Give me your thoughts on each game without involving mods

>FO3
Oblivion with guns. Plain and stupid. Major downgrade but still fun.
>New Vegas
I don’t give a shit about bugs. Masterpiece. Great RPG and worthy successor to the original games.
>FO4
Shit and disappointment.

FO3 was a pretty fun experience for a first fallout for me personally. Which made me excited to see the sequel.

NV is my favorite so many good characters, memes, story, and debate over which is the best faction.

FO4 was one of the worst fallout experiences I have ever had. I hated every faction, the story, the voiced protagonist, dumb down Rpg aspects, minecraft building, being the garbage man collecting trash for settlements. I remember at one point I got a legendary explosive minigun. That minigun killed everything and that moment I gave up and knew this game sucked. It sucked so bad I never beat it.

Attached: trash.png (735x490, 298K)

>FO3
A needed evil to take the game into the 3d space, is surprisingly varied and fun once you get past the god awful story. DLC's are the best in the series.

>New Vegas
Fun roleplaying, but each factions ending being the same "recruit" missions ruins the ending

>Fallout 4
Actually terrible in every way. Fuck this game, it's not even fun past your first time.

3 in a vacuum is a half decent 6/10 RPG that has some decent moments surrounded by a game made by people who can't write for shit, making it a huge step down from 1 and 2
NV is mostly the same as 3, outside of a few improvements to gameplay, the main difference though is that the writing is high quality, no one would complain if this was named Fallout 3 outside of Bethesda drones
4 is total shit, the standards for open world games and RPG had increased tremendously since the end of 7th gen and yet this game not only plays like a game from 2008, it downgrades every aspect of the RPG mechanics and forces combat even harder than 3 when the shooting is dogshit

Attached: mug.jpg (478x395, 25K)

Bethesda shit.
they're all trash, fallout was better off remaining a turnbased isometric rpg

>3: bland and hamstrung by being the First into the 3d fps model
>NV: Overrated as fuck. the nostalgic mistake above trash for peak quality. Not a bad game, actively good. Just still nothing to shit yourself over
>4: Questionable "improvements" in engine and moment-to-moment. Downgrade in roleplaying, freedom,story. Not worth playing without the following mod types
>several graphical overhauls
>Character progression, perk and combat lethality overhaul
>drug crafting nerf
>WOTC level mob density buffer
and even then you'll get maybe 3 playthroughs before never touching it again.

New Vegas for all its dick sucking hypefags is still the best of the three. Just remember you're only getting into a not-shit plot. You're not playing a masterpiece of plot and prose

Fallout 3 is all right and while a huge departure from the 1 and 2 in a lot of ways. I think it's a decent RPG. Probably has the best presentation of the Gamebryo games.

New Vegas pretty much improves most of the mechanics of 3 along with adding brand new features that work really well. Story serves the gameplay well but gets circlejerked as being something deeper than it actually is. Overall the better game, but I think it does a few things worse than 3. Primarily hate the fact that a lot of NPCs feel like nothing more than exposition dumps and the whole NCR-Legion War is pretty much static until the end of the game so it feels like there aren't any stakes.

Fallout 4 is just awful all around. It has some cool improvements and features, but its mechanics make it a terrible open-world shooter and RPG. I don't know how anyone expected Bethesda to make a good game after this shitshow.

Attached: 64syh3.jpg (600x600, 381K)

>Yea Forums made me hate NV
Unironically this

But Fallout 3's sidequests are better than Fallout New Vegas' ones and the DLC except for Dead Money was shit.

FO4 leveling system and perks fucking suck, anyone have any mod suggestions for that?

Attached: radical rat wearing the skin of its prey.jpg (420x388, 52K)

nexusmods.com/fallout4/mods/28222

The menu mod this depends on doesn't seem to work on the latest version of the game.

FO3 was fun to pick up and go. replay limited since world interactions are limited.
NV easy to be very invested. replay can be rewarding but challenging due to some restrictions. annoying to just explore without consequences at time.
FO4 somehow holds worst aspects of 3 and NV. Narrative set pieces too interwoven into pre-set bullshit. Locations are either shitty unmemorable dungeons or are build it urself annoyances. Gunplay much better but at a huge cost to overall game.

Fallout 4 is the only game you can play without mods. New Vegas will crash every ten minutes and Fallout 3 won't even launch.

>I don't know how anyone expected Bethesda to make a good game after this shitshow.
Here's a better question. How the fuck did this game get praised to high hell when Fallout 76 is more of the same and got bashed by fucking everyone and their mothers?

I remember Fallout 4 being hyped for years even before it was released. People compared it to Half Life 3 because it had been 4-5 years since New Vegas even though that's no time at all for a sequel. Fallout 4 pretty much got the BOTW treatment for a while where any criticism of the game was deflected because nobody thought Bethesda could do anything wrong. Fallout 76 was only such a shitshow because of how poorly they handled the marketing and launch plus Bethesda. Also 76 got the crowbcat video treatment where a ton of youtube channels were looking for any triple A fuck up they could easily shit on for views. A lot of shit has changed in the last 4 years alone.

3 was fun but silly
nv made sense but was less fun
Didn't touch 4 or 76

>Fallout 3
Constantly feels empty, no real story, okayish dlcs that are far more interesting than the main game. Weapons feel sluggish and the game seems like a drag.
>Fallout NV
What fallout 3 should have been, never feels too empty and you can never truly see everything without multiple playthroughs, dialogue actually matters, everyone has an actual story. Bretty good tier dlc like old world blues and Dead Money that connect the world and actually have significance to the story. Variety of guns makes shooting not so shit.
>Fallout 4
Gameplay wise better than the abysmal shooting in previous games. Factions are gay as shit this time around. Meh tier dlcs and dialogue options are mostly limited to yes, no and sarcastic yes. Generally untapped potential in a game that lacks any real soul despite being given such advantages over the previous ones. Yea Forums zoomers will defend Todd "it works except when it doesn't" Howard

Attached: 1560371082113.webm (768x480, 2.95M)

>FO4 cover is just 3 but zoomed in

Attached: 1553276382571.gif (220x260, 1005K)

>3 is alright Oblivion with guns, it’s fun to explore around but Bethesda’s shitty writing constantly reminds you why it’s not exactly something that would be remembered as a classic. I don’t hate it, but I don’t really love it either.
>NV is easily the best game out of the three: you can see that it is unpolished and Mojave can be a bit boring environment at times, but it’s the only one with a writing that can rival old Fallouts, while also capturing their atmosphere suprisingly well. It’s also easily the best one for role-playing, with lots of options to utilize almost every skill at some point. One of the best modern RPG games, and it pains me that we can never see how it would have been if they had more time to finish it.
>4 is meh, it’s like a worse 3. Sure, the gunplay is a bit better, but it slims down on RPG elements so much that it starts to feel like an action-adventure game instead of a RPG. Base-building feels tacked on, and there’s a serious lack of alternate options when completing quests. Honestly, it’s the first Bethesda game that left me completely disappointed, while all of the previous ones had their flaws too, at least they also had enough good things too to excuse them.

If we add mods to the formula, I feel that 3 probably benefits the most, while 4 remains unfixable, because its flaws are rooted so deep in its design philosophy.

Attached: 3AF687C9-5592-477E-A138-64542D1D6743.gif (236x161, 1.33M)

>The constant circlejerk over New Vegas having decent writing makes people think Obsidian a competent company
The worst part of NV is the Obsidian shilling

Attached: Snapchat-1432484552.jpg (1440x2560, 605K)

>3
Crushingly boring, basically a straight line
>NV
Not as boring, but just as linear
>4
The straightest line, and the most boring

3 had a laughable story but was ok.
Nv had better writing and gameplay buy the empty desert was a much worse setting and ruined it for me.

I never bothered with vanilla 4, I started like 3 games over the last week as I try adjusting mods and just recently settled in for playthrough 1 with 180 mods

I own Fallout 4 but haven't played it, any absolute must have mods I should consider?

ANSWER ME

Do Your Damn Job, Codsworth is a pretty good one for making Sanctuary actually look decent/have room to build

3 has really cool interiors. almost every little dungeon or building you enter seems to have a lot of cool details

3 was okay for the time.
NV raised the bar. Now completely shits on 3.
For every step forward 4 took, it took one back.

