How is it the "easy" way out. Ending the game after the main quest slides and allowing the player to carry on with no changes are both equally easy.

One way pleases fans of sandbox games and wasting time, the other way pleases fans of narrative storytelling. They went with the fans of storytelling.

There could be a way to allow the player to continue after the main quest, but still keep the ending meaningful. An expansion like Dragon Age: Awakenings, where after the game you leave the Mojave area for good and continue your adventures in a new area, I'd love to see what New Reno is like these days (plus they could add new games like poker and craps).

It's the 'easy' way out... because you can -go back on it- later, if the opposition is too loud.


Bethesda already proved you can just tack on any crap you please to 'destroy' the permanent ending of a game by retconning the whole damn thing if you like. All Obsidian has to do is sit tight and listen to the complaints as they come in. If there's a sufficient outcry, and they feel there might be loss in revenue for DLC if they don't remove the 'ending'... then they can just double back and pull a Bethesda.

If they had -not- had a definitive ending... than the folks who railed against Broken Steel for having absolutely NO bearing whatsoever on the ending the player chose, essentially marginalizing the entire thing would have jumped down their throat when they found another 'poor' excuse for an after-game experience. They would have complained almost as loudly as the people complaining now...

... only you can't really make an expansion that ENDS the game... because then you'd probably get burned by both sides for being stupid!


I suppose, in the grand scheme, it's all trivial.

After all, we're talking a company who makes plenty of cash doing what they do.

I doubt either side complaining would mean too much.

Agreed, agreed and agreed. Also, the Devs thought this through and through.

And you can use as big a text as you like... and point out as many -opinions- as you please... but it doesn't make yours more valid than mine.


My characters haven't hit level 20 by the time I'm done, most games... and -I- will be the judge of when my character's story is over. If you think that we're all just going to IGNORE this massive war about to erupt... so that we can go gamble some more, screw a couple of hokers, and pick corn... you've got another thing coming.


You and titan both, that goes for.

The thing about RPG's, dating back to when they first began to be used for entertainment, rather than a psych tool, was that they didn't end, per se.

Certainly, video gaming is somewhat limiting in this regard, but a non-hard finish is a good touch.

Mind you, I don't think it's worth insulting each other about...

This is a good philosophy!

It's good that -some- folks can keep a level head... I get so tired of hearing both sides going at it over and over... I really do. A single button-press option could have shut -everyone- up.

To be honest, -that- would have been the easy way out. Even though I contradict myself.

Maybe not. Maybe it would be easier for us... and not for Obsidian, who would have to live with their decision possibly eating away at them. I don't know.

But really! Why can't we all just agree that we disagree... state our opinions and feelings reasonably... and leave it be?

I was rather content in having a fairly peaceful conversation with whats-his-face >.> *goes back to look* ... before someone posted a massive wall of letters quoted from somewhere else which entirely dismissed everyone else with a differing opinion as being wrong or stupid. Meh.

Ding-ding-ding-ding-ding!

What did he win, Johnny?

Hardly a topic worth trying to slit each others' throats over.

My only problem with a definitive ending was in fallout 3's main quest, I saved after entering the room where you activate the purifyer not knowing that you can't exit that room once you've gone in it. Not a problem if I hadn't blazed through the main quest without doing any sidequests lol. So I deleted my lv 20 character and started over and just saved before doing the last part of the main quest. New vegas was at least courteous enough to tell me about the last quest lol. I love that I get to see the consequences of my actions in the end cutscene, do I enjoy playing after the ending? Yes. Am I upset by this game ending? Not in the least. I still have 2 more factions to complete and several sidequests that I "failed" by doing a certain faction's quest. All in all either way suits me, doesn't change the fact that the game is epic lol.

I'm happy that the game ends (more so that it ends well). It gives a real sense of accomplishment instead of "That's it? Did I just do a bunch of sidequests?" after dropping me back to an empty world where there is no goal anymore. There's no incentive to do anything after the MQ is over (as there is nothing to reach for anymore, no building up your character for the endgame and that nullifies the power of the sidequests also as the reward is either XP, money or storycontinuance), but pointless running around and killing things which one can do before ending the game already.

What makes me feel a dumdum is not understanding why are people feeling "screwed" over non-post-endgame-support. Are you guys buying your games specifically for that purpose while ignoring everything else, to get the annoying drivel off the way to play the meaningless wasteland jogging sim where there is no storydistractions ruining the party?

Truth, the ending otf RPG doesn't come until the digital version emerge.
But isn't that why we have sequels?

There's plenty if you plan on selling people the "proper" ending as DLC content again, they got away with pulling that disgusting stunt with FO3 so no doubt they'll do it again.

On the bright side, Bethesda may give Obsidian a good budget to make it worth while.

Truly don't understand why it's such a big deal.

I've been playing digital RPGs since the early 80s. Games having stories that End is familiar to me. Ones that Don't End tend to be the more plotless hack-n-slash games (Diablo & it's ARPG ilk, for example).

The stronger the Story, the higher odds that the game will End. Console JRPGs, for example (derided by some as "interactive movies" rather than games) tend to have very strong story, and they tend to End. Games that just want to keep grinding on tend to have less story.


