So far I have beaten the game twice once for the ncr the other time for myself. But after the ending battle at the damn thats it? This was done on Fallout 3 and people hated it. Would like to be able to continue my journey and just mess around as the owner of the strip, have the lucky 38 open to the public like the casino and the cocktail lounge. Would also be better if you had more npcs on the strip seems kind of well empty. As well as the casinos. Primm that place once you get the town stored out is like an old peoples home for gambling only open for the day and not many npcs there. Also fixes for the ultra lux from crashing in the bath area. Scripting fixes made for ED-E once your able to carry weapons in the TOPS if you have ED-E with you he no longer gets his laser re-armed and has issues following you afterwards. Then the Thorn if once you win if you go into the animal/creature exit area the game crashes, if you start up a paid fight the npc creatures below just look at each other bugging out that area of the questline. Oh and why is my super mutant friend carrying around a marksman carbine with a silencer on it? Also why is my first recon buddy now carrying a laser pistol.... he started using one after I told Arcade to help with the followers during the battle.
But my main gripe is not being able to play after I beat the game just like FO3.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2010-08-23-why-fallout-new-vegas-has-to-end-article

Well its something the devs fail to take into account by players not once but twice now on a game franchise=/ It would not be hard, but would require a little effort to keep the story going. placement of more npcs, changing out of npcs. Hopefully the DLC fixes this but having to wait past dec since the xbox is getting the first dlc....=/ lame and let me say lame again....

They didnt fail to take anything into account. Its done this way on purpose.

Won't happen, WAY too many variables. Of course, with my luck they'll announce that's EXACTLY the first DLC now :rolleyes:

I am still waiting for the common wealth up in mass......

Well then, if it has been brought up so consistently and so many times, to the point that you bash your head against a wall and the number can't even be properly represented with the use of comma separation, I think we have accurately identified a problem here.

Yes. That today's gamers obviously think only open-ended games are worth playing.

With any luck they will bring out a Broken Steel-esque DLC soon.

I hope not, Broken Steel was terrible.

Bethesda might make one, Obsidian won't.

Oh that's right, I forgot, we're supposed to hate everything and anything about FO3 here. Everything they did was terrible. I heard all the cool kids think that way.

That too, but even people who like Fallout 3 think Broken Steel was terrible. Including me :swear:

I thought broken steel was great and even if it was a lot worse, I'd still get it just to continue playing instead of a final ending.

You can continue playing, just not with the same character. :twirl:

The fundamental problem here seems to be with recognizing the narrative format. When we play Fallout we're telling a story, just like in a book or a movie. In this case it's the story of this courier who got caught up in the Hoover Dam/New Vegas conflict. When that story is over, it's over. "'And he lived happily ever after, to the end of his days" or, you know, not.

The nice thing is that once we're done this story we can just go back and re-tell it completely differently. That's the whole point.

If it makes you feel better consider each replay a "reboot", they seem hugely popular in fluffy Hollywood right now.

Just save right before the 'point of no return'

The devs knew full well about Broken Steel and what caused it. They chose to have no freeplay after the ending anyway, and for very good reasons at that.

Much more importantly, they warned you with a huge unskippable message box for everyone who hadn't been following the game before release.

And really, I don't see the difference (besides Lanius' helmet and his sword) between simply not doing the final quest like the message box recommends, and playing after the end... Except that playing after the end would cheapen the ending.



Not just a "little" effort. We're talking about a huge amount of effort here. There's four different paths to the ending, each of which are massively different from each other in results. On top of that, each major settlement also has its own ending, which varies depending on the sidequests you do there and how you handled those sidequests. The complexity here is growing exponentially, not linearly.

http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1131103-the-game-has-ended-oh-no-what-am-i-supposed-to-do/

Yep, because "the end" doesn't really mean "the end". :shakehead:

I like FO3 more than New Vegas.


Broken Steel was terrible.

if you want want to play.. after end just get a mod.. on steam news there is 25 most downloaded mods... there should be one that makes you play. after ending..

i dont get the point of playing after end.. but.. if that suits you . i dont care..

this...

I agree. Would it be so hard to be able to have the story continue. I think they did it so they can pull another "our customers requested it DLC" to extend the ending, and hey, make a grip of money.

Yes, yes it would. At a bare minimum, if you allowed freeplay after the end, you'd have to remove all NCR troops and autofail all NCR quests (any ending except the NCR one), remove all legion troops and autofail any legion quests (any ending except legion), completely revamp the power structure in New Vegas (Yes Man ending), and remove the Kings (House ending.)

You'd then need more quests and many more lines of dialog to convey the situation changing.

If we had a game that allowed freeplay after the end without urinating all over the ending, we'd end up with the game coming out in 2012, if that.

Meanwhile, the way we have now, where there's this big huge message box that cannot be skipped or ignored allows all the freeroaming benefit of freeplay after the end with none of the downsides. Not one single person who's ever advocated for FP after the end has ever explained to me why the solution we have is a bad one.

The difference between FO3 and NV's endings is that the former is shoe-horned, full of fridge logic, and a wall banger, while the latter actually makes sense and wraps things up nicely.

You can't continue on after the end of NV because the world is an entirely different place. It would require an entirely different game to depict the Mojave under, say, Legion rule. It would take another for the NCR, House, and the different permutations of Wildcard. That's a bit too lofty, in my book. Essentialy it comes down to whether you want to have multiple endings, or a single ending that allows you to keep playing (and is, by it's very nature, boring and uneventful so as not to change the wasteland overly much).

Obsidian made the right choice. There's nothing wrong with simply starting a new character.

Also, why do so many people want to contiue playing after the level cap is reached? It sort of ceases to be an RPG once character growth comes to a halt.