This is a question for the New Vegas and Fallout 3 team. After the completion of Fallout 3 and New Vegas why can’t a player be free to continue to play in such a big open world like the GTA games? I’m not expecting more quests, new dialogue or new characters etc but just the freedom to roam, kill etc. I’ve got some old scores to settle especially with the Deathclaws!

Definitive endings can create more substantial endings. That's the short answer.

Fallout 3 ended because the theme was sacrifice. Mom dies giving birth to you, so that you may live. You get a quote from Revelations 21:6. Dad leaves the Vault so that he may save the wastes. Dad sacrifices himself so that you may escape and complete his mission. You sacrifice yourself and/or Sarah Lyons in order to save the wasteland.

Fallout: New Vegas's ending could've continued on afterwards, seeing as the Courier doesn't die, but this was probably left that way for future DLC(s), and/or because of the fact that they can expand the possible endings much further. Just take a look at what happened after Broken Steel finished.

Also something else to bear in mind is Fallout 2's easter egg continuation aside, all of the Fallout games including Fallout 2 have had definate endings until Bethesda's Broken Steel for Fallout 3 and Fallout 3 is the only one which had a 'forced' character death as one possible ending.

With Fallout New Vegas, if they were to allow us to carry on after the end of the main quest for them to do it in a manner consistent with how we played the game would have at least doubled the time it took to create the game if not increased it even more. Admitadly they could have just allowed people to carry on regardless with a simple yes/no question at the end of the main quest (I did try suggesting this before the game was released but was shot down in short order, because it would have broken some people's 'immersion' in the game). I'm also pretty certain that if they had done that with absolutely no changes to the post main quest game world, there would be some people going berserk on the forums because their ingame choices have not been taken into account in the post main quest gameworld.

If I read what has been stated by Obsidian about New Vegas having a definitive ending and there will not be a DLC to continue it period, is they felt that lumbering us with a post main quest game world which does not reflect the gamers choices is not acceptable and that would be the only way (in the time frame they had) to allow post main quest gaming.

@Volundarkoia. Obsidian have previously stated categorically that they will not be doing a DLC which allows post main quest play.

Question: why can't we explore after the game ends?
Answer: because you can do it before the game ends.
Answer 2: games end. Most games, anyway, do end.

You want to do everything there is to do in New Vegas? Go do it before you start the last quest. There's your solution. There is absolutely no need to allow players to continue past the end since there is nothing that can only be done after you beat the final boss.

I dont see why they cant let be able to keep playing. But this way it forces to make and play as multiple characters. Also, it does tell you pretty outright that you wont be able to play after this quest or something. I find it really annoying, however, but I understand its Fallout tradition to have an ending I just feel like New Vegas's ending had no excuse, as a poster above me said, you dont die in New Vegas as in Fallout 3 so why not keep playing?

If you purchase broken steel for F3, the game never ends. In NV, currently it does end so make sure to save prior to doing the final quest.

As to why? All of the previous Fallout games had endings, but they changed that later on with F3 as players found it more fun to just be allowed to continue playing on.

A different team made NV, so they made the same decision but there is a slight possibility (even if they deny it) that they may change it later on.

Currently ? Ifyou expect a BS like dlc you will be dissapointed. BS was an abomination.

Fallout is not ment to be a sandbox game. The endings show what happens in the future to the area. New Vegas has big changes to the Mojave after the main quest, so to have play after the end of the main quest would mean the Devs would have to pretty much many a whole new game times four. Each out come would need a new Mojave wasteland with new dialogue and characters in order for it not to be complete crap.

FO3 had broken steel because that ending svcked. It did not have multiple endings like FO1,FO2 and New Vegas. It just past judgement on the player. Still broken steel took a bad ending and replaced it with endless nothing and in doing so ruined FO3s story.

How hard is it to load a save before you start the main quest? The game even gives you a warning saying theres no going back game will end after this.

Bethesda gave Obsidian the ok to do so. Obsidian did not have free rain to do what ever they wanted for New Vegas. Bethesda was the overseer so if Bethesda "changed there not being an ending" they changed back with New Vegas. And FO3 did have an ending but it was crap. We could not send followers in to stop it. There was no multiple endings to let us know what happened. Boken Steel Broke the story to FO3.

There will be no broken steel like DLC because FO New Vegas endings make sense and they are awesome.

You gave the best advice "NV does end so make sure to save prior to doing the final quest."

Not quite, there are quite a few pluses to continuing a game.

1) You feel like the 'Hero' having defeated the bad guys, you can go about the game talking to people and doing smaller tasks feeling 'complete'.

2) Ever play an MMORPG? What if your game ended when you hit level 99 with 99.9% exp? Wouldn't you want to at least see what it's like after getting 100? Maybe not, but I know I would.

3) There are often unique weapons, armor or items around the final areas of games that make perfect keepsakes so long as the game doesn't end (F3: colonel's coat and unique laser pistol; NV: Ranger Armor etc).

4) Once you've beaten the game, you most likely have accepted that the story part of the game is over, so really... why not? You'd be playing to enjoy your max-level character that achieved everything.

