In Fallout 3 for the PC there was a fairly major issue with radio stuttering and general instability that seemed to revolve around Fallout 3's use of Window's installed codecs. Has this issue been resolved for New Vegas?

I ask because I went to play Fallout 3 again the other night and ran into the issue again. This time it manifested itself as a crash on startup just as the intro music started to play. The fix was to once again install the MadFilter 1.0.0.3 mp3 codec and elevate its merit to the highest possible so that it would be used first.

I know a lot of people had this issue with Fallout 3, and I would be glad to hear that this issue has been resolved for New Vegas.

Codecs have caused this game issues. Mostly it is related to some non stock codec that one has installed. Ironically, this is usually fixed by either installing another 3rd party codec, or, not so appealing, ripping out all the non stock ones.

I fortunately never had this issue, but I only have just a smattering of codecs other than stock. K-Lite, DivX and FFD Show are it.

I do hope this issue has been resolved for those who have it.

Yeah, I definitely had the stuttering issue but solved it by using this fix:

http://www.fallout3nexus.com/downloads/file.php?id=10127

I think it works for some, maybe not for others, but it did for me.

I think the issue was the CODEC used by Windows 7. I had the problem after upgrading, but the MadFilter CODEC fixed it. I never crashed for me, it just stuttered when music was played on the radio, voices worked fine. It was a minor problem since I don't listen to the music.

What I hope they fix is the multi-core CPU problem with the engine instead of applying the workaround of limiting it to two threads.

The Gamebryo engine seems to have a few problems like this. I had the stuttering and messed up videos in both Oblivion and FO3 on my old computer. No amount of codec shuffling, installs, uninstalls, etc. fixed the problem. I never did find a solution, but luckily my current PC has no such issues with either Oblivion or FO3.

The multi-core CPU support is also something I hope has been addressed with NV. It seems a shame for me to have a quad core CPU that is never utilized to its full potential. Surely with the widespread adoption of multi-core CPUs this has been addressed.

Quad-Cores are still in the minority as far as most people's systems are concerned. The general public is only now starting to move to dual-core, never mind anything more than that. So it's not necessarily in a game developer's best interest to code with quad-cores+ in mind. If any issues that may result are as easily fixed as adding a line in an ini file, that might very well be enough for them.

If any possible issues can be fixed by adding a line to the ini file, you'd think the programmers might make the minimum effort to have the game detect a quad core and make the necessary change to the ini file itself. People may be unaware of WHY they are having a problem. Expecting customers to troubleshoot what is a simple fix for the developers is just poor form.

Also, quad cores may not be common amongst the general public, but according to Valve's hardware survey they do on a regular basis, more than a quarter of PC gamers use a quad core. Those CPUs have been available on the market for three years now. Developers need to start adding support for them - there is really no excuse, as doing so will future proof the games as well.

It is the same thing that annoys me with some software developers' seeming refusal to support a 64-bit OS. RAM is now cheap and plentiful, and a 32-bit OS literally can't use more than 4 GB of it. And an operating system like Windows 7 uses up to 2 GB of that RAM for itself - locking you at 2 or less for games or other applications. 64-bit OSs have been around for years now, and I have one, because I need it to use the 14 GB of RAM in my system. No game uses that much, but am a digital and 3D artist, and programs like Photoshop and 3ds Max make use of it - not to mention it lets me multitask with several open programs at once. However, I have to keep 32-bit versions of those programs installed on my system, because big name companies like Nvidia and Adobe won't port or update some fairly essential workflow plug-ins and tools to work with 64-bit versions. A shame, because, according to Valve, 36% of PC users are using a 64-bit operating system.

So I just get tired of the seeming developer laziness in refusal to put forth the extra effort to support technology advances that were made half a decade ago. It impedes my professional work, and annoys me when it impedes my gaming as well. I shouldn't be penalized because my PC outstrips recommended requirements. Many developers seem to be ignoring a third of PC users - I just hope Obsidian is not one of them.

The problem with 64 bit in particular is that while 32 bit applications will run on a 64 bit OS, the reverse is not the case. So developers would have to provide 2 versions of their software to accommodate the 3/4 of computer users who are still using a 32 bit OS. It has nothing at all to do with laziness but is simply a question of cost efficiency. If you can sell your product to more than twice as many people by sticking with the 32 bit format, it simply makes economic sense to do so. When the numbers flip and 64 bit users become the majority, then you'll see software developers designing with that platform in mind, not before that. This is especially true of the gaming industry because of the tough competition they find themselves having to deal with. At this point in time it would be economic suicide for a company to release titles that were strictly for 64 bit systems. As for the game adding the necessary line in the ini file, how do you know they haven't already arranged for that to happen?

I don't know if they already arranged for that to happen. I was just expressing the idea that if they haven't, they should have.

And I know what you are saying about 32-bit efficiency versus 64-bit - I don't expect games to be programmed to make use of a 64 bit OS yet. I just expect them to work with no problems or hick-ups on a 64-bit OS, which should be accounted for. Professional graphics software and plug-ins are another matter however - they get no sympathy from me. Professional computer artists build workstations with a lot of RAM. It makes our jobs easier and isn't that expensive. That requires 64-bit software, however. When the refusal to update an industry wide plug-in or piece of software to 64bit impedes on MY efficiency and cost, I get upset. A lot of people get upset. When whole groups of professionals are petitioning a major graphics company like Nvidia to update a plugin to 64bit (and have been for years now) and see no response or effort in that direction, I see that as pure laziness on the company's part. They have a working version for 32bit that needs no update. They have many people willing to pay them for a 64bit update (which they will have to make sometime, so it may as well be now). I fail to see any reason for not doing so besides not caring.

I'm no programmer, but it doesn't seem to me like it would be all that difficult to do a straight port of a piece of software from 32 to 64 bit with no other changes. Give it full access to 64bit OS features like more RAM access and call it a day.

My guess is that they didn't foresee the kinds of problems that running the game on a quad-core could cause. And it doesn't seem to happen to all of them, by the sounds of it only a few people experienced any issues with it. So my guess, if they haven't actually fixed it the problems, is that they will include the appropriate lines in the ini file rather than having to dig that info up from the internet somewhere.



Well there I'd have to agree with you. There should be no reason why a professional application can't come up with a 64 bit version as well. A general public product like a game though is a different story altogether.

Take a moment to browse the Fallout 3 PC Issues forum. I used to help out there quite a bit, and there used to be several posts per day of people complaining of lockups after upgrading their system to a quad core CPU. It is a strange bug indeed, but it seems to effect everyone with more than a 2-core CPU eventually. I upgraded just after starting a new game, but did not experience a problem until a certain point in the Operation Anchorage DLC.