Which Fallout Should I Play?

[Pumpkin]

So I am attempting some games that are not things I might normally play, and the Fallout series has some aspects I think I might like and some I think I might not at all like. I have the option between Fallout 3 and New Vegas. So I know people here seem to like New Vegas more but I'll just list a few things and hopefully you guys could tell me which would fit me better? Thank you!

So which of the two games fits better in to these:
-Lots of customization
-Lots of different dialogue choices
-More open
-Less drab environment
-Interesting characters
-Easier
-Less fighting (something I am very much dreading is the fighting)

[escobert]

So which of the two games fits better in to these:
-Lots of customization
-Lots of different dialogue choices
-More open
-Less drab environment
-Interesting characters
-Easier
-Less fighting (something I am very much dreading is the fighting)
Equal.
Both!
Both are equally as open I'd say. But, 3 has lots of underground tunnels.
Both are desert-ish and drab.
Again, both :p
I'd say NV is easier. 3 can be a pain to navigate when you first start playing.
Both are equal but NV has a little more complex fighting with bullet types. Use V.A.T.S. and you'll be good!

[Spuuky]

Fallout 2. It has more options and is more interesting than either of the Bethesda games, and you can choose to basically not fight at all if you feel like it.

[Psychotic]

So I am attempting some games that are not things I might normally play, and the Fallout series has some aspects I think I might like and some I think I might not at all like. I have the option between Fallout 3 and New Vegas. So I know people here seem to like New Vegas more but I'll just list a few things and hopefully you guys could tell me which would fit me better? Thank you!

So which of the two games fits better in to these:
-Lots of customization
-Lots of different dialogue choices
-More open
-Less drab environment
-Interesting characters
-Easier
-Less fighting (something I am very much dreading is the fighting)I've just had playthroughs of both in the past month and I am happy to say New Vegas on every single one of these points apart from difficulty/fighting where it's equal.

I would just advise you to put the difficulty onto the lowest setting. The first few levels are the toughest (and it doesn't help being a newbie who doesn't know what they're doing xD) but stick it out.

[Pike]

-Less drab environment


Fallout games tend to be pretty drab by definition, since they take place in an apocalyptic wasteland. That's not to say they aren't great games, but, well... expect drabness, I guess :p If you're looking for a similar playstyle to FO3/NV and want something a little more colorful you might want to look into the Elder Scrolls games.

[Pumpkin]

I know they both have drab environments, but I would prefer the leastly drably environmently

[Pumpkin]

I have started the Fallout New Vegas. Sunny whatshername is my twin :nonono: Doing alright so far. I don't take much damage, which is good, because I'm not super good at the game. I seem about as good at random shooting as I am with the VATS thingy. I think it's called VATS(?) I broke my first lockpick door and sharky is laughing at how differently I play the game. I did really like all the options for the character like in terms of customization and questions and stuff. I'm trying to make a character who is relatively like myself, so weak but with more people oriented skills. Especially since that's my main interest in the game is meeting people. Healed a little molerat creature thing's leg!

[Psychotic]

Did you do Wendy the Welder hair?

[sharkythesharkdogg]

Yup.

And similar hair color.

And similar facial features.

And the same armor.

I didn't realize how similar they looked until her and Sunny were running side by side on the first little mission. It's basically just two Sunny Smiles.

[Psychotic]

Wendy the Welder is the superior female hair choice. (Men obviously either Tunnel Snake or King)

[Pumpkin]

The face isn't actually very similar at all, but you don't really get to see my face that often

[sharkythesharkdogg]

Maybe not.

It was still fairly amusing.

[Vyk]

I think you will get along with Veronica

[Lazerface]

I'd say play the first Fallout first. So that you at least know where the story starts and where it ends at New Vegas.

[Vyk]

Original Fallout games are not rookie-friendly. And ... not easy. Or colorful. It probably helps to appreciate New Vegas more, but there's also a place to get a crash course in that history lesson regardless. I don't really think it impacts the game much either, sadly. They're good games, but not worth torturing yourself over. They haven't aged very well at all. I would love an HD re-release. Give them a better overhaul than Baldur's Gate Enhanced and I would be 100% behind it. As it stands, I'm glad I own them, but I haven't beaten either of them, so I technically wasted my money. I don't regret it, but I wouldn't jump to encourage anyone to follow suite

[Pumpkin]

So I'm in the town with Boonefer. I remember him being useful when sharky played and I don't like shooting things and Boone seems okay with shooting things. sharky did lead me astray and kept sending me through those big umm deathclaw(?) things and it turns out that isn't even where Boonesville was :colbert: I stumbled upon the actual area while exploring further east. So I'll see how that goes!

[Pike]

I've played and beaten the first Fallout. It was good but definitely a different playstyle than the newer ones.