5) These new fallout games aren't like the old ones. They play very differently, they're very open sandbox games. The old Fallout worldmap gave you a sense of an open world, but in reality it was more like a turn based final fantasy game (minus the character/world design and story). You had random encounters and slow paced combat. You couldn't store items anywhere, you had to take things with you. The games had time limits. There were only a few interesting characters in the game, mostly under 15 (maybe 10?) ish talking heads. Everyone else had text speech. It just wasn't as interactive or immersive. In many ways they were more of an interactive tactical book than a game. The new games play as actual games.

All that said... you're right that it's not so bad to just load a save before the end, but there is definite merit in game play continuity. Maybe lose a little of that rage?

1-4 can't happen in New Vegas unless you remove the endings and or make four whole new Mojave wastelands. Removing the endings would ruin the story. Making all those new Mojaves so playing after the end makes sense, where all the locations are changed and all the NPC a changed to reflect the change.

1) meh
2) I detest, and loathe, and hate, and abhor, and loathe (yes, repeated) MMORPG games (there's my rage!)
3) True... but I can live without Lanius' helmet (or whatever)
4) Once you've done everything there is to do (which you can do prior to end-game), what else is there? Walking around?
5) ...

Let me use Broken Steel as an example. I did *everything* else in FO3 before embarking on those quests. I was happy to continue only because I was very unhappy that I had to (string of curses) commit suicide to give DC clean water (suicide is a flat-out [censored] way to end a game). After I finished Broken Steel... there was nothing left to do. Sure, I could walk around and engage the random enemies, but that got boring after about ten minutes. So I started over. *Much* more fun.

I feel the same way about New Vegas. It ends, but at least I didn't have to suicide - my character lives, and lives well. Considering that I did everything else - and capped out - before I went to the final battle, there would be nothing left for me to do after. Walk around and maybe engage a random enemy? Nope. Start over. New character. *Much* more fun.

I just don't see the point in being able to walk around without actually accomplishing anything (assuming you did everything... which, again, I reiterate, you can do before the end-game).

Actually he doesn't the Colonel and his men don't react to your presence even if they know you're there, he just kills himself because... nothing, he just uses the radioactive bomb which he installed for saftey in the CONTOL CENTER PLUS PURIFYING CHAMBER OF HIS WORLD SAVING PURIFIER! Oh yeah and it instantly penetrated and kills two troopers in SEALED and supposedly rad resistant power armour, fail.

I agree with everything you said. When i purchase a game i tend to stick to the main story all the way, if side quests become available while im walking down that road then ill do them. Id rather not start side quests halfway through the main story then forget about what i was doing 2 weeks down the road (not all gamers spend every hour of the day playing games). So to be able to come back after the main quest is finished and complete those side quest always made me feel totally complete. I can see why the game developers have done what they've done. But i also dont like to have to restart my character just because the game ends and i cant start or finish those side quests.

I'm on the 'let it end' side in this debate. A player can explore the entire wasteland before the point of no return (I recommend detaching from the MQ immediately after engaging with House and settling the Benny problem) when all the quests, etc, will actually make sense. Asking the devs to reprogram all those quests to reflect the wasteland after the final battle is sort of nuts (We'll see if I have to eat my words, I guess).

The original Fallout 3 ending was terribly illogical, due to some last minute additions to the game -- originally there were no companions. Sacrificing oneself with a potentially radiation-immune NPC standing right there -- Hiya, Fawkes -- was irritating. Personally, I welcomed Broken Steel and I enjoyed playing it. I enjoyed the admittedly-limited changes in the wastes and finding stuff that wasn't there before. I even made some Lvl 30-perfect 10s-all 100s-uber-characters and strolled through the DC area like an avenging god with my magic invisibility armor and lightning sword, etc. It's fun for awhile.

Lately, though, I consider the 'end' of F3 to be the vertibird ride back to the Pentagon after destroying the crawler. I wish the ending slides came then, because that's when I stop playing. Any extra exploring I do comes right after waking up from the coma.

It's all about choice, I guess. F3 doesn't make you continue. You can end it if you wish at anytime. F:NV doesn't make you go directly to the point of no return. Continue your exploration before that -- the world will wait for you.

Yep, Dad was a [censored] idiot. Imo from the purifier scene it should have been enclave/BoS/neither path. But no dad sees the enclave, kills himself for no reason "run" Well gee dad I wouldnt have foght the guys in there anyway.
Then you are suddenly forced to join the BoS, because the enclave are just raiders in power armour. (face it in 3 they were). Then because he kills himself you die too. It gets more [censored] up the BoS has prime and the enclave dont, they qere there before the BoS and let them have the pentagon, then conveniently during that time the orbital nukes failed. Conveniently the FEV dosent [censored] kill them, conveniently you are still forced to work with the BoS, conveniently it took slow moving prime 2 weeks to find and destoy raven rock, you know the hidden place, in the [censored] mountains.
Fallout 3 was a piece of [censored] story wise. Forced into joining a side, further screwed over with BS, that makes a bad story worse, and sadly it will be [censored] canon that the DC BoS are white knights, who beat the enclave (shouldnt have happened) and your character survived. (shouldnt have [censored] died in the first place, the sacrafice thing was damn stupid).
An d about the power armour, is even more fail Autumn survived.

