All posts by Kelis98

Had to combine the last two options cause the polls only give 6 options.

What? The series isn't dead, not even close. The show was very popular with two more seasons confirmed. Fallout 76 gets consistent updates and Fallout 5 is confirmed to be coming out at some point, plus there is rumors of a Fallout 3 remaster. The Fallout TTRPGs also get frequent updates. Plus mods come out very frequently.

It's obvious that this series takes long stretches between games I mean Bethesda also makes Elder Scrolls and now also Starfield too. Just give it time. Just cause there hadn't been any major releases doesn't mean it's dead. Plus people can still enjoy something even if it isn't getting constant content.

Also generally wikis get a lot more readers than they do people who edit or talk on slightly obscure forums. I mean wiki forms aren't usually as active as dedicated social media sites, though it can sometimes vary (especially with the larger wikis).

At the end of the day a series isn't dead unless there is no one to enjoy it and/or it stops getting content, and in Fallout's case neither of which is true. I reckon it has a long run to go still.

IDK how 4 could be considered a better game, as to me 3 is amazing and is way better in many areas, but to each their own.

Perhaps it depends on which area of the game you look at, but when it comes to atmosphere, gameplay/RPG elements, locations/map, story in some ways, etc. I think 3 is better IMO. and is a better Fallout game (again IMO).

4 has some good stuff too, like shooting, companions, some map locations some story aspects (but not all), building if you like that, etc.

Both games have good DLC, but I think 3's is more consistent.

But like I said agree to disagree. I played 3 first and I'll admit I'm a bit biased, but hey we all enjoy what we enjoy.

Fallout 3 isn't whack, it's great. I didn't have a problem with weak gear or the game being too hard myself, plus there are many ways to play just like NV.

The game doesn't give you all weapon types right away like NV does, but they are still able to be found.

Acadia aren't degenerates

There is good and bad to house. He wants to improve technology and aims high which is good, but he doesn't do much to help people individually. He doesn't oppress them and avoids violence when possible, but he could do more to help people and expand his scope beyond just Vegas and the strip. Plus like the NCR he continues part of the Pre War days, just in a different way. Yes he is different in some ways, but he still does business and promotes capitalism instead of moving beyond it.

He also has thrown people of their home to further his goals.

@The Appalachian Well in Survival mode everyone is a glass cannon, instead of bullet sponges.

Possibly, I'd have to check it out/find it (would you happen to know a link?).

I suppose that's true, wiki doesn't always represent what may be true in some cases, and can change on a whim.

The sight?

Personally I like the fact that 3/NV used filters and limited colors in places as it added to the atmosphere (and I think 4 was too colorful in places), but I get why some wouldn't. 3/NV wouldn't be the same without it.

Also there are plenty of great games from that era.

I like 3/NV's the best, due to the colors, designs, etc.

Cause I ran out of room and I didn't know how to combine them.

Also that's not a fact (nor is it science), Fallout 3 is not overrated, as it's a really good game (IMO).

You could simply say you don't care for it you don't have to act like all who like it are wrong.

Also 76 while not perfect, has improved some and has good things about it.

They're bad, the worst the BoS has been, basically the Enclave with a different name.

How is this the results?, both have good worlds/maps, but overall 3's is better as both a map and a wasteland.

People here are biased, and I wonder how many have actually played 3.

Why specifically those games, and not just the Fallout universe, as they all share the same one. Also, wdym non canon?