For a simple point by point response from someone who has played EVERY single Fallout

1) 'Just Fallout DLC'.. Right. The only comparison would be Dragon Age Awakenings, which is a complete-game DLC. Or perhaps how any game on Steam is DLC. Since they have all the full games. In that case, I MIGHT agree. But a 'simple DLC' as 'just' an addition to Fallout 3. No, not even close.

2) I don't generally bother with the music as I usually have my own playing on my computer (yes, I'm playing this on the 360 actually) . But I can understand this. Three dog was a bit more fun, but I have to say I like how they got Wayne Newton for the part. And the overall voice-actors are by far MUCH better than in FO3

3) *shakes head* As others have said. What were you expecting? Salvador Dali artwork? It's a VERY set type of setting. Post-apocalyptic. They're not going to go with bright pastels. Play Katamari Damacy. It's not an anime game. Go play some endless version of Final Fantasy. This is Fallout. I expect a look like they had. If they didn't have it, THEN I would be disappointed.

4) Haven't had it happen yet, on FO3, FONV, or even any Elder Scrolls (and I can trace back to the original one: Arena) never had the 'invisible walls' yet either. Hell, I've had more 'getting stuck' in location with WoW more.

5 & 6 (ok, not quite point by point)... There's really no way to sugarcoat it for these two points, and where it becomes obvious that the only 'Fallout fan' you are is of Fallout 3.... Fallout has never had a Co-Op and I'd likely not buy it if it did. While they took it from a TBS to a first-person feel (which I was rather sketchy about originally) with FO3... This is NOT a shooter... and if the devs at Obsidian/Bethesda have ANY brains, they won't turn it in to one. As for char-gen. The overall setup is a tried-and-true and totally Series-set way of Chargen. WHY in the hell would you change it? The questions were nice ( done in Elder Scrolls games before but whoop de do. I liked this variant too). D&D, GURPS, White Wolf game system RPGS all have been using the same vein of char-gen in their respective systems for over a decade. WHY the hell would you expect a game-series as long-lasting as Fallout to suddenly up and change it???

Oh ... wow.

*locks while she decides who will be warned for flaming*

:stare:


------

Reopened following edits. Please remember that flaming will result in warnings, suspensions and bannings!

Wow, so I come back to check on my post and all these nerds are going crazy--

Here is my over-arching theme. Subtract everything I have said in my original post but this.

It FEELS like I am playing DLC for Fallout 3. I don't care what things you may think that I am missing, it FEELS that way. I don't want them to completely re-define and change the gameplay. I just think it would be nice to see some updated changes.

Actually, I think it would be nice if game developers who are working on a franchise would stop remaking the same game over and over in an attempt to save money and put little effort into enhanceing the experience.

I don't mean to diminish Bethesda devs work, I know they worked hard on the game. But did they work hard at wiping the Fallout 3 map out and building on that existing map, just changing the skin and placement of buildings??? It looks like it to me. It just reminds me of Halo, how they keep making the same game over and over again, just re-packaging it.

Now before all of you brainwashed [censored] start digging in against me--just really think about what i am saying and give me 5 major differences between Fallout 3 and New Vegas--and don't say --"You can use work benches in New Vegas."--Give me something really innovative and different. Or....be satisfied with mediocrity.

I miss going through alot of the ruins, I hope in a DLc they open up many of these buildings and work on west, north, free side

I have to say all in all I'm impressed and having a good time.

1. Graphics... I saw the videos. I knew the graphics were not much different. I watched the combat and it was the same... What can I say. We knew what we were getting so I can't really complain about that. Secondly the graphics are nice and enjoyable. I mean come on man. Have you just stood for a bit and watched the wind and dust and light? It's awesome! Have you noticed the smoke that issues from your cooling weapon barrels? Very nice touch. The details are vastly improved over FO3..if you look.

2. Game World... I don't, in any way shape or form feel the game world to be small. Sorry I just don't. Doesn't matter to me if FO3 had more or this one. It has plenty to do on the main quest and there are side quests galore.

