I don't know about empty but it is more confined. Brought on right when I discovered about 25% of the map seemed inaccessible. If anything is empty it is The Strip part of Vegas. The whole thing reminded me of the Hollywood level from VtM: Bloodlines. Not necessarily a bad thing but a pretty weak centerpiece showing of the namesake of the game if you ask me. Still love it. I see lots of potential for modding.

Only thing I lack is slightly more stuff to shoot at.

Edit: Typo

Well im not trying to bash it, that was just my initial reaction. I will explore more of course, I sure hope your right about there being more. Also maybe some1 can point out a storage container to put my over stock in.. Yeah I collect alot of stuff lol or a house I can buy to start storing stuff and pimp out. THX

Ohh yeah, just curious if the jukebox thats " broken " is supposed to play music... How do I fix it if theres no option lol or did that glitch out on me..?

This.

3 tutorial.
11 main quests.
17 side quests.
20 unmarked quests. (extremely small)

It did so not have 50 sidequests or 20 main quests.
With the DLC's then yeah, it might have something along those numbers.
But we're comparing the Vanilla version, not GOTY or add-ons.

But for those of us who love dungeon crawling those tunnels and deserted buildings were the meat of the game, quest were merely spice ^_^

I guess i'll need to play this like a Bioware game then. Not a bad thing, but i wanted a sandbox.

Little 'Bioware' mixed with some little 'Sandbox' wouldn't hurt.

Still, I am glad for the current state. Exploring(aka endless tourism and wasteland safari) is kinda overrated in my opinion. Just sayin'

I tend to agree with the OP. I have one character from F3 who has over 1000 hours, and is still finding things.

FNV is a good game, has a good feel to it, but in some ways it does feel lacking, almost like once I've been through an area I feel like I don't need to go back there. Could be me, perhaps I'm just taking the wrong approach.

I think part of my problem is that I've played it with the F3 experience behind me, so my gaming skills are a bit sharper, and my tactics are pretty much down pat. Problems or tough points that others are having seem fairly average to me. But environmentally, it's okay, but not attention grabbing, more of an add-on with changes, rather than an evolutionary step forward.

I'm actually carrying less weapons in FNV than I ever did in F3, so I guess that's an improvement.

You make me sad face .

We've all be waiting for this for ages, and when it comes out, We're all disappoint? It's another Fallout game. Another. after two years. bam. another.

The start was better, vault 101 got so boring.

The story on NV is...meh. I haven't got around to finishing it, I don't feel like recruiting many factions, I already did that on Oblivion.

Anyway, We've got new aspects, Crafting etc.

This game isn't shamazingly awesomesauces, but is any RPG?

... 1000 hours with one character... Don't believe you.
I did all qeusts, found all locations, completed all DLC's found all collectibles and did it all around 100 hours.
And I did not rush at any point.
1000 hours. Sorry dude, but I just can't believe someone put that many hours into one character.

In all, I find FONV to be more in the spirit of Fallout, and less in the "sandbox" spirit of FO3.

FO3 was a very "sandboxy" game, with tons of things to discover everywhere, and a plot that easily led to wandering around and doing your own thing earlier. This is not the case in FONV, where the main quest guides you through a linear progression of locations (which themselves spawn side-quests of course).

Just think of how FO2 was designed. Sure, you had this big map to start, but you really were led to follow the standard arroyo->klamath->den->vault city->etc. route. This is basically the same in FONV.

Similarly, I find that FONV captures the feeling of "wasteland" better. There are empty stretches of desert, bleak places were survival is nigh impossible.

Personally, I prefer it this way, though I liked FO3's approach as well.

Itkovian

I was so excited to hear that the Vegas area supposedly was untouched by nuclear devastation, I was really really hoping for towns bigger than 3 people and a fracking cow. I just can't believe that, after New Reno and Vault City (Obsidian) and Vivec and the Imperial City (Bethesda) that the towns have actually gotten SMALLER than in Fallout 3... Am I to believe that, according to Fallout Lore, cities that were created hundreds of years prior to Fallout 3 and NV were 50X bigger? They could have done much, much better; using the "Its a wasteland" excuse doesn't cut it, it's pure laziness.

EDIT: I know Vivec and Imperial city were a different game altogether; my point is 10 years ago they were fully capable of creating cities that feel like actual cities, why are we getting little piddlances of towns now?

