Your force seems to be a bit.....excessive.

:hubbahubba:

If we can get entertainment like this everyday until July 19th, I will forget about the whole June release of OWB. :hubbahubba:

so you paid 200 dollars to be pissed off? if that's not funny, i don't know what is! :dance:

Bloody hell, that's impressive. I had heard that a Mac release of FO2 took place, but after all these years I was just about convinced that it was an urban legend.

I hear where you're coming from...in point of fact, you're actually getting more and more coherent with every post you make :whistling: and I sympathize, I really do. I don't think anyone would argue that at least a handful of the points you raise have happened to us at some point or another during our playthroughs of NV. The problem is that you didn't actually mention those bugs in your early rants. You mentioned...well, inasmuch as I can decipher the fury, you mentioned things that were never promised to us, and in point of fact were (as I mentioned already) http://www.destructoid.com/fallout-new-vegas-has-a-definitive-end-181927.phtml long before the game's release.

Also, yes, the game is still buggy. It's also enormous, and for that matter it's enormously more stable than it was at time of release. There's no magic bullet here--speaking as someone who fiddles amateurishly with coding in my free time, bugfixing and patching is an organic, ongoing process. If you're looking for the be-all-and-end-all patch, in any game ever...well, you're likely to be disappointed for a long, long time.

Dude, there have been truly solid patches. At least two of them, with another on the way! You remember the reloading bug for guns that reload rounds one at a time? They fixed that. Quest bugs? Fixed most of those too. Crash bugs? Most of those were fixed too. Hell, they even went one better and fixed balance issues too.

The problem here is that your angry rant fails because it's ranting about stuff that was never promised, and which was outright denied long before the game hit shelves. Then you try to switch tracks to bugs, without remembering that, yeah, they've released at least 300+ fixes through patches, with another huge patch on the way to set things up for OWB.

Facts:

1) Obsidian always said that the game would have a definite ending if you followed right through the main quests. No play after that point, no Broken Steel style DLC to open it up.

2) The 7 DLC idea came about from people speculating and getting too far ahead of themselves. Some speculation has been spot in, some hasn't. In this case people extrapolated from the space for 7 more globes on the display in Lucky 38 that that meant 7 more DLCs. As Roy Walker used to say on Catchphrase, "It's a good guess but it's not right."

3) There are many RPGs with closed endings. In fact, closed endings are probably the norm.

4) Bethesda's forums, Bethesda's rules. Heck, they could ban you now for the hell of it if they wanted. They wouldn't. But they do have guidelines - http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/724862-forum-rules-and-general-information/ - in short, posting criticism is fine as long as you do it politely. Edit: And foul mouth certainly falls foul of the rules, which Bethesda are well within their rights to moderate.

This is just so absurd I almost believe it must be true, in which case, I gotta say, maybe you should be a bit more frugal with your money? Were you such a die-hard FO fan that you bought two copies of New Vegas at release? Or did the 360 version let you down, but your faith remained strong in the game, so you got the PC version, in case it was better?

Also, when has your "blend of intelligence and a foul mouth" ever gotten your point across? Because, said tactic seems to have failed here. Also, you have an interesting idiosyncratic writing style that involves capitalizing random words, what's the goal of that?

Is this about having no open ending? Seriously sir? Wow, if it bothers you that much either A) Mod it if you have PC, B) Deal with it on consoles. I mean, what's the point of continuing the main quest when you can do everything you can do afterwards, before that big ass battle at the dam. Waste of the devs times, I would much rather they focus on patching and their current DLC'S then making one broken steel like DLC. Just my opinion, but one that makes alot of sense.

I'm sorry I have no idea WTF you said..

My opinion is that Yes Obsidian is a poorly run company, that should not be allowed to make games unless some1 from Bethesda is in office with them 24/7, but not for a lot of the reasons put forth, they do not handle deadlines like they should, they dont test as they should, and they try to ride on laurels that just dont apply to the modern gamer, fallouts 1,2, and the BOS, were great games, but their 3rd person cartoony graphics svck by comparison to bethesdas 1st and 3rd switch type, I think they dragged their feet because of the problems from their former company (vain hope of being picked back up) (aint gonna happen,.... they gonna lose case !), I personally believe that fallout 3 was a much better game then fallout NV, with exception of character movement, and I am hoping it gets even better in fallout4 (including a crawl mode of movement and stance), but I am also hoping that if they dont fire the whole obsidian team, they do keep better watch over them in the future, and may the case in court be over soon, so we can move forward with a bit more security, that the franchise is not in danger from a 3rd party, (especially one that has a history of making bad choices).

*sigh*

Once again, and maybe it'll stick this time. http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Black_Isle_Studios http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Obsidian_Entertainment

Actually, I've seen a lot of sandbox games going the "open end" route nowadays.
But I find it hard to see why it's superior to just ending the game.
Whenever I get tossed back into the game after the end it feels like the game is incomplete.
Like somethings still left to see, when there in fact isn't.
So good riddance, no more open end in anything IMO. (Except Borderlands for multiplayer reasons.)


Actually, the rumour only said that Ulysses and the Courier had a relationship.
It was the fans that spazzed out thinking that a relationship can only mean two people bonking each others brains out.


C) Reload a save prior to the final quest.

1. Blame Bethesda's marketing department.
2. Put part of the blame on Bethesda's QA.
3. Cartoony graphics? With the exception of some rocks in HH I don't see how it got cartoony graphics.

Oh for craps sake.

Protip: In the games development world, the publisher is the one who handles deadlines. The developer has little if any say in it.



Protip: Bethesda oversaw bugtesting for this game. Take a look at the credits.



Look at when those games were released. Fallout 1 - 1997. Fallout 2 - 1998. Fallout Tactics: Brotherhood of Steel (not actually an Obsidian game, but whatever) - 2001. Fallout 3 - 2008. Of course Fallout 3's graphics look "better" from a technical standpoint - computers and consoles have many times the processing power!

Is it really hard for people to have actual informed opinions? And why is it that it's always the ones who leap in to defend Fallout 3 that always seem to get their facts wrong? It's been like this since FO3 was in development.



You're getting Obsidian mixed up with Interplay, there. There's no court case pending between Beth and Obsidian.

Yes I understand that Blackisle is the 3rd party not obsidian, but they are made up in part from part of the original teams



"1. Blame Bethesda's marketing department.
2. Put part of the blame on Bethesda's QA.
3. Cartoony graphics? With the exception of some rocks in HH I don't see how it got cartoony graphics. "



the cartoony graphics refers to their earlier games with black isle fallout 1 and 2 and The BOS,....... as for the other 2, marketing how do I blame beth, obsidian has their own I believe,....... and yes I guess we can blame beths QA a bit

Waitwaitwait. No. Black Isle is not the third party. Nor is Obsidian. Obsidian's core was formed from the remnants of Black Isle prior to its dissolution by Interplay. So to be perfectly blunt, weighing all four developers who have been involved with the primary Fallout franchise equally...the closest thing to a third party in the mix is Bethesda itself.

Black Isle no longer exists. Do you know the difference between a publisher and a developer? Interplay and Bethesda are fighting for the rights to create a Fallout MMO, which, I believe, Interplay has actually won. Bethesda is in no danger of losing the rights to develop or publish single-player Fallout games, unless they sell the IP.

Lt. Banana's point is that Obsidian is hardly a third party, if we take into account years worked on a Fallout game. The third party here is Beth themselves, if anyone.



Generally speaking, when there's a problem, you go to the one in charge first. Bethesda was in charge of overseeing bugfixing.



Again, we're talking a gulf of anywhere from 7 to 10 years between all past Fallout games (except FO:BOS which is crap) and Fallout 3. Of course Fallout 3 will have more pixels. It's got years and years of hardware development to stand on.



You believe wrong. The publisher (that's Bethesda) handles marketing and distribution.

