I'm glad they gave Obsidian a shot at a new Fallout. I mean, this is as close to Van Buren as we're ever gonna get.

I think it was a great move for both companies. Pretty much a win-win deal. They both make fallout games, this one was a success on the back of FO:3 (yes it was financially very successful, sold a lot), this one sold more and I would think that would be a big boost for Obsidian. I'm hoping between the two of them we can get one about every two to four years. That would make me very happy and hopefully mean both companies can put some money into making other great games...

So, basically you don't have anything to say that hasn't already been argued over tiresomely (and to no avail) for the past 2 months?

That would make me really happy too. I love the Fallout series. For a long time it seemed like we'd never see another one, and now the franchise is healthier than it's ever been.

This is just not true. I can basically count on one hand the number of things New Vegas recycles from Van Buren (Caesar's Legion, Hoover Dam, Joshua Graham, Arcade Gannon). Basically everything else you see in the game was never in Van Buren and three of those things serve very different roles than they were planned to in Van Buren.

I'll be happy as long as Obsidian gets to keep making FO games, but I don't think the franchise is "healthier than its ever been" in any sense but sales.

Unless you want the franchise to exist only in your mind, this is what healthy means.

Think.... Carlin telling a joke(s) on 'Shining Time Station'... Its Carlin, its a joke, and its funny ~its not what you'd expect or have sought if someone sent (or sold!) you a video of George Carlin telling jokes.

With FO3/NV... Its Fallout (looking), its fun ~its not what you'd expect or have sought if someone sent (or sold!) you a videogame from the Fallout series. :shrug:

*(This is not at all about censorship either.)

I think you're a little held up Gizmo, not in a rude way, but whether we like it or not, we have to accept that a series HAS to change in some respects if it wants to survive in the market. I started the series with Fallout 3, then played F1 and F2 and half assedly played F:Tactics. All in all. They were fun games, but if the game were to 'go back to its roots' as a few people who obsess over the older ones vocally shout for it to do, the series would falter. While there are a bunch of older fans, ther new fans brought in from F3 and F:NV likely outnumbers the fans like the hardliner Interplay over Bethesda fans at this point. I'm not trying to say you need to think these new versions are better, this is just a matter of accepting a series must change. I mean, the series could have taken a far worse route. Instead of open world explorers like F3 and F:NV, it could have become a 12 sections game thats strictly FPS, with the only reason people buy it is for multiplayer online.

All I'm saying is that it could be worse.

None taken

Of course it can change with the times, but any change should be tempered with the core concept in mind.
There comes a time when tinkering with say... Ice cream (to "modernize" it for today's consumer),
results in a non-fat, non-dairy, sugar-free frozen paste.
All I can say is that if it must be changed that drastically, its time to call it something else.

** Now... How does your statement apply to other venerable series like Diablo, Starcraft and Disciples?

Well, I don't think the series has changed THAT drastically, graphics are different, UI is different, the dialogue has less funny to it (Fallout 2's r-tard cake comment in Vault city is the best line in any Fallout xD)


Can't rightly say as I've played none of those :laugh:

But it is based on the Fallout IP and to call it something else would not protect that IP in legal ways.

Oh, and would you like some of my non-dairy ice cream? :rofl: 'tis good.

... the gameplay is completely different, the general design is different.... I'd say the change is THAT drastic, and when we really look down to it all that hasn't changed is the setting.
That's not to say the series can't evolve with this new direction and finding a better middleground, though.



Youtube to the help...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0M4sksBOtI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0GI4C8ypoIw

BlueBeary?

Or raspberry or cloudberry or bearberry or a mixture of all of the above.

Fallout 3 was the first Fallout game I played and I thought it was great - still do. Considering the amount of hours I've spent playing it, I couldn't possibly say it was anything other than a fantastic gaming experience. Having played New Vegas, my personal opinion is it's just better. Apart from the invisible walls (that I've by now found quite a few of) that totally do my head in. Sure it could be improved - what game couldn't? But IMHO the writing is better, the huge array of quests and the way they interlock more interesting and the world designed more like a real place. Having loved Fallout 3 to bits, I'm now set to be disappointed by Fallout 4 if it reverts back to Fallout 3 style game design. I feel I've been spoiled now. At the very least I hope they don't listen to all the people moaning about a story (horror!) having a definitive ending that shows your impact on the world, as opposed to your dramatic intervention being reduced to some water caravans milling around because some people can't cope with putting off the climactic big battle until they're ready to finish the game.
I'm thinking of buying the originals now and playing them just because all the references in FNV have made me interested in the stories - Fallout 3, great as it was, seemed like a series of cool places and some entertaining quests but not a very convincingly drawn fictional world.

This. My experience exactly. I'm tired of reading that it's "only old school fans of the 1st two games that perfer FONV".

Nicely, pretty accuratly and diplomatically put. Agreed. If you wish, you can find the originals at http://www.gog.com/en/frontpage for $5.99 a piece (DRM free). Great - player driven to a certain degree - stories indeed and pure RPG gameplay.

Yeah but those 4 things make up 70% of the story (and you forgot about the war between NCR, and the brotherhood).

I am not saying NV is not different then Van Buren's story.

All I am saying is, that FO:3 was not just a copy/paste, and FO:NV is not this super bundle of originality.

I to feel that FO:NV is better then FO:3, but most of the reasons people give are nothing but old company really devoted fan'ism.

The story in FO:3 was fine. It fit well into the Fallout World, and moved it further along.

***edit***

LOL they edited 'that' word... that cracks me up

24 hours in--All i could say is--How do I get out of this glitch I am stuck in??? Oh yeah, I'll fast travel. Uh oh...now my save game data is corrupted. Guess I'll have to play all of my progress back over. Hey, why is VATS broken? Why can't I find more Alien Blaster ammo? What, the Chinese stealth armor doesn't go into invisible mode.

You should have played Fallout 3 longer than a few hours. Getting out of the vault was pretty boring, but after that Fallout 3 gets alot better and it blows New Vegas away--New Vegas is just DLC for Fallout 3, a very broken, buggy and glitchy DLC.

How's that? Aside from the bugs and glitches you're encountering (and which I did not see), what's different than the integrity of quests and gameplay (in favor of NV)?

I think that all the aspects you mentioned needed to be nerfed to preserve the feeling FNV has to offer.

Harmy52

Yep.

I still don't understand why they nerfed the Chinese stealth armor though.

It was a call back to FO:3, but it does not act in any way like the old stealth armor?

Yeah it was broken, but heck you can't even get the Chinese stealth armor till you are locked into the final conflict... What would it have really changed at that point?
They could have at least called it Chinese stealth armor prototype or something...

2 Things,

1) You can get CSA as long as you figure out the way to get in, not necessarily at 2nd Battle of Hoover Dam.

2) The OA simulation is suppose to be exaggerated and all over the place, the CSA's capability could have been less; the FO3 one could have been a rare one which have proper optical camouflage.