Well, I'm not saying they couldn't just drop the player back after the credits. I just have this faint recollection of JES mentioning (either in these boards of elsewhere) that the endings consist of things crafting which for each of the possible ending would require too much work and would probably end up being crap and downplaying the effect the ending is intended to have. Anyways, I'm sure you'll work your way around it one way or another.

Check out elder scrolls iv.

I don't see the problem. The game is going to create a save file before the end so you can see the end and go back and continue playing. Ever heard the saying "All good things must come to an end." well I'm afraid its true. I for one welcome a comprehensive story with a dynamic ending. It promises to be epic (that is something we will have to wait and see). They say the changes made based on your actions in the game are so vast that they can't depict them without making it seem like nothing really happened.

Like in F3 when they continued the story all you got was a few water crates some caravans and the water pouring out of the memorial but no real since that what you did meant anything. If you poisoned the water its not like the place was littered with corpses. There for poisoning the water felt like you didn't really poison the water. Sure 3-dog said something about it on the radio but if the effects of the FEV where really shown in Broken Steel EVERYONE who drank the water would be dead, even Ol'3-dog.

This I think is an acceptable alternative to feeling like nothing meant anything. I just hope they don't ruin it with a DLC that lets you continue without showing the effects of your choices.

What about it? After the ending it was just running around like nothing ever happened. Or, at least that's how I percieved it.

This.

In Oblivion nothing changed. Hell, after I became master of the fighters guild nothing changed. Almost no one recognized that I had done anything. Same with the main quest. I got some armor and a pat on the back. And besides, TES games are one of the very few RPGs that let you play after the ending.

You serious? Well let's see...after the main quest you can enjoy four guild factions from start to finish, the arena and all of the other numerous side quests, dungeon dive, continue to explore the world, dabble with alchemy...of course all this stuff could be done even before you start the main quest or during the main quest but the point is ALL of this awesome stuff could be done afterwards with no hint of the game ending after the main quest...but your right after the main quest there's nothing to do except mindless killing...yikes.

As I've iterated on several occassion and will undoubtably do again, I think it's better for a game to have a good if not stonking end to the main quest rather than something which is just meh?.

If the last stage of the main quest has umpteen variables as to what you can do to complete it which may vary depending on what you did previously ingame then that can expotentially increase the amount of time it would take the devs to ensure that the post end main quest game world is contigious with what you did during the previous gameplay and thus believable.

One of the supposid mainstays of RPG's is that they usually have choices and consequences and for pre-Borked Steel Fallout 3 and now New Vegas one of the major ones is that if you choose to speed through the main quest the main consequence is that you then lock yourself out of being able to continue to explore the gameworld with that character.
On a side note about choices and consequences, I wouldn't be surprised if some people do their initial playthrough favouring one faction, their next for another and discover that they like the gear in a certain factions stores better and then complain that they can't gain access to those stores fully if they decide to go fo a different faction, this is I would say a consequence of the choice of faction that is made for that play through.

I've found with at least most of the games which let you continue to play after the main quest has ended is that it doesn't matter what choices you made during the game the consequences are always exactly the same and more often than not no matter what you do during the game it does not matter for the post endgame content.

This.

To me the main quest is Not the main point of the game, its merely one of the things I plan to do while playing the game. I suspect you are 100% correct in that the post endgame content will be the same (and just as good) as we perceive it to be. It really comes down to player personal preference, as this thread clearly bears-out (there can be no agreement). This is a good thing, and Obsidian has made it such by giving us the option of ending the game in our own ways.

For old crazies like me that plan to spend a minimum of 2 years in Vegas playing and modding, the main quest is just the climix but by no means the end.

Miax

Realistically speaking, the vast majority of RPGs aren't "free roam" style, have definitive endings, and Just End?. It's only because gamesas games are always free-roam style that people even have this expectation of Fallout3/NV. If it had been from any other company, people would have seen that it ends and been completely ok with it, since they wouldn't have had any different expectations.





I think his point was that none of those things (play with alchemy, do the arena, do the guilds, etc) is any different before or after the Main Quest ends. Doing them after you close the Oblivion Gates doesn't make them give a different result, or have different quests, etc.

Yes I'm serious.

