Well, not problems, but deficiencies, I would call them. For one, the engine is still as poor as it was in 3. Some improvements were made- you get stuck in objects much less often. I was resetting Three almost every hour because of getting stuck. As well, I believe the AI is better, though not much.
The engine is actually a bit more unstable in New Vegas, from my observation. I've had to deal with a lot of loading freezes and enemies clipping through the terrain. Led to a hilarious moment at the end of Restoring Hope when a single Legionary got stuck in a cliff wall and Boone, ED-E, and all the NCR troops with me were surround the cliff, firing point blank into it in an effort to tunnel to the Legionary.
I was hugely disappointed in the story of Fallout 3, which could not have been less interesting. Especially since the story of Van Buren, Black Isle's original plan for Fallout 3, was so much cooler and more ambitious. I'm glad that much of the material went into New Vegas. Although I liked the Hanged Man/Burned Man a lot more in his original incarnation.
Bethesda didn't make RAGE, and it's on a different engine...
"Steel wins battles. Gold wins wars."
Bethseda's parent company owns Rage and they did say that all future games they released were going to be made using Rage's engine, but Skyrim didn't use it (maybe they'd already started development by that point? The games were released at a similar time)
Leave a Comment:
Why New Vegas is better than 3
New Vegas easily a great game, and better than 3. Now, let's get into why.
Firstly, the story is almost 200% better. The game is much longer, for one thing, with the main quest stretching 12 hours at the least. Secondly, the third very much railroaded you- you only have two options to finish the main quest, and there were only two endings for the main quest. New Vegas has a much better main storyline- I'm assuming you know it, but it is much, much more interesting. 3 reused the same factions from 1 and 2. New Vegas uses the NCR, but it makes sense, unlike the Enclave and Brotherhood in 3.
On top of this, the writing is much better, with plot holes being very few and far between. The game can be finished in 4 main ways, with tons of variation on top of the main 4. For example, what you do with the Fiends does effect the ending outside of their specific ending.
Though New Vegas's story is so, so much better than the third, there are a couple problems.
Well, not problems, but deficiencies, I would call them. For one, the engine is still as poor as it was in 3. Some improvements were made- you get stuck in objects much less often. I was resetting Three almost every hour because of getting stuck. As well, I believe the AI is better, though not much.
Beyond this, 3 seemed more stunning to me, visually. I played both on a 15 year old, crappy, non HD TV, and that does affect it- I've played New Vegas on a 40 inch HD plasma, and almost came my pants. But besides that, the Capitol Wasteland, however obnoxious it was to explore the inner city, seemed much more stunning to me. The color tint that gets bashed so much actually really helped for me. I won't lie- The Strip and the Grand Canyon were incredible for me, but nothing compared to walking onto the Mall for the first time, or looking out of the Washington Monument. The atmosphere of Three is really the only thing in it better than New Vegas.
Outside of those two deficiencies, New Vegas is one of the greatest games, story wise, I have ever played. I've only played the naked version of New Vegas, and if the DLCS are as good as Three's, I cant wait to play them. The engine does leave something to be desired, but hopefully the next game will be in the engine Bethesda used for Rage and Skyrim. If so, it'll top every game I've ever played, if the story is as good as Vegas.