Still not very far but I'm already vilified with powder gang and the legion. I guess I better stay friendly with NCR?
You don't have to :pEl Beardo wrote:
Still not very far but I'm already vilified with powder gang and the legion. I guess I better stay friendly with NCR?
Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
They only sell the good stuff I already have / can't afford / can't afford to feed[-DER-]Omega wrote:
got mine at the gun runners shop near freesideFloppY_ wrote:
Have anyone else managed to scrape up a Hunting rifle scope?
I really want one but I can't find it
Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
It's like way better than FO3.-CARNIFEX-[LOC] wrote:
So this thread seems pretty active given the small population of BF2s these days...how would you guys rank this game compared to Fallout 3?
About as good? Better? Worse? (I don't trust game "reviewers" these days, and don't want to sift through 26 pages of posts here)
I love RPGs, love the Fallout universe, etc., but I hesitate to spend $50 on a brand new game that lacks multiplayer unless it's truly amazing.
Everything is better compared to FO3.
I liked FO3
Am I cool now?
"Raise the flag high! Let the degenerates know who comes to claim their lives this day!"
8.75/10 so far. Not better than FO3 in terms of story/setting, but in terms of content alone it destroys FO3.-CARNIFEX-[LOC] wrote:
So this thread seems pretty active given the small population of BF2s these days...how would you guys rank this game compared to Fallout 3?
About as good? Better? Worse? (I don't trust game "reviewers" these days, and don't want to sift through 26 pages of posts here)
I love RPGs, love the Fallout universe, etc., but I hesitate to spend $50 on a brand new game that lacks multiplayer unless it's truly amazing.
whare are you guys using for screens? I cant get fraps to work with this game
didn't even start playing the game until i disabled mouse acceleration. same old bullshit.
carry on.
carry on.
"people in ny have a general idea of how to drive. one of the pedals goes forward the other one prevents you from dying"
Fuck I dunno. prob why fraps doesnt work. lol.RTHKI wrote:
can it capture its own screens? like battlefield.
Fraps works for Cammy, what version are you using?
The latest I assume, just redownloaded and installed yesterday. Is he saving to a custom dirctory? Wonder if thats it?Finray wrote:
Fraps works for Cammy, what version are you using?
Poseidon wrote:
Not better than FO3 in terms of story/setting, but in terms of content alone it destroys FO3.-CARNIFEX-[LOC] wrote:
So this thread seems pretty active given the small population of BF2s these days...how would you guys rank this game compared to Fallout 3?
About as good? Better? Worse? (I don't trust game "reviewers" these days, and don't want to sift through 26 pages of posts here)
I love RPGs, love the Fallout universe, etc., but I hesitate to spend $50 on a brand new game that lacks multiplayer unless it's truly amazing.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________ 
fraps works fine for me
Last edited by krazed (2010-10-26 15:22:27)
Pretty sure his settings are all defaultSonderKommando wrote:
The latest I assume, just redownloaded and installed yesterday. Is he saving to a custom dirctory? Wonder if thats it?Finray wrote:
Fraps works for Cammy, what version are you using?
.. tried pressing F12 to change the corner it shows the FPS in? Might be running after all.
What??? The story/setting is far better than FO3. 3 was just going into variations of the same metro station/industrial building over and over again, and the story didn't have very much variation in it, whereas here you can choose to destroy any number of factions should you so desire.Poseidon wrote:
8.75/10 so far. Not better than FO3 in terms of story/setting, but in terms of content alone it destroys FO3.-CARNIFEX-[LOC] wrote:
So this thread seems pretty active given the small population of BF2s these days...how would you guys rank this game compared to Fallout 3?
About as good? Better? Worse? (I don't trust game "reviewers" these days, and don't want to sift through 26 pages of posts here)
I love RPGs, love the Fallout universe, etc., but I hesitate to spend $50 on a brand new game that lacks multiplayer unless it's truly amazing.
it still runs, just doesnt capture screens.
DC is a MUCH better setting than the Mojave Desert. The only interesting place in NV is The Strip. In DC you had The Capitol, the White House (though a crater), the Washington Monument, The Lincoln/Jefferson Memorials, Arlington Cemetary.. so many national landmarks. It was almost surreal to see them in ruin. In NV, not so much. So setting definitely goes to FO3.DesertFox- wrote:
What??? The story/setting is far better than FO3. 3 was just going into variations of the same metro station/industrial building over and over again, and the story didn't have very much variation in it, whereas here you can choose to destroy any number of factions should you so desire.Poseidon wrote:
8.75/10 so far. Not better than FO3 in terms of story/setting, but in terms of content alone it destroys FO3.-CARNIFEX-[LOC] wrote:
So this thread seems pretty active given the small population of BF2s these days...how would you guys rank this game compared to Fallout 3?
About as good? Better? Worse? (I don't trust game "reviewers" these days, and don't want to sift through 26 pages of posts here)
I love RPGs, love the Fallout universe, etc., but I hesitate to spend $50 on a brand new game that lacks multiplayer unless it's truly amazing.
In terms of story... I believe I've mentioned this before, but the fact that you really connect to your character in FO3 is what pulled me into it. In NV it's just like "sup you're some guy, you got shot in the head, kill matthew perry". In FO3 you see your own birth... and Liam Neeson's beautiful voice is there to guide you along the birth canal.
