You're right. If you kill Joe Cobb in the beginning of the game he has a stealth Boy on him. With a bit of good/lucky timing you can slip right past the Deathclaws.

The thing I miss the most from New Vegas has to be hardcoe mode, I don't see why Bethseda never thought to actually implement a system similar to it earlier on. It really made NV much more intense for me, although I do RP hardcoe mode in Skyrim...

Huge new Vegas fan. But obsidian made NV. But skyrim should of took some notes from NV. None the less, skyrim is excellent.

Cheers

I would love to see Obsidian do for Skyrim what they did for Fallout 3. They would be right at home in the sword-and-sorcery genre.

Skyrim is gorgeous, and the environments and dungeons are really incredibly varied considering how many there are, and so much of it is really great.

And I think the main quest/s are actually pretty darn good. But the characters need more depth.

I don't want full-on Bioware-ization-- where the PC becomes a psychoanolyst for everyone they encounter; but there needs to be a little more.

Yeah, Bethesda always seems to play it safe and conservative with player choices affecting the world for some reason..I was also disappointed that they didn't pick up anything from New Vegas,

I think Obsidian is working on the South Park rpg atm.I don,t know if they are big enough to take on another large project right now.

completely agree! this is the biggest disappointment i've had with the elder scrolls since oblivion got rid of the morrowind book reading depth.
i thought a hardcoe mode like vegas and advanced upon was an absolute no-brainer.
i'm still hoping dlc will add it.

I would love a full-on Bioware-ization of dialogue lol. That would be unrealistic for sandbox games, however. What I would like is Skyrim (or the next TES game) to at least be on-par with New Vegas. Currently, dialogue is incredibly weak.



Edit: When I say Bioware-ization of dialogue, I mean the old bioware dialogue system like in KOTOR or DA:O. I would vomit if the dialogue system (or anything) from Dragon Fail 2 was implemented in a TES game.

Yeah, they could've easily done something like:

Harder difficulty, have to eat and sleep, turn off some HUD elements for a hardcoe mode, and it would have also been throwing an (easy to do) bone to the more 'veteran' TES fans.

I think a more interesting topic would be what New Vegas could learn from Skyrim, personally.

Agree with all your points except maybe the scaling. I think the way they handled it in Skyrim is fine. The dialogue, the companions, the handholding, etc., New Vegas was definitely superior. Overall Skyrim is still a better game but also has its less than special points too. The dialogue and companions I was especially disappointed in.

That is more a niche group.Mods will care about it more and probably do more of what that groups wants

World design and maybe setting. Really my only gripes with NV.

Have Obsidian do next Fallouts story, mechanics and quest, and leave the art, world and music to Bethesda. I would never need another game with post-apocalyptic setting

Yeah, I know..and mods will likely do a better job of it than Bethesda would..still, I would like it if they'd added something like this for the few of us who would want it on console versions, wishful thinking I know.

New Vegas had many improvements over Fallout 3, but the only reason they could make it better was because they could copy/paste the basis that Bethesda build for them. I especially hate it when NV fans say NV is better because it had a larger weapon collection, they (for some reason) fail to understand that still 80% of the weapons in NV were made by Bethesda and copy/pasted. What I'm saying is that OF COURSE New Vegas was an improvement: it essentially had the development time of two games (with fallout 3 functioning as a public alpha build), so they could get it 'just right for Fallout fans'.

Having said that, NV also did A LOT wrong. For example it wasnt 100% openworld with its invisible borders and world design choices. It wasnt as fun to explore because of it, even though there were some unique items to be found in random caves (which Bethesda did right in Morrowind, completely wrong in Oblivion and only parcially right in Skyrim).

I like how this topic provides constructive criticism but it does make it seem as if NV was perfect. In my opinion Skyrim is all-round a better game. I dont blame it for not having faction reputation, interesting companions or dialogue choices because it isnt that kind of game. The focus was in other gameplay features, mainly features NV lacked. I wouldnt want Bethesda to trade in the features that make TES what it is just so they have the time and resources to make it like FO:NV.

I don't think that the OP is saying that FONV has it all over Skyrim. What he did say is that FONV made some really good design decisions that could/should have been carried over to Skyrim, and did not. Foremost among them are the much greater dialog options and the much better companion depth. Huge RP + to FONV in these areas. It's a real shame that these aspects did not make it into Skyrim.

Skills/perks is debatable. Skyrim's system is dumbed down on purpose streamlined to appeal to a wiser audience. I don't like it but many do. As a system I think that it works and despite my very strong preferences I can deal with Skyrim as it is.

Bethesda's and Obsidian's strengths are easily seen when comparing Fallout 3 and New Vegas. Fallout 3 has an interesting and immersive world in the post-apocalyptic Washington with underground tunnels and unique locations. The writing just isn't too good. New Vegas in turn has little to no interesting locations, and majority of the world is a boring desert. The writing, however, especially the main quest line, is far better done than in Fallout 3. Skyrim is a game made by Bethesda, so they exceed in world-building rather than dialogue and story. I agee, they could learn much from Obsidian in the writing part.

I've always said that the Obsidian team needs to be integrated into Bethesda. Bethesda knows how to make the engine and handle bugs, but they sometimes svck at story and dialogue and stuff like that (though Skyrim is a huge improvement over past Oblivion).


-More character dialogue
-More player choices
-More persausion and intimidation chances
-More dynamic faction interaction (factions might not like you based on who you're working with)
-Better characters and companions with actual backstories
-Better companion control like in NV
-hardcoe mode (come on, would it have been so hard?)
-Ability to work for yourself or your own goals (Screw the Stormcloaks and the Empire! I want to make a new country!)


-Also Barbers

I would have liked to see the follower system and hardcoe mode from FO:NV incorporated into Skyrim (and I'm sure they will be soon, via mods.)

Apart from that, though, I must say Skyrim outdoes FO:NV in every conceivable way for me. I stopped playing FO:NV after about 50 hours, as I was rather uninspired by the quests and absolutely hated navigating the "open" world of of the Mojave Wasteland.

In Skyrim I've logged 150 hours and counting, and I have no plans to quit soon.

There are things I admire in FO:NV, but to me it really just felt like a big expansion pack for the (superior) FO3. Many who profess to hate FO3 while loving FO:NV are just convinced the latter is better because some of the original Fallout 1-2 team works at Obsidian, and they still resent Bethesda for resurrecting the franchise.

Perhaps Skyrim should just be enjoyed for what it is . . . basically it plays like a console game not a great PC game (I am a PC player). I pretty much agree with everything above .. I never played NV but I did play Dragon Age ... a totally different type of game, but the writing and acting were IMHO fabulous ... as a player I became very engrossed in the NPC stories and characters .. it was a joy. Skyrim is becoming repetitious, and FORGET the followers and the "follower system" ... I am totally frustrated I can't track, locate or effectively direct a follower. Yet, Skyrim *is* expansive, and if what one wants to do is dungeon crawl there's certainly plenty of that!

I don't hate FO3 but NV is far, far superior to FO3. FO3 didn't feel like a FO game. With NV they recaptured that feel. You're choices actually matter. The world actually reacts to what you do. Your companions are fully fleshed out people. NPCs have more than just a couple lines of dialog. FO3 also butchered a lot of the lore. As far as Skyrim? I couldn't even get through two characters. The quests are repetitive and boring with no difference in outcomes. I popped NV in again a couple weeks back and just played through my 8th character. To me the only thing Skyrim has on NV is that it's prettier.

Skyrim stands alone though. They didn't need to take any tips.

Cheers

All you get to choose in the main quest is what uni the bad guys wear at the end.The devs will decide what happens in NV

It will be interesting to see just how much of Skyrim is accessible when the CK is released. It feels to me that about a quarter of the world is blocked off by walls painted to look like mountains.

OP: Completely agree with your post. The thing is, as people have noticed, BGS strengths and Oblivion's strengths are in completely different area.

BGS does great world-building, and does an amazing job of filling in little details and hinting at a story. But they're not great when it comes to dialog, story/quests, balance, providing choices, or companions.

Oblivion really shines with story, dialog, providing RP options, and companions. I wish BGS would take a hint, but I don't think they will, because I don't think Todd and the team are interested in those elements at all.

The reputation issues make no sense. I agree with you, but the strange thing is that Daggerfall and IIRC (to a lesser extent) Morrowind, already had faction systems. They could've been better, but they worked--definitely better than having nothing at all. I think the developers that departed after Daggerfall and Morrowind were the ones who were most interested in role-play, story, and other less graphical features.