I personally doubt that New Vegas will end with what amounts to gameworld destruction on a mass scale.

If it's like the originals, than it will go into detail about fate of each faction, location, and some characters that you interacted with over the course of the game. Unless you make a decision that directly causes it, I doubt the ending will be like "everyone died, lulz. The end."

So ... you dread a unsatisfactory ending to the game, and hope for something "new and refreshing"?!

THAT'S SO WEIRD, I FEEL THE SAME WAY!

Do you also like six and money? ME TOO! OMG

(actually I hate money, it's the devil)

@ Sneakmaster
I am with you mate. I thought there wont be an end of the game, but now I am disappointed.

When I play an RPGame, I rarely roll many characters. I play only one, because I try to role play him as my self. I don't do couple of plays, being good, bad and neutral. In such games I rush to do the main story quest and then continue with side quests and special item collecting. When there is no free play after the end, I just play to the final mission and then quit the game. I am not fancy on "OMG this is the final, now I better reload my last save and do all the quests I can and get all the special items" It just breaks the immersion, because I know that I am actually to the end of the game. Another thing for me is when the freeplay hits, its time for mods, do as you wish, without messing the main story.

Well it is good that I saw this thread, I was planning to preorder the game this week, but I better wait and read the first player reviews about the game length and replayability factor. If it's something like Mafia 2, one can finish it for 10+ hours and then wait for DLC to enhance the gaming experience, no thanks, I will pass.

Well here's the thing; supposedly you wouldn't be able to do everything in one playthrough anyway. There are supposedly different main quests, and side quests that are only open to be completed if you made certain choices in certain ways. So to do EVERYTHING you would have to make more characters anyway.

1. So it has a definite ending.... Don't play the ending until you've done all you want... Fallout 3 I had done everything by the ending.. there wasn't anything left to do.. So when broken steel came out I happily played and then had nothing to do.. so I started a new game.

2. Fallout 1 and 2 you got a perk every 3 levels.. So getting 1 every 2 levels still is great.... Top level in Fallout 1 was 21.. which was pretty hard to get to even if you did everything there was to do... Fallout 2 was 99 .. but I probably only got into my mid 20's. You'd really have to just wander the wastes killing things to get higher.

3. Fallout New Vegas has 13 skills, Fallout 3 has 13 skills... All they did was combine the 2 gun skills big and small and added a new skill, Survival.. So you actually are getting new skills in New Vegas even though it doesn't feel like it. They could break down different types of guns forever and give you a skill for each of those guns if they wanted I guess. I was more disappointed in the skill culling from Fallout 1 and 2 into Fallout 3.. But everything seemed to work out just fine.
Kind of surprised that they didn't put gambling back in as a skill.. or throwing .. or divide first aid and doctor back up since they seem to have put all those game playing devices into New Vegas.. but again it'll probably all work just fine.

Nooo they dissected the Big Guns skill into all the other ranged combat skills.

While I like the ability to continue after completing the main quest, such as in the TES series, the way Fallout series endings are handled makes that impractical. Now, you can choose to continue after the MQ in FO2, however the manual explicitly tells you that the game is not set up to account for your having completed it if you do so.

The obvious problem I can see in attempting to make post-MQ play make sense is the amount of additional dialogue items that would be needed in order to apply every possible outcome of every quest to the relevant NPCs. If each of the 2200 NPCs is involved in 2 quests with 5 options each you would need 70,400 dialogue items if they do not know of the outcomes of other quests, but if they do know of those outcomes then you would have to account for each additional result they were aware of, and at that point the amount of additional dialogue items becomes truly staggering. If there are 50 quests with 5 outcomes each and all 2200 NPCs know about all of them, you would need 6.875 billion dialogue items to cover every possibility. A more realistic value would be about half of that, but that's still a prohibitive amount of work.

While it's true you also need 'slides' for the various effects on the various settlements and/or the map as a whole, since those are essentially snapshots one can make a template version and clone it repeatedly to make copies to be edited accordingly, which is not that much work with professional editing software. It's still a fair amount of work, but not nearly as much as the above dialogue would be.

As such, having the game end when the main quest does starts to make a lot more sense when one realizes that a huge amount of work would be needed to do it 'properly' as well as that doing it 'improperly' would be a colossal waste of time and effort.

Wow, you must be disappointed in alot of games. Or not play many RPGs. :huh:


(I say this because, in my experience, most RPGs have a definite story with an ending; it's rare for me to find one that's open-ended. Also many have semi-set characters that it's hard to redefine into being "you". But, hey, maybe I play different RPGs than you. )

No, I play the same RPGs and thats why I was so happy with the few of them that have no ending and freeplay option. I thought that because Fallout 3 has freeplay, this one should have too, but...

And there are throwing weapons within both explosives and melee.

They should have had Throwing skill back...

That svcks, I'm so getting this for PC because I loved how I could do just about anything after the Storyline like Oblivion and FO3. I guess Modding is the only thing that will keep me coming back to New Vegas. :sadvaultboy:

Eh?
Start a new character once you've finished one?
Fallout 3 and New Vegas are games with replayability.
You don't use that and you miss out on maybe half the game.

I don't get peoples rage of that the game ends. I mean every RTS ever made (to my knowledge) and 99% of all RPG's have a defined ending as do all other puzzle, FPS, TPS, Mystery, Action, Adventure and/or [Insert Every Game Genre Known to Mankind] and I don't see any "rage" threads on them ending so what's the big deal about F3 and F:NV?

Edit: And Spore ain't an RTS. Spore is, well... Spore. And The Sims as well. (Which technically dose have an ending. When your Sim family die)

I agree, like I continuosly state to the people who go 'OMG NO ENDING TO GAME'. All you have to do is see your game ending, and just move on, it isnt the end of the world to reload a save and just pretend you beat it all up to the final point.

I agree.

I haven't seen any explanation, that I can relate to, that would shed some light into what is there in "continue playing after the MQ, even though you decide when the game ends and all that you'll be doing is the same thing you'll be doing before it" - and even more so when we know that one playthrough isn't enough to experience it all, and that almost all that you do will have an effect on the ending.

I don't get it either. When Fallout 3 ended (before Broken Steel), I simply loaded a previous save and continued exploring. It's understandable that some people wouldn't have had any previous saves for some reason, but luckily for those people, New Vegas warns you when you're at the "point of no return," and warns you to save if you want to keep playing with your character.

The only problem I ever had with this system in Fallout 3 was that having Liberty Prime standing near the Purifier for the rest of eternity as I went off and explored the rest of the wasteland felt a little weird. Of course I could have simply loaded a save before he was even deployed but I could never pass up the loot dropped by the small army of Enclave soldiers.

But other than the feeling of the game being incomplete, I just don't see why people are complaining about it. :shrug:

The flaws of the ending in Fallout 3 weren't the fact that it was over after the main quest, was the fact that the quality of the ending was really bad.

Broken Steel as an actual quest and story, was really dumb. Was it good and entertaining? Of course, I guess I enjoyed blowing up the Citadel and decapitating Sarah Lyons with a combat knife.

I think it's because people played Oblivion which didn't end, then they played Oblivion With Guns and when Broken Game got released then the game didn't end either.
And now since this is Oblivion With Guns' giant expansion pack people want there to be no end after final main quest.

So I just think it dates back to "This is Bethesda, their games does not end", and while this new expansion pack is not made by Bethesda it still looks really similar to Oblivion With Guns with the engine and all and they expect the game to not end because of it.

So when people say "Most RPG's don't end" they mean most Bethesda RPG's, and by most Bethesda RPG's they mean the latest three released on xbox 360 and PS3. >_>

Every time that occurs, http://img715.imageshack.us/img715/8988/uhhno.jpg picture comes to mind.

Yeah, the dissapointment in no open end is LAME.

Fallout 3's ending svcked and it felt like you made no impact, when broken steel came, you just kept playing and did all the stuff you could do right before the point of no return.

In order to have an open ending, bethesda basically had to make it so your choices didn't make much of a difference, and everything was the same. The ending svcked.

In order to have a good ending, where all your choices make a difference, Obsidian had to make the ending definate.

-and good people, why WOULDN'T you replay it when there's FOUR DIFFERENT MAIN PATHS? (NCR, CS, House, and alone) Would you just play through one fourth of the game's main story and say, "Well, no open ending, never playing this again."

Really though, in this type of game with so many choices that cause a real impact, a definate, permenant end is absolutely necessary, lest the ending svck.

Although, an expansion pack that detailed the aftermath of the main quest and implements all the things you did into the game would be AWESOME. (like a good broken steel)

Well actually I think it might have more than just that.
Maybe be an evil bastard while joining the Legion, or maybe just joining them for the caps, or joining them for their cause but disliking hurting people.
Same for house and NCR.

The only recent notable strongly-plotted RPGs that let you continue after "the end" that I can think of are Dragon Age and Mass Effect 2.... and neither of those make sense. (ME2, for instance - ME 1 ended with the credits, and it was perfect. ME2.... only maybe half your squad has any reason to stick around. Heck, several of them explicitly stated they were only with you til the final mission. So why are they still here for you to do sidequests?)


It doesn't make sense - until you notice that Bioware's been steadily putting out DLC for both games, long after they were released. And people having to start a new game to play the latest DLC might impact sales. So, who cares if letting them play after "the end" shoots holes in your narrative - it's more $$$$, baby! :whistling:

It was my favorite perk too.
Hope it's still there.

Also, I hope there is something like the Ghoul mask. They frighten me. :nope: