Be careful saying something that inconvenient to the "Fallout: New Vegas is linear" argument.

I haven't gotten to anyplace that you couldn't bypass with some effort and patience. *shrugs*

EDIT:


Indeed. From what some people are implying it's like there a pack of Deathclaws at the hot gates blocking you from passing....XD

Which is exactly what I stated above but with more filler words.

I hate level scaling personally. It makes the game way too easy.

And also, how was FO3 hard? At level 10, I waltzed into Old Olney and wiped out all the deathclaws.....easily.

In FNV, with a lvl 30 with 100 in energy weapons, it took me TWO shots with a YCS186 (one of the best weapons in the game) to kill a deathclaw. In FO3, I take deathclaws out with one shot from a plasma rifle.

The most deathclaws I saw was in that field to the right of the road, that don't even see you walking straight down the road. Now the powder gangers by the house see you, but their easy to take care of.

A frequent complaint made against sandbox games is that players often feel lost or lacking in direction especially early in the game, the above serves as nothing but a suggestion to get the player started, I read nothing more into it. One could also take it in a role playing context as an early 'character forming' decision, safety or danger. The third route is not even mentioned and is for the player to discover. As for top-tier creatures would 2nd or 3rd from top be acceptable, or are you asking for an open road in both directions? On the whole I think the game design does very well when it comes to supporting different character builds and character choices. If you want to run and gun then south is your best bet. If you're playing a stealth character then north is easy though not impossible with lower sneak skills. The third route is an interesting one and as it uses a marked pass I consider it an intentional addition, the only 'skill' I used was the skill of running away very, very quickly and when I returned a short time later the path was clear.



Heh, try going to Vegas at level 2, in the end you skip nothing and game plays just as well with this out of order, non-linear, approach. Honestly, there have been a number of occasions where I've been impressed at how well the game holds together even with a chaotic approach to questing, this includes finding things in Vegas that even a level 2 can do

If you guys don't mind me saying, but it seems like the arguments against New Vegas are becoming more ridiculous as this thread progresses with the tune basically being: the game is too hard at the beginning. It's like hearing about Morrowind all over again. Betheseda if you guys are reading this, you better not revert back :nono:

:P

From your posts I feel that maybe you just don't like a challenge. I and other have been able to get past those deathclaws "walls" as you call them. Without having to battle them and use up are stimpaks. I get that you want to be able to walk into that area and take them all out at a low level. Trust me coming back later with a 50.cal rifle and hollow point bullets is alot of fun. New Vegas is not linear, its just it requires the use of ones creative mind to get around obstacles, which FO1 and FO2 also do. Fallout 3 is a game that holds my had all they way. I never encounter an enemy I am afraid of. Like others I rarely died, only when messing around. Sorry I come off as an ass here.

I like the fact that NV makes you a little more cautious about where you journey.

Betheseda if you guys are reading this, you know you're on the right track :twirl:

I'll throw my dime in and say that I died due to my own stupidity like walking into traps and never once was killed by a mob. FO3 was disappointingly easy.

Edit: Ecat that may have have sounded like I was agreeing with them about NV being "linear" but I wasn't. I'm glad they are doing what they are doing. Sorry for the confusion

It holds up to a non-linear approach like the devs expected it. There's even dialog in one town that only exists if you go there signifigantly after going to vegas, even though if you go the way you're 'supposed' to go, you would have gone through the encounter already.

2001-

Gamers - "It's too hard to explore in Morrowind. I keep dying!"

2006/2008-

Gamers - "Oblivion/Fallout 3 is so easy, I wish there was more challenge like Morrowind. Level scaling svcks!"

2010-

Gamers - "It's too hard to explore in New Vegas. I keep dying!"

I never had a problem with Morrowind, its my favorite RPG. :shrug:

I don't think I have seen many "against" NV but rather folks indicating what they liked better in one or the other. I can like both games and point out the things in each that bother me or things that aren't as I would have liked. It's pretty normal for folks to want to let someone know the aspects of each game they play that they like and dislike. That's not to say one is "better" than the other nor does it indicate someone is a lesser person for what they do or don't like.