So you're saying Fallout 4 is as good as NV?

Fallout - game
Fallout 2 - memes
Fallout 3 - snore
Fallout NV - homosex
Fallout 4 - fun

Don't forget all those info graphs telling you how NV is objectively better than 3, therefore your bad person with shit taste for having a personal preference.

Attached: olUvIVr - Copy.jpg (1625x2319, 569K)

NV >> FO3 >> FO4

3 - worst AAA game of all time
NV - good but overhyped RPG
4 - decent open world shooter

How contrarian of you.

Daily reminder even IGN admit NV > 3

m.ign.com/articles/2015/07/24/the-best-fallout-games

Fallout 3 - Below Average
Fallout New Vegas - Mediocre
Fallout 4 - Bad

NV>4>3

The only bad part of NV is the lol fucking ass boring desert environment. It had better weapons, better quests/writing than 4. 4 really shot itself in the foot with the weapon """building""".

FO3, massive downgrade from FO2 both in writing, gameplay and atmosphere.
FO:NV, comes close to the originals but not quite.
FO4, only a fallout game by name, peel away the skin and you find a boring open world shooter.

This. Having to wander an empty, bland wasteland isn't atmospheric it's just boring.

it does

I get this, any ideas?

Attached: Capture.png (252x159, 4K)

The desert really doesn't make any sense for a post-apoc setting because it just looks like a regular desert except there are radioactive scorpions.

>Just started a new playthrough
>See this

Whelp that was a waste of a couple hours

>Yea Forums made me hate NV
How's that?

post your characters, any game

Attached: fallout.png (1352x1196, 129K)

>Fallout 3
Dumb and fun
>New Vegas
Pretentious and boring
>Fallout 4
Haven't played

Is 3 supposed to feel way harder than NV? I swear that most enemies in 3 feel like bullet sponges where they seem to die more easily in NV.

I liked FO3.
I liked NV a little more since it’s got more content and more RP elements than 3.
Hated 4. What a shit, boring game.

Dunno about ”most” enemies, but yea, especially the high-end enemy variants are ridiculous in 3. Albino scorps, ghoul reavers etc. tank up damage like some unique boss enemies in NV despite being nothing but generic enemies.

>3
I liked it, I was 9 at the time of release but it was still kinda fun.
>NV
I disliked it at first, then I started liking it. I didn't play it at release, but played it when I was 16/17.
>4
I wouldn't have hated it as much if the loading times weren't so bad and they didn't hop on the voice acting train which led to limited dialogue options. If it had 3/NV's stuff instead of Yes-Yes-Yes-No, it could have been decent. I'm fairly certain even younger me would have disliked it.

>without involving mods
What the fuck is with the default walk/run speed for Fallout 3/NV? It's so fucking slow. Without mods, each game turns into pumping as much ranged firepower as possible. Fallout 3 in particular is designed for it, how the like 3 damage-altering perks in the game are all to make one of the Big Gun varieties viable endgame.

Anyway 3 is fine but underwritten, NV is fine but doesn't push gameplay enough, didn't play 4.

Why was the Institute making and releasing Super Mutants into the Commonwealth? I've gone through that lab and I've saved that scientist and I still haven't gotten any fucking answers or clues as to why they would ever fucking do this. They literally made, tagged, and released hundreds of them- possible a thousands- into the fucking Commonwealth and I can't see how they benefit from this at all.

Attached: t4re9GK[1].jpg (1920x1080, 157K)

At parts I guess since you do encounter super mutants pretty early in 3. NV with the DLC is definitely harder though make no mistake.

FO3: medicore writing and world, but really well done quests. Shit combat system where your gun can literally fire behind you if you're unskilled like we're back to fucking Morrowind logic

FNV: Great world building and world. Quests range from good to slave labor trash, but there's an insane amount of them. Combat upgraded from shit to mediocre

FO4: Combat upgraded from mediocre to decent enough. Everything else gets shot straight in the dick, besides perhaps exploration, so why not just play a competant shooter elsewhere?

