:shrug:

No idea.. I'm assuming that it'll have respawn.. although there were lots of places in F3 that I kind of wished once you cleared an area out it would then be inhabited by friendlies. I thought that would have added a neat touch. Like you cleared the way for others to settle in an area or something.

Well... It does happen with Fort Bannister, post-Broken Steel (assuming one didn't clear it out previously). That said, I quite agree. There were many areas - such as The Mall - which I wished would simply remain clean after you'd gone through the effort of cleaning it out. Instead, every time you clean it wout, it simply reverts to how it was before. Same about all those Enclave camps I constantly went through the trouble of cleaning out. I didn't much like respawning in Fallout 3, I tell you. For an inexhaustable source of enemies, random encounters would've been enough and there's almost always some place in the world where enemies can be found anyway...

Thus, I too wonder how much if any respawning there is in Fallout New Vegas...

In another thread here, some people said that casino's don't respawn (or at least, when you are banned from a casino it is a permanent thing). Also, with the addition of the reputation system, they will definitely have to retool the way the game "resets" NPC disposition/wellbeing every few days; you build up reputation with NPCs over time and it does not reset.

I don't know the direct answer to your question and I don't think it's been stated yet officially, but maybe the above information will give you some hope that the system has been changed at least somewhat...

I was just reading this topic on the way to work and i was thinking that maybe we have got the answer indirectly.
I don't remember which dev/writer said it but whoever said we could kill all 2200 npc's but one mayhave given us the respawn clue.
If npcs respawn wouldn't he have said that we could kill a minimum of 2200 npc's?

I don't know, but it could be the answer!

Not for civilized humanoids. (raiders included) (feral ghouls excluded)
But all animals and feral humanoids should respawn after some time.

I think the problem with clearing out an area and then it never respawning or having friendlies turn up and settle it is that sooner or later those of us that like to spend a LONG time on one character would repopulate the entire wasteland with nice people. Which is unrealistic, [censored]s exist and there will always be more of them no matter how many you shoot. It would be nice if "some" places would randomly spawn good or bad guys temporarily and then you never really know what you're going to get but at some point if it spawns friendlies you have to spawn some bad guys to clear them out unless you're being all evil and doing that yourself.

Who's the one? If it's the doc I'll be upset. One of my chars rp opens with killing him...


Otherwise agreed with goldfish man. Civilised persons should remain dead, the rest are more numerate and less likely to stay away.

The game engine is pretty saavy in this area, allowing the respawn settings to be tweaked differently for different areas. With scripts I have found that we can get very complex with respawns, and I know Beth/Obs can do tons better. I suspect the respawn will be more complex than a single day-value across the world.

I'm not sure how happy i'll be if some enemies do not respawn, i love the whole "never ending horde of raiders" in Fallout3. It made the world seem abit more populated, and also made sense that most surviving people in the world would have turned to this way of life.

Off topic, do we know if raiders will make a return in new vegas?

Opening cinematic has a person in a Psycho-Tic helmet get head-shotted. To dead. With lead. I didn't feel alot of dread...Though.

Okay?
Was one of the worst things ever to happen to fallout IMO.
For there to be raiders is one thing, for the land to be covered by raiders is another.
There were too many raiders in Fallout 3.
Worst of all, they were generic.
No name, no agenda, no nothing.
They were just there for being there.
Placed in the game for just having raiders without giving a reason for why.

I hated them, but it seems that we have Khans and Jackals now, and they seem to have stories to them.

I hope there never is a raider faction like it was in fallout 3 ever again.

i agree Gabriel, good point

I got to slightly disagree with this. I liked that there were raiders with no reason or command structure. But I am glad that they have included the Khans and Jackals in this game. I hope there are still raiders who have no back story just generic pieces of [censored] to be killed.

On topic: I don't want to see that non important area's change (evergreen terrace in F3) but do hope that if I do a quest to attack a CL base with the NCR and we win then I want the NCR to hold on to that base.

Some areas will have enemies that respawn, some won't. Rule of thumb, if it is a generic NPC, odds are you will see it again in that area. If it has a name, then you won't if you kill it.

Now, some areas are not set to respawn, some are. At least with how it was in FO3. This game is not known at this time.

Personally, I would like to see some areas respawn with nice or neutral folks, and some with enemies, and some areas remain barren.

When I played fallout 3, I would have liked if some buildings / sewers / vaults re-spawned enemies. In fallout 3 only surface, or the wasteland was the only place where things respawn, where as I would have liked it if buildings / sewers / vaults had enemies that re-spawned, like oblivion, in oblivion dungeons had enemies that would re-spawn that's what I would like as far as respawn goes.

Now where as clearing out an area then people settling into it I think is an awesome idea and I hope F:NV would have that feature but I would not count on it as there's only 3 weeks until it hits the shelves.

The biggest reason why I don't want any civilized humanoids to respawn is that they said we could kill everyone in the game.
I don't want to slaughter a town only to find out it's been repopulated after a week.
I kill everyone then I kill everyone.
Including generics.

:cryvaultboy:
in "real life" it wouldn't be possible to kill everyone so enemies need to respwan in most areas, a few areas they prob should't but in a "real life" situation something or someone would re populate certain areas again, like settlements or buildings, its just not realistic at all or even semi realistic to kill everything around and have nothing left, thats not even fun, that wouldn't have the right feel to it, they do need to make the respwn system more complex so for instance if you kill raiders at a certain area, maybe sometihng else respawns down the road, or clear a building out maybe another type of enemy inhabits it after a while. the actualy number of people/other things in the game is just a representation of the actualy number of inhabitants, like in FO3 where lets say megaton had 20 or 30 people, it was just a representation of how many people were really there, more like 2 or 3 hundred, same with rivet city etc, so any idea of actually being able to kill everything isn't just not realistic it would leave you being the only thing left on the entire map and i just don't see any fun in that at all. thats like you thinking you can kill everyone in your town, the town i live in has 200,000 people so it would be impossible to kill everyone, not even possible. there is always gonna people around or creatures etc.

They said we could kill everyone. I want to kill everyone. I don't want to see some disgusting generic NPC popping up all happy to see me.
Won't back down on this.
Won't change my opinion on this.

That was my point, they wouldn't have made that "kill everyone" comment if there were respawning...

it could just mean people with names, not including raiders

There's going to be 2200 named NPC's?

Unrealistic? Depends on how you see it. I mean...

- Super mutants are the enemies of almost everyone and not all that many in numbers (especially after our rampages towards them), they should have a limited supply of FEV (in fact, it's mentioned that they're searching for more, so they may be running out of it) - and as far as FEV goes, not everyone becomes a super mutant after being dipped in the stuff either, so all in all - their numbers thining and so forth seems logical.

- The Enclave is, at the end of the game, essentially shattered. They have no (known) leader, they have been beaten by the main character and the Brotherhood... So what reason do they have to hang around? You'd rather expect them to quietly leave rather than waste resources when they're already beaten. Even if that was not the case, the Enclave has it's "pure human" ideology going on and thus, for them to be low in manpower would be to be expected (similar to how the original Brotherhood rarely accepts outsiders into their ranks). Granted, this MAY have changed with Colonel Autumn in charge, but chances aren't too great of this - he was only truly in charge for a fairly short time after all. So, where are they getting manpower and resources to re-man the outposts we clean up? Doesn't make sense...

- Talon Company may not have the same problem with replinishing their ranks as the above does - but still, they don't seem to accept just anyone in their ranks either, and furthermore it takes time and money to create soldiers, so... Furthermore, since we can kill their leader in the region, it wouldn't be unexpcted to see them pull out and regroup, leaving only occassional patrols out in the wasteland (not inside the capital itself) for us to encounter.

Raiders, however, are another thing as they're not an organization, they're more like a lot of indvidual gangs under the same name, sorta, with people from all walks of life in them, so I can excuse them respawning. As I can excuse respawning of feral gouls and all manner of critters (radroaches, mirelurks, radscorpions, Yao Gai, etc). Robots are more of a puzzle though - unlike animals, they don't multipy or the like, so there should be a limited number of'em - who keeps releasing'em all over the wasteland? :rolleyes: .



That'd be a change, at least. Though I'd rather they stay (as in not simply changing the next time you show up there) until cleaned out by an opposing force or such (such as the player or a bypassing deathclaw or the like). Assuming it's a "permaantent" place such as a sandbag fort, of course, not some random spot in the wasteland.



Oh, I dunno. "realistically" speaking, the setting is in a post-apocalyptic world, where Mankind have greatly dwindled in numbers. Manpower is often refered to as a constant problem in Fallout, even for armies and military organizations. When they speak of "armies" in the world of Fallout, then I imagine no more than a few hundred people fightning on either side. And it IS certainly possible for the player to kill hundreds of people, so under those circumstances, asking why the enemies never run out is a fair question . I would, however, welcome changes at least - instead of having the same group of raiders occupy the same sandbag fort that I cleaned up just a few hours before, then they could have something else there for a change, if they feel that respawning HAS to occur.

you need to use some logic, there are 2,200 npc's in NV and those you can kill, they didn't say you could kill everything in the game and nothing will be left, in FO3 you could kill most every npc and there's sitll plenty of enemies left so the "you can kill all npc's" refers to npc's only, its not possible to kill every living thing around, the number of enemies at any given time in the video game is limited due to graphics etc. so the number of living things in the game is a "representation" of the actual number, in your town you don't only have 20 people, but because of graphics limitations there can only be so many moving objects in an area at any given time, so respawning is a way of basically giving it a feel of there being more living etc objects, so for example again in "real" life your town lets say doesn't have just 20 people in it, get it, my town has 200,000 people in it, but in a video game you can't make a town with even 5,000 people in it, so respawning is a way of dealing with that problem, so lets say in fallout 3, there's not really just 30 people living in rivet city, its an aircraft carrier it would have room for hundreds of people easily. real towns don't have only 10 or 15 people in em, they only do that because of the video game limitations. there you go.

to add to my previous post for anyone saying its post apocalyptic and not many people would be left, lets take the city of new vegas, do you really think it only has lets say 50 people in it? its a pretty big town, even in post apocalyptic situation it would have thousands of people living there most likely, its a pretty big city, but but because of video game limitations they can't put anywhere close to the real population, in real life, vegas has over 500,000 people so even in a post apocalyptic situation its gonna have several thousands of people but they obviously can't put that many people in the game, so respawning deals with that. i can't see how anyone really thinks you can kill everyone around and leave nothing left, you can't even kill everyone in a town with only 500 people in it, so some people aren't thinking here.