I do as well just I like some more then others...and have played them all, well all the PC versions anyway!

Too bad this game was just a money grab. Was really looking forward to something new from bethesda, rather then a copy of an old game. With all the glitches, freezing, and just general problems in the game, it'll definitely be the last Bethesda game i support. This title won't do anything positive for the company, especially from console users.

Opinion < Fact

So, because it wasn't a new game engine it was a "money grab?" Are all of the other gazillion games that are made using a game engine already used by another game also "money grabs?" Urge...to...roll...eyes...rising...

More like "Fallout 3, quick fix for lack of Fallout"

At least that's how I feel.

Can Beth, Obsi, and Zeni work together in the next title???

We can't have a normal conversation because somehow, some way, people have gotten their egos entangled in their game tastes.

Someone going on about how great the originals were and stating more people should appreciate how great they were without ever having played them really took the cake though, that's when the thread officially clutched it's chest and keeled over with a long, tortured moan.

no not at all. point just being it worked well for fallout 3, when fallout 3 first came out. new vegas is nothing new, it's just a revamp of fallout 3. If it were fallout 3.5 it would be amazing... in 2008. It's just too bad the game isn't as polished as a finished product should be.

I would argue that just about everything is new outside of the game engine and some of the art assets and enemies. I thought Fallout 3's graphics were fine, especially for an RPG. Many of Fallout 3's conventions were taken from a game that was made in 1997. It's two years later and console hardware hasn't changed, so what, exactly, is unacceptable due to the fact that it is now 2010? Is the lack of polish you're referring to the bugs that people are experiencing, or are you referring to something else?

And you didn't know about the "concept" employed in this game before you bought it and began playing it? Being that the concept itself "fails" for you (the word "fail" is annoyingly overused these days), wouldn't some simple, free research have saved you money, time and frustration? Personally, by the title of the game I guessed that casinos would be involved. Then it was just confirmed by the many commercials I saw on TV and promo vids I saw online. All of that free information that I got before buying the game, btw. More can be found at the Vault Fallout Wiki.

At any rate, as I stated before, I loved both games.

I am sure I would love the first two as well if I could possibly stand turn-based combat. One of these days I will force myself to play my copies of those games just so I can get the benefit of the story lines that I hear so many positive things about.

I had never even heard of the Fallout franchise before Bethesda did Fallout 3, so I am very glad they put this very enjoyable series under my radar.

Youre missing his point. In your perspective, Halo 2, 3, and Reach, Most of Call of Duty series, Fable series, Mario Bros series, Resident Evil Series, Most of Elder Scrolls series, etc., etc., are all "money-grabs" and "revamped" versions of their predecessor... So now, all your preconceptions of the game, have actually transpired into compliments because most of the best game series ever, involve those attributes as you have described Fallout New Vegas to be.

It was never supposed to be its own game, with a new engine, or new dialouge system, or new inventory and fight mechanics etc. Just because it has a different name doesnt entitle it to be entirely unique in every game aspect.

The ridiculous amount of bugs/glitches etc in this game takes away the excitement of playing it for the first time after the hype waiting for its realise.

The graphics are not the best, but are reasonable. Game really seems unfinished. Might have some good new features but it is missing a few good ones too which FO3 had.



Once you get over a few things, you will eventually start to love this game too

I did not really have to get over anything. I expect bugs in every Obsidian and Bethesda games...Here is what I do: I set my expectations really (and I mean really) low so that way I am blown away but just about everything.

I have a question for you. What features did they take away? I know schematics but what else?

You talking about Fallout 3?

The lack of polish meaning that on release day, people are already complaining about patches. Not just for cosmetics, but actual functionality of the game. If you can't actually get through a game, or at least from one point to another without it crashing/freezing, several times, sometimes in key locations, I'd say thats a pretty big fail... fallout 3 was great.. New vegas would be awesome if it wasn't such a mess.

Fallout 3 also crashed for me in several key places, such as the ending.

Sorry you're having problems. I guess I'm lucky that it runs perfectly for me. The only issues I've had have been some companion scripting bugs, the weapon reload script bug for some weapons (as of the last patch), and a minor side-quest bug. Overall really minor. I hope your opinion of the game changes when they get some of the crash issues worked out.

Just general things like Slaving, random events, and there seems to be a lot of really random amazing areas in FO3 where NV didnt really have any. Especially places with the Behemoths (One with all the fiends and the one with the brotherhood vs mutants vs mercs) Wow thinking back on it those were amazing lol.

DC had such a great feel to it when walking around and was the main area in FO3. Load of Super mutents to kill and Brotherhoods to team up with.
NV main area the strip... has 3 parts? All tiny, takes ages to load. And nothing exciting in it really.

NV may have more areas but half of them just dont seem that interesting. Remember the scary building in the SW corner of the map in FO3? Not many places like that in NV. Just the vaults which seem like the only good random places in NV.

And im sure NV only has two songs in it, I hate the radio in NV. I want to listen to ThreeDawg oowwww!!!!


I could go on for ages.

Eh, what? Fallout 3 was essential in the same situation as Fallout New Vegas in term of bugs. It took at least 6 month to get a handful of obvious bugs in the final patch. Even then, GFWL tend to be a bother with the PC users.

Every person to every person, I manage to get through New Vegas just fine in my PC version. I already heard its unfortunate for those with the console version. In any case, bug really should not be a factor in favoring game.


Legion practically serve the slavery part. The encounter of combat still exist (more noticeable in routes, borderline of NCR and Legion territory, or Fiends vs NCR trooper). Its more of a matter of placement. Enemies territories don't usually overlap, hence why there isn't a constant war zone all the time, which is a bit of ironic.

Ya referring to the Dunwich Building? That building is more of a meh and just serve as an easter egg of Lovecraft. Try visiting any Vaults in the Mojave and see if ya like those or not.

Hearing Mr. New Vegas was a great change of pace as it does not always lead to propaganda or constantly tell everyone who ya are and what ya do all the time.

Is that what people state when they have nothing else to argue? Why are you responding to my actions in the first place? What's in it for you? In fact, what does anyone gain from arguing over the internet? Why do people complain on the internet? Why are any of us here?


...and you get to... do what exactly? What I find funny is that those who prefer 1 and/or 2 in this thread are defensive of someone saying they prefer a game they haven't played, and for what, exactly? Need all the troops you can get? I suppose one could similarly ask why I brought up the point, in the first place. I brought it up for a couple reasons:

1. Game companies actually do listen to what their fans say, hence why there may be debates over the internet. Most likely, turn-based combat and isometric viewpoints are stuck in the past, but Bethesda does react to criticism, and yet we have people here criticizing a game and praising the features of another/others, yet they haven't played the others. So, then we end up getting a game full of features many people didn't really want but thought they would praise because it was cool to do so. It reminds me of a little kid walking into an ice cream store, asking for chocolate, and then complaining about how they got chocolate when they wanted vanilla. You can get what you ask for, so ask carefully and choose what you want.

2. I don't take kindly to people complaining about one of my favorite games and wishing everyone knew about the subjective greatness of other games, especially when they have never played the games they praise, when they insult me and assume I play games that I do not (the entire FPS genre, for example, but Call of Duty, specifically, in this case), and when I have played the very games being praised and still don't like them as much. I have a problem with people trying to fit in with a group and hypocritically picking on others because they dare to not follow suit and give them the middle finger, instead, and I'm referring ONLY to elitists. So, unless you are an egotistic, inconsiderate ass with a "holier than thou" attitude, YOU ARE NOT AN ELITIST AND I AM NOT REFERRING TO YOU!

Those are not specific thoughts about the person I was directing the point towards earlier in this thread as I know such things do not all apply to him, but that's why I am as vehemently opposed to such things as I am, and such things are not meant as insults to anyone and it's just how I feel, therefore I am acknowledging the fact this it is just MY OPINION. I'm attempting to be as civil as possible with this, but these are forums, and I must state how I feel. Anyone who proudly wears the label of "elitist", please don't. It's not something to be proud of.

FO3 definitely had more random places and some of them were pretty cool...others were kind of a waste of time, IMO.


I don't think the Strip is the main area...maybe the Strip + all of the surrounding areas. Taken as a whole the Strip "area" has quite a lot going on.


I personally didn't really enjoy that building as much as some others apparently have. You're right, though, FO3 had more random places. I do feel like the "non-random" places in NV (which there are more of) have a lot more meat, back-story, and thought behind them, though.


I think there's a glitch with the radio on the console versions. I'm on the PC version and there are a lot more than two songs. Hated Three Dog, by the way, I thought he was pretty irritating. I did laugh when he made fun of Eden, though.


Me too, but it would just be our opinions. :shrug:

I have to agree, FO3 did do better in the random encounter department. Nothing beats having to disfuse a bomb on a slave or having to kill a deathclaw to prevent it from mauling some people

Oh Christ... :laugh:

I haven't been arguing with you about anything.

Responding because I found your undeniably cute enthusiasm about this rather trite matter amusing - and yet a mystery in its reasons.

As for the rest of the questions.... I'll just skip them as "angertalk".

NV do lack of a personal slave however.....maybe a Clover like (i.e female slave, not Clover in NV) companion.

...slow clap...