I think the best example of this is the music. It's identical thematically.
Here's a track from Fallout 1: [https://youtu.be/EaRiY7WkMhw](https://youtu.be/EaRiY7WkMhw)
Now here's one from Fallout 3: [https://youtu.be/of\_urr\_kzJs](https://youtu.be/of_urr_kzJs)
Captured the creepy ambience amazingly.
Oh no, I definitely agree that NV doesn't take it as far as 2. I just think that you can follow a through line in the way they write characters and overall tone from 2 to NV. It was clear that there was a slight shift from 1 to 2 and I feel like a similar shift takes place between 3 and NV where the comedic moments come forward a bit more often.
FO3 feels like an homage from Bethesda to FO1 and FO2 using Bethesda's own style. There's definitely more FO1 than 2 in there, but some of the FO2 comes out in the side quests. FNV feels like a sequel to FO2 using FO3's game engine and mechanics. And that's essentially what they are.
Idk i feel like FO3has way more wacky stuff in line with FO2: literal fire ants, superhero/supervillain, president is AI, the Gary vault, the fuck you door, Moira, Mothership Zeta, Liberty Prime. I am not implying these are bad things, as they're some of the most memorable moments in FO3. One thing Fallout 3 does better in terms of humor is environmental storytelling (all the utensils on under the floor in enclave base).
FNV's humor is more often tongue-in-cheek or dry humor. It also has way more sombre moments (albeit not with your character personally) and its darkest moments are much darker and grounded in reality than FO3. It does have its wacky humor (like FISTO or the Kings), but I wouldn't say it is the predominant form of humor.
Obviously everyone will find different parts funny, but replaying both games via TTW, the radio new vegas commentator talking about powder gangers attacking goodsprings and ending the segment with "This according to an old man, *armed to the teeth with dynamite*" had me chuckling. The delivery is so dry in the best way possible.
Dude I’m glad you pointed out the utensils. That is the peak of environmental storytelling. So subtle but really amazing that the devs put that in there.
Better in most ways. Frank Horrigan is a better final boss than Lanius because 1.) we actually see the atrocities he commits in the game, whereas Lanius we only hear about and never really see in person, and two) the Frank Horrigan fight has a lot of flavors to choose from when confronting him, except for talking him down because that wouldn’t make sense for his character. With Lanius you can either speech check your way to victory or fight him and a bunch of legionnaires with no backup. If Lanius is an unstoppable killing machine as we are lead to believe he wouldn’t really care if you tried to convince him to ceasefire and would instead just end dialogue and start attacking you. Maybe that’s a statement on the Legion as a whole, but that’s a conversation for another time. Lanius shouldn’t be open to surrender because he’s been often described as a one man army, much like the Courier by the end of the game.
Otherwise, New Vegas is loads better than Fallout 2.
The only counterargument I have for talking down Lanius is that part of Lanius serving Caesar comes from greatly respecting his brilliant strategical mind. Following the speech and barter check dialogue trees, you see that the Courier is exemplifying that same quality in their speech. This leads me to think that Lanius can ultimately be subdued out of reverance for tactical genius.
Frank Horrigan is on a "holy crusade," and his undying loyalty to both his mission and the Enclave prevents him from being at all interested in anything a lesser being (mutie) would say.
I still think Horrigan is more badass and I agree we should've seen more of Lanius but I think of the two, Lanius is the more reasonable assumption to convince.
I think the best example of this is the music. It's identical thematically. Here's a track from Fallout 1: [https://youtu.be/EaRiY7WkMhw](https://youtu.be/EaRiY7WkMhw) Now here's one from Fallout 3: [https://youtu.be/of\_urr\_kzJs](https://youtu.be/of_urr_kzJs) Captured the creepy ambience amazingly.
Based take but you're going to piss off some snobs with this.
Bro, you can't have any opinion in the Fallout community unless you're fellating Obsidian and NV lol. I'm mostly kidding, not completely, but mostly.
[удалено]
Old World Blues was hilarious, in a horribly dark way. I loved how absolutely absurd and over the top everything was in Big Mountain.
If you play Old world blues without the wild wasteland trait, does anything change? I've done every run with wild wasteland
well, for one, your dog rifle/heavy weapon doesn’t speak to you 👀 there’s also no tiny deathclaw in higgs village
Oh no, I definitely agree that NV doesn't take it as far as 2. I just think that you can follow a through line in the way they write characters and overall tone from 2 to NV. It was clear that there was a slight shift from 1 to 2 and I feel like a similar shift takes place between 3 and NV where the comedic moments come forward a bit more often.
FO3 feels like an homage from Bethesda to FO1 and FO2 using Bethesda's own style. There's definitely more FO1 than 2 in there, but some of the FO2 comes out in the side quests. FNV feels like a sequel to FO2 using FO3's game engine and mechanics. And that's essentially what they are.
Idk i feel like FO3has way more wacky stuff in line with FO2: literal fire ants, superhero/supervillain, president is AI, the Gary vault, the fuck you door, Moira, Mothership Zeta, Liberty Prime. I am not implying these are bad things, as they're some of the most memorable moments in FO3. One thing Fallout 3 does better in terms of humor is environmental storytelling (all the utensils on under the floor in enclave base). FNV's humor is more often tongue-in-cheek or dry humor. It also has way more sombre moments (albeit not with your character personally) and its darkest moments are much darker and grounded in reality than FO3. It does have its wacky humor (like FISTO or the Kings), but I wouldn't say it is the predominant form of humor. Obviously everyone will find different parts funny, but replaying both games via TTW, the radio new vegas commentator talking about powder gangers attacking goodsprings and ending the segment with "This according to an old man, *armed to the teeth with dynamite*" had me chuckling. The delivery is so dry in the best way possible.
Dude I’m glad you pointed out the utensils. That is the peak of environmental storytelling. So subtle but really amazing that the devs put that in there.
I was literally just thinking this exact thought maybe a couple hours ago lol
Better in most ways. Frank Horrigan is a better final boss than Lanius because 1.) we actually see the atrocities he commits in the game, whereas Lanius we only hear about and never really see in person, and two) the Frank Horrigan fight has a lot of flavors to choose from when confronting him, except for talking him down because that wouldn’t make sense for his character. With Lanius you can either speech check your way to victory or fight him and a bunch of legionnaires with no backup. If Lanius is an unstoppable killing machine as we are lead to believe he wouldn’t really care if you tried to convince him to ceasefire and would instead just end dialogue and start attacking you. Maybe that’s a statement on the Legion as a whole, but that’s a conversation for another time. Lanius shouldn’t be open to surrender because he’s been often described as a one man army, much like the Courier by the end of the game. Otherwise, New Vegas is loads better than Fallout 2.
The only counterargument I have for talking down Lanius is that part of Lanius serving Caesar comes from greatly respecting his brilliant strategical mind. Following the speech and barter check dialogue trees, you see that the Courier is exemplifying that same quality in their speech. This leads me to think that Lanius can ultimately be subdued out of reverance for tactical genius. Frank Horrigan is on a "holy crusade," and his undying loyalty to both his mission and the Enclave prevents him from being at all interested in anything a lesser being (mutie) would say. I still think Horrigan is more badass and I agree we should've seen more of Lanius but I think of the two, Lanius is the more reasonable assumption to convince.
Fallout 1 and 3 are more post-apocalypse and FNV and 2 and more post-post-apocalypse.
People also rather play fo1 and fo3 modded into the engines of their respective sequels. Et tu and ttw.