Its absolutly mroe linear, almost annoyingly so. You cant head north or west at the start or you'll die. Freedom removed right there. You cant head over mountains or down certain paths because there are invisible walls. Im shocked Bethesda let Obsidian do that, it kinda goes against the whole freedom thing they've been doing since Oblivion. New Vegas is way more linear, and I hope they stop that [censored] right after this game, if it comes back you might as well play Fable

Fallout is not Oblivion, it should not be a sand box game. Not something you can win at level two. I'll take hard to climb hills over annoying subway tunnels any day.

Fallout was never meant to be a cake-walk ya' know.

Aye, very true. In my opinion Fallout should be a challenging game with area's where you get creamed instantly by the denziens of that area if you try to wander through their turf when you are not capable of handling them.

I don't see the problem as the world would still be open, just more sophisticated, varied and geared more towards the players abilities (depending of course, how the devs would pull it off). Of course, if "one big map" is the sole determinator of person B's (and his ilks) judgement on the games qualities, then that game wouldn't be for him and he'd possibly have to find a substitute in TES series - I see no problem there. I'm personally fine both ways generally speaking (when done right), but I do want the Fallout series to clearly stand out from the TES series - which is something it at its current state does not do.

An "old tyme maptravel" with node locations developed also to provide exploration (for those who wish it) would only do good for the series.

I can say that Morrowinds was done well. Almost perfect and if the end bosses would have been more powerful, it would have been perfect to me. Oblivions was done rather poorly in some ways but I enjoyed it too bar the loot scaling. Fallout:3 did a fair job I think. Fallout:NV was a step back in time to the point of feeling herded through a cattle gap and I am in hopes that the next game whatever it is will fall somewhere in the middle that will meet the "no scaling at all" folks a bit better yet allow the "please don't make us walk a straight line" folks to do their exploration. Asking a lot but you never know when a perfect mix can occur.

I'm keeping my fingers crossed.

Enemy do level in NV, in a sense, like the NCR/Legion Veteran doesn't show up until you hit 20+ (admittedly you also need to be at certain stage of MQ). Only if Obsidian have time to extent that to the Fiends, Viper, Jackal, Traveling Merchant etc.


And really, leveled enemy was invented to allow post-game to become more challenging; RPG established enemies with various difficultly for the "director's cut" story; I mean it is just crazy to see all the Deathclaws terrorizing I15 are Deathclaw babys :facepalm:

Doesn't that make the game more realistic though? Someone who's just beginning their trek through the wasteland shouldn't be able to go everywhere and do everything. As little more than a civillian, you shouldn't be doing anything too dangerous anyway. It makes sense that a more powerful character should be able to explore more, out of both common sense and the game's rewards system.

Another thing New Vegas does better then FO3 is the number of enemies. FO3 I get attacked by three, four max at a time. New Vegas is like the originals. Running into six to a dozen enemies at a time. Alot more fun. People complaning they can't go to the strip right way bugs me. Make a character that can sneak past them. Fallout svcks as a sand box. It makes it to easy. I don't have to think. I don't have to worry about challenging enemies. Behemoths area a joke to me. I can stand back and take them out with a pistol. I can finish FO3 at a very low level. I can do the main quest in less then an hour. I know the counter to this "Just handicap yourself. Don't do the main quest right away. Wander around collect teddy bears and soda bottles, fight low level enemies". :facepalm: "Sand Box = imagination" :rolleyes: IMO Sand Box = lazy pointlessness. I don't want to handiecap myself. I rather be challenged by enemies and forced away from a location then to have to force myself to avoid the locations.

This. I also like the challenge of wanting to see if I could take on a deathclaw at lvl5 & a varmint rifle, or grab a companion early and see if together we can take something big down, or whatever other outrageous thing suits my fancy...even if I fail, I like the option to be able to try.

To me, the first few levels are the most difficult, and it's all downhill from there. In vanilla game you level so fast as you're traveling along it doesn't take much to get there. I spent a lot of time 'randomly exploring' after Primm, before doing any of the rest of the main plot and I didn't have any major issues. Sure there's a few places that I had to circle around & avoid/go back to, but not that many.

The game is linear during the Main Quest, but is become with more freedom after.

It makes a bit of sense. Like in Morrowind there were dungeons you dared not enter until you were "more experienced" (though again, I didn't like that and liked how creatures got stronger in all dungeons as your character gained strength which made it seem as if you were finding the dangerous ones later in your trek. But in other areas it seemed just wrong. One should be able to go to the towns along a safer route even as a weak character so many years after the war. Safe routes should be expected I would think between settlements.

I still think there can be a "somewhere in the middle" leveling system that will work for most everyone.

@ valkebu, yes there is leveled scaling in all of them but all done differently. I guess folks are just commenting on their preferences of what type of leveling and how much is right for them. Since we are all different folks, I expect we won't all agree and that is fine. At least we can discuss it and see where our commonalities fall. And fortunately so far folks are doing that without demanding someone see it their way so far.

Why is everyone saying there is no scaling, I found some ammount scaling and higher numbers of scaled foes, reaching level 30 just meant I had a slightly better % chance of killing them and some more HP / equipment to cope a little better.
What it did was make certain areas alot harder early on, some easier later, and make certain player actions suicidal to keep you on a fixed path untill mid levels.