None of the questlines have an impact on anything. And after the MQ, I just see no point in running around doing quests you missed as there is no goal anymore and the world feels like nothing has happened. I don't particularly like to play the "neverending story" where nothing really makes any difference. So yes, it is just mindless running around killing things.

@kiralyn what's with the just end trademark?

I think that is what I didn't like about Oblivion it felt like everything you did basically meant zilch and you really didn't much of any credit for doing things. (Also I just didn't like how skills were increased, I prefer a point system like Fallout.) :tops:

You don't like increasing skills the more you use them? Makes perfect sense. The more you do something the more comfortable you are doing it and get better each time...

It sounds good on paper, doesn't it? In actual execution the system encourages and sometimes requires tedious skill grinding, especially in Daggerfall and Morrowind where things didn't really scale to your level (at least not to the degree that they did in Oblivion). If you wanted to actually progress through the game sometime this century you ended up abusing the system. The TES system may be more realistic than the Fallout system, but realism isn't always what is best for video games.

As for the definite ending, I like it. In my experience definite endings are generally more satisfying than endings that give you a pat on the back, and then send you off to find cameras and sensor modules.

Just a different way of emphasizing it, instead of underlining or boldfacing. I Just Like It?. :celebration:





Heh. Yeah, I remember things like tagging skills you weren't going to use (so you could control when you actually gained a level), creating 1-point spells in every category so that you could stand in your house and cast "Heal 3hp" a hundred times for your next point of Restoration, jumping up and down a set of stairs in town to practice your Athletics..... whee!

Don't for get sneaking against a wall with automove.

"Good times..."

The ending isn't really a huge deal for me but I think
if a game ends once you beat the main storyline, to me, it adds more depth
and meaning towards the end.

It just feels weird if I have this huge quest to take, and once I finish it with the final amazing cutscene
when I keep playing after that...........it just feels offf......

Except you just proved my point.

Elder Scrolls iv put you into a game world after the main story ended AND gave you content that took place after the game was completed.

Without the content after the game is completed its no different to not completing it. i.e. if the world dosn't recognise whats happened then it dosn't matter if you finish the main story or not.

I think its best for the game to have a definitive ending but at the same time allow you to continue using that same save file. Which they will. I think you dieing at the end of the game is best for the game(adds story). Its Fallout; you can't always have what you want.

But are we really dying at the end, though? Being definite does not necesserely mean death.

But I do agree with your main point.

you have to die for the game to be good?, thats the movies, i totally disgaree that you have to die for a game to be good, lots of game the character doesn't die and they're good, so i never did get the having to die for a game to be good thing. if i find out our character does die. i will never do the last quest. i die here and there during the game and thats enough for me. in FO3 i never did the last quest until broken steel came out, so its not gonna be any different for NV. if i find out you die at the end, i won't ever do the last quest. cause i don't like my character dying permanently.

I signed up for an account on this forum JUST to state my anger about the decision to end the game abruptly. I WANT TO EXPLORE AFTER THE MAIN STORYLINE IS OVER! Maybe I don't want to do all the side quests first.. maybe I want to beat the main storyline and then go back and do side quests! I think this is a really, really dumb decision being made by the developers here... I was SO happy when broken steel came out for Fallout 3 because that abrupt ending was the only thing I hated about the game. Then what about DLC? Am I going to have to start the game all over again if I have beaten it just to play the DLC? Or am I going to be charged just to keep exploring a world I already paid for like I pretty much did with broken steel? Sure it added extra content but it sure felt like that open ending should have been there to begin with. I currently have the collectors edition on New Vegas pre-ordered and if they dont change this decision soon then I am considering just skipping this Fallout all together and waiting for the next true Fallout from Bethesda themselves. Sorry for ranting, but I was really looking forward to this game and now just thinking about it is upsetting me. This is just wrong.

Seems a bit harsh decision over one single aspect of the game. I guess I'll never understand the point of it. True Fallout? Strange...

Wow dude. Did you not read the part that the game does an autosave before you get to the "point of no return" so you can keep exploring? Also, next "true" Fallout? I don't even feel like pointing out how many things are wrong about that statement. The ending, by the way, will be much better, because it tells you the consequences of your major actions and the fate of specific characters, factions, and places. It's not the lame ending from Fallout 3. It's really not that much of an issue. If you actually base how good the game is by this insignificant little detail, enough to not even buy it, then you don't really deserve such a awesome game in the first place.

I think I agree with you