First thing's first, there's no convincing me that Bethesda didn't give Fallout 3 the ending that it did because it intended to release Broken Steel. It wasn't a matter of a company caving in to fan pressure. The fans already bought the game - there was no reason to ammend the "faulty ending" other than to cash in on Broken Steel. At the end of the day, the ending of Fallout 3 amounted to nothing more than a huge, glaring "DLC To Come" sign. I don't think this is a strictly Bethesda reasoning. It's just the nature of the industry.

Dont worry i read it.

Ice cream? :icecream:

Perhaps, though I still hope that Obsidian doesn't pull the same trick as Bethesda. They just don't seem the type.

As do I. I believe the writers' reasoning is sound - they want the ending to have real impact, therefore they can't allow the player to continue in this new world they created without making an entirely different game out of it.

Watch it, please.

You can disagree with what someone is saying without the insults and flames.

Well, then...

Anybody have any other arguments that could be used? I'm thinking of expanding the guide.

In addition to Talaran's advice, I deleted over a dozen posts, because it was getting way to snippy, which seems unnecessary given the topic.

It's not that hard to understand why some people would like an open-ended game. Any more than it is hard to understand why a game with a good story line and good ending isn't a problem for many others.

Erm...just have the player create the same character, over and over again? That's sort of like continuing after the ending, right?

I actually already have that in there. I would do the "Vet Armor" complaint but I don't think it's going to come up enough to be an issue.

I'd say the only thing that really needs to be added is a section talking about the definite impossibly hard to miss warning that the game gives you.

Other than that, you've pretty much got it nailed. :tops:

I really wish this would be stickied as well.

Make a short note about how most single player RPGs throughout the history of gaming have had a definitive ending, and it's really only Bethesda who became popular and notable for including free-play in an RPG setting. (Yes, I am aware that free-play exists in Fallout 2 and a few other games, but Bethesda brought the concept to popularity in the mainstream.)

A little brushing up on history never hurt anyone, and maybe it will help the new users understand why things are the way they are with New Vegas.

I'll try and find a way to add those two. The only problems are that I have it set up to go in a coherent order, and I'll have to find a way to make the argument fit. Both coherently and style-wise. I should've put both in to begin with, though. They've come up god knows how many times.

You should also mention there is a mod to allow free play after the MQ on PC as well.

Looks like I'm just going to add a separate section. Can't fit these into the main writing.

Great guide... Were you thinking of the http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4KhM3jVehVo (promo) when writing it. :disguise:

:rofl: lawl Iawl!

that was utterly hilarious great post I imagined a little blond kid and a man in a suite with the music from tenpenny tower playing.lol!

Not a big fan of the two I just added, but they'll have to work.

I like definite endings...when they are definite. When I beat the game the first two times, knowing the ending was definite, it just pissed me off that I had the option to tell the guys that i'll just go on minding my own business. Now if that option said, 'Im going to go back to my old life of being a courier!" That would be fine by me, but nooooo. However I can't complain too much because I love the game.

I hope you don't mind that I'm sort of "spamming" this guide in recent alive threads that are complaining about the game ending.

I'm just trying to get the word out and help those in need. :angel:

As long as you don't just mindlessly bump it and somewhat stick to a conversation.


Oh dear lawd. Putting those links to the end removers makes the entire thread seem so counterproductive. "Here's why it's not a bad thing, but you can go ahead and skip all of this and grab the mods below!"

Would've prefered an open ending to be honest, but I can understand why it was made definite. Its still possible to do everything with the same character. Still, I just can't help but think what might have been if they'd only let me play on as the king of an independant Vegas. Then again, if we could play on, it really would take the effect off of the ending and given the time constraints and what they already cost the game, I doubt a post-MQ would've been feasible without compromising the effect of life after Hoover Dam. Perhaps a DLC could be made in the future, giving the devs time to plan how they're going to implement it without ruining the effect of the ending but still making it fun to carry on. By the way, very good thread.

Just completed the game through siding with the NCR having never stolen, pickpocketed or picking non-moral options or killing (other then the ones necessary to do the main NCR story), even after losing 15 hours playtime to a DLC error beforehand, but you know what I'm going to do now?


I'm going to start again, and to all the people in my next play through, in the words of Frank Horrigan,



Time to Die.

I actually don't think it is. Siding with a faction or going against a faction knocks out a few quests. Not having the right karma level knocks out at least one. Not having the appropriate reputation or skills knocks out some more. It might be possible, but it has to be pretty dang hard.

After failing "Don't Tread on the Bear", "The House Has Gone Bust!" or "Beware the Wrath of Caesar" you can no longer do quests for the NCR, Mr. House or Caesars Legion respectively.

Not to mention some quests require 90+ skill points to do something, science, barter, speech, etc. So its unlikely people have made a character specifically for that, im teaking my character, but I could never do everything.
Also best thread ever.