Fallout 3 and New Vegas are great games. I personally think FNV is the better of the two because of it's more refined role playing elements and fantastic story, but there is one thing in my opinion that Fallout 3 trumps FNV in, exploration. In my opinion, FNV is really bland when it comes to exploring the wasteland. It feels like a path from one area to the other. It doesn't really gives you the feeling of discovery like Fallout 3. When it came to Fallout 3, you would have a lot of random encounters. When you went to a certain area for the first time, you'll run into like one of three encounters. You would either run into a merchant, a bunch of angry wildlife, or a scuffle between two wastelanders. That is not even it, you can run into a wastelander trying to mug you, slavers, or even a pacifist supermutant. What also was great about the exploration in Fallout 3 was that it felt like a living world. You would find random firefights, animals fighting eachother, etc. You would always be on your toes when you're out in the Capital wasteland because at any moment, two Albino Radscorpions would be crawling right behind you or a Deathclaw would be pouncing right at you. The Capital Wasteland felt bigger, too. You felt like you were going on an endless path of depressing destruction. FNV's world felt pretty small in comparison. It may have to do with all the huge rocks taking up space, but still, it felt small. The funny thing is that I read up on the size of both wastelands, and they're basically the same size. What are your thoughts. Do you think that FNV has a better world to explore? Or do you FO3 is better in exploration?

Gonna have to agree with everyone and say that Fallout 3's world and exploration is better. A ruined cityscape is a lot more interesting to explore than an empty desert wasteland. It feels empty anyway. I liked the story and quests in FNV more than Fallout 3.

I'm not sure if it's because of my introduction to PC gaming but I found NV exploration to be better than 3's. I played 3 on the Xbox 360 and NV on PS3 and PC. Playing on the PC made NV feel more alive to me because of how much closer I was to the screen and being able to see much more detail.

When i first played FO3 and looked at the map i was amazed. Took me a long time to explore it all. After 4 years and 2.5k Hours of NV i can dream the whole Mojave Wasteland. New Vegas is a great game and all but....its a desert....there isn't just alot to explore. In FO3 you had metro stations, alot of buildings (In the Downtown area) and small towns in the eastern part. New Vegas had few towns, some ranger stations and thats all. Plus a big part of NV map across the Colorado River is just the Legion Fort and a big group of Deathclaws. FO3's world will always be the best (So far) in my opinion.

@Fidller The metro stations were probably my places to explore. It felt so ominous and scary walking through them. One minute, you'll be fighting through swarms of feral ghouls, another minute you'll be fighting crazy raiders. I also like the fact that they can take you almost anywhere in the downtown area. I remember watching a LP from a guy named Crocodi1e. In his LP, he had a goal of discovering EVERYTHING there has there has to offer in the Capital Wasteland. It meant discovering every location, every unmarked location, everything, and I think he almost reached his goal. I remember watching one episode where found this massive pit that was heavily irradiated and filled with muties. I thought to myself how many areas was there to explore. I was amazed. That is why I am hoping whenever Obsidian decides to do another Fallout, it would be in a better location because the desert isn't that interesting of a setting. I heard that if they were ever to do another Fallout, they said that New Orleans or Mississippi would be an interesting place.

Fallout 3 hands down. There is nothing more satisfying than running around downtown DC running and gunning or even exploring the vast metro system or even just going out and exploring the vast open wasteland. One of my major gripes with NV was how most of the map wasn't even accessible due to the amount of barriers on the simplest of hills - that and making actual NV/LV so small was a terrible choice. Good idea, bad implementation.

I dunno ,Fo3 had that depressing atmosphere and it was ...more explorable .Unlike New Vegas where there are more settlements and ...basically some kind of civilization .
Whish the maps were 4 times larger so you can get lost .
Ill have to go with Fo3 .

Alright, its obvious. FO3 beats FNV with exploration, encounters and such but FNV offered some intresting or so to say better encounters than FO3 but still FO3 for exploration definetly and obviously.