3. Locations... Does there have to be something of value at every location? Does there? I like that I don't have to pick up every Bleeping item that's not nailed down and I kinda like the notion that not all locations are "significant" but rather only offer a place to fast travel too if I need to. SHRUG.

It would be cool to be able to enter more places. I mean I saw a small town with some Raiders in it and not one house could be entered. That was kinda odd, but I can live with that. All the houses are pretty much the same inside anyway so not missing much.

4. Exploration.... I do kinda have to agree with some of the naysayers here. It' s fun to explore but I do run into invisible walls at very inconvenient times. I explore alot. I use the high ground and I push where I can go. This is supposed to be that kind of game. If I can get up on a ridge or feasibly cross over a mountain top I should be able to. It annoys me to know end to work at finding a way over an obstacle cuz I don't want to walk miles around only to find a force field blocking my path. When I feel like I'm being forced to enter an area a certain way I begin to think it less a sandbox game and more something like an action game. This is not KOTOR...good game but it's not what FO is supposed to be like IMO.

It's still fun I just get annoyed as hell when it happens and it happens too much IMO.

5. Story... Great. It's written well enough. There is a clear sense of progression. The side quests and stories are intriguing. Not all of them of course but enough that I want to find out more and dig more into it.

6. Acting ... Very Good to Great... They did a good job all in all. There only a minimal amount of bad voice acting.

7. Companion Mechanics and interface and viability...great.

8. Crafting... Complex and USEFUL. It's nice. Some may be a little too complex or require too much to make but so what? The crafting system is Far superior to FO3. I CAN MAKE MY OWN AMMO! OMG that is what WE ALL WANTED ISN'T IT?

9. NPC's... I find there to be many interesting NPCs with interesting stories. The overall interaction with them ok.

10. Factions. Well done. Ya, it's not exactly complex geopolitics and there aren't alot of subtle nuances but they are well done and I can clearly support or not support who I want. There are many ways to play with some great OPTIONS. It's pretty difficult not to like that. .

11. Engine: Bites... Not Obsidian's fault. Hopefully well see some tools/patches/utilities as time goes on to address the play issues.

... I give the Game an 8.5

If NV feels like a DLC to you then you had better quit gaming altogether. How can anyone who dismisses NV as a DLC expect to be taken seriously.

I'm not a co-op fan either, but one thing did spring to mind and that's companions, there is only so much you can discuss with an AI before all the dialogue is exhausted, but for roleplaing purposes imagine you and a friend pitching camp for the night, sitting by the fire, listening to the sounds and creatures of the night, relaxed but alert to the dangers, both of you gabbing, then you hear a sound......


Don't mind me, just my imagination getting the better of me.

The money-grab part made me laugh.

The invisible walls are so absurd, you can actually jump on top some of them and walk way up to the sky.

People who think that Wayne Newton is boring don't understand the whole 50's Vegas culture. Look up Frank Sinatra, Dean Martin, and the Rat Pack. They were considered the Kings of Cool because they were suave and nonchalant. That's the kind of attitude that Mr. New Vegas is supposed to embody.

It seems like half the people on this thread agree with me and half do not. I'll end it here---this game not only is the equivelent to sub-par DLC for FO3, it is the most glitchy game I have played this year. Ususally I am complaining or raging against an online multiplayer game that has lag issues and exploits...but a single-player game that fails this hard....

You know it is bad when a Great Khan spawns at every fast travel you perform, and as soon as you look at them you lose control of your character. The effing thing like, scopes in on the Great Khan and then you are like unable to aim your weapon and go to third person view.

And you guys think this is a good game???? Fallout 3 had issues, but they were resolved quickly for the most part.

I had a friend who completed a quest and then lost a whole weeks worth of save game data--now you tell me one game this year that has come out, that has this as an issue.

And FO3 is bigger than New Vegas--I measured it with a timed walk from north to south--east to west--it is approximately 4 minutes longer.

I think that because these forums have the complaints sectioned off from the General Discussion, there is alot of clueless people on the Gen Discussions that haven't looked at all the complaints.

