Many times, in these situations, it's obvious that they didn't play Fallout 3 and Fallout New Vegas side by side with the same care. It is like they need to say that Fallout 3 is better than the other ones as a way to elevate Fallout 3 status or something. The problem is when they start using other Fallout games to try and make Fallout 3 seems good. So they want to show to others how Fallout 3 was a good game (specially compared to Fallout 4). They liked Fallout 3 and started to remember how Fallout 3 did those things better than Fallout 4. The off road areas are for higher level players who are starting to get into the world more either by exploring, doing the main questlines and needing to meet the other factions, etc.Д¬laiming roads are too safe for players to complete the game is nearly like saying the ability to fast travel with no random encounter chances to a safe settlement is too handholding, which I would say is a better argument.Д¬lick to expand.Many are like that because they played Fallout 4 and started to miss stuff like Skills, dialogue checks, extensive dialogue options, etc. And the roads are also only really meant to be the intended path in the part of the early game/Act I of hunting down Benny and taking the safer route to New Vegas. That also just implies that there aren't enemies on the roads, like the first time you leave Nipton or the Legion ambush on the caravan somewhat near Novac, or the other raiders, geckos, ants, and bloatflies you see on the roads.

You know, kinda what roads do anyway? The way he said it from what I remember also just implies you can complete most of vanilla New Vegas quests by staying on roads and being relatively safe because there are more dangerous enemies off the roads.

As in, roads are bad map design because roads show players paths to major settlements and trade routes. He (ManyATrueNerd) also seems to think that roads existing in New Vegas were handholding and sheltering the player from danger.

Fallout new vegas what in the goddamn