But then the mods would have a good reason to close these threads :nod:

True, I didn't take that into consideration.

You heard it here, forum deities! Let's get some stickies!

Members actually read the stickies? Well you surprise me.

There are no problems with topics being repeated (every so often). New members join and are so keen to get their thoughts down they don't check the forums, only the "old hands" who have seen them all before like to have a little moan.

As long as they stay constructive and civil then they get left alone.

I sense a lot of ***hurt in the OP...

Playing after MQ made some sense for FO3, especially the way Broken Steel handled it, imho.

But getting told the fate for all the factions kinda conflicts with keeping on playing.
Either your actions would render the ending you just wittnessed meaningless, or you would have nothing left to do.

Anyway the game stays fresh longer when playing with different characters instead of going for 100% completion with one.

I disagree, one of the distinctive features that stands out with Bethesda games is the open-endedness of it all and that is a GOOD thing if you ask me. Granted, that is MEANT to be a feature of TES games, but people got so used to it that when FO3 ended as it did, many people were unpleasantly shocked. I was glad Broken Steel took the ending away.

NOW, on the other hand, with Fallout NV, I was somewhat disappointed that it ends, just because I wanted to see people's direct reactions to what I did, HOWEVER, I understand why it had to end, with how the quests and factions are set up.

Still, over all, I am in favor of no endings with Bethesda's games. I suppose I wouldn't care as much when it comes to Fallout games and just keep enjoying that aspect of Elder Scrolls games, but it seems as though Fallout has for Bethesda, become the new Elder Scrolls. They just don't seem to have ANY interest whatsoever in bringing us another actual TES game. Part 5 should be released by now or at least near to it, but its not even a twinkle in it's Daddy's eye yet. Will it ever be? I have my doubts, since Micro$oft seems to be in the driver's seat these days and I am sure they and Bethesda both consider the Fallout franchise much more lucrative than the TES franchise.

So, I vote for more open ended Fallout games.

Every good story has its ending. Get over yourself. How selfish does someone have to be? I want it to be like oblivion too, but I have the maturity at least to realize that santa isn't going to bring me everything I want so I deal with it and grow up.

I'm sorry you don't like the game for this one insignificant detail. Endings can be just as good as beginnings, they let you know you've accomplished something, rather than having you wander around for eternity wondering if you did enough. I'm on the "no endings" camp, but i'm just as satisfied if they leave it as is. I just want to have the bugs fixed, and i'll be fine with the game.

Just chill man, there's always oblivion... although my crap PC can't play wonderful mods for it I'm still rockin it on the PS3... if only I had some money ;(.

This is directed to the OP... lol not anyone else .

I hate mix ups.

I'm really surprised at the defense of New Vegas' ending. It was neither far-reaching enough or complex enough to warrant a hard ending. Obviously this is all my opinion, but I really just don't get it. This is an open-world game with a pretty open narrative and yet people don't understand it when people complain about not having an open ending. Bethesda's games have always been about the world as much as the story. To be able to keep playing, to continue to experience the world after the "end" is not some foreign concept. Fallout 3's original ending was awful, but New Vegas' isn't much better. You end the game in a way that you just walk off into the sunset. New Vegas' ending is literally and interruption. You defeat the "boss" and as you're leaving you get interrupted and told "Hey, good job. The game's over." From my point of view, that's an awful ending. I just don't understand how it's defensible. I hope they release post game DLC, I want to be able to go out and see what I've done.

Opinions, opinions. Everyone's right and everyone's wrong.

And yes, I'm aware Obsidian made New Vegas.

Yup, with emphasis on "Bethesda's games". :angel:

I am glad Bethesda bought the Fallout franchise for a few reasons.

1) I have my doubts that it would have successfully continued on otherwise without the intervention of Bethesda.

2) I would likely never have heard of it, and I LOVE this franchise. I fully intend to force myself to play the first two games now despite my intense hatred of turn-based combat in games simply so I can enjoy what sounds like it must be one hell of a story.

3) I am VERY glad that they changed the game-play. I think it (the storyline that is) fits well in the first person RPG genre, I really do. And that Turn-based combat is gone is QUITE a cause for celebration for me.

I wish I was as lucky to have a reason to celebrate.

Yeah.

I PRESSED THE BIG RED "END GAME NOW" BUTTON AND THE GAME ENDED! RAAAAGE!

Next they'll be complaining that the game closes down when they select "Exit Game" from the main menu.

So thats's why my game crashes so much. they sould really patch that JK

On topic: I think that the game would definetly benifit from an open ending. Like i would love to see the battle for the strip and other bases of importance.

You did not notice that the game was coming to an end? It gives so so many hints that the main quest is about to start. I love the endings. FO New Vegas brings back the multiple endings based on my actions on which I get to learn what happens.

No this is utter crap. There's mods out there that changes the factions around and makes it look like the Hoover Dam battle happened with new quests and everything. If a community modder could do that in the first month of release, then there's no excuse to why a professional video game team couldn't. After all, all they have to do is add voice acting and integrate more quests.

The main problem would probably be the minor quests but some of the more trivial ones like the Powder Ganger fate could ultimately be ignored as it's so vague. In any case, if a modder could do that with very few bugs and no voice acting, I think a professional company could make a big DLC with a few bugs with voice acting.

Well Bethesda's post-apo games had hard endings before Fallout 3, though of course they were FPS's.

Christ! What's wrong with an ending? Just load a previous save or install an 'open ending' mod and game on. Problem solved!

Or just start a new game.
You managed to do that once, you can do it again.

Open end would make most of the end game narration pointless in case of NV's ending.

There is nothing wrong with designing a story where one of the possible endings is a return to or maintenance of a status quo that would allow post game play, while still allowing other transformative endings that would actually end the game. I don't see them as necessarily exclusive.

Personally, I feel that any hard ending should be associated with the last DLC, not something that can occur before you even get your hands on the first DLC. I, for one, don't want to have to start over or roll back the history of my character to play upcoming DLCs. I want to be able to enjoy DLC content regardless of the current status of my game.

Put me in the 'sandbox play after main quest' group.

Well, I have ZERO understanding of how computers and/or games are programmed/made but I've read in other threads about how difficult it would be to continue a game after the "hard ending" when such an ending has a fluid beginning.

What I mean is that, and again I borrow from the thoughts of others in other threads, how can the game continue after the ending when there are so many endings to begin with? Does that make sense? LOL!

Again, I don't know how easy or hard it would be, but to my limited understanding the fact that the game has so many possible endings would mean that it would take a hell of a lot on the developer's end to continue afterward.

Sorry to sound stupid.
I just really wonder how it could be accomplished. I mean, had Obsidian incorporated this in to the current game, wouldn't it have added a lot of time to the release? Won't developing an open ending require a LOT of time for DLC?

I'm not slamming or arguing. I'm just honestly curious.
I really don't mind putting off the main quest while I explore the NV Wasteland but I do understand the neurotic feelings of some who are bothered. I just don't know enough about how games are designed to comment intelligently on whether an open ending is possible.

Maybe because the ending slides tell you what happens over years of time?

the end of the game = the end of the game! at what point did this become unclear!? they had the option to have a brilliant ending that was similar to that of the earlier fallout games (which they chose) or they could've copped out, had a [censored]-assed ending that didn't change anythign just so that {censored} little {censoreds!] like you could carry on playing AFTER THE GAME WAS FINISHED. get a life, go smell the fresh air, and stick your [censored] inside of something.

I like the way it is
Everything must end
you dont want to wander after finishing all and just quit game
you want end credit that tells you that game is finished
Story is over
Start another one

y'know, every gamer of a certain age remembers when the end of the game meant THE END OF THE GAME. look up the dictionary definition of "end" and you might just realise that when the end credits roll, it's time to either start the game anew or play something else well done obsidian for having the balls to repeat what bethesda did with the first game and end the game, yknow, AT THE END. new vegas is all the better for it, i for one, as does anybody with half a brain, understand the reasons why the game ends when it ends. because completely changing the world in four different ways after the end of the game would be a completely unneccasery burden. kudos for sticking two fingers up at the [censoreds] who demand that the end of this book be only the beginning! morons.

Wurrble is right
Its END
and Obsidian deliver one of best endings