About the normal number of crashes here for me.Like 5 so far I think?Over the course of 28 hours played.

Nothing has gone wobbly or looked ...unusual.Had a quest pointer go whacky on me...but it was due to something I did with the quest I think.
All in all im having a blast...

the only problem im having is on hardcoe my sleep doesnt go up lol and i think my food and water is going up soooooooooo sloowwwwwwwwwwww

that gamspot review is load of [censored], for six minutes you got a guy just complaing and say how much it svcks and what wrong with it, there was hardly anything about the good things

What do you expect from a biased place? ...

Its always been known GS is biased and that they dislike anything thats not something new with new gfx engine etc. thats just how it is... but well if they can give MOH 7.5 it says it all.... Linear gaming will be the future ... ohhh welll

Besides the users don't agree http://www.gamespot.com/pc/rpg/falloutnewvegas/players.html?tag=scoresummary%3Buser-score
380 users giving FNV 9.0 in avg (thats even when they know its full of bugs/glitches... I wonder what score it would get when its gotv

Then again the only one that can tell you if the game is good is yourself.. as old philosophy would say (every man have his own value of things)

I've played for seven hours now. Not one freeze, not one crash, and not one bug. Smooth sailing so far.

It's an open world game that has been out for 3 days and developed within a limited schedule, by Obsidian.

What did you expect?
_{^{It's still awesome, though.}}

I've only experienced one freeze in 12 hours of gameplay. Sounds like a hardware problem on your end, pal.

The only problem I've had so far is a doozy: I started up this morning and the quicksave I left it at last night was gone. The existing quicksave was from about 24 hours ago; three levels of experience, 10-12 locations explored, lots of trading, and who-knows-how-many gunfights just gone. Now I have to do it all over again. Lesson (partially not joking): don't quit the game!

The guys at G4 tv loved the game, but where dissapointed at all the crashes and glitches. The one guy said on feedback that every time there is a little frame rate twitch, he cringes in fear that he is gonna loose loot or whatever, I can relate with that.

Looks like they heard you man.
http://www.duckandcover.cx/forums/viewtopic.php?t=24716

This game is a technical mess.

Major problems so far:

1) Saved files not working.
2) Quests broken.
3) Performance is terrible
4) Visual glitches.


Problems 1,2 and 3 contribute to game play.

It deserves the score it got. A game should not be shipped with these type of bugs.

And please don't encourage publishers by taking the view "game play over graphics".

If you are enjoying the game with these kinds of bugs imagine how much better the game would be without these kind of problems.

Obviously the game was rushed or incompetent QA.

Any other game that would be true but, they seemed to find a way to even mess that up with this game...

Anybody in this forum who denies that bugs exist is going to be screwed when they run into them. I guarantee that Bethesda reads these forums and if they see more people saying there aren't bugs than people who say they are then they won't patch anything. You might not be experiencing bugs now but they do exist, these people complaining are not liars.

Man, did you even watch the video? The guy was constantly mentioning that it was still a good game despite the bugs. :shakehead:

I [censored]ed and complained on these forums when Fallout3 came out, cause I had so many problems with it at launch I couldnt even get out of the vault, I even filed a report with the better business bureau.
I swore I would never buy another game with Bethesda name on it again. Yet here I am with a copy of Fallout New Vegas. But Fallout when playable is a great game.
First it is a damn shame they do this to the Fallout fans. And second do it to themselves. They could prevent all of this before release but they dont, and it only makes them look bad.
You do not do the beta testing on games on paying customers!!!!
I dont know, It is a bummer!!! I am 20 hours or so into new vegas and it only takes 3-4 times of loosing 30minutes to a hour of play to crashes, and I am now taking the game out and waiting for a patch.
When you pay for a product it should be a finished product. I am a fan of Fallout and only Fallout. I am not happy Bethesda, Obsidian, Havok gets my $

Their biggest mistake was letting Obsidian even touch the game, they are known for things like this. I think the biggest bug is the missing storyline, I'll admit I'm not really far into the game but coming from Fallout 3 I'm not impressed.

Enough with the bashing of both companies, your just going to get the thread shut-down.

Yes there are too many bugs, yes the PC savegame bug is absolutely inexcusable and ridiculous that it got through, but keep the bashing rhetroic down please.

What I actually hope is that This time Bethesda does a little research internally to find out how this bug and the other big/glaring/obvious ones got through QA. Clearly something broke down here, and both companies are taking big black eyes for all their efforts at QA this time around. What is the missing element? I hope they find it - soon.

Be constructive in the posts, and the thread stands a chance at living.

strange that 90% of the "problems" are people with a steam copy....me thinks it's steam and their usual crappy chopping up of the code and using their own compression. I have problems with almost every game off steam....and no problems with games that I buy other places. So maybe stop blasming bethesda and acting like they made a horrible game. New vegas is awesome, steam is a pile of crap.

That's like saying "my tricycle never broke down, why should my honda civic". LULZ

its not just steam man, xbox 360 has mad bugs too, including but not exclusive to the save game bug.

Next gen games are infinitely more complex than Super Mario Brothers was.

You can either accept that games will have bugs, or the game companies can take 2 - 4 times longer to develop, or Hire More Devs. The latter two options require more money to be spent on game development. That equates to more money we need to spend to buy the game. If the game took twice as long to develop or they doubled the # of devs, we'd need to spend $120 bucks for the game, instead of 60 (not including the DLC!).

So, the way I see it, you have three possibilities.

a. Play a buggy game for $60
b. Play a mostly bug free game (non buggy programs are basically an impossibility, even SMB had some minor ones, they were just almost unnoticeable, due to the lack of complexity)
c. Don't buy the product, which if enough people decide not to, will force the next game to be less buggy, or the devs to go out of business.

I'm not saying you can't be annoyed by bugs, but expecting a bug free game is idiotic. It would be nice if they at least worked out the major game breaking bugs first tho

Stopped reading right there. If anything, it was their best decision ever. Why not hand over the next Fallout game to the ORIGINAL DEVS OF FALLOUT 1 AND 2???

True Obsidian isn't too well known for their QA, but they seem to always be able to release a patch that fixes most, if not all, the issues. And if not, they keep patching the small things until it's near perfect. This happens a lot with smaller developers.

Take GSC, developer of S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Both Shadow of Chernobyl and especially Clear Sky were bug ridden messes. But after about 4 patches, the game was mostly bug free. And it was at least very much playable after the first patch.

So please, don't hate on the devs so much. They put 2+ years of effort trying to make a true Fallout game, and they succeeded. And besides, how would you feel if you got on these forums everyday and saw all the insults directed towards you after slaving over something for more than 2 years?

Also, lol at the kids saying they're going to call the BBB or hire a lawyer, etc. As if that's going to do anything. :rolleyes:

I agree, sir, and well said.

These guys did their best, and it really shows, it's a wonderful game and I trust them to correct the issues.

Like Gamespot (or any large reviewer website/magazine really) is a trustworthy medium for reviews. In these times it's all about the money, baby. B)

Remember when E3 was a place to show your games instead of whoring yourself out to the press? Exactly.

Are you seriously asking this?

Let me put it this way. Cars from 10-20 year back had less minor repairs compared to cars now... you know why? because their components were basically a large hunk of metal with a few wires. Nowadays you have tons of nifty gadgeds beside your engine, all controlled by a single computer that only knows right from wrong, 1 from 0. A minor problem (like the petrol pump not getting any petrol for a second, yeah driving around in circles with just a few liters of petrol left, the computer shuts down the whole car and won't start up again until you've hooked up your car to a computer at a dealership.)

That's basically why modern games have patches.