Attached: 9hjq2vhs2cj21.jpg (560x925, 96K)

I think NV is better mainly because of the extra guns and armor sets.

F3 has mediocre writing but a great world, NV has great writing but a mediocre world

All mediocre, I don't like the setting at all. The gameplay feels far clunkier than in the Elder Scrolls or Gothic.

I don’t understand why action points are necessary. The game is basically unplayable without VATS

I considered world as world building elements more than exploration. Bethesda may be fuck ups on a lot of things, but they're really good at the exploration aspect. I still like NV more in that regard because I fucking loathed the Metro tunnels

Attached: lwdkcu7qgfw21.jpg (728x546, 54K)

Gothic is clunky as fucking hell. It's a great RPG but the gameplay isn't why

Attached: 5qewj3upe6c21.jpg (800x588, 53K)

i never use mods

NV>3>4

mostly hated 3 because it was more interested in being a theme park than a role playing game. 4 drops the pretense of choices and consequences almost entirely.

I feel like Fallout 3 had a lot more cool little things to find throughout the world like random encounters and unmarked quests and such. I feel like it gets too much shit for not being exactly true to the original games.

The inventory alone is far more clunky in any given fallout game

2 plays very well. You can beat end-game enemies at level 1 if you master the combat, that must count for something, and the magic system is among the best IMO

>Elder Scrolls
Debatable, but each game is so significantly different on that front.
>Gothic
u fuckin wot m8
Gothic is amazing but not for anything remotely related to combat.

>Gothic is amazing but not for anything remotely related to combat.
RPGs have more components than combat

oblivion with guns
3D fallout game
minecraft with guns

wot

unironically just get good, the game is a fucking breeze even on the hardest difficulty

I don't think I've ever touched VATS once in 3 or NV.

3 lays the groundwork for a welcome paradigm shift for Fallout, unfortunately it’s Bethesda and all of their flaws are on full display. Particularly the miserable writing and worldbuilding.

NV suffers from some of the same flaws as 3, due to being on the same engine, rushed, and a classic Obsidian mess. However the writing and stronger RPG elements make it one of my all time favorite games.

4 is...it’s when I realized the trend I was seeing in Bethesda wasn’t just a dev making mistakes, it was all premeditated. They don’t care about their properties, they care about iconography. Every flaw Bethesda ever had is glaring in this game along with some new ones we never expected. The funny thing is they learned from NV and they did try to improve areas where they’ve been criticized in the past, it was just lazy and shit.

Imagine letting Yea Forums dictate your tastes

The combat in g2 is good, it's responsive, you get timing hints on all enemies and there'a variety in enemy moves. Then theres magic combat which is great

Yea the animations are shit, not an argument tho

Supposedly, the Institute was using a modified FEV as a testbed for their "Synthetic organics" program. Which is why they needed pre-war DNA to study its full effects.

There really is no good explanation as why they kept kidnapping wastelanders, turning them into Super Mutants and dumping them in the Commonwealth sixty years later. It's just stupid.

3 was ok at the time. Pretty lame as far as narrative went but it was fun. Fawkes story and the one where you find the synth are all I remember being more than subpar.

4 is garbage. The only redeeming quality it has is cosmetic and qol shit.

New Vegas is the best example of a 3d fallout. It's not perfect at all but INFINITELY better than the others in every way.

If you need to see craters and burned buildings every thirty seconds to remember it's after an apocalypse, you're Bethesda's target audience.

Because when people think of Fallout, they think of Super Mutants, BoS, and Nuka-Cola so you’re literally never going to have a game without those being shoved into your face

I strongly disagree on both accounts. 3 had a couple great side quests everyone remembers, but also a LOT of shit ones. NV has one or two great ones, but most are pretty meh.

