Never understood why people say this. FNV is more like its own beast, the way your actions change the world and endgame state has never been seen before in a Fallout game.
3 is far closer to the original game story structure than NV is. 1, 2, and 3 all follow a straight line but take you to locations that have their own quests and stuff to do and choices to make.
Hell, FNV was the first game to give you more than one faction to side with at the end out of minor cutscene changes. 1 is basically a special game over and 3 has the FEV that only affects stuff with Broken Steel DLC. 2 just straight up says "fuck you, you're fighting the baddies and you can't say no".
There are differences, but structurally they and how they are designed in their quests, these are the closest cousins in the franchise.
Like, people shit on 3 for being on rails with simple moral choices but honestly, that's what the old games were too. You go to town, there is good guy and bad guy and you choose (Khans/Shady Sands, Gizmo/Killian, Harold/Decker etc.) and the Main Story™ is largely a simple affair with little player agency outside of some non-standard game overs.
I feel like New Vegas colours people's views of the first two games. You can argue that the first two felt more realistic I guess, but never that they were any sort of vast political thinker's game.
Never understood why people say this. FNV is more like its own beast, the way your actions change the world and endgame state has never been seen before in a Fallout game.
3 is far closer to the original game story structure than NV is. 1, 2, and 3 all follow a straight line but take you to locations that have their own quests and stuff to do and choices to make.
Hell, FNV was the first game to give you more than one faction to side with at the end out of minor cutscene changes. 1 is basically a special game over and 3 has the FEV that only affects stuff with Broken Steel DLC. 2 just straight up says "fuck you, you're fighting the baddies and you can't say no".
deleted by creator
I say this as someone who has played all of them.
1,2,3, and 76 are in one zone.
NV and 4 are in the other.
There are differences, but structurally they and how they are designed in their quests, these are the closest cousins in the franchise.
Like, people shit on 3 for being on rails with simple moral choices but honestly, that's what the old games were too. You go to town, there is good guy and bad guy and you choose (Khans/Shady Sands, Gizmo/Killian, Harold/Decker etc.) and the Main Story™ is largely a simple affair with little player agency outside of some non-standard game overs.
I feel like New Vegas colours people's views of the first two games. You can argue that the first two felt more realistic I guess, but never that they were any sort of vast political thinker's game.