Hey guys,



We all recognize this as the games "hardcoe" achievement. What do you have to do to get it? Play the game from start to finish on hardcoe difficulty. Sounds simple right? Not to me. :shrug:

Now, if you read it, it says "play the game from start to finish..". When exactly does the game "finish"? I thought this game didn't end the way FO3 did, and you could keep playing forever, like FO3 after the Broken Steel DLC..

Or does this game end the same way? Is that when we get the achievement? After finishing the main-questline? After finishing all quests? When?

If so, it would encourage people to ignore everything else and just grind through the main-quest up until the end to get the achievement. That's far from the true Fallout experience IMO..

It probably means that you have to finish the main quest on hardcoe mode.

the game has a definitive ending. once you beat it, its over. they have a good reason for it.
there is a good reason for it.
your ending tells the fate of the Mojave wasteland.
if Caesars legion took over in your ending. would you still want top keep playing even though it still showed them at war with the NCR

oh i HAVE to hear this.
please. explain.

The game ends when you finish the main quest, (maybe later with a DLC they'll include a "continue to play after the end" feature like they did with FO3's Broken Steel. So you get the hardcoe Achievement by playing the game all the way through in hardcoe Mode. This isn't a real problem at all since most of the people I've seen here in the forums plan on playing FONV in hardcoe mode only.

read above post. i edited it.

they would have to do so much to make it work.

say there was an NPC that gave you a mission to fight N.C.R soldiers, but in your ending Caesars legion destroyed the N.C.R. it wouldn't make sense

Well, that's a buzz-kill..

I thought they would've learned their lesson from Bethesda.. Or maybe they have..

They knew how much caps Bethesda made out of selling a DLC, so those greedy bastards at Obsidian are doing the same! That really makes my piss boil, it does.. :swear:

See:

http://planetfallout.gamespy.com/articles/interviews/1930/Planet-Fallout-Interviews-Josh-Sawyer

"What was the decision behind the definitive ending? There was a lot of moaning and arguing about Fallout 3 having a hard ending and in the end we got a DLC that allowed for an open ending. Don't you expect the same to happen?

Sure, but I also think that would happen if we allowed players to play past the end of the game but didn't show the impact of their actions on the world. There is a lot of reactivity to your actions at the end of the game and we give the player a very clear warning when they are approaching the main plot's conclusion.
We felt that having an endgame denouement with a large number of far-reaching effects was too important to either allow the player to continue playing in a world that didn't react to any of those things or make the endgame states minimalistic. There is a lot of reactivity to your actions at the end of the game and we give the player a very clear warning when they are approaching the main plot's conclusion. "

It is possible to have an ending without disabling the character to play on though. I mean, look at GTA and RDR..

That is a good thought. :huh:
I reckon you'll get it after the main quests likely. But as if Obsidian are doing the same thing Bethesda did! :glare: Thought they would have learnt from their mistakes.. *tut tut* Reason probably being will be GREED! Wanting more money..

they have announced that they will not be making a DLC to continue the game after the story.

@-holy assassin- ok what if in your ending you destroy Hoover damn. story wise Vegas would be without power and all the factions would be screwed. but if you just continued the story right after the events of the ending and nothing had changed, that would be worse. i see no problem with there decision.

but if they go back on there word and release a game continuation DLC i will be disappointed in them

At this point the only way I could see playing after the main quest ending, is if they released a DLC that made you go to a different place to continue playing. I think this is very unlikely. However if Obsidian did this, it would have to be a very good DLC and the storyline couldn't be dependent on anything you could do in the game. Never the less, the FONV Geck for pc is suppose to be released the same day the game is, so if you really wanted to play after the main quest, I'm sure there will be a mod for that in a week or so... (if it even takes modders that long, maybe a day or two LOL :user: )

I would rather DLC "places" like The Pitt and Point Lookout, than another DLC open-ending the game. Unless, of course, they (or Bethesda) cleverly work out a way to open-end the game in a meaningful way, in which case fine.

