack of player choice and agency within quests was all there in 3. People loved it.

Maybe expectations will be different from now on. But we'll see. Starfield won't have any baggage and if Elder Scrolls 6 is just Skyrim with modern tech and visuals I think they'll be fine.

Then again Starfield is gonna be compared with Cyberpunk 2077 and they look like tough competition.
---

I still stand by Fallout 3 as my favorite, but it was also my first ever Fallout game. I was experiencing that game's world for the first time ever, and it was something special for me. I got a similar feel from Bioshock the first time.
---

The weirdest thing for me specifically is that people seemed to have their boners on for their lame Starfield and Elder Scrolls 6 announcements this year despite them showing nothing. Even people got really hyped for Fallout 76 before it sunk in what it actually was (to the point where people got angry at leakers because they didn't want to believe it). Now I'm seeing everywhere that people have apparently hated Bethesda for years.

It's weird lol

I'm gonna make a guess it'll be gone when Starfield marketing starts.
---

Vyrulisse posted...

Darmik posted...

Vyrulisse posted...

Inb4 someone says New Vegas was "empty" compared to Fallout 3 when infact most of Fallout 3 was trudging across empty wasteland

Most of Fallout 3 was going through boring subway tunnels and shooting ghouls.

That too. It was kinda cool at first but then there were more... and more... knee high rubble made you have to take some labyrinth of subway tunnels to get to the other side. Awful design.

Something about it being in a downtown area does make it seem less empty, even if pretty much is.
---

Darmik posted...

Bethesda has never made anything like New Vegas. It just isn't who they are. I doubt Starfield or Elder Scrolls 6 will be any different. They're not a studio who makes WRPG's that lets you control the story. They give a pretty free open world and offer a variety of linear stories within it. This is how they've always functioned.

This is why I don't really understand when people say the role playing in 4 was worse. It was just the same with voice acting. Those options that lead to nothing were all in 3. The lack of player choice and agency within quests was all there in 3. People loved it.

When I talk about the role playing aspects being better in three, i'm referring more to the character building aspects. The streamlining of Perks, Skills and S.P.E.C.I.A.L all into what is essentially a skill tree all but eliminated the differentiation between character builds.

Bethesda has never made anything like new vegas because they refuse to evolve as a studio, and that's becoming clearer to people. Lots of studios have evolved when it comes to making open world RPGs, so people are becoming loss tolerable of bethesda's stagnation over time.
---

4 is better than 3.

3 has better add-ons.

NV is better than both.

Edit: subway tunnels in 3 were terrible

I know Darmik's thing is being contrarian

But this is a hot take that is just not very hot at all

Fallout 3 is one of my most memorable gaming experiences ever

Overall though the series popularity in the last 10 years feels like a mistake

New Vegas is overrated too

Great amount of content but it's overarching story is only slightly better than Fallout 76 until the end
---