As for the DLCs, I dislike Lonesome Road, but HH had some really good stuff despite the poop premise. We both know I mean Graham. And OWB is my favorite DLC of all, although I know it’s suddenly become “reddit-tier”

3 doesn't get enough credit for its dark atmosphere and hopeless survivalist feel. NV is the best one by far due to its great style and tremendous SWANK. 4 is literally retarded

Attached: IMG_1180.png (540x785, 716K)

Most NV side quests are pretty great, lots of roleplay value, the great ones in 3 are le whacky ones I assume, which are still mediocre most of the time

Never played DLC for either, besides the BoS exp in 3, it was painfully shit

>3
Boring
>NV
Great
>4
Boring

without mods?
fallout 3 not working on windows seven and on
fallout nv not working on windows sseven and on
fallout 4 working without mods

it been years and bethesda never put an official patch to fix the game and not do all the work of looking out for outdated fix mods that still get your game to crash sometimes.

i would say NV its my favorite but i liked the idea of fallout 4 making your own home and shit.

Having to decide whetherornot to kill the tree, and having the option to slice its heart, force it to grow forever for the people or burn it the fuck alive, was fun. Whacky dumb shit, but fun and memorable

Attached: 1508418231317.png (500x500, 278K)

Are there any mods to improve 4 to the point of making it worth a full play through again if I've already played it to death.

I think the whacky quests are what people are remembering from 3 when they claim it had good quests desu. That’s fine and I can respect their opinion, but I’d personally take something more grounded any day.

>3
genuinely a garbage game, the best thing about the game is the map.
>NV
writing is fantastic and the slight changes to the shooting makes the gameplay loop bearable. 10/10 roleplaying autism
>4
big surprise, the game about garbage collecting is garbage.

Attached: 1550454742513.jpg (1620x1032, 1.02M)

I think it would of made more sense back when super mutants were going to be a more "neutral" faction.

Given how they are in the released game, it just makes the Institute look like a bunch of horrible bastards for releasing a horde of human-eating monsters onto the Commonwealth.

Kinda makes the whole "Synth" thing feel less important too.

Attached: falloutmutant.jpg (752x968, 128K)

>dark atmosphere and hopeless survivalist feel
>town full of kids that tell you to go fuck yourself
>a cult of vampires that make out with blood packs
>90% of evil in the game is just a caricature
It felt more like a theme ride than anything else. A dozen bags with gore around every corner isn't enough to give your game a dark atmosphere.
I think the only time where F3 gets reasonably dark is when you just inadvertently slaughter the whole Tenpenny tower.

FO3
>can never live up to nostalgia in subsequent playthroughs
>horrendous gameplay, especially the shooting
>terrible level design, especially the metro
>godawful, contrived, and ludicrously short plotline
>boring, forgettable characters
>interesting from a conceptual standpoint and still has a few good sidequests
>fucks up the lore so badly that it's basically unforgivable
>Mediocre DLC with the exception of Point Lookout

FONV
>best mechanics out of the three
>special, skills, and perks are all well fleshed out and useful
>awesome dialogue choices and integration of skill/perk stats within them
>crafting mechanics, especially reloading, were well done additions that were not overly obtrusive
>survival mode is meh
>level design is pretty good, suffers in some of the generic caves and buildings
>best environmental storytelling by far
>best main quest and side quests by a massive margin
>best written characters with Graham, Caesar, and House having more charisma each than the entire casts of 3 and 4
>best weapons out of the three by far
>interesting lore direction and a neat concept which stands on its own and has fantastic ties to the original two games
>all of the DLC is good with some aspects breaking into greatness

ok
ok
useless piece of shit

FO4
>best looking of the three despite some weird aesthetic choices
>best gunplay of the three
>most visually interesting of the three
>actually has pretty decent level design through most of the content with some awful standouts that have Skyrim cave syndrome
>shit main quest, some pretty good side quests
>shit characters
>lore abortion that continues to rape the franchise on the back of 3
>shit special and perk mechanics
>WHERE THE FUCK ARE THE SKILLS TODD
>crafting is annoying and too linear
>fucking settlement system is too underdeveloped for all the real estate it takes in game
>infuriating companions
>fucking awful voiced protagonist and yes, yes, maybe, no (yes) dialogue choices
>legendary drop system tries to ape on looter shooters in the worst fucking way
>DLC is disappointing as fuck
>Far Harbors atmosphere is wasted on shit plot and mechanics
>Nuka World is almost universally trash except for the AK
>everything else is settlement bullshit

Overall, NV>3>4. An argument could be made between 3 and 4, but 4 cuts so much shit out that it just pisses me ofd to play it anymore. After months of fucking with mods, I gave up and literally just used it as a city building simulator with Sim Settlements. It was the most fun I ever had with the game.

