Fallout 3 Is Better Than You Think (ManyATrueNerd)

[DiscoInferno]

The only enemies in New Vegas are the ones you make yourself (and the non-respawning raiders and deathclaws), and even then you can usually talk and sneak your way around upsetting
people. The DLC, especially Lonesome Road, allieviates the drought of less-justifiable killfests but Fallout 3 has respawning raiders, radscorpions, Enclave, and super mutants galore.

The best way to play is Tale of Two Wastelands. New Vegas gives you the better toys and Fallout 3 gives you the better playground.

[Baconheart]

I'm pretty sure I remember Vegas being surrounded by infinitely respawning always hostile Fiends

[Notanything]

Yeah, this is as always, the best of both worlds. It feels like a cop-out to cite a mod, but sometimes I think TTW may as well be the definitive way of playing
Fallout 3 nowadays because by extension, it introduces the numerous improvements to the rough combat that was in Fallout 3.

A big problem in New Vegas is that for all the variety in your enemies, most of your hostile targets are pretty basic. Hostile animals are probably one of the most frequent enemies, but they're not all terribly interesting opponents, and New Vegas really enjoyed giving animals some pretty bogus damage outputs. I still have nightmares about the geckos in Honest Hearts.

The most interesting opponents always feel pretty limited. And it's pretty easy to wipe the fiends that occasionally attack near Camp McCarran. In fact, that's pretty much the most lively spot in the game, because that's really one of the few locations you'll see NPCs fighting with each other. Seems like the NCR fights more fiends than they do the Legion.

[angrytoadnoises]

This is exactly the point I've been trying to make. This is a subjective subject and it's absolutely unfair to claim New Vegas has a weak world or has somehow failed to allow proper player exploration without prefacing that with a heavy disclaimer that it's simply your opinion. New Vegas handles it's player exploration just as well, arguably better than Fallout 3 if you're willing to approach it on it's own terms.

The real discussion is which approach works better for the type of game Fallout bethbyro games try to be. I obviously believe New Vegas wins out on this one, for reasons I've previously described - a more traditional approach to the genre that produces more satisfying results. You seem to believe that a visual approach with tangible exploration is more important, which is fair enough, but seems inherently at odds with the genre.