Forums

ForumsVideo Games

Fallout New Vegas

Posted Oct 28, '12 at 1:16pm

ProDemon

ProDemon

8 posts

I know this game has been out for quite a while, but I have noticed that people write negatively about it.  I don't see why.  The game is magnificent with a great number of quests.  This Western RPG makes for a great game.  Let me hear what you think about it.

 

Posted Oct 28, '12 at 2:36pm

ATCaver

ATCaver

51 posts

I think that it is an excellent addition to the Fallout franchise. My only concern is that it is not really a successor to Fallout 3, it is more of a companion game. It was built on the same system as FO3, and only had a few new features added. While the vast array of weapons, armor, and general items added to the game gave it a little spice, it was overall kind of mediocre as a continuation of the series. The one aspect of the game that truly shines, however, was the story. Politics, intrigue, betrayal, conquest. All of this and more can be found as you play out not only the main questline, but also as you complete the side quests and DLC. The rich array of new characters in the game, as well as the companions, only add to the overall exceptionality of the story. All in all, I have always given the game a 7.5/10, because the new features as well as the tried-and-true stuff was good, and the story was excellent. At any rate, it's better than Rage...

 

Posted Oct 28, '12 at 4:12pm

PauseBreak

PauseBreak

310 posts

Yeah, they were sad that Bethesda went and made a Fallout game that outsold their dearly beloved Fallout 2, and decided to compete for the right too make a self-serving wankfeast to prove they still had *it*.

So they took Fallout 3 and "improved" it.

Thanks for that guys.  Talking about the original Fallout games a lot doesn't make your slapped-together GECK mod more "authentic". I find it so hilarious the Black Isle apologists came out in droves to join in the wankfeast, so eager to like FO:NV better. They said it had more "Fallout Feeling". That the "vibe" was better.  It wasn't made by Bethesda, it MUST be better. Right? I thought to myself...how?

Fallout took place in a  radioactive dung-heap full of junkies, despair, sci-fi horrors , and secret societies that dominated with space-age tech. NV took place in a communist republic very reminiscent of the real  modern-day California, only a bit cleaner.  It was almost devoid of A) Radiation B) Mutants C) The Enclave D) Interesting Dungeons and E) A plot.  And how 'bout those nice tourists in their pre-war vintage weekend wear, out playing Blackjack. Where do they live? Did they come here on a Greyhound? Are they on a 2 week vacation from their office jobs? Did they just walk across the Mojave in their Sunday best, dodging Rad-Scorpions and Fiends?

It turns out, NV doesn't remind me of Fallout 1/2 at all, even though they talk about the NCR constantly just so you get the point that these devs were personally in the building serving coffee as interns when Fallout was originally made. They have the T-shirt. I get it.

 

Posted Oct 29, '12 at 8:11am

ProDemon

ProDemon

8 posts

I agree that NV does not fit in with the other Fallout games, but I still find it to be quite enjoying.  Nice comments!

 

Posted Oct 29, '12 at 8:12am

ProDemon

ProDemon

8 posts

What is your favorite companion in Fallout NV?  Mission?  Faction?  Quote?

 

Posted Oct 29, '12 at 6:49pm

ATCaver

ATCaver

51 posts

Companion: ****, I can't for the life of me remember his name. The first companion in Old World Blues. His epilogue is beautiful depending on how you help him, whether he stays with the tribe or explores.
Mission: Just the whole Strip questline. Renovating the casinos and making it an overall better place.
Faction: Brotherhood. But this is mostly carried over from FO3, Fallout: Tactics, Brotherhood Of Steel, and Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel.
Quote: A man chooses, a slave obeys. Oh ****, that's Bioshock. I don't remember any Fallout games having any lasting quotes. 'cept maybe the one about war, never changing...

