|
Post by JMMREVIEW on Nov 17, 2015 17:22:42 GMT -5
Should I play Fallout 3 or New Vegas first? Or should I skip em both and jump into Fallout 4? Skip Fallout 3 and New Vegas, there is no need to play them. IMO Fallout 4 is just an improved version of Fallout 3. *Edit: I made that sound like bad thing. It is an improved version in the same way Perfect Dark is an improved version of GoldenEye. They are both good games but you don't have to play GoldenEye to enjoy Perfect Dark.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 17, 2015 18:19:30 GMT -5
I disagree, you should play both fallout 3 and new vegas. skipping both fallout 3 and new vegas would be like skipping the first two metal gear solids and going straight to snake eater. fallout 3 and new vegas are easier games than fallout 4 and if you do play them(which you should) then you'll have a better understanding of the gameplay and lore.
|
|
|
Post by JMMREVIEW on Nov 17, 2015 18:29:51 GMT -5
Maybe but come on who has time to do that? Fallout 3 + New Vegas would be like 120 hours at least. Also the stories aren't connected in any meaningful way, I am sure a new player could pick up Fallout 4 no problem.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 17, 2015 18:38:56 GMT -5
they're worth playing. this isn't madden where the next game automatically makes the previous one obsolete. these games still have value. these games have places to explore, characters to meet, stories to hear, and to just completely ignore them simply because the next game in the series is an improvement is absurd. but to each his own.
|
|
|
Post by Blade Runner 07 on Nov 17, 2015 19:07:15 GMT -5
I'm not worried about not getting the story. If it's anything like Skyrim than there will be plenty of exposition to fill me in. I would much rather spend $10 on Fallout 3 and find out I'm way more of a Skyrim guy, than $59.99 on Fallout 4 to find out that same thing.
|
|