Its Red Dead Redemption, and there was 2 Free DLC. Lmao!! You don't play games much, do you?!? lol :celebration:

I just want Area 51. Then this game will be acceptable.

I'd be absolutely stunned if someone ever released a game with no bugs.

I 2nd that.

I don't think anyone ever has. New Vegas is a bit bugger than most new releases, but I think this is forgivable since New Vegas is bigger than most other new releases. Considering the amount of content in the final product I can certainly look beyond the few bugs I've personally seen and praise Obsidian for an exceptional product; really I'd have actually expected more bugs than I've encountered thus far from a game this size. This is not to say that the bugs I've encountered don't exist, they most certainly do, but I'm confident that Obsidian will fix as many as they can.

I agree with that completely. I hope everyone experiencing game-stopping bugs (and I know there are still some problems for some people) gets patched soon, and I wish everyone who thinks that a radscorpion with its head in the ground is a game-stopping bug would get a life. Sorry, I've been bottling that up for ages....

The developers don't owe me anything, I paid ￡30 for a very enjoyable and immersive game that I've spent 220 hours playing so far, and will spend more time playing it yet to see different endings. I can't think of any other form of entertainment media that has given such good value for money in a while...

Fallout 3 was full of bugs however you could mostly just ignore them as nothing linked up quest/npc wise.

NV on the other hand is more complex than any Oblivion mod and you should know from modders how painful those are to get working (things like factions, linked up quests etc).

Hmm funny i cant think of anything thats not at least ten years old that MAY have been bug free like PHANTASMAGORIA. Guess there are bugs which hide and never bother anyone then there are bugs that jump out with the crashing jaws of the void biting on ones emotions like a rabid dog.

And these things are the very things haunting Obsidian, as far as memory serves, I have never played and Obsidian developed game, but New Vegas, being in the hands of a foreign company (in terms of people who didnt work with F3, or having little experience with Gamebryo) I'm pleasantly surprised at how LITTLE bugs there are. I do admit it has a few tedious bugs, but when all is said and done, Obsidian could not have been a better choice in candidate for Bethesda to ask to do a sequal.

All my favourite games have had massive bugs in them, but then I mainly play Black isle. bethesda and bioware games, NV has apart from some very minor bugs ran perfectly for me*...
So far I've encountered no Torment scale ctd or levels of in game bugs.


* Apart from having Avira install a memory leak bug into their software a week into playing NV, making it crash badly when playing NV.

New Vegas doesn't need to "redeem" itself at all, OP. It was worth every penny I paid for it alone. That said, I hope they release lots, and lots, and lots of DLC. :fallout:

I'd be happy to see 3-5 DLCs, I most certainly don't think Vegas needs to be Redeemed in anyway! I like FO3 more than New Vegas but I like what they did with Vegas, combat felt better, I liked the Rep. System, liked the companion wheel, although I'm not a big Fan of companions generally I think they improved upon FO3 but I didn't find it as compelling as Fallout 3 was for me. I would have liked a larger map though. I like the weapon mods etc, Vegas doesn't have to Redeem anything overall its a brilliant game but as I said I was compelled more to play FO3 than Vegas. I hated the invisible walls, really like whats going on there If the DLCs could perhaps open up more of the map ie the Highlands of the game there was a lot of areas that couldn't be reached and I felt it should have been a larger area to explore.

Three free one to fix up house, energy weapon and lack of Legion missions.

Then 5 to match FO3 so no one would ever say FO3 have more contents.

The game doesn't need DLC at all, honestly. I'm satisfied with the game as it is, and if any game needs extra content to redeem itself, then the developers weren't doing their job. DLC is supposed to be extra content, not a necessary part of the game.

Although I wouldn't object to an expansion or two, like Tribunal and Bloodmoon for Morrowind, or Shivering Isles for Oblivion. DLC is overrated, let's bring back the days when addons for games were actually worth buying separately and significantly expanded upon the game, and weren't just a series of hour long quests, each sold separately, whose combined price is enough to buy a whole new game. If there's anything New Vegas needs now (Aside from a few more patches that fix the more problematic bugs and DON'T INTRODUCE NEW ONES.) it's that, and not because the game lacks something important, but just because expansions seem to have become underrated in this day where developers can get away with charging five dollars so you can give your horse armor, in a game where you can't even fight on horseback, no less, and I don't object to having more content in a game that is already good, provided the new content is good and worth the price.

