is fall out new vegas more linear then fall out 3?

[Sentinala]

i had fallout 3, and it was a cool game, but i couldnt navigate past the part where after you go to the village with the nuke (after getting out of the bomb shelter) and you have to go somehwere and its really confusing (and theres no clairevoyance like skyrim!!!)

so is new vegas more linear?

thinking of getting it

 

[NikolaTesla]

it's more or less the same in terms of Linear lay, but overall I feel like fallout 3 was a better game, less glitches, cooler weapons and story, so i personally wouldn't recommend it but it's your choice.

 

[VictoireXII]

I liked both. But really they are both in a very different setting.

Fallout 3 was set in Washington DC which was the epi-centre for all the chinese nukes, and that's why you mainly go through the DC ruins. You come across alot of nuke related stuff like ghouls and mutants. I hated going through subway after subway, It really got really annoying & repetitive.

Fallout New Vegas was set in Nevada, Las Vegas,(also called New Vegas ingame) a place mostly untouched by the atomic warfare thanks to a person called Mr.House. So you don't really find as much ruins,(it's a desert mainly anyway, for the most part).and less nuke related creatures. But in this game, you get to meet a whole lot of a new different factions, including the original brotherhood of steel. It's really fun as well, and any Fallout fan should give it a shot.

 

[Charlemagne]

I'd say it's less linear in that you have a ton of choices. However, it's got a more-or-less easy to follow main plot. The major main-plot places are along the roads, so if you can just follow the roads it isn't that hard.

I personally like it more, for the writing. It has more characters and factions.

 

[locomoto]

New Vegas is absolutely superior in my opinion.
In terms of Linearity it's pretty much the same.

 

[Jersey Dagmar]

I prefer New Vegas over Fallout 3, mainly cause I found it less confusing. And it wasn't as bleak and depressing.

 

[El-Lee Zardo]

I love exploring downtown DC in 3. They both have their strong points. The level cap in 3 sucks and only can be improved by 1 of the dlc (operation anchorage), where every dlc in new vegas comes with a level cap increase.
Both are worth a play through in my opinion.
Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk

 

[Lee]

I found FNV to be a major disappointment after F3. I was disappointed that you couldn't craft new weapons from parts. The breaking down and making bullets was completely confusing for me and the storyline just didn't engage me like F3s did.

 

[Duderino]

Cons:
-The main storyline is much shorter and somewhat less immersive.
-The map is smaller overall too.
-Less crafting
-Less weapon choices
-No Dart Gun or RR spike gun

Pros:
-There are a ton of side quests (more possibly?) and factions mean far more than your karma in NV.
-NV is FAR easier to navigate and the DLC is superior to 3.
-The followers are more interesting and each have a story arc and quest line (some of which are great and to me makes up for the short main quest - Veronica's quest is amazing)
-Oh and NO SEWERS!!!!!!!!!!!!

Subjective difference: You can steal EVERYTHING and maintain positive karma just based upon quest choices.


Overall they are both great games and I would recommend both.