So, you want half the map to be a city clustered with NPC's to talk to and unnamed NPC's who's there to fill the streets and tons and tons and tons of loading screens?

One thing to remember - think about the flow of FO3's main quest line. They send you SE from Megaton, and probably 80% of the early quest involves stuff in the SE quadrant of the map. (GNR, Rivet City, Pentagon, Megaton). The other 2/3 of the map doesn't come into play until much later in the storyline - and since you've never been there, it feels wild and untamed. In FO:NV, by the time you get to New Vegas, you've traveled in a counter-clockwise fashion around what seems like 2/3 of the map already.

The map is also a lot flatter then FO3 was. It's a lot easier to see that there is nothing there for a long ways on the flats of the Mohave, compared to all the little hills and twisty passages up in the mountains in the DC Wastelands.

There's still a lot of areas with not even a few ants or radscorps to spice it up. The area around Goodsprings feels thick with geckos and flies, but south of Primm is pretty much barren. Not much around Nipton either except for a few molerats. East of Novac is also empty.

(Lots and lots of mod help will be needed to flesh out FO:NV.)

Hell I dont mind if they add more stuff to this "empty" world of yours.

but what exactly do you suppose they put in?

I dont seem to know what you want, you complain theres not enough of something yet you dont tell us what that something is that you want.

Neither Vivec nor the Imperial city were anywhere near "half the map", and many of the NPC's had a purpose, like, oh, say, giving you quests, or offering different services, which is what the game is all about.

Imperial City wasn't all that big, New Vegas + Freeside rivals it's size.

New Vegas really reminds me of the Imperial City, to be honest. It's large enough, is in the center of the map, and has a giant tower in its center where the "ruler" of Vegas lives.

Most of this is personal taste--whether you prefer a ruined urban environment or a slightly less ruined desert environment. From my perspective, there is a greater synergy in FNV between the desolate spaces, your character's ambiguous predicament, and the vagaries that motivate the various factions. The question presented is--who am I and what role shall I play in this strange and hostile landscape? FNV engages the imagination in a more evocative manner than FO3 did. It is more abstract and I find that refreshing.

In FNV there’s an aptly fitting discordant note reminiscent of certain 1950’s cowboy films--even the color palette used on the billboards and posters scattered around the Mojave seem near identical to film posters from that genre. During that period (the Ike years), America was very staid and conservative and a film such as “Johnny Guitar” is now recognized as very strange and subversive for its time. I’m pretty sure someone at Obsidian must have known all about these thematic elements because if anything the factions are a study in contrasts

Did you guys play the same game?





Have you ever been to Vegas? By Car? Just outside of Las Vegas, there is, well, nothing. You will drive for miles and hours and not see anything but creosote bushes and cactii in between towns and settlements, and this is in a viable world.

I do think more could have been added to the map, but when I am walking a long distance to a place like Jacobstown and see nothing for a long distance, I feel like I am in a wasteland. With FO3, I never felt like I was getting away from civilization or the remnants there of.

Yes. What Fallout New Vegas needs is m0ar Metros like Chevy & Georgetown East, West & North type locations or MDPL-05/13/16/52 type places where we can pick up scrap metal for caps & XP! Or towns with 2 people in it who survive on nothing except Nuka-Cola tours! :shakehead: <-- added to emphasize sarcasm.

The Mojave feels more realistic because it is designed more realistic. IMO, the story & writing wouldn't be as effective if it didn't match it's backdrop of having the towns feel a little separated. There are lots of locations off the beaten path, but be prepared to dose your character with some Psycho & stims if you stray too early, because you'll be in for a fight! Exploring is now a risk vs. reward thing.

So...why exactly is everyone comparing fallout 3 to fallout: new vegas?
They're made by different companies, therefore have different strengths and weaknesses.
Hmph. Funny how before everyone was annoyed that Fallout 3 had bad voice acting and not many quests (and other things), and now everyone is annoyed about everything wrong in vegas. It's not perfect, no game is. So why doesn't everyone just forgive it a bit hm?
I swear, kids these days *grumble grumble* ...never knew a good pear when they saw one... *rumble rumble* holy hand grenade...

You came to a gaming forum expecting people not to complain about a game?

expecting them to complain about the real problems rather than crazy ones

Like why the [censored] those fruity bastards at the ultra casino are killing me over stealing a key, those [censored]s