Fallout 1 or Fallout New Vegas?

TheHouseAlwaysWins

TheHouseAlwaysWins

Look, Ma! Two Heads!
I've been browsing older posts on this forum and it seems the initial response to New Vegas was positive, but it's obviously soared over the years. I think NV is overrated in the sense it doesn't deserve literally thousands of threads across websites like Reddit but I enjoy it and it's definitely better than Bethesda Fallout's I think.

So, now that NV is almost a decade old, is it better than Fallout 1? Fallout 1 is pretty basic. NV is made in the Bethesda engine but it has so many memorable quests and characters. I mean Elijah for instance.
 
Well without Fallout 1 there would not have been a Fallout New Vegas but I do think FNV took what Fallout 1 had and improved on it.
A Fallout 1 remake today would really have to be expanded in various ways.
 
New Vegas easily earns the title of perfect sequel.

It's up there with the likes of toy story 2, aliens, T2, fucking hell it does everything a great sequel should do.

It expanded the universe more than any other mainline game before or after it did. The Mojave has more history written for just one or two factions than 1 or 2 had combined. Continued the story from the previous game (fallout 2) by showing what happened to the NCR, the Khan's, the followers and even specific characters.
And introduced interesting new themes into the series. Perhaps most appropriately the theme of what happens to people when they can't let go of the past.
 
1 is a better RPG in that your character can be much more shaped by their stats and curtailed to their play style/ character archetype. The way your SPECIAL, Skills and Perks reflect on your character is really amazing.

By comparison, NV is a better RPG because it has better opportunities for personality role-play in shaping your character's background and has more/better choice and consequence on a huge scale, however the other side of this being that pretty much most NV characters play like variations of the same dude.

Overall whilst I love F1, NV has more content and I love the Mojave Wasteland + the lore of the West Coast as of 2281. I just wish there was a better way for stats to shape gameplay in 3D Fallout.
 
This is it, the question that broke my brain.

To be completely honest, Fallout 1 is and likely always will be my favorite Fallout game, but New Vegas also does so much more with the setting that 1 simply couldn't. I suppose it comes down to which I'd rather play, and that award goes to 1, by a gnat's dick.

That being said, I play both almost whenever I have free time, and I think in a lot of ways both are better than the other. Neither beats out Total War Napoleon/Shogun 2 as my favorite game of all time, but both hold special places in my heart and deserve to be recognized as masterpieces, Fallout 1 not just for the game itself but subsequent media that it inspired and created, and NV not just for what it created but for the game itself.
 
That depends on whether we can count 'starting the series' in Fo's favor. If so then it goes to Fo. If not then it goes to NV. it's kind of hard for a tiny game to compete. Which admittedly is a little unfair, albeit not inaccurate, as NV benefits from not being made in the 90s. So really, it depends on what is being asked.
 
FoNV has great ideas, but is way too hampened by the gamebryo to overthrow the originals...
 
If New Vegas was isometric and not caught in the web of Bethesda's groundwork I would hold it higher as a contender.

My feelings is that Fallout is my favorite of the series and New Vegas is the best sequel. FO2 is still a good game but I wish it was more like New Vegas and 1 in tone and theme.
 
TheHouseAlwaysWins said:
I've been browsing older posts on this forum and it seems the initial response to New Vegas was positive, but it's obviously soared over the years. I think NV is overrated in the sense it doesn't deserve literally thousands of threads across websites like Reddit but I enjoy it and it's definitely better than Bethesda Fallout's I think.

So, now that NV is almost a decade old, is it better than Fallout 1? Fallout 1 is pretty basic. NV is made in the Bethesda engine but it has so many memorable quests and characters. I mean Elijah for instance.
Click to expand...

New Vegas deserves all those threads because it's the best we've gotten from the later Fallouts... let Beth be reminded of that for eternity, even if I am not particularly or openly-hostile towards them. I wish it was a better game overall, though. We are, however, constantly brought back to those less-than-2 years during which the game was developed.

Fallout 1 is still very crisp in terms of story telling, plot, structure, atmosphere. Even to this day. I think if we combine what makes F1 and NV good we will get a very good game. I'd personally prefer isometric, but am not opposed to fps.
 
I still think Fallout 1 is better. It has the story, it has the flair, and it has the gameplay. To me, it defines Fallout. NV has a great story as well, and it does fit the mood, but it suffers from its gameplay.
 
New Vegas has nude mods.
Yeah I can watch porn, but does porn let me be a cowboy looking at titties?
Only if I wear a cowboy hat while I jerk it.
 
Titties?
Cowboys are gay as fuck
5e3b83e0e99dafd171cb31533955a83d.jpg
They ain't got time for titties
 
Fallout 1.

Fallout:New Vegas makes due with FO3 as its foundation; it makes great strides [back] towards the proper series, but it doesn't shed its Bethesda baggage, and that stuff is like day-glow smears of acrylic paint on the Mona Lisa; it can't be ignored, or forgiven.

____
So here is a question: What about a (hypothetical) comparison of the entire NV campaign (plus DLC) implemented in the SFall/ Fallout 2 engine... How might that compare?
 
Gizmojunk said:
What about a (hypothetical) comparison of the entire NV campaign (plus DLC) implemented in the SFall/ Fallout 2 engine... How might that compare?
Click to expand...

Would probably look as shitty as it gets, offer no better gameplay, lots of stuff must be cut or rewritten, not to forget the tremendous amount of work that such a thing would be, considering nobody really wants it except for these 10 people over there.
 
Seriously?

Why exactly? (I certainly did not mean the reuse of [rendered] assets from New Vegas)

How can you say it would offer no better gameplay? (As the gameplay would essentially be that of Fallout 2, with the new story.)
 
Last edited:
Classic Fallout gameplay is different, but saying it is better is highly subjective. Besides, combat system in the original Fallout's wasn't exactly the peak of gaming either.

To me, porting FNV to the classic engine would be a pointless waste of time as much as porting the classic games to the Bethsoft engine. What's up with that anyway, are these projects still going anywhere?
 
Lexx said:
Classic Fallout gameplay is different, but saying it is better is highly subjective.
Click to expand...
I would say that it is better in the same sense as a pipe-wrench is better than a hammer—for loosening & tightening pipes. In this respect I consider Fallout 1 & 2 gameplay to be better Fallout gameplay... with New Vegas', (and FO3)'s gameplay to be almost unrelated to the series, and something each unto themselves with their own distinctly alien merits; more akin to the Elder Scrolls games than anything Fallout related—including FOBOS*. >_>

*BTW I have always considered that FO3 could have almost passed as a FOBOS II; for it seems to share more in common with FOBOS than any other Fallout game... both mechanically, and somewhat narratively.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top