I've played games both ways. I've played dozens of games that Just End. And in most of those games with sidequests or similar things, I've kept a save before the point where some NPC says "Hey, once you go forward from here? No Going Back?." I'm used to that mechanic, I've seen it for decades. It's normal. You're not "done" with your character? Ok, take a left, ignore the meteor hanging over the city about to destroy it, and go race Chocobos at the Gold Saucer.... the World Ending Armageddon will wait.

So, yeah..... I don't understand the problem. At all.

------

re: "continue" style DLC. Not being a raging cynic, I believe Obsidian when they say there won't be one. Mostly because, given the story structure and the vast & different changes in the Mojave depending on the end you pick, it's virtually impossible to do a decent Continue without several DLC and/or an entire expansion/sequel game.

Bethesda could shoe-horn in a continuation (due to the vast whining) because FO3 had an immensely shallow and linear Main Quest. FO:NV does not have this - doing a proper continuation isn't feasible..... and why would they want to do a terrible one? (Again, not such a raging cynic that I consider all DLC to be sell-out / rip-off / content deliberately held back to screw you / etc.)

I object!

*insert convincing argument here*


... so there!

(Sorry, didn't notice this thread was dug up out of the graveyard and I already had stuck my editorial in it once. Ah, well.)

FO3 ending svcked hence Broken Steel. This does not mean Broken Steel change of ending was a huge improvement. Point is RPG with no real choice in how it ends... you can't get any worse than that. So it needed a DLC to change things.

FNV had several awesome endings. To make a DLC that implements all those endings just so we can continue past the end and shoot some more people would be a huge investment with very little return. A waste of resources.

If you're complaining that it took you by surprise... next time make your homework before buying a game, this was long known AND learn to read the messages in-game.
If you're complaining that it affects your role playing having to postpone the end quest then how about playing in a world where all the choices you made and their effects gets presented to you at the end and then there are no changes? That does not affect your role playing ? Deciding the end and then nothing happens does not break immersion? Yeah, I know "I'll role play that for some weird reason it's like this and all is right"... :rolleyes:

No, no... it's fine... I've been sticking my nose in here too and debating it all over again! ^_^


I enjoy it. Mostly because I -can- play after the end of the game... so really... I argue on the side of the suffering simply because I very well -could- have been one of them, had I done what I originally planned and bought the game for the 360.

Besides, I don't think it was -that- dead...

... there have been far worse.

Do feel free to contribute! Of all the folks who have, you're one of the few who actually come with some fair talking points.

Since your on PC use a mod dude(http://www.newvegasnexus.com/downloads/file.php?id=35450), anyway the game DOES have replay value, different factions to allie with, also there are other ways for alot of quests to play out trust me.....I have the CE game book and have read a few pages so far cause I won't really use it untill 3RD play through so I can find as much on my own.

bigcrazewolf

http://www.newvegasnexus.com/downloads/file.php?id=35450

There you go buddy, it's a mod that lets you basically restart; continue playing like HD never happened; or if you want it'll move npcs and change dialogue so it's post-HD.

Have fun, it lets you keep playing

Okay, I really don't want to have to go through this whole thread to clean up properly. If things can't stay civil from here on in, it'll just get locked.

This is a very polarizing topic, but people get to have their own opinions. (And remember - as opinions, they are neither right, nor wrong...)

But! But! But! But my opinion is always the right opinion! T__T



... or anyways, back to the topic at hand, I think it's pretty well summed up for the most part. I mean, everyone is going to have a different opinion. Most folks just plain won't care one way or the other. They'll play it. They'll play it again. They'll enjoy it. If a DLC changes it so they can keep playing it... some folks will cheer... others will rage... and the world will pretty much keep right on going the way it always has.

It is interesting to see how many people feel one way or the other.

I wonder if there's actually a poll for one of these topics with just a 'Yes, No, Don't Care' option...

Just to say, If you want a game that never ends, Play World of Warcraft..

It never ends for whoever plays it.

Also, They will not make a 'Continue-After' DLC, They even said this before, And no, You can return your games but guess what?
People will still buy it even though you guys through a hissy-fit.

(Directed at people who are complaining about no Broken-Steel..)

I tried suggesting an option that would allow those who wanted to continue on afterwards before the game was finished but was shot down post haste by those who want it to be open ended (end of story, so to speak).


Personally I usually find most games with a definite ending to have a more exiting ending sequence and at least for myself tend to be more enjoyable, while conversely I tend to find most games which are open ended, have their main quests end with a fizzle rather than a bang leaving me with a feeling of "what ?????, that's it ?????????????". Plus all to many games which allow you to continue playing after the end of the main quest leave at least myself with a bad taste in my mouth because it feels like nothing I did during the main questline made any difference at all.

My feelings towards post-endgame DLC are definately against it with just one major proviso for it, with the proviso being that if they do decide to do a post-endgame DLC they ensure that it makes complete sense in context with what we did or did not do during the main quest line (but to do this would involve an obscenely huge amount of work, that if they do do a Post-endgame DLC it will more than likely be in my opinion bland and meaningless).

Yeez. Just download the MOD that keeps u playing after end. Problem solved.

I just want to clarify that I do -not- want a post-ending DLC. I would have -liked- the cheap option of a 'keep playing? Y/N' button.

However, my feelings are thus:

Either they leave it as it is, and deal with the complaints... or they make a PROPER expansion pack which extends the game beyond the end with reasonable, rational extrapolations of the events which took place during the Battle of Hoover Dam pt. II

That's what I want.