Tell us how you feel about Obsidian post New Vegas release.

In my books they're awesome sauces.

They just need to test their games a lot more.

Awesome, and why is 1 option positive and the rest negative?... i take it you don't like New Vegas?

you should give them a little more time be patient and im confident that the patch will solve a lot of problems and i'm having a lot of fun playing the game i didnt have major bugs yet

Where's the option for "Obsidian is full of ignorance and learns nothing from other game developer's mistakes."

The lead creator of Fallout 3 said he learned two main lessons from Fallout 3:

1) Don't have a definitive ending.
2) Don't put a level cap

Guess which game has both?

Can't vote because there really isn't a choice that best reflects my opinion.

My opinion is that they did a great job, but there are a few areas they could definitely improve on.

Right. Right. New Vegas makes no improvements what so ever over Fallout 3. And guess what? Fallout 3 still has a level cap. They never changed that. Fallout 4 will probably have a level cap. What kind of developer doesn't learn from his own mistakes?

Or maybe Obsidian should just listen to everything the community says. I'm sure that would lead to a fantastic game. :glare:

The game that is a lot better. If I had gotten to choose, it would've been capped at 20.

Anyways, my opinion of Obsidian has always been fairly high since I think they are one of few RPG developers that develop *interesting* and creative games, though they sadly suffer in the polish department at times.

New Vegas will most likely end up as my fav Obsidian product except for Mask of the Betrayer.

I've only had Fallout 3 and soon New Vegas so haven't yet experienced Obsidian's work.

What I can say is that as a Poll this is stupidly biased. Maybe you could change it?

Everyone is allowed a mulligan.

The game is great. So I will give them a reasonable amount of time to fix the bugs. I may be lucky, as I have not run into any game-breaking bugs, or maybe people just over-exaggerate...I don't know.

The DLC, however, better be solid and bug-free PRIOR to release.

Improved, since Neverwinter Nights 2. Fallout: NV is the first good Obsidian game I've ever played.

I don't care about the bugs, people who cry that it's an aweful clearly have never played a video game a day in their life.

The reason I voted for the last option is because I have this really weird game bug/glitch that makes my character unplayable after I finish the main quest. I've tried it several different ways but my character always ends up breaking. I don't understand what Obsidian did wrong but I'm sure they'll fix it in the next DLC/Patch.

The game itself is superb. The quests, the writing, the characters are all truly top notch. The world is huge, the real Fallout ending is a welcome return...

But I'm still a little disappointed. I knew going into it that there would be bugs; with a company like Obsidian and one like Bethesda working on this, they're to be expected. And to be fair, I've only encountered a few bugs and all of them are easily fixed with one way or another... Yet I've heard a lot about bugs, and it's hard to not be disappointed that everyone else is not having as good a time as me.



That's not a bug or a glitch, that's fully intentional. It's meant to lend the ending gravitas. I guess you weren't observant enough to notice the huge unskippable text box that warned you about the final battle and how if you had anything else you wanted to do, you should do it before accepting the quest.

Never had an Obsidian before. Don't think I'll be very quick to buy one in the future. No matter what the fanbois say. They dropped the ball with Fallout.

Or a Fallout game in general, or a massive, open-world game with multiple factions/quest lines/dialogue options, for that matter.

Making an unplayable game isnt a "great job." This game is fun in terms of gameplay, but a piece of [censored] in terms of quality. I haven't played it in 3 days because of the constant freezes and quest breaking bugs. I didn't collect scrap metal for hours just to have a quest end because i can't open a freakin door.

It's more than likely he's encountered little to no bugs. I've barely come across any.

Considering the restraints and restrictions they had to work within I think they did a marvelous job.
New Vegas is more "Fallout" and more of an RPG than F3 was.

Your experience is not the standard. I've encountered very few bugs in my playthrough.



Fun fact: You remember Grim Reaper's Sprint? The original version in FO3, where if you kill an enemy in VATS all your AP is restored? The one that was completely broken and made every character godlike? That was the winner of one of those "we'll integrate one community perk into the game" contests before the release.

So yeah, listening to the community can be very terrible.

Just test your damn games before release and you will be my favorite developers. Now, not so much.

Obsidian is credit to team!

They actually tested it for at least a month. Sawyer has even admitted that some of the more serious bugs (such as the saves reverting) was never encountered in their testing times. It's possible. It happens all the time. If it didn't then most games would come out completely bug free. Saying they didn't test at all is ridiculous.

Am I trying to justify the amount of bugs? No. But still, don't over-react.

I wish they had told us about the bugs so I could have bought the game on xbox and not ps3 and was massively disappointed there is no poker in a game called new Vegas . Who decided to not have poker ? He should be made to clean toilets at the office for 3 months

Load a save. TAADAAAA!