It was fun to explore and there was a really good amount of stuff to scavenge. The setting was much nicer too. The sun really gets to you in Vegas..

Desert------------------------------------------------Swamp

lol Obsidian has no idea what they're doing.

They do when it comes to making a great Fallout game but not so much when it comes to making a good TES game.

Good thing that was never their intent.

Let's not throw hidden(Well not really) jabs in there. Bethesda Games Studio and Obsidian have their own fortes and shortcommings. Bethesda's ability to basically be a swiss army knife in terms of everything is impressive though, other than their writing shortcommings wether because Todd Howard decided it or because their writers do svck. I wouldn't say Obsidian made a good Fallout game either unless I judge them as I did Bethesda. Aka not Black Isle standards. Chris Avellone's been known to not have his facts straight either, even if I respect him and Josh Sawyer. If your trying to say their "good" at Fallout games though then New Vegas failed worse than 2. Hardly comparable to 1 as a sequel. Both teams have much to improve. We shouldn't praise Obsidian just because of anything against Bethesda. Back to the DLC. I still think Play got either good info or they were guessing by the trademarks. Although the source might of misspelled Old World Blues it wouldn't be surprising if Ulysses/Joshua Graham/ or Big Empty is the subject of the new DLC. And it most likely will either be announced next week or after that. Release next week? Highly doubt it. No issues though. I want a well written and featured DLC with minimal bugs. So do most of you I'm guessing. Let Obsidian and whatever few Bethesda lackeys are helpig take their time if needed. No matter how much we're dieing for these especially after the hints dropped in Dead Money >.< *explodes*

What's ironic, is that New Vegas - at times - gets slammed for lacking TES features and staples and looking and feeling too much like Fallout despite the label.

Let them take their sweet time. I just hope they realize how much they're frustrating their customer base. There's only so long a fan will wait before he/she gives up on the game/franchise.

This, I know exactly what you mean. Fallout 3 had a lot of dungeons because its design philosophy was "oblivion with guns".

New Vegas is more like "Fallout 2: Gamebryo Edition" and as such does not have lots of dungeons.

That being said, I did like some of the Dungeons NV DOES have, for example, Vault 34 is a super pain in the ass, but it has a very worthy reward in the guns you find in the Armory. NV has places that would be "dungeons" but they're inhabited by non-hostile factions, like Hidden Valley- if the BOS wasn't there and it was filled with angry critters it would be a pretty neat dungeon. Does that mean I think that Bark Scorpions should replace the BOS? No, not at all.

The only real dungeons in the original fallouts would be the vaults and other quest related areas like Mariposa base, the Oil Rig, the Cathedral, etc. But the important thing about those is that they're quest related, they aren't just random dungeons that are scattered around as in TES and Fallout 3.

I wouldn't mind having dungeon crawler gameplay in a DLC, after all, they experimented with survival horror in Dead Money, and I enjoyed the result. The formula for a fallout dungeon crawler has of course already been done successfully in Fallout 3.

One thing I hope Bethesda does if they make Fallout 4 is to bring in Obsidian talent to do the writing for quests and dialog, while they can handle the open world design that has dungeons and lots of loot filled places so they can satisfy the Oblivion with Guns demographic. To me that would actually be the ideal fallout game, but that's just me.

But I digress, I think Bethesda is very foolish to take this tightlipped course when it comes to their DLCs. You should at least give people a calendar date to count down to, otherwise, you'll see excitement wane everyday instead of grow.

So basically you've repeated offences against Berhesda that've been said for years, some true and many others unfounded. You have a pretty biased mindset to think that New Vegas doesn't follow a similar "dungeon" philosophy and its not based around Oblivion(With guns which FO 3 never was skipping over its multiple problems. And if so New Vegas is also that). However there are less. And the thing with New Vegas is their spread out and there's many of them but most the players touch don't feel like it while others are hidden or placed in areas that players rush through or glance past. I disgree that NV is 2 but if your trying to say New Reno was something they looked at and used extensively when figuring out how to build Vegas, the scheme of it, quests, etc. then I agree. The rest though, you can read above of my podt to Styles. You seem to be evangelizing Obsidian for the sake of it. Truely it seems like many of you glance over Brian Fargo-era Interplay and Black Isle at the time. Obsidian is a good studio but if you approach it with an open mind and look over Bethesda's work you can find their just as good when they hit their Prime. Maybe even better. Many of their decisions around design and story have been explained as taken knowingly such as Oblivions plot going past politics or any sort of deep complexity between lieu of a traditional story. This also accounts issues such as Bethesda getting a handle of fully voiced games at the start of this console era. FO 3 was just their second fully voiced game. I see much more potential in Bethesda and if they do go hard Fallout 4 can succeed as a true Fallout game(I extremely doubt it can conpare to Fallout 1. 2 -possibly-). Of coarse thats being presumptious and they have a lot of hurdles. But how about some real contructive criticism over this bag of childish crying. That goes for all of you. As for Obsidian. I think they'll continue to rise aswell. I just think they get much more positive attention and glory just because they might have Fergus or Avellone than they deserve. That goes for their writing aswell.(Dead Money was fairly interesting in some parts by the way Obsidian devs if you stumble across this. I feel you held yourself back and botched some parts though.). NOTE: Sorry for all spelling errors. Typed from a touchscreen.

Where the hell did this come from? My post wasn't negative, or even really critical, more like observational. I realize that people use "Oblivion with Guns" as a derisive term, but I do not use it in that sense. Even before Fallout 3 came out, people were saying it was just going to be Oblivion with Guns.

I said: So what? An Oblivion style game in the Fallout Universe? Why the hell not?

Allow me to deconstruct your post so I can address some of your concerns.
"You have a pretty biased mindset to think that New Vegas doesn't follow a similar "dungeon" philosophy and its not based around Oblivion"
No, new vegas does not follow a dungeon philosophy. Fallout 3 had a lot of abandoned military bases, deep caves, abandoned houses and crumbled buildings which were filled with enemies and loot. There were a few settlements around, but most areas had doorways to lower levels that extended to labyrinthine paths. This is similar to oblivion in that most locations have an entryway with a few enemies and then a doorway to an interior cell, AKA a dungeon.

In new vegas there's a lot more towns and settlements. There's lots of locations that are surface locations only, and don't have much loot in them. There's some caves and mines but they often don't extend more than a few levels. For every Vault 34 there's a dozen ghost towns, boarded up buildings and truck stops, farms and sacked caravans. Many of these places are quest related, especially if they're a dungeon that goes down a few levels. In oblivion and Fallout 3 there were lots of non-quest dungeons that were just there for your amusemant. There was also less quests in F3.

"(With guns which FO 3 never was skipping over its multiple problems. And if so New Vegas is also that)."

I dont really understand this sentence, are you saying that Fallout 3 did not play like oblivion? New Vegas of course is still "oblivion with guns" in that it still has gameplay similar to oblivion, but with its toned down level scaling it feels more like Morrowind with Guns. Of course Fallout 3's level scaling was toned down from Oblivion already. I have no problem with F3 style level scaling, but it was nice that New Vegas had fixed level enemies around.

"And the thing with New Vegas is their spread out and there's many of them but most the players touch don't feel like it while others are hidden or placed in areas that players rush through or glance past."
Well, the "dungeon" locations might be spread out, but in general the map markers are much more squished together than fallout 3 or oblivion. That's because the Map is not a square but a rectangle with a lot of invisible walls and borders. I'm still hoping that the sealed off areas will be filled by a DLC.

"I disgree that NV is 2 but if your trying to say New Reno was something they looked at and used extensively when figuring out how to build Vegas, the scheme of it, quests, etc. then I agree."

I would definitely say that, and I'm glad you'd agree. I would also point out that the dialogue, the story, the setting, the atmosphere, and even the gear over the whole game draw a lot from Fallout 1/2.
"You seem to be evangelizing Obsidian for the sake of it."
This and all the stuff that follows about Black Isle and such are you reading themes into my post that just don't exist. I realize many people especially those from certain other boards have those statements apply to them, but that ain't me.

"This also accounts issues such as Bethesda getting a handle of fully voiced games at the start of this console era. FO 3 was just their second fully voiced game. I see much more potential in Bethesda and if they do go hard Fallout 4 can succeed as a true Fallout game".

This is true, I've always thought the transfer to full voice was a mistake, it wastes resources that can be used for other stuff and generally limits the writing to how much you want to pay the VAs to record. I much prefer Morrowind's sparser VA with everything in text or Fallout or any number of RPGs that just have voice for important characters. I think the VA in fallout 3 was a step down from Oblivion, personally. Bethesda needs to stop blowing all their VA budget on Captain Picard or Liam Neeson only to have their characters die after a comparatively small amount of lines.

>That goes for their writing aswell

Well, I personally think Obsidian trumps Bethesda in the writing department any day. Except for Kirkbride. That man made morrowind's lore the masterpiece it is. Oblivion was Kirbride deficient and thus was a bit boring and generic. Then he came back for KOTN and Shivering Isles and both of those were great.


Anyway, hope that clears things up as to how I feel.

If the article is true we only have a couple of days wait to find out....




Nice to see this turned this into a FO3 vs FONV/Obsidian vs Bethesda thread. Any danger of giving it a rest?

what do you call lots? shacks and tents? and a big huge empty desert with nothing in it you might have yourself convinced of that but compared to other games i play, its got very little to explore, even the repconn buildings and helios one aren't very complex at all and those are the the only large buildings in the game.

Better than having a ridiculous dungeon filled with the same enemies every 40 meters.

Quoted for the truth

it was still somewhat barren in FO3 and you even call that too much? well new vegas is one of the most empty ennvironments i have ever seen in any game i ever played, to me it lacked imagination and creativity, almost no artisitc license was used in the vast majority of the map area, and thats just one of the reasons not many people who bought it late last year are playing it anymore.

Good god is there no end to your posts comparing the games?

There is a god, and he is laughing at anyone who reads this forum.

It seems they're fix aritcle in fallout wiki. http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Fallout:_New_Vegas_add-ons

Judged that article, possibly someone give to wrong information. Of coures, this topic is very pointless.

Don't change the wiki, we where right, when Beth say "the info on the story is wrong" it means we where spot on.

Remember when info on Point Lookout leaked? Beth said it "absolutely doesn't exist, and there are no plans to make a DLC called Point Lookout"

Two weeks later it was announced, there under a contract, they cant talk about it, even when it's clearly there.

Or how about the folks over at the wiki actually running the thing like the encyclopedia it is and only putting in verifiable and source-cited information? If they want to run a "news" feed as an added feature for their readership and market a tidbit like that in the "news" section labeled as *rumor* or *speculation*, then that's fine, but to post it up in the encyclopedia as verified fact without any due diligence to actually verify it is irresponsible and disingenuous.

-Gunny out.

I expected a discussion on why Bethesda made this dumb mistake of waiting this long to release info., how they responded so far to the leaked rumors, and how they will still remain tight lipped and will not release any new info. for a few more weeks. But NO. I get immature people crying over the forums of how NV is better or worse than FO3. :facepalm:

I really want a new DLC, I've kinda lost interest in NV otherwise.

COUPLE WEEKS? COUPLE [censored] WEEKS?!?! FOR JUST INFORMATION?! You make great games, but [censored] YOU BETHESDA [censored] YOU :brokencomputer: :banghead: :flame: :gun: :swear:

Seriously, how can they think leaving us in the dark is a good idea? How is it possible that games like Bioshock infinite have full trailers and gameplay TWO YEARS before being released, but we have to wait till just before (judging on dead money) new DLC comes out to EVEN KNOW WHAT THE NAME IS!!!!!

Honest Hearts. :whisper:

They haven't officially said it though, which is my point. they haven't officially said ANYTHING, other than that 3 more are being made. If there making it take this log, we better be getting at least one DLC a month from april/may (at latest) on, which if there are the rumored 7 DLC will take us till right before skyrim.