[Pumpkin]

So I got umm Veronica, I think her name is, as a partner. She punches things really hard

[Lazerface]

Original Fallout games are not rookie-friendly. And ... not easy. Or colorful. It probably helps to appreciate New Vegas more, but there's also a place to get a crash course in that history lesson regardless. I don't really think it impacts the game much either, sadly. They're good games, but not worth torturing yourself over. They haven't aged very well at all. I would love an HD re-release. Give them a better overhaul than Baldur's Gate Enhanced and I would be 100% behind it. As it stands, I'm glad I own them, but I haven't beaten either of them, so I technically wasted my money. I don't regret it, but I wouldn't jump to encourage anyone to follow suite They're not supposed to be rookie friendly. Usually you either learn fast or you get fucked in the desert by raiders and super mutants. The hardcoreness of that is what makes the Fallout series by Interplay so damn awesome.

[Shauna]

You do have a point, but this thread is about a newbie to Fallout asking where to start, specifying which one would be easiest. So maybe not with the original Fallout, is all Vyk was saying.

[sharkythesharkdogg]

So I'm in the town with Boonefer. I remember him being useful when sharky played and I don't like shooting things and Boone seems okay with shooting things. sharky did lead me astray and kept sending me through those big umm deathclaw(?) things and it turns out that isn't even where Boonesville was :colbert: I stumbled upon the actual area while exploring further east. So I'll see how that goes!

I warned you about them, and said I thought Novac was that way, but I couldn't remember. It had been a while. :mad2:

[Laddy]

Fallout 2 is, in my opinion, the best Fallout but New Vegas is the next best choice. Fallout 3 is more combat-oriented and plays out more like a Hollywood film than a deep and complex role-playing game. Plus it has very little to do with the other games in the series.

[Slothy]

So which of the two games fits better in to these:
-Lots of customization
-Lots of different dialogue choices
-More open
-Less drab environment
-Interesting characters
-Easier
-Less fighting (something I am very much dreading is the fighting)

- Considering NV has everything 3 had, and has different types of ammo for all weapons as well as weapon mods to use, it's definitely in the lead there.
- NV used skills better in opening up dialogue options, and used them more often. Odds are if you run with high enough intelligence, medical, science, speech, and a variety of other skills you'll do a lot better at working a lot of situations to your advantage. I just replayed New Vegas and started replaying 3 immediately after and they just didn't use your skills in dialogue as often or nearly as well.
- I might actually give it to 3 though the crumbling city itself is such a maze of sewers and subways connecting various areas that may actually disqualify it. On the other hand, NV has some barriers in the form of really powerful enemies preventing you from taking the most direct route from where you start to Vegas, but it is possible to sneak through there and bypass a ton of the game temporarily. I guess I'll go with NV being more open because I really hate going into Washington in 3, but I'm not giving it to NV by much. They're both pretty even.
- New Vegas was more varied, had multiple factions to visit including numerous settlements, farms, towns, etc. And even the more isolated stuff like the Repconn rocket facility is pretty interesting. 3 had... a lot less of that. It also had a hideous green tinge to everything, some half assed settlements, and no apparent way for them to feed themselves. Ever since I learned that there's nothing in 3 to indicate how they get food it's bothered me to no end. So basically, if you want a game where it seems like everyone still thinks the bombs just fell, most things are irradiated, and you'll mostly trudge through old factories, sewers, etc then go with that. If you want a game that actually has some semblance of civilization 200 years after the bombs fell, and people actually building successful communities, while also facing threat from other factions, and having some variety to the places you meet all of these folks go to NV. You'll still see repeated scenery here and there, but the factions, characters, and conflicts really make exploring the scenery a lot more interesting than in 3.
- See above. One thing I've been reminded after starting 3 again is how little of it actually makes a damn bit of sense. The majority of characters and the quests they end up sending you on are either insane or make no sense. I've actually come across two outside of the main quest so far that were actually pretty well done and not idiotic at all. New Vegas is just a better written and more complete world. Even when it does trend into the zanier aspects of Fallout.
Both are pretty easy on the easiest setting. I'd say New Vegas can get a bit tricky at higher levels because of weapon types, but you can still ignore it, rely on VATS and your companions and do pretty well without much trouble. Just keep the difficulty down.
- About the same really, though when it comes to quests, you'll have a much better chance of talking your way out of trouble in NV than in 3 if you build those skills.


So I got umm Veronica, I think her name is, as a partner. She punches things really hard

Veronica is a boss.

[Pumpkin]

I got lucky and ended up in the place with the Boomers or whatever. They are friggin insane and I hate them :stare:

[Ayen]

Original Fallout games are not rookie-friendly. And ... not easy. Or colorful. It probably helps to appreciate New Vegas more, but there's also a place to get a crash course in that history lesson regardless. I don't really think it impacts the game much either, sadly. They're good games, but not worth torturing yourself over. They haven't aged very well at all. I would love an HD re-release. Give them a better overhaul than Baldur's Gate Enhanced and I would be 100% behind it. As it stands, I'm glad I own them, but I haven't beaten either of them, so I technically wasted my money. I don't regret it, but I wouldn't jump to encourage anyone to follow suite

The first two games may as well be from an entirely different franchise altogether, honestly. I played the first one last year, and enjoyed it, but would definitely point to the newer games for anyone new to the series. I think it makes you appreciate the origins more if you're already a fan of the series by the time you play them. I still plan to play the second one at some point.