I'm thinking of picking this up. I get all these games. I'm an older gamer here and have been playing these games for a long time. The problem is i always end up being disapointed these days and don't think games are really progressing like they should. I bought fallout 3 i was bored in about a week. The world felt sterile to me. The story was bland. Teh characters were plastic. From what i've read this game has more character to it though. So I'm interested. But it's still a single player experience. That's another issue i have with these games. So much can be done these days and developers aren't taking advantage of the the tech at hand. I've also read it's buggy and thrown together which is another thing that is holding me back. So why should i spend another $60 other than I'm a svcker? I'm still waiting for that game that fulfills that void and lives up to my expectation.

Bethesda or Obsidian or whatever seems to be on the right track out of any developer to me. They have this huge open world where you can really do anything but it's still not quite there. Am I wrong?

I am a old school fan of Fallout one and two. I felt the dissapointed by FO3 as well. New Vegas is alot more like the Originals. Its a great game.

My suggestion, considering your experiences, is to just rent it.
Give it a go over a weekend and see if the story appeals to you and if the remaining bugs bother you. If not, buy it. You'll have your saves so you can continue your playthrough.
That's about all I can offer. :shrug:

Based on how you describe your tastes, I would say that it really is a must play. Not the perfect game, but I've yet to play one that is. If you have a xbox 360 or PS3 you could always rent it first.

edit: jaymesB beat me to the renting suggestion. :confused:

It's definitely worth it, keep in mind NV has generally the same game mechanics as FO3 however quests/storyline/voice actors/in-game consequences are so much better IMO. It's sort of like a merging between the old and the FO3 game style. Considering bugs: I have know idea what's it like on the two console platforms, I'm on PC and well, okay there are some bugs but I haven't had any game breaking errors in a total of 211 hours game time, only occasional CTD's. Plus most glitches are fixable with mods or console commands. As for the single player aspect, I don't know about your gaming history but Fallout (exept TicTacs) was and I hope it will be single player forever, the last thing I need is some online kid shouting abusive comments like [censored] noob or something like that at me.

I had the same type of experience with Fallout 3 and I'm really enjoying New Vegas. First new RPG in ages I've sunk so many hours into. I'd advise you to get it on the PC though if at all possible. Seems a more stable experience overall and any bugs you do run across can be fixed pretty easily.

This.

%90 chance you won't be disappointed by New Vegas.

Styles hit the nail on the head here. :tops:

Just my opinion here but, I don't care if they make it possible to play online, but I really don't want that to negatively impact how much single player game I get. I like playing with my wife. We pass it back and forth and have a great time. I'm not interested in dealing with a world full of [censored]s. I'd rather not compete with other players to get places, WOW style. And I don't know anyone on XBOX live really. So you can have it, but I just hope I don't lose what I'm looking for in the deal.

you should run..run as far and as fast as you can from fallout: nv..

I've been a gamer since the early '80s, and I agree. Despite better technology games companies just keep cranking out more of the same rather than trying anything new. It's pretty sad that there seemed to be more variety and innovation in the '80s and '90s than there is now. Anyway, I liked FO3, but I was disappointed in many of the same things you were. I found the characters and the game world to be pretty uninteresting, shallow, and contrived. I do think that NV is a rather large improvement in those areas. It's definitely my favorite game of the year this year. I'd say give it a try. What platform are you on, by the way?

If you didn't like Fallout 3 you definitely won't like New Vegas

In your opinion

I was not keen on FO3 ( I am more a Elder Scrolls player) but I have loved Fallout New Vegas, got well over 100 hours and enjoyed every minute - especially exploring the wasteland and picking up the odd quest here and there. Maybe it is time to look again at Fallout 3 - maybe even at the originals that I definitely didn't like. But then who knows, good job we all don't like the same thing.

When you say the world felt sterile, how do you mean exactly? I know it feels lonely and empty at times but it is an apocalyptic wasteland after all which I think is the mood they are trying to set.

Atmosphere and believability is improved; but it comes at cost. There a lot of empty areas, because it would be like that. For me it would lose credibility otherwise, but some prefer it in keeping with FO3's approach to attention retention (which admittedly works GREAT ~undeniable... but has side effects that I don't much care for myself).