Last edited by Poseidon (2010-10-26 15:46:07)
not before you put on the wasteland doctor outfit (the one boone is wearing)
I love having Raul as my companion
All my weapons have double their normal hp
Last edited by FloppY_ (2010-10-26 16:04:24)
Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
Poseidon has my opinion
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
The Capital was to dead. It was a skeleton, bare, cold and empty. The Mojave felt as if it were alive, it was also full, like there was just shit everywhere and not like in the Capital where a full three quarters of the map is pretty much empty. It had more proper population centers, really the only places where people lived in the Capital were Rivet City, The Citadel and Megaton. All the other settlements were to small and uninteresting or blocked inaccessible for all but one or two missions (like V101). But in the Mojave you got decent sized settlements at Goodsprings, Novac, Freeside, West-side, Nellis, McCarran, Hoover Dam, the Fort, Mojave Outpost and Jacobstown. The 188 Trading Post is incredibly minor in the Mojave, it exists only to serve as a place for Veronica to chill when you don't want her with you, and it has equal population as most of the settlements in the Capital.
The story also gets more interesting as it goes along. While FO3 did start off really strong, by the end it was just "Brotherhood = Good, Enclave = Bad, but you're stuck with the Brotherhood until the very end even if you are bad." While in NV the conflict is much more interesting. The NCR seem like the good guys, but their self imposed bureaucracy gets in the way of the ideals behind their objectives. The Legion is brutal, but only they seem capable of bringing proper order to a place where order is in the highest demands. And in FO3 you needed to be good or bad or suffer the incredibly lame middle route, while in NV the middle route makes you another faction in the conflict, instead of just some guy in the place.
NV really is a big improvement over FO3.
The story also gets more interesting as it goes along. While FO3 did start off really strong, by the end it was just "Brotherhood = Good, Enclave = Bad, but you're stuck with the Brotherhood until the very end even if you are bad." While in NV the conflict is much more interesting. The NCR seem like the good guys, but their self imposed bureaucracy gets in the way of the ideals behind their objectives. The Legion is brutal, but only they seem capable of bringing proper order to a place where order is in the highest demands. And in FO3 you needed to be good or bad or suffer the incredibly lame middle route, while in NV the middle route makes you another faction in the conflict, instead of just some guy in the place.
NV really is a big improvement over FO3.
DC was also directly hit by several nukes. New Vegas was not. And even with that, DC still had plenty of places. Underworld, Oasis, Paradise Falls, Tenpenny Tower (on top of what you mentioned)... plenty of places. Of course NV is going to have more proper population centers, half the population isn't infected like DC.
NV does have better/more choices... but that doesn't make a better story. I don't know about you but I actually connected with the Lone Wanderer in Fallout 3.
Spoiler (highlight to read):
When you "die" in Fallout 3 - obviously not the real ending, but dying as I knew it at the time - it's actually really upsetting. If The Courier were to die, I'd only be upset that I lost my progress and wouldn't be able to continue anymore.
NV does have better/more choices... but that doesn't make a better story. I don't know about you but I actually connected with the Lone Wanderer in Fallout 3.
Spoiler (highlight to read):
When you "die" in Fallout 3 - obviously not the real ending, but dying as I knew it at the time - it's actually really upsetting. If The Courier were to die, I'd only be upset that I lost my progress and wouldn't be able to continue anymore.
Thats the pointDoctor Strangelove wrote:
The Capital was to dead. It was a skeleton, bare, cold and empty.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
You are really forgetting alot of encampments from FO3 tbh,,Doctor Strangelove wrote:
The Capital was to dead. It was a skeleton, bare, cold and empty. The Mojave felt as if it were alive, it was also full, like there was just shit everywhere and not like in the Capital where a full three quarters of the map is pretty much empty. It had more proper population centers, really the only places where people lived in the Capital were Rivet City, The Citadel and Megaton. All the other settlements were to small and uninteresting or blocked inaccessible for all but one or two missions (like V101). But in the Mojave you got decent sized settlements at Goodsprings, Novac, Freeside, West-side, Nellis, McCarran, Hoover Dam, the Fort, Mojave Outpost and Jacobstown. The 188 Trading Post is incredibly minor in the Mojave, it exists only to serve as a place for Veronica to chill when you don't want her with you, and it has equal population as most of the settlements in the Capital.
The story also gets more interesting as it goes along. While FO3 did start off really strong, by the end it was just "Brotherhood = Good, Enclave = Bad, but you're stuck with the Brotherhood until the very end even if you are bad." While in NV the conflict is much more interesting. The NCR seem like the good guys, but their self imposed bureaucracy gets in the way of the ideals behind their objectives. The Legion is brutal, but only they seem capable of bringing proper order to a place where order is in the highest demands. And in FO3 you needed to be good or bad or suffer the incredibly lame middle route, while in NV the middle route makes you another faction in the conflict, instead of just some guy in the place.
NV really is a big improvement over FO3.
Megaton
Tenpenny Tower
Underworld
The Vampire's station
Rivet City
The Citadel
Little Lamplight
(Big town)
and more..
Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me