Of the 3 I think that 3 has the best and most consistent presentation.

FO3: Enjoyable overall, DC is a nice place to get lost in.
FONV: Used to dislike it but now it is my favourite due to such a freedom with character builds.
FO4:Great weapon building and the best power armour but that is it

>good
>good
>could be better, but still good
now, move on

Attached: 1543516278836.jpg (528x460, 18K)

Fallout 3 would have been a lot better with more big towns

I think if I was going to "fix" the unforgivably retarded oversight of the Institute not only making Super Mutants but for fucking DECADES.. I'd go maybe a little bit of the "repeating the same mistakes of the master" route?

In the sense that the Super Mutant project could have potentially served multiple purposes while making the Institute not seem like amoral unsympathetic autists:
-One was they could have been using their own heavily modified version of the FEV to 'improve' top *side people. Maybe their brand of FEV didn't immediately turn people into Super Mutants, but gave them the immediate benefits of: regeneration, disease resistance, strength, stamina, radiation-resistance, but later degenerated into Super Mutants.
*And in an attempt to fix/strengthen their damaged DNA

-Another hypothetical purpose could have been the Super Mutants were the 'mistakes' made in the process of making the 3rd gen Synths (who aren't even fucking robots). These Super Mutants were initially obedient, but like Vergile they eventually degenerated into violent retards. In a "not-so-fucking-perfect" act the Railroad could have maybe been responsible for releasing these ones? Or maybe the Institute was just using them as trial operatives and they went feral.

It just feels like they didn't even fucking try to explain them or the Institute. At all.
But then again nobody in FO4 seems to actually put any effort in trying to explain anything to you or convince you to join them.
The game has really blatant "video game writing": everyone just expects you to just do stuff for them with little cohersion or reason.

shit
slightly less shit
mega shit

it could have been better with more small girls

Attached: Amy and Cat mod_enb 2016_09_19 00_41_26_99.jpg (3440x1440, 329K)

>blowing up megaton
>Big Town's situation
>The Wilks
>Andale

I always thought the Wilks and Andale were super heavy handed

>>blowing up megaton
Comical, edgy evil. You only need Tenpenny and his crony to twirl their mustaches while you're looking at the explosion to make it sillier.

>>Big Town's situation
Didn't leave any impression on me desu. Things like that are par for the course.

>>The Wilks
>>Andale
I don't even remember what those are, it's been a long time.

Rollback your game. I did it before I set up too much because looksmenu I think was fucking up

Woooah, slow down there son! We can't have that kind of degeneracy in Todd Howard's Kid-safe Whacky Wasteland!

What would our investors think?

Attached: 047.png (640x480, 228K)

Megaton is comfy, I don’t know why anyone would blow it

The only way I see an "evil" Super Mutant faction making sense in the future is if they're under active leadership. Fallout had the Unity, New Vegas had Black Mountain- hell, even New California had its own Master knock-off.

The way I see it Super Mutants are better off treated as people, since at least they have a reason to be organized. Fallout 3 and 4 relies heavily on casting them as dumb orcs that only how to "KILL LOOT RETURN."

Attached: 1515288618908.jpg (1600x2125, 810K)

Are you literally me?

The design gives me cancer, even on good characters I nuke it to get tenpenny.

>FO3 is my personal favorite
How many windows do you lick in a day?

what's a window

Attached: 1455414422451.png (1000x1000, 801K)

One of my good friends is super fucking defensive of Fallout, despite having started with 3 and never playing NV. He loved 4 and 76. I think I might have to put him down for his own good.

3 good action game
NV good fallout game
4 bad game

I want to clean my sole survivor's whole body with my tongue

Attached: Fallout4 2019-07-03 00-53-01.jpg (1920x1080, 967K)

Tenpenny tower already exists though right? You’re just getting the room

4 is a far, FAR better action game than 3 though.

op said without involving mods

fallout 4 feels like shit when first playing

Yeah.

gameplay boring as shit