I would say its wrong to force MP on a game that neither needs nor benefits from it TES & Fallout would gain a lot of hardship and technical misery from implementing that, and the series does not seem like it would be better for it IMO.

The Fallout series as a whole was not meant to be multiplayer :shrug:
The very premise is about an isolated loner alone in the world outside of his home; no one leaves with you (they don't want anyone to leave!). The buddy aspect pollutes the feel of it IMO ~you can't feel alone out in the desolation when you bring your friends along.

Many other series are intended multiplayer. Fallout Tactics and Van Buren had (and would have had) it, but I got the impression that it was a forced mandate by the publisher. I wouldn't want MP in a Fallout title myself (such considerations affect the design of the game, and could potentially affect it in a bad way IMO). TES hasn't had MP either, and I can understand why... Its not a case of 'not taking advantage', some games are better without; and MP (like FPP) is no grand panacea for making a game better.

some bugs, mostly random crashes every 3 hrs avg, (thats average, Ive gone a whole day with no crashes then five or six the next)

Its what FO3 should have been. but its true what you heard about it being thrown together. there are several objects that are floating in the air and some interior structures' cells aren't quite connected leaving a gap where you can see the infinite blue fog. worth buying, I wouldn't get it on pc unless you really like steam, because if you do get pc you will be dealing with steam an awful lot.

as far as online multiplayer, depends on what kind, call of duty style? or WOW style. both would get old fast, COD style every one would be basicly using the same weapons (eg: the most powerful ones). And gamesas probably wont be doing a wow style multiplayer ever since it would require weekly or monthly updates inserting weapons, armor, quests into the game and it wouldn't flow very evenly (at least not unless they dumped a truckload of cash into it) I used to be one of the people who wanted online for Fallout/elderscroll series until I realized these to things I just stated.

Also, how would they get v.a.t.s to work in real time in multiplayer.

I agree that FO games are great single player games, but the above is just not true. In every Fallout there are multiple companions that may join the player. It is conceivable that those companions could be played by a living person instead of the AI. If implemented well, FO would make a great co-op.

I picked it up. I'm really enjoying it so far. Where Fallout 3 almost seemed like oblivion with guns this is something else. It seems a bit buggy and thrown together so far but hopefully the patch will fix it. My point with coop is the game would be a lot better. I'm not saying add it and subtract from teh single player component. It would have to be implemented correctly which most games don't do. I meant more if it was added in a way where it worked with this game. Like someone said you have npc companions you should be able to have human companions where the person who is controlling the master game should be able to control the loot etc... You'd still have your single player game but be able to join another game as a companion and get loot that way. Where the host has control over distribution. It would be tricky to balance it but it can be done. I'm not saying make the game wow here...... What would be really cool imo is have separate single player campaigns for different npc's where you actually play that character and can join another person's game as that npc and it's restricted as far as what quests you can do coop etc.

It would have to be done right and not at the expense of the single player component. But how cool would that be if it was......

Anyways what struck me about this game at first sight is how different it is than oblivion. The sound especially is amazing. It's still using hte same graphic engine which could use some work but the ambience is something else. The sound is really good.

Game ingenuity plummeted as the pressure to put multiplayer into every title increased. It is a correlation and not cause and effect... but it does make sense that money spent implementing MP is money better spent on game depth.

EDIT: I forgot to mention how I have had more fun conversing with NV companions than WoW heroic dungeon pick-up-groups.

I'm tired of all the emphasis on MP in games. 99% of the time, I want a single player game. For the other 1% of the time, all I need are UT 2004 and TF2.

Well, acording to The Vaults, Interplay have no more problems on creating a MMO Fallout, so

I would definitely try it out, but it would have to be vastly different from the current trends that MMOs are so fond of. After playing them for a while, they all start to seem like the same game (WoW) with different graphics. Ultimately, they prove to be very shallow games IMO because of this "sameness."

I hear that EVE does some interesting and different things, but I've never tried it.

I was burned already this year by the Star Trek MMO, which was a horribly disappointing and simplistic little distraction. I would want a Fallout MMO to be really special and unique. I don't think it's even worth doing otherwise.

Mark Morgan's Fallout classic tunes. :celebration:

Fallout 3 and New Vegas are worth ten times as much as those copy-paste, 12 hour, bland games that come out today. I wont name any names but its pretty much 90% of the current game market.