People, just save the game before you finish the last mission. Get your Reward, reload the game and play in the sandbox as long as you like. Now you have a game that does not end and you have the hardcoe reward

I swear I heard a Bethseda guy say in an interview that they wouldn't be making a Fallout game without an open ending again after Fallout 3. :\

I honestly don't care if the world doesn't make sense in some ways after my victory; I can understand those to be long-term consequences. After all, even if you end up destroying a faction or something in your ending, it's NOT going to happen overnight.

It's just a bummer that we're going to have to wait for the inevitable DLC to enable an open ending when Bethseda said that there would be no more closed endings.

Yup, that's correct

I absolutely care about the results of my actions. It's utterly pointless to go back to poking around ruins for a handful of caps and scrap metal after you've done something epic. Gimme my slideshow over pointless wandering any time.

^ This.

The dev's already said that you'll know EXACTLY when the final mission is coming up, so you can choose to avoid it and finish off anything else you were trying to do before it's over.

I'm not quite sure I understand your stupid and circular logic... If I wanted to destroy the Hoover Damn then I did it for a reason knowing that the [censored] consequences would be that Vegas would lose power, ergo I would want to live with those consequences just as I would have to live with the consequences of every other action I had since committed leading up to that climix. Your argument is, to be politically correct, lacking any actual argument. You're saying that because we make decisions in the game and because we desire consequences we should therefore desire to conclude our gameplay by negating the processes of choice and consequence... Yeah, brilliant idea... "If you destroy the Hoover Damn because you wanted to do that then you clearly shouldn't be allowed to continue playing the game because I wouldn't make that decision and it's totally logical to assume that everyone else would agree with me!"

And to everyone else… DLC is not necessarily a representation of corporate greed. If you think all DLC should be included on launch then you are sadly mistaken for if that were the case games would never be released due to the simple fact that they could go on forever coming up with ideas as to what they should add (consequently pushing back the release date each time). DLC is productive, has a purpose, and can be cost effective, but is often manipulated by the gaming industry. So I do not disagree with you in your protest, but keep in mind that DLC is not GREED!

I agree that DLC isn't "inherently" greedy, but that it has been manipulated to a point where it is understandable for the consumer to be cynical about the topic.

However, Bethesda has a sterling reputation when it comes to DLC thus far regarding content vs. price; and I think it's implementation in New Vegas will be critical in maintaining that.

To those who cry "Greed!"... seriously?

A 70 hour game (not completing all sidequests, mind you) with significant replayability... I can only assume that much of the House/NCR/Legion gameplay excludes working for other factions, so some of the main quest will be all new material at least 3 times, and some quests are only open to individuals with particular minor faction reps or karmic alignments. So there's more novel gameplay to be had on multiple playthroughs, to say nothing of a. new character builds (since you won't have enough perks to get all the good ones this time through) and b. playing regular mode vs. hardcoe.

You're not going to get much better value for your dollar. I don't know what you feel you're entitled to, but you're bound to be disappointed in much of life if that position is representative of your general outlook.

Mods
Eehehehehhe

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. I'm going to buy New Vegas, and I'm going to buy every single DLC that is released for New Vegas. However, if any of the released DLC remove the hard ending to allow the player to free roam after the main quest, I'm finished with Obsidian. Bethesda did that, but they didn't expect everyone to be as upset about the hard ending as they were. Bethesda learned that they made a mistake and I doubt it will happen again.

Now, if Obsidian really wants a hard ending to tell there story properly, that's perfectly fine and I look forward to seeing the ending. However, if they are gonna try to pull a "well we didn't think fans would want to free roam THAT bad after the main quest, so for 10 dollars extra we'll let you" then I won't be purchasing another game made by them at all. I very well may rent them, but I will refuse to give a single penny more of my money to them. Don't get me wrong, I'll download that DLC, and any after that are for New Vegas, but once they're done with New Vegas, I'd be done with them.

That being said, I have faith in Obsidian that they'll do the right thing and create excellent DLCs that will be well worth our money that won't require the cheap "play after main quest" gimmick to sell like Broken Steel did. I just hope my faith is well placed.

Well, your faith isn't well placed at all.

In addition, I'm pretty sure you represent a vocal minority when it comes to not wanting open-ended gameplay.
It all comes down to sales, and they stand to make too much off of DLC that unlocks the game.