 

Posted Oct 29, '12 at 7:07pm

Jblaze101

Jblaze101

461 posts

The One thing I can remember about nv was That i could not figure out how to search in the Radiation zones bummer but one day ill go back to that game and search them

 

Posted Oct 29, '12 at 8:30pm

partydevil

partydevil

5,109 posts

Yeah, they were sad that Bethesda went and made a Fallout game that outsold their dearly beloved Fallout 2, and decided to compete for the right too make a self-serving wankfeast to prove they still had *it*.

not true. the makers of faalout went on making 1 more title after they sold fallout to bethesda. and  that was fallout online. but they were not able to meet bethesdas requirments and so it was never released.
fallout new vegas was made by a 3th company, commissioned by bethesda.

and bethesda themself have said close befor the release of new vegas. that we should look at it as a massive stand alone expension on fallout3.
fallout 4 will be made on a newer engine again. (they already bought the rights for the game. so yes, it will come sometime)

 

Posted Oct 30, '12 at 7:49pm

Devoidless

Devoidless

3,553 posts

Seeing as I've owned and beaten all the game in the Fallout series (not counting Tactics, we never speak of Tactics), I can formulate a pretty decent comparison between them all. Especially when it comes to how "Fallout-y" they feel.

Fallout 1+2 are my favourite games in the series. The stories were brilliant, the characters were memorable and the sense of being in a post-apocalyptic world was there 100% percent of the time. Even though I know a lot of people had no real love for the combat system, I loved it. Largely for one reason that neither of the two most recent ones implemented:
True body part targeting. In 1 and 2, you could aim your guns not only at the head, legs, core and weapon (like in FO3 and NV) but also the eyes and groin. Those shots were hard to pull off for anyone but a skilled sniper, but were they ever worth it. Shots in the eyes either outright killed some or at least blinded them. Groin shots were great for highly-armoured opponents. Why? Because no matter how much armour you have, a .223 round fired from a rifle is going to hurt a lot when it impacts your ghoulies.
Oh, and you could aim melee attacks the same way. Which was great.

Fallout 3 was a huge departure from the first two games, keeping only a few things intact (namely the title, a few weapons, the Vaults and little things here and there.) It could just of as easily been an entirely different game franchise, and no one would of been the wiser. The Fallout name helped carry it along, despite it have as much in common with the original games as a shrew and human have in common.
I will give it one thing, though. They managed to get the sense of a post-apocalyptic world pretty darn well. There were large expanses between the towns, and those towns were ramshackle at best.
Not to even mention the story.
*******
*******
SPOILERS FOR FO3 PLOT
The story started out so well! You grow up in the Vault, grow attached to the character of your father then one day he bugs out. Why? Who knows! Let's go follow him and find out! After far too long of an story arc, you find out neither one of you were born in the Vault. He just managed to somehow get in after your mother did during birth. And his plan? His dream? Create fresh drinking water for the Wasteland. Noble, yes, but not something to get really excited about.
Speaking of good ol' Dad, hope you never really got attached to him. Even though you were supposed to. You only end up seeing him a few times after the tutorial part of the game. Then he dies for no reason.
Great, thanks game. The whole reason for me leaving the Vault, killing countless people and creatures while marching up and down the Wasteland is moot. You find him, and he just up and dies.
Then when you get to the very end of main story, finish the final quest...Credits roll. That's it. No more roaming for you! You beat it and can only restore to the most recent save. Worse decision by developers evar.
END SPOILERS
********
********
Now, on to New Vegas.
New Vegas is a really mixed bag for me. The feel of being in a destroyed world is only sorta there (I blame the large, developed towns a New Vegas for that). STALKER has a better sense of that, for crying out loud. It kinda ruins some of the magic.
However! They did improve on a lot of things. Even though at least one of your shuns the idea that it is more Fallout-y, I agree with that statement. The story, music and other things remind me far more of the original two than FO3 ever managed (I'll go into more detail about this if requested). That is not saying much all things considered, but it is still nice.
I must say that playing through vanilla New Vegas once before the DLCs came out was a little bit of a drag, but I still enjoyed it. Yet when all the DLCs were finally out (and I was playing a super-modded version of the game), I had more fun that I thought was possible. The DLCs give some nice throwbacks to the lore and previous stories, and provided some interesting albeit highly ambiguous back story for your character. That combined with all the little tweaks and additions from the mods makes for one of my favourite gaming experiences.

 

Posted Oct 30, '12 at 7:53pm

loco5

loco5

1,289 posts

a little off topic: why don't we talk of Tactics? cause it's not 100% Canon? i loved tactics, it was a very good game

 
Reply to Fallout New Vegas

You must be logged in to post a reply!