Watch you language, its fine if you dont like it, but some of us enjoyed it much more than Fallout 3

Hrm 5 major differences between Fallout 3 and New Vegas, let me see.

1) Factions and factional reputations.

2) Companion Quests.

3) Alternate Ammo Types

4) Traits are back in again.

5) We can't easily make J.O.N.T.M.O.A. godling characters with relative ease now (Jontmoa stands fot Jack Of No Trades, Master Of All.)

6) We can now craft ammo variations and weapon repair kits.

7) We can now also craft foodstuffs (ok this is similar to 6, but I think is sufficiently different to warrant as another point)

7) We can repair weapons and armour up to 100% condition no matter what our characters repair skill is, plus there are also weapon repair kits to help with that as well.

8) There are now character craftable and usable poisons ingame (ok, they have to be applied to melee weapons)

9) VATS no longer equates to invincibility mode

10) Combat, you can no longer rush in and expect to survive easily against any foe.

11) Deathclaws are now the mincing machines of doom if you get too careless near them.


I could probably add more, but I feel those should suffice and it only took me a minute or two to put that list together.

It had the usual barrier walls at the edge of the map itself, and a couple at the mountain, but overall it was free of them. In NV there's a mod to remove them anyway on the PC. Really I think they were put in to funnel people from taking short cuts, or finding easy paths around certain areas. Which is kinda moot anyway because if I got really tinked off I'd simply use TCL.

I kinda miss morrowind too, I think after this NV playthrough i'm going to find my discs and give it a go again.

And multiplayer in fallout? Never. A pox upon those that wish for it, and a pox on interplay for trying to make a FO MMO.

Hey, I just thought I would throw my two cents in. First, calling someone a nerd who has a different opinion of your is the lamest defense of your position possible. While I agree with some of what you said, I take issue with others.

I played all of the Fallout series. I remember when FO3 came out and I did not think I would like the first person aspect. I loved it , and played thru countless times. FO3 was a fun romp. Not true to the original is some aspects but the amount of time spent on building the world you lived in was immense. FO NV fails in the aspect. The map may be the same size as the original , but one sixth of the game map is closed off , possibly for a future DLC. Most places one visits have nothing, no notes, no history, or anything. While I could believe that mos areast would be picked over by now, I would have expected more evidence of human occupations. A couple of small settlements outside of Vegas with survivors/losers of when House pushed people out of Vegas would have been nice.
That having been said, a couple of the vaults surpass FO3 with great back stories. Also, the storyline is so much better in NV, it helps offset that . Character development requires more thought as to what you want from your character. At level 20, there are plenty of things that can kill you in NV. Your actions also have consequences, so if you kill someone in a town, they don't forget it in a week. You can pursue a backstory with your companions if you wish, or not : if you don't want to. You are not forced down a " I want to reunite with my dad/save the Capitol wasteland/destroy the Enclave (again)/make everyone happy". The true storyline unfolds how you see fit. Your actions,even if noble, may have unexpected results. You don't find some of that out until you view the slides at the end.

To those people who hated the dungeon crawl of FO3, I really hate running into an invisible wall after I spend half an hour real time climbing to the top of a hill. That is an immersion killer; if there ever was one. I also hate that I might clip into a hillside and not be able to progress. Some more thought should have gone into some of that . I know some people have said, well your followers can't follow you. So what? What if I did not HAVE any followers at the time, etc? I would have prefered that they say " you have reached the end of the map" like in FO3. At least, I know that is as far as I can go.

Insofar as no graphics updated, what were you expecting? Did you not see any screenshots before you bought the game? Eye candy is nice but it has never been a game changer for me. Too many games relie on that alone instead of a story to go along with it...oh, look at the new and shiny!! Aren't we great? Then there is no story to go with it.

The game has more going on for it than FO3 did, but I like both about the same. Since the mechanics were reworked, it is not a DLC; not even in the least. I like being able to rework ammo, wish there were more things to craft at a fire and workbench. I am glad that skills are required to make bottlecap mines etc etc (though I miss them). I miss using a MIRV to wipe whole towns out, but if you want a Godmode, someone has made it for you. I am not sure what you expected out of the game , but it has been everything I thought it would be....and then some.

1- its not a DLC. how can it be a DLC if its bigger then the game that its a sequel too. its bigger then fallout 3 so it is a worthy sequel.

2-i like the music, but i wish Mr. New vegas would speak up.

3- the graphics are slightly better. but they were not given a new engine, so there was little they could do. i am happy with what they did improve

4- there called mountains, you tries climbin them. it aint easy.

5- Impossible for many reasons. wouldn't it svck if someone you invited to play didnt want to side with the faction you wanted to side with, and ruined your reputation with that faction or killed a vital NPC. also you would have to stop moving every time a teammate uses V.A.T.S. and the world is just to big for it to work. what about conversations, what would you do when you friend was talking to an NPC. i would not work.

6- yeah i kinda agree

your final point- Fallout new vegas is bigger then fallout 3. it would be like releasing Dead rising 2 as a DLC to Dead rising 1 because they are similar.

Fallout NV is bigger and better then 3 so it is not a DLC.

How many times am i going to have to repeat myself.

Also with regards to Spectre's point 5, what would happen if the NPC who was being conversed with was slaughtered by the other player mid-dialogue.

With regards to repeating ourselves ad nauseum Spectre, unfortionately probably until we turn black in the face and cowp over.

I'm with you. I generally stop paying attention when they complain about graphics because its been known since the game was announced that it would run on the same engine and look just like F3 (maybe with a little more polish). So to expect some great innovation in graphics or new revelation in the use of the F3 engine is naive at best and completely out of the loop on the other end of the spectrum.

Honestly, I wouldn't mind if they put out several more Fallout games using this engine.

I mean, I'd like them to fix some of the more pervasive glitches, like important NPCs wandering off to their death, or things getting stuck in the ground, but I think it's a fine engine. This is the third game I've enjoyed on the engine, and they happen to be 3 of my favorite games ever.. so.. why mess with a good thing, I say.

I would not mind them using the engine, but I would want them to use it in a way that better fits with the series. Loki uses the Gamebryo engine, and so does Kohan 2...
What I would really prefer the most, is a game that plays almost exactly like FO2, but uses their existing Gamebryo engine to do it. :shrug:

**In fact, this unfinished tech demo by Troika demonstrates precisely what I would want (in finished & polished form).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzYmQyHl2bc (and yes, it includes optional 'First person'.)

Missing in the Fallout serious as a whole?

Horses.

Nuff said.

This isn't really a critique, as critique implies thinking critically about the work you're critiquing. This seems more like some silly "hey guiz, you know what would be awesom? Coop! And bettar graphix! This game sux because it doesn't innovate! What? Different ammo types? Damage threshold? Choices and consequences and an inability to make a godcharacter? Those aren't innovations!" rant.

Boom,extinct!

Horses,Good point,i really expected to see a horse or atleast a Robotic horse like the one advertised in fo3 during load screens.i really thought it was gonna be part of the dlc in fo3 but i was hugely dissapointed when it turned out to be a mini robohorse toy.Hopefully they get it right with one of the vegas dlc's and give us some sort of vehicle or animal to ride or drive and before everyone starts yapping that its not fallout cannon or some other rubbish about the fallout bible or that it wont work because it will get stuck in things then zip it because if they want to make it work and enough of the community want it then it CAN happen.

on another note i cant help but laugh at people who are offended by the word nerd.its just too funny seeing their reactions
**** edit **** To those who are runnin their mouths about how big a fallout series fan they are n this n that then going on to say that noway should fallout have coop,to them i say go and look at footage of the original fallout3 that interplay,black isle n whoever else was working on before besthsoft got the rights to the ip of fallout,IT HAD MULTIPLAYER CO OP!

It also did not have VATS which is the main reason co-op would not work with the current fallout games.