Well, Fallout 3's story is great for those who like a more personal and somewhat linear adventure. The main character has a clear goal from the start - find dad. The worldbuilding in Fallout 3 is also quite good, but it mainly serves to support this central story. In Fallout New Vegas, the story is a complex web. You start as a Courier who gets caught in the middle of a huge power struggle. There are so many different paths you can take depending on which faction you side with. Each faction has its own ideology and goals, and your choices really shape the outcome of the story. It offers a much more immersive and replayable story experience than Fallout 3.
Definitely. Norman Bates is purely fictional. He was created by authors and has appeared in books, movies, and other forms of entertainment to thrill and scare audiences.
In most cases, Norman is not based on a true story. It's more likely a creation of the writer's mind to entertain and engage the audience with an interesting fictional narrative.
The story of Fallout 3 is set in a more desolate and depressing Capital Wasteland. It's mainly about survival and the search for the protagonist's father. Meanwhile, Fallout New Vegas has a story that is more about politics and influence. The Courier has to deal with different groups like the NCR, Caesar's Legion, and Mr. House, and their different ideas of how to run the Mojave Wasteland. This makes the story of Fallout New Vegas more complex and less centered on a single personal quest like in Fallout 3.