It isn't enough if we (I'm using 'we' in the collective, generic sense) were to try to discuss possible ways to actually improve the balance (without resorting to scaling) to be a little more flexible for more players styles, vs. just stating subjective opinions, which is what most of thread is about. And that's fine...I just find ambiguous answers frustrating. I said it didn't have to be absolute, but, for instance, does it have to be done so that such enemies can't ever possibly be stumbled on accidentally by a lvl 2 character? A lvl 5 chr? Since the game already allows people to 'sneak' around a good portion of the map, at lvl 1 or 3 or 5 (without fighting), I'm still not seeing how placing them elsewhere is going to make a huge difference in terms of 'dangerous random exploring'. So all I'm saying is when it comes to non-scaling, it's hard to draw a line in the sand anywhere, that is going to please most people.

The point of them being placed where they are as high encouragement to follow the main storyline, at least to a certain early point, is valid, however, and I'm certainly not debating that aspect. (edit)What it feels like to me that many others are saying, is that it's not impossible to get around those encouragement obstacles, therefore it's not truly limiting/linear.

No one is denying it's possible to sneak around. That's why that skill is there... but can you sneak around the ENTIRE game? No one is saying they want to sneak right to the main city of the game. We want to explore it.

Just think of it like this... in FO3 you leave home and can go in ANY direction. In New Vegas you're limited, therefore it's more linear.

He just pointed out, and you acknowledge that that wasn't so. XD No you don't sneak around the entire game...you just sneak around the stuff thats too dangerous for you and fight the stuff you can take. Or do you put forth that you stay on level one the whole time?

You can go in any direction you want at the beginning of Fallout: New Vegas, you just need to excercise caution when traveling in certain areas. He proved you can walk to New Vegas though. He didn't say he was sneaking.

It would probably be more honest if you just said that you don't think that Deathclaws should be anywhere near the more traveled areas or that you should be able to take them on easily at lower levels. Right now you're just trying to argument semantics.

I should probably add that when I personally say 'sneaking around' I don't necessarily mean using the Sneak ability. Only that you're avoiding the combats that would be too difficult for you to deal with at the moment. If you're careful and observant this is manageable and yes, you can explore much of the open world this way. Not every square inch, but a lot of it. I've done it, while being an enforced (via XP mod) lvl 2.

edit:sorry, I'm the Queen of editing...I'm also not saying you can grab all the gear at lvl2 from every location/cave/Vault. But you can explore, see what's there, see what you might want to go back to, get locations on your map, see npc's fighting and maybe grab their gear when they fall, etc. It's actually quite fun.

Personally I hate how sneak works in Bethesda's games. Even with it at 100 it doesn't really work until you get silent running at level 12 I think it is. Even then, you don't always know a threat is there beforehand. Most of the time they see you anyway and you have to duke it out because enemies move around all hyper like.

I'm not saying I want the game to be easy, I just hate leaving things un-explored because I know I may forget to come back to that area and never get to experience it. There are more locations in New Vegas than FO3. I can't keep track of them all easily. Beyond getting by those roadblocks I've only seen one person in this thread that actually said they could wipe out the deathclaws at the start of the game. (and I didn't believe him).

Plenty of people are saying you can run away from them/avoid them, and I say why? The fun is in exploring the area, not avoiding it. *shrug* I think I'm just too used to playing FO3, I liked how it worked in that game. NV uses the same engine and looks exactly the same, which is what frustrates me. I bought it expecting it to be like FO3 so it's to be expected that I'm disappointed it's very different.

Like I said on like page 2 though, the main reason I'm complaining at all is I can't proceed in the game due to bugs! Something I think we can all agree need to be fixed soon.

eh I say just "play the game normally" getting as may quests as you can from every city. They do a pretty good job or taking you to the majority of the locations(IIRC) anyway. Then just stop at the infamously never seen "Warning this is the end game" marker and scout around to your hearts content. *shrugs* Then move in for the end game after your satisfied.

This is where we differ. Sure the exploration is a major part, for me the fun is in advancing my character so they can explore further and face new challenges, possibly using different skills and talents. This is why I like RPGs.

I actually like having some of both aspects to a game. Which is probably why I like NV so much. For me it's a perfect balance of the two.

Agreed. And the way I see it, that's why the skills are there in the first place.