The game doesn't need redemption. It's already much better than Fallout 3. Though I seriously miss the days when customers got real expansions, and not garbage DLC like we (for the most part) got with Fallout 3.

Will there be DLC? I've been told that the games engine, Gamebyro have gone bankrupt and that there will not be any DLC... I find this hard to believe, but have anybody heard something?

They did? Huh, well kudos to Rockstar. Maybe I should hold Bethesda/Obsidian to that standard, then. The game was extremely buggy, and I wasn't being paid to test. Though the bugs all seem fixed now, haven't encountered any after my first playthrough (on 5 or 6, now).

I absolutely despise the concept of DLC. If you need proof that the industry has gone down the crapper, just look at the very idea of DLC. They deliberately release an unfinished, unpolished game, so they can charge you money later for what SHOULD have been there in the first place.

of course, its very reasonably priced and the content is usually quite good..... i'm not very good at taking a moral opposition to things, and they count on others like myself just forking over the money because they asked us to.

rather sickening... but.. i guess thats change for you.

So far I haves played for 108 hours and have yet to stratch the surface of what I will eventualy do in this game. Yes there are things that irk me.. always are in every game. But I have gotten a hell of alot out of it and will get alot more.

As for how many dlc should be free... none. At least no BIG dlc should be. Maybe a nice little mini dlc or 2.. a weapons pack.. a songs that arnt that blasted johnny and his ninnie emo girl.... dlc would be nice and would cost em much to make.. id LOVE butcher pete and stuff....

Maybe even a simple.. things to pick up and plop in your shack dlc with cool nicknacks like working lamps.. working clocks... juteboxes... plants... funji...

And you have proof that every single game which had DLC's that has been released has had content held back to be saved for DLC's?
Some studios decide to hold back content so that they can earn extra money on the DLC's.
That does not mean every studio has the same plan.

NONE. Zero.

It doesn't NEED anything to redeem itself. It doesn't NEED to be redeemed at all.

I'm pretty sure DLCs are planned from the beginning with the main titles, and not what they used to be, expansions to games that companies decided to create due to demand, well after the game had been out for a while.

In any case, I am not buying anymore stuff from Bethesda. This was the last one. Even if free DLCs are released, I'm not getting them. I am done with the code bugs, half-assed QA effort, and now the insistence of controlling, through bloatware, where and how I install and play games in my computer. Even modding, which is the one reason that made me buy this game, is not working properly, or at least not even on a par with FO3.

Proof? Look back a few years even at all the games that have been released, their sequels, the laughable 'DLC's....

You don't need any more proof than whats already in front of you.

They used to be created because people didn't want the game to end. They wanted more. Now DLC is created because the companies plan to do it from the start.

Thinking anything else is plain naive. Sorry.

Don't get your point.
Fable III was just released, I looked up on the market place and they just released a ton of clothing and armor DLC's.
So yes, Lionhead Studios or whatever it's called decided to hold back content to release it later.
But most other DLC's that I've seen has not seemed like content they held back but rather content they came up with after the release that they thought would be nice to add for the fans and to add longtivety(?) to the game.
Not all DLC's are content held back from the vanilla version.
Now, whether or not the DLC's are good or not is a whole nother story.

Offtopic I guess


Anyway, so DLC's are planned on ahead, what's the big deal about it?
It still doesn't mean they hold back content.
Neither you not I know the truth really.
If it's content that is too obvious then it's clear as water that they held it back.
But most DLC's I've played aren't like that.
So you might be right, I might be right, but none of us can know for sure until the DLC's are released.
I think you should at least give them a chance before saying that it's held back content.
And who knows, maybe the content was held back for a reason because it wasn't finished yet or something.

I agree with Seti...I...agree with Seti?

...

:ahhh: