Anyone else worried that New Vegas is going to svck? : Fallout: New Vegas

» Fri May 13, 2011 1:53 am

I'm actually a bit worried. These people are notorious for delivering brilliant plotlines and fascinating gameplay but delivering products that are still patched and modded years after the intitial release. Planescape: Torment, Fallout 2, Knights of the Old Republic 2, Neverwinter Nights 2... I'm still buying the game and am happy they're finally redoing the setting that made them famous, but I'd be lying if I said I was 100% confident I was getting the complete package they planned out.

» Fri May 13, 2011 3:54 pm

In a word, OP, NO.

» Fri May 13, 2011 12:19 am

At the very least it can't be worse than FO3, and I liked that. So, not worried, I guess?

Obsidian has never disappointed me with a game. Neverwinter Nights 2 was superior to its predecessor, and its expansion, Mask of the Betrayer, was one of the most in depth and amazing RPGs I've played on the PC, ever. Alpha Protocol was awesome. It had bugs and wasn't polished as much as I would have liked, but nothing game breaking. And it was still an incredible enough experience that I played it three times in a row. KOTOR 2 was incredible, and though it lacked the 'OMG-reveal' of KOTOR 1, it's story was generally more refined and better. The game wasn't really finished - and I loved it more than KOTOR 1 anyway.

Obsidian has a knack for taking another developer's series or franchise and making them better in every way. Unfortunately it seems that being handed the reigns also comes with time tables that are difficult to meet, resulting in unfinished or unpolished work that had to be completed in a hurry. It doesn't look like that happened with New Vegas though, so I have no worries.

Yes i give obsidian the credit of improvment. There not perfect starting from scratch, but with fallout new vegas they borrowed Bethsedas game engine, then enchanced it. Yes there will be your occasional Floating Female.

But hey if you ask me i like my ladies in the air as i like them on the ground.

» Fri May 13, 2011 2:06 pm

my only concern is that everything is going to be too complicated. the whole reputation/damage threshold/strength requirement kinda things all sound like they'll be more complicated/annoying than fun.

Those will be some of the best parts about New Vegas. It would svck if a fallout was made without reputation system, damage threshold and strenght requirements.... :whistling:

» Fri May 13, 2011 5:52 am

Of course. Until actual reviews come in, meaning from people who don't have any financial interest in what they say, there is always the possibility that something won't be so good. Here's hoping they did their best and made an excellent game.

» Fri May 13, 2011 1:21 pm

Never played Alpha Protocol I take it?

I have, and I noticed no bugs or glitches. It played near perfect for me - 3 times all the way through. I'm having a hard time understanding it when reviewers mentioned "game breaking" bugs, etc. because I never saw them. I don't see how anyone that loves games like Mass Effect could fail to love Alpha Protocol, because they play very much the same. The big difference being that Alpha Protocol changes based on your decisions far more than Mass Effect 1 or 2 ever have.

» Fri May 13, 2011 12:28 pm

fnv is going to be awesome. you don't need graphics to have a good game.

You just need guns, six, and Floating People!

» Fri May 13, 2011 5:03 am

Huh, because Fallout 3 didn't have crappy animations and a crapload of bugs?

Not to mention one of the absolutely terrible storyline and cut n' paste npc's

The only reason I think people liked it was "oohh look at all the guns" and "ooh look at the enemies explode and body parts fly around hahahah"

In all honesty I have no idea how the game got such a high rating at all. I mean really the game is just terrible in almost all aspects and yet somehow everyone loves it.

Obsidian seems to have at least improved upon the storyline and possibly even on the cut n' paste npc's (ie diverse dialogue)

» Fri May 13, 2011 10:11 am

I played FO3. Weird bugs like that don't bother me any more. I mean, FO3 was at least as buggy as any Obsidian game. I've never, for instance, been unable to complete a quest in an Obsidian game because the questgiver ran off randomly. Also, Obsidian is very good about patches.

And if that weren't enough, I think the Obsidian reputation for bugginess is at least partly undeserved. I played KoTOR2 and NWN2 on release and noticed no major bugs that jumped out at me.

Are they good with patches...I'm still waiting for my Alpha Protocol patch.

» Fri May 13, 2011 3:48 pm

I have, and I noticed no bugs or glitches. It played near perfect for me - 3 times all the way through. I'm having a hard time understanding it when reviewers mentioned "game breaking" bugs, etc. because I never saw them. I don't see how anyone that loves games like Mass Effect could fail to love Alpha Protocol, because they play very much the same. The big difference being that Alpha Protocol changes based on your decisions far more than Mass Effect 1 or 2 ever have.

From what I hear, some people will have flawless games while other people have bug-filled, game-breaking nightmares. Some character builds are broken, but if you pick the correct one it's smooth sailing.

» Fri May 13, 2011 4:39 am

Wow..a..a...so I guess you really don't like "true" RPG. :rolleyes:

ya. funny thing. i kinda hate rpgs. but i love fallout and TES because of the exploration and freedom. plus fallout is post-apocalyptic, my favorite.

weird how rpg is my second least favorite genre (1st being sports), but oblivion and FO3 are my 2 favorite games

» Fri May 13, 2011 10:56 am

Never played Alpha Protocol I take it?

No, but I've heard others say that its bugginess was greatly overexagerated as well.