These are not allways a bad thing as going off route to gain a xp boost is both a challange and rewarding, but the fact is enemy scaling and level scaling of enemies are in this game, just as much as OOO in oblivion making it harder for some, more realistic for others imo.

Loot scaling is gimped slightly though to me any way, as certain areas the rewards are placed, but containers carry little at lower levels.
So you may gain levels but equipment to tackle foes of similar levels are rare or ill repaired, making certain builds ( power gaming ) favourable, but this is just speculation on my part.

Fallout 3 scattered the wasteland with skill books, bobbleheads and schematics giving you plenty to find while exploring the odd area. It had the metrotunnels being used to navigating the decaying ruins of downtown DC. So yeah in Fallout 3 exploring was way better. Obsidian moved away from that by having no bobbleheads, the snowglobes are all in safe locations and a fraction of the skill books.[and as you can't max all skills there is less reason to hunt most of them down]. Most of the unique weapons are only marginally better then the base one. Certainly a plus is Vegas has 60 or so more quests.

Now imagine if we could take the explorer feel of fallout 3, the well written and numerous quests of Fallout NV and minus the freezing bugs. Imagine the game we could have.

FO3 should have allowed us the option to side with the enclave. but in new vegas we get to decide between 4 fractions an improvement.

Wow...I just realized why I've been so confused since release with people claiming "exploration" was better in FO3 than New Vegas, while I didn't really see much difference between the two in the exploration respect.

It's because when I think of exploration, I think of exploring- while based on the explanation given above, the "lacking exploration" complaint isn't about a lack of ability to explore, or a lack of locations- it's a lack of loot at those locations being thrown around like candy.

Note to self: apparently, exploration =/= exploration.

I loathe enemy scaling system with a fairy furry of a thousand suns! If I saw powder gangers with AMR rifles and plasma casters in New Vegas I would probably break down and cry and refuse to touch the game till i could get a mod that fixed it.

Thus I see FONV as a shining example of what should be done in games. It would be cool if there were event triggers which injected strong enemies into some areas of the map, and lets assume those events were could only be activated if you had a decent level to start with. I would be willing to see that as an appropriate and cool way of implementing level scaling, but finding death claws in a place where only coyotes used to hang out... no thanks.

Umm, you say that likes it's a bad thing. It's not, just different preferences. I'm lucky in that I just play for the fun and I find fun either way but I am objective enough to realize others don't and in no way think my way or anyones way of liking their games is something to roll my eyes at them about. It's a bit rude really.

It's fine we think differently and we should all be able to state what we like without someone looking down their nose at us.

I agree I love the game but it is very linear. Until you go through the quest line leading to vegas you have almost no freedom and even then there isnt that much to do that isnt part of the story. I am kind of dissapointed but I still love the game.

Alois Hammer summed my thoughts up well I believe. It isn't the lack of locations, or the ability to go out and explore; it's about the lack of tons of valuable junk and incredible availability and accessibility of powerful weapons and armor that seems to be the major complaint.

Fallout: New Vegas isn't linear, Fallout 3 is. New Vegas only seems linear early on because the path through the early stages of the game is fairly enforced until you reach Novac, after which it branches out.. In this way the game represents a tree. Starting at the trunk and developing into multiple possibilities which all deliver different results.

Edit for different anology: Fallout 3's story branches as much as yardstick... (Better?)

Once you get to the strip, you'll have a very different opinion about the overal linearity... I promise you.

Yeah, the start is a bit pushed, but shortcuts can be done.

I must agree that it does get better but since I have gone there I still can't explore some areas of the map. Missiles, aliens, tall mountains all still block me from going where I would like. I just want to sneak in there, take a look see and that's all. Can't do it. Nope, just can't until I open up that part of the quest.

EXACTLY. I even helped the Enclave destroy the Citadael at the end. The Enclave still shoots me on sight. BTW, I thought the ending of Broken Steel was bull****, if you couldn't tell. Sorry I'm kind of off-topic, I've already posted.

You can still explore very early, you just have to be skilled. I've cleared out the Cazardors and Jackals at Bonnie Springs (great way to get some armor early, and a trail carbine) on hard-hardcoe at level 5. It isn't impossible to explore a bit and ignore the path they intend you to take, it's just difficult until you're familiar with the game.



Well, to each their own. Being invincible takes any tension out of the combat, in my opinion, and thus makes it boring.



It's entirely possible to sneak your way to Vegas and skip Primm, Nipton, Novac and Boulder City. You can't kill a deathclaw straight out of the gate (and you shouldn't be able to, they're DEATHclaws), but they can be avoided. Cut through Hidden Valley and head north.

As for bugs, I honestly haven't seen a single one since launch day. Sorry to hear it's still a problem for you.



So don't pick fights with packs of giant scorpions.



I don't see how this is a problem. It isn't impossible to do exploring early, it's just more difficult. If you want to play as a super hero from the start and slice through them, play on very easy and turn hardcoe mode off. That's what those settings are for.



Well, if you haven't gotten past Novac you aren't in a position to complain about weapon mod scarcity. Have you downloaded the patches?



Too true on the voice acting and story, though I don't think the lack of freedom is as bad as you paint it.

I agree the moment I began playing it didn't feel post-apocalyptic at all. The world needs to be more destroyed, more dark and more creepy. Otherwise, I enjoy pretty much everything else and I'm one of the lucky ones that doesn't experience many bugs.