Also funny ddidnt fallout 3 boast over 1000 endings, there was what
You die
lyons dies
fev
no fev
Karma -
karma +
And karma neautral.
Mos were just random pictures. I hope Bethesdas writers watched obsidian and took notes, and if fallout 4s story is like 3 not NV I want obsidian in complete control of the writing side of any future fallouts.

I've always wondered where all these scientists in F3 came from, haven't you? I mean, they are everywhere. The Ghoul researchers, Mom & Dad & company, Dr. Lesko, etc. Who's paying the bills? Enclave? BoS? Institute? Some one we have not yet encountered?
I don't know if Dad was an idiot, exactly, but he knew a lot more than he told you. I've long suspected that somewhere in his past lurks a connection with the Enclave. His actions, after all, make little to no sense unless he is aware of Eden's plans or has already encountered (and formed a dislike for) the Enclave before embarking on Project Purity.
It's a pipe dream, but I wish Bethesda would release a polished version of F3 with some corrected/updated content, including a bit more for Enclave enthusiasts to do. It would be interesting to see the events of the game from their perspective. That, and make Broken Steel the end; put the slides in after the final crawler battle.

Honestly, I wish they'd just release a small free DLC which allows people to continue.
No new quests.
No changed dialogue.
No new items or factions.
No new changes at all.
Basically just let's them keep going on with the DLC.
It would allow us who want the game to end to end and those who want to continue even though it doesn't make much sense to continue.

I mean, seems simple enough right?
On that note, Obsidian, if you're not going to add any new traits. (:stare:) then at least give us a small free DLC which when downloaded changes perks earned to every third level instead of every other level.

Going by the previous Fallouts let me see.

Fallout 1, the character lives and the game ends.

Fallout 2, the character lives and the game ends (although there is an easter eggish continuation option (which is non-cannon))

Fallout Tactics, the characters consiousness continues on depending on the ending chosen or lives and the game ends

Failout Brotherhood of Steel, the character lives and the game ends

Fallout 3, the character can choose to sacrafice themself or attendant NPC and the game ends (Using the Vanilla Version of the game without Broken Steel added)

Fallout New Vegas, the character lives and the game ends.

Can you see the continuity between most of the games there ?, yes the Character lives and the Game ENDS.

There are multiple endings for FONV all of which have very significant impact on the Mojave Wasteland. It would have been very complicated to impliment the applicaple changes for all the endings just so the GTA sandbox set can run around shooting things after the game is completed.



I actually thoroughly enjoyed FO3 but I can't find fault with ONE THING you just posted. It's all true.

Well as you know Obsidian made New Vegas not Bethesda, And we seen how well that was done, it took 2-3 patches and one massive comprehensive patch 2 months after it was released to get things running smoothly.:facepalm:

And if Obsidian is going to put such lazy Game developing into the game pre launch date I can only imagine how screwed up a DLC would be that would allow you to play past the main quest. The next fallout game is being done by Bethesda and I am sure they'll rectify this by allowing you to play past the main quest from launch date.

I really do not want to pay another ten bucks to keep playing in the same area of the game I have already paid sixty for. Once everything has been done in the Mojave, it gets really old really fast. Plus if there was a continuation of the game, it would be lame not matter what. The only reason BS worked was because F03's story is fairly straight forward, and therefore continuation could happen. New Vegas? Way too many outcomes. Plus what would be the point of seeing the winning army do it's thing? The only faction that would really matter is the winner, as the losers have left either on foot or by death. There would be little to nothing do other than to reap rewards. Boring.

If there is an update with an option to continue playing after that, or perhaps after the game players can have an option to restart the game with the same character with the same abilities/stats (though I personally think that would be a bit complicated), this could be a possible compromise. I just don't want a DLC to be wasted staying in the same area.

I guess that's likely since they will probably "rectify" the multiple endings. So why not have free roam after the (linear) main quest?

They can call it Fallout 4: Grand Theft Vertibird.

having endings that stop gameplay don't make the game better, bethesada rpg's generally don't have endings and they're great games, elder scrolls and past fallout games is the perfect examples, new vegas got a 7.5 rating from gamestop i think, its a good game, i still play it, its got a lot of improvements over FO3 but some downsides also, and the ending doesn't make it a better game, far from it. so maybe they'll learn a lesson if they get to make another fallout game, watching a 5 minute slideshow isn't exactly very rewarding, it was cool but not that cool, i'm looking forward to ESV and i'm not worried it will have an end like new vegas did, fortunately and it will prob be a pretty excellent game so just because a game has some definitive ending doesn't make it better, far from it, i don't hear too many people going "boy the ending of new vegas is awesome ! " it wasn't that awesome, its so so, take it or leave it type of deal.

Well thanks guys! It’s made things clearer and ALL of you had valid points! I still feel having an option to continue to play after the main quest has been completed would make the game a better experience. Okay, a player can save before the game has ended (which I’ve done) but to me that doesn’t feel right. Anyway, it was just a thought so thanks for all of your opinions and facts!