Hi guys I'm putting this up so that we can get the word out to those who offer reviews of the games we play. Fallout 3 was voted game of the year in 2008 even though the main mission was glitched to where it could not be completed. This glitch was easy for the developer to fix but it did require that the game be tested more and fine tuned. However IGN and other major review sites still gave the game great reviews. In fact no mention of any glitching or game issues was mentioned by the reviewers. I bought the game and fell in love only to find out that I couldn't finish the game. I asked the tech team about the issue and they suggested only completing the main quest and then restarting a new game to play other quests. Otherwise it will freeze. IGN and a few other major review sites not only knew about the glitches and freezes but they tried to keep it quite. I'm posting a senior editors contact page up for any of you who felt fooled into buying a game that was ready for release. Please feel free to post up other review sites who you feel gave New Vegas a unfair high score.

For example IGN mentions some freezing and glitching but then says the story and depth is so good it's worth it. So they never marked it down for it's game play but instead canceled out the problems with something it does well. That's like saying China makes poor baby products that contain lead but it's ok because it was a good price. We need to send a message to those who lie to us about a game. I used to think these reviews were objective now I see that they are afraid to upset game companies because they get so much revenue in advertising from them.


Please make a note, if you love the game and your happy with glitching and freezing, you are not familiar with quality. If this is the case please let those of us with standards handle this. You will be rewarded with a higher quality gaming experience in the future.

Here is IGN comment link: http://stars.ign.com/email.html please use it.

It's been noted elsewhere that Bethesda was frowning upon low review scores from sites running their ads, such as IGN. Since Fallout ads are all over every major gaming site, they won't cover this sadly. Such a shame. I'd throw this on the front page of the New York Times if I could.

Also, since Bethesda sent the review copies out several weeks after the game was done, reviewers only had barely enough time to play it enough to give it a review, and most of them didn't have time to finish the main quest. So more than likely, this concealed the fact that there were even more bugs than the reviewers noticed, since their time was limited.

Scandalous.

This is sort of off topic but in what way was Fallout 3's main quest bugged to be un-finishable? I've finished it plenty of times..

Same, I was able to complete the main quest. Heck while I was unable to play broken steel due to massive dips in framerate I managed to complete it.

Also I'm not going to listen to someone whom created an account just to get people to stop playing their games. I don't care if you call me an idiot or an ignorant person I just don't think bullying reviewers whom did not experience the same bugs or enjoyed the game into changing their opinion is the right thing to do. It's wrong.

I definitely agree.