Of the Obsidian games I have experience with, none of them are particularly buggy. NWN2's problem was that the engine wasn't optimized; which they fixed in subsequent patches. KoTOR2's problem was that Lucasarts kicked the game out the door for Christmas, which is why the ending seems so incomplete. The kicker is that Obsidian offered to patch in the ending they'd planned but LA said no.

I'm actually a bit worried. These people are notorious for delivering brilliant plotlines and fascinating gameplay but delivering products that are still patched and modded years after the intitial release. Planescape: Torment, Fallout 2, Knights of the Old Republic 2, Neverwinter Nights 2... I'm still buying the game and am happy they're finally redoing the setting that made them famous, but I'd be lying if I said I was 100% confident I was getting the complete package they planned out.

A game being modded and patched years after release is a good thing, because it shows that the company is committed to supporting their community and product.

Are they good with patches...I'm still waiting for my Alpha Protocol patch.

I think you might want to check around, because from what I understand, AP has been patched a few times since release.

» Fri May 13, 2011 5:19 am

Theirs one expection even though its Obsidian, the original team that worked on Fallouts 1 and 2 are the ones that developed New Vegas that is the main reason why we won't see a dissapointment from Obsidian.

» Fri May 13, 2011 3:37 pm

I'm sure if I don't have to hear "we stand now at the precipice" more than one time in New Vegas, it'll at least be better than Fallout 3, which was still a good game.

» Fri May 13, 2011 12:40 pm

I don't have any worries about New Vegas. It looks great. And as far as animations and bugs, Fallout 3 had all the same problems and it was a great game.

» Fri May 13, 2011 7:21 pm

A game being modded and patched years after release is a good thing, because it shows that the company is committed to supporting their community and product.

I'm sorry, I thought you knew. No, these are dedicated fans who patch and mod, nerds who are forced to comb through 'Fallout diaries' and faulty programming and osbscure interviews to see what went wrong, then rebuild the game system. The mod patches for Fallout 2 alone are massive. KOTOR 2 is a pretty tragic piece in terms of unfulfilled potential. Chris Avellone has a nasty streak of luck when it comes to finishing his games.

» Fri May 13, 2011 6:05 am

I'm sorry, I thought you knew. No, these are dedicated fans who patch and mod, nerds who are forced to comb through 'Fallout diaries' and faulty programming and osbscure interviews to see what went wrong, then rebuild the game system. The mod patches for Fallout 2 alone are massive. KOTOR 2 is a pretty tragic piece in terms of unfulfilled potential. Chris Avellone has a nasty streak of luck when it comes to finishing his games.

Obsidian supports those efforts though. In the case of KOTOR 2, they even released the high resolution movies files they used to make the original low resolution ones used in the game, so that PC users could benefit from the advances in PC hardware in the intervening time.

Also, patch support may not extend for years, but Obsidian has a better record of putting out patches for their games than a lot of other companies.

And really, it's no surprise that FO2 was a buggy mess at release. Wasn't it released just 9 months after FO1? That is an insane turnaround, and explains a lot. I bet with another year of development time, a lot of the insanity and nonsensical elements of the story and encounters would have been ironed out. But that was Black Isle, and though some team members may be the same, we can't lump in any of their failings or mistakes with Obsidian.

» Fri May 13, 2011 1:10 pm

No, but I've heard others say that its bugginess was greatly overexagerated as well.

Of the Obsidian games I have experience with, none of them are particularly buggy. NWN2's problem was that the engine wasn't optimized; which they fixed in subsequent patches. KoTOR2's problem was that Lucasarts kicked the game out the door for Christmas, which is why the ending seems so incomplete. The kicker is that Obsidian offered to patch in the ending they'd planned but LA said no.

A game being modded and patched years after release is a good thing, because it shows that the company is committed to supporting their community and product.

I think you might want to check around, because from what I understand, AP has been patched a few times since release.

Thanks...even though I played it three times now!

» Fri May 13, 2011 2:17 pm

ya. funny thing. i kinda hate rpgs. but i love fallout and TES because of the exploration and freedom. plus fallout is post-apocalyptic, my favorite.

weird how rpg is my second least favorite genre (1st being sports), but oblivion and FO3 are my 2 favorite games

Thats because those aren't "true" rpg games either, like the older Fallouts or Planescape:Torrment say, they're hybrid action/rpg games that draw in the non-rpg crowds. Not that it's a bad thing or anything. Just sayin'. Probably makes them alot more money that way.

» Fri May 13, 2011 10:22 am

The beauty is Bethesda isn't any better at any of that. :thumbsup:

» Fri May 13, 2011 7:26 pm

I can answer that question right now no New Vegas will not svck it fact it will be GOTY.

» Fri May 13, 2011 5:23 pm

Never ever crossed my mind, and you must NEVER speak such heresy again!!! Capiche!? There's a guy in my class that was writing up a list of most anticipated games for some site/forum thingy. He put New Vegas at #14 and said it was going to be okay. They'll never find the body

» Fri May 13, 2011 11:54 am

actually, I woke up yesterday really really exited - and I've NEVER been exited about the release of a computer game before. Strange. But then, later on in the afternoon, I had a major comedown, like... what if the game isn't as good as Fallout 3? What if we're hyping it up too much, to the point that even the best game in the world wouldn't live up to our expectations?

So from today I'm keeping a close reality-check. It's just a game, I will enjoy playing it.

» Fri May 13, 2011 9:41 pm

it will at least be as good as FO3

» Fri May 13, 2011 10:14 am

You call a few bugs bad design?
The only svcking that will be related to NV is the robot six