Yes, Yes, It is quite possible that beth had some over seeing of the game being created, but originally it was not being closely watched because it was supposed to be nothing more then an expansion, but it took on a life of it own and it was decided it was already to big to be just an expansion this was explained b4 it was ever released (the reason it was never called fallout4) and my gripe about the graphics was because the mmo was gonna be in the old style (didnt know that did ya) and that would have svcked, and the court case is between beth and interplay but we not allowed to speak about it so I am trying to walk around it, BTW why does every1 who defends black isle seem to think they know so much more then every1 else just because they liked the old style and are usually all pc lovers

Maybe you heard of Interplay, a once-great computer game publishing company responsible for titles like Baldur’s Gate, Descent, Fallout and many others. I say "maybe" because not being informed about an existence of a company that hasn’t published anything of substance in the last twelve years is not a big deal. On the other hand, you probably heard of Bethesda, a game developer known for The Elder Scrolls franchise, as well as the two latest - and successful - Fallout games. After years of success in the 1990s, Interplay went public, a move that proved eventually to be disastrous, resulting in an involuntary bankruptcy order in 2006. It cancelled most of their plans, including the would-be fourth game in the Fallout franchise - Fallout 3.

Fallout MMORPG - Selling License, Licensing Back, Court Issues
Instead of creating its own game, the new management of Interplay decided to sell the license for three single-player Fallout games to Bethesda. This, in my opinion, given the situation, was really the best thing to do. Bethesda was willing to pay, had the will and skill to create good RPG games (thus unlikely to ruin the franchise) as well as giving Interplay enough time to get back on its feet and - after a few years and three Fallout games later - pick up the single-player license again. At the same time, Interplay kept all other rights to the Fallout franchise, as it was planning on making a Fallout-based MMOG. In 2007, when the MMOG industry was booming, it was rather obvious that a successful MMOG would solve most, if not all of Interplay’s financial problems.

Unfortunately, not everything went according to plan. Interplay got sued by some former employees for not paying out salaries - and lost. This put Interplay into a rather unpleasant situation. The deal where Bethesda was paying for the Fallout license on a game-by-game basis was no longer so appealing; they needed the cash now. Interplay had little choice but to sell the whole Fallout franchise to Bethesda for mere $5,750.000. Interplay managed to salvage something out of this situation as Bethesda agreed to back-license the rights for a Fallout MMOG to Interplay under several conditions, most notably securing funds for initial development as well as starting full scale development of the game by a certain date (April 2009).


This is the news as of today,.......... direct quote and not all of it as it is a huge write up in "Bright side of the news"

I'm sorry but I have trouble believing you're not trolling. Here's why:

1) The DLCs you mentioned in the first post were based off a baseless rumor. Someone spread a rumor that we'd get 7 DLCs, and Obsidian has denied this rumor various times since then. They've flat out confirmed there'd be no post-ending gameplay since the day the game was released. I'm sorry if you were misinformed and it got your hopes up, but I promise you that Obsidian did all it could to deny these rumors. You'll struggle to find a regular visitor to these forums who isn't aware of this.

2) It's funny you mention a "truly solid patch," because we're supposed to get one within the next month. They're wrapping one up as we speek.

3) The developers are known for frequently visiting these forums, even posting and discussing issues with us. You're definitely not ignored.

4) If a thread got locked, it's more likely that it has to do with their "lock-after-so-many-pages" policy than because they want to silence someone. Dunno what you're referring to exactly, but if you check locked threads, 9 times out of 10 it's because the thread exceeds 10 pages, nothing more.

5) Sit down and take a deep breath. Your posts until now haven't even made an objective point. You're just blindly ranting from one point to the next. I have no idea if you're angry because you just found out we're only getting 4 DLCs or if you're angry because some other thread of yours got locked. You might wanna calm down and think about WHY you're angry before you run in shooting off bullets in every direction.

Oh dear Bruce Willis you're so wrong, Obsidian was contracted to develop a new Fallout game using Gamebryo and Fallout 3's resources.


There is a difference between Fallout Online and FOnline/Fallout: 2238.

I wont argue this point as It is possible I am wrong, but I do not believe that to be the case, but I dont care enough to keep arguing my belief and am too lazy to go looking thru old info to back me up or prove me wrong.

dude it's not "possible" that you're wrong, you ARE wrong! :flamethrower: