Anyone still play NV now that Skyrims out? : Fallout: New Vegas

» Wed May 09, 2012 11:45 am

The game was poorly optimized, you're not the only one with this problem.

Yup, as usual Bethesda forgot to give the PC users a decent, functional UI for a keyboard and mouse so we're forced to fight with a shoddy, impractical console UI.

Things I'd like to note here:

Only a fraction of the speedup comes from using SSE2 code. The original exe also uses SSE2 code, just not in the right places where it is truly needed. This could've been prevented by using automated SSE2 vectorization and/or another math library. Interestingly, in this case, it's the dot product function that has been rewritten, which is somewhat ironically the #1 textbook example for automated vectorization in compiler demos.
Much of the speedup is gained by manually eliminating (only possible if the entire function can be reduced to 5 bytes or less), or at least simplifying calls along the critical code paths as far as possible. This doesn't even produce nearly as good results as an optimizing compiler could have because of many restrictions a compiler doesn't have to deal with in the first place, so every optimizing compiler can do and usually does an excellent job at this if told to do it. Skyrim would probably experience an execution speed gain of over 100% just by applying this single optimization, as it has drastic consequences to the amount of code that could be detected as being redundant and thus completely eliminated. I know that sounds exaggerated, and normally would be, but it isn't when you've read and profiled enough of the code to know just how bad the compiled code is.
Just 3 functions have truly been rewritten, everything else is either a variant form or an instruction-level simplification of functions consisting of things like "return *this;" which are at the very top in the profiled list because the compiler was obviously told not to inline it. So, every time a certain kind of pointer needs to be dereferenced, the game will call a lengthy function to do what can be (and is) replaced by a single instruction. Fixing this manually isn't feasible after a certain point, but the compiler can do this for the whole binary at the cost of just a few seconds extra compiling time and much better than ever possible by a human (at least at these code dimensions).
In general, the TESV code has pretty high register pressure. A huge part of this is simply due to the completely missing optimizations which would otherwise eliminate the unneeded allocations, but an x86_64 build would also definitely help improving this condition.
Jump targets are completely unaligned, including the so-called hot targets which are hit millions of times in short periods, leading to cache stress due to multiple fetches being required to execute a jump, whether correctly predicted or not. Optimizing compilers can automatically align them properly.
I guess I don't have to mention how bad the threading is; this isn't trivial to fix though. Just sad that it's almost 2012 and this thing can't even properly use two threads. Besides all the other obvious flaws, this is the main reason why the game is so strongly limited by the CPU. Single-core speed didn't grow nearly as much as the number of cores did. Everyone knew it 10 years ago, but back then they could still just wait for the hardware to provide the additional power needed to run the sloppy code - this trick doesn't work anymore.

Yeah, Skyrim is a nice game, but many obstacles we've got here have trivial fixes compared to the size of their respective payoffs (little to none extra coding required). Especially with over 10 million copies already sold, I somewhat expect that it will at least run on recent hardware without sub-30 framerates.

Question: Thanks for explaining (and of course for making the awesome mod). Interesting to read. Do you think you will be able to do more optimization fixes like this?
Theoretically, yes, of course. I'd currently estimate that an additional +10% could be achieved in the game executable itself using the same procedure as before. However, to fix a problematic function using only a normal person's tools, it has to be detected and isolated from the call graph, then its assembly code has to be reverse engineered, rewritten and tested until it can be replaced by a better performing variant.

Now that many of the biggest CPU hogs have been softened, there still is a lot of potential gains ahead, but acquiring them would require multiple times the work already invested for a smaller amount of additional performance. It all has to be hand-crafted - there are no tools to automate this. Worse yet, some of the work has to be redone when porting the changes to a different game version. This way, only very simple optimizations are even possible at all, due to the sheer amount of places where a call must be inlined. Most function calls suitable for inlining have a varying amount of setup and cleanup code for that function call and I just can't go through each of the (tens of!) thousands of references to figure out the optimal replacement at each point. A compiler does all this for free, within seconds - and not only for the first dozen of hottest targets, but for the whole game, which consists of millions of lines of assembly code.

My true hope is therefore that this little demo will create a demand that Bethesda must answer. Much like what happened with the LAA patch. This would be the best outcome for all and also the best base for any further optimizations that can only be hand-crafted.

Question: And did I understood you right that you said that if an optimization compiler would have been used by Bethesda from the start, we would have experienced over 100% better performance?
Yeah, pretty sure about that. The current patch doesn't modify even nearly 1% of the code, but still manages to cut the cycles per frame by 30-40%. The whole binary is full of redundant code, it's just way too much to ever do manually, but sums up quickly when eliminated by an optimizing compiler.

(...) turning on optimizations takes this much effort:
http://www.netrostar.com/Admin/Files/Images/Tutorials/1vsoptimization.jpg

http://img822.imageshack.us/img822/5635/aiosh.png

One of my friends found this here some where, and posted it at the other Eldar scrolls and other game forums I goto.

» Wed May 09, 2012 11:13 am

nobody undestads nv and i dont know why :stare:

» Wed May 09, 2012 6:43 pm

killing deathclaws isn't combat, there's far more human enemies in skyrim and well over 200 dungeones, there is 1000 times more content in skyrim, over 400 quests and thats not even counting the never ending radiant quests, the towns and cities are way better designed, well over 50 followers you can use,..you don't have the same exact enemy respawning in every location every time, skyrim is much more fluid and dynamic of a gameworld, the random factor isn't even present in new vegas. and skyrim doesn't have some dumb ending where the credits roll after the last battle...skyrim has much better battles than that last battle in new vegas, just clearing out labyrinthian alone is like 10 times bigger than that last battle in new vegas. none of the dungeons in skyrim are small, most of em are pretty elaborate and there's lots of enemies to kill, blackreach cave system alone is more content than all the buildings in new vegas put together. there's also around 500 locations in skyrim. and they're not dumb locations like a wrecked car or a shack.

In other words, "Skyrim is an action./adventure game". An RPG could supply lots of combat, but the randomly generated grind quests and no logic to enemy spawns screams action game. What % of the Skyrim dungeons try to fit into the world plausibly, or are they mostly just random meat grinders for the sake of action?

EDIT: The main reason I have not purchased Skyrim is because I knew it would be an action/adventure game and not an RPG.

» Wed May 09, 2012 9:10 am

I don't think anyone would argue that Skyrim's gameworld and locations and dungeons and so forth aren't quite large and expansive and good-looking, with lots of enemies and critters to fight and kill, when compared to NV. But, I notice that nowhere in your post do you mention how much better and more interesting the story and quest writing is than that of NV, with all its great variety of different RPG dialogue choices and different ways of doing the quests, and how captivating all of those followers are to talk to and interact with, etc....

So, agreed it's a great, big open world exploration game with stuff everywhere to see and fight... but is it a good RPG with tons of replayability interest once you've seen all the places and scenery that the gameworld has to offer, killed all the things there is to kill?

the story? a story is mainly just a backdrop for the fun stuff like using different weapons, taking perks to make your character better, sneaking around stalking and fighting enemies, interacting wiith npcs, exploring, collecting good gear, ...there's a lot of elements to a game, the story is the least of em....and skyrims story is pretty good actually, there's lot of factions, endless quests you can do for each faction, you can become the leader of many of the factions, you can pick sides and choose what to do....the story serves the purpose just fine, its not what makes the game so fun, its everything else. the world is dynamic and immersive. in a way which most open world games can't come close to.

» Wed May 09, 2012 1:04 pm

I... I can't stand idly by.

1. And well over 200 dungeones, there is 1000 times more content in skyrim,
2. over 400 quests and thats
3. not even counting the never ending radiant quests,
3. the towns and cities are way better designed,
5. well over 50 followers you can use,..
6. you don't have the same exact enemy respawning in every location every time,
7. skyrim is much more fluid and dynamic of a gameworld,
8. the random factor isn't even present in new vegas.
9. and skyrim doesn't have some dumb ending where the credits roll after the last battle...
10. skyrim has much better battles than that last battle in new vegas, just clearing out labyrinthian alone is like 10 times bigger than that last battle in new vegas.
11. none of the dungeons in skyrim are small, most of em are pretty elaborate and there's lots of enemies to kill, blackreach cave system alone is more content than all the buildings in new vegas put together. there's also around 500 locations in skyrim. 12. and they're not dumb locations like a wrecked car or a shack.

1. Yeah, 200 dungeons that get repetitive, dragged out and ultimately at lvl 40+ unrewarding, especially since most crap in the dungeons is player-scaled or randomized.
2. Most of which are linear and incredibly short.
3. Oh you mean Ask bartender for work>Get assassination target>kill said target>collect moneyz.
4. You mean how every city looks like a small town with walls? And every town looks like a small village? And how every small village looks like a small settlment?
5. Yes, quantity over quality right! 50 followers with about 3 unique dialogue lines and then they all become the same repetitive [censored].
6. >_> Actually, enemies spawn at the same areas in Skyrim too, it's just that they are now scaled to the players level again.
7. Did I hear dynamic? Oh... Yeah I just killed every guard in Markarth, wanna bet on a game from Steam (of the winners choice) that they will have respawned or been replaced and no longer attack on sight despite almost completely wiping out the entire town singelhandedly?
8. Is there anything good about a "random factor" apart from the general wilderness?
9. ...That's because in New Vegas the changes that happen after the battle are so great and so many that designing the aftermath would be like designing another 3 games, it's better to just cut it off and end the game.
10. Uh-huh.... Should we compare Fallout New Vegas and Fallout 3 to Oblivion then?
11. Which is not a point in it's favor for me. I don't like having to go through a [censored] one hour dungeon to clear one [censored] quest.
12. Nah, of course not, it's completely realistic to have a massive dungeon every 50 meters. :rolleyes:

» Wed May 09, 2012 3:13 pm

Lol good answers Gabe!

» Wed May 09, 2012 3:33 pm

the story? a story is mainly just a backdrop for the fun stuff like using different weapons, taking perks to make your character better, sneaking around stalking and fighting enemies, interacting wiith npcs, exploring, collecting good gear, ...there's a lot of elements to a game, the story is the least of em....and skyrims story is pretty good actually, there's lot of factions, endless quests you can do for each faction, you can become the leader of many of the factions, you can pick sides and choose what to do....the story serves the purpose just fine, its not what makes the game so fun, its everything else. the world is dynamic and immersive. in a way which most open world games can't come close to.

Ayup, in an action adventure game (like Skyrim), those are the key things. Although good story only adds to the experience, while a cheap, generic, poorly written story makes the experience seem much more shallow, in any kind of game. I love throwaway games like that too, I've played plenty of them over the years. Fun till yer done, but then it's done, and it ain't much fun to keep playing on afterwards. Unlike a real RPG game with a great story and varied quests that can be played differently numerous ways, with lots of branching choices and decisions to make that can affect the world and how it reacts to you in many different ways. Kindof like, umm.... FO:NV. They are different types of games, from all reports... so comparing which is 'better' is like comparing an Abrams tank to a Ferrari... they're both great in their own fields- but those fields are miles apart.

» Wed May 09, 2012 3:28 pm

I... I can't stand idly by.

1. Yeah, 200 dungeons that get repetitive, dragged out and ultimately at lvl 40+ unrewarding, especially since most crap in the dungeons is player-scaled or randomized.
2. Most of which are linear and incredibly short.
3. Oh you mean Ask bartender for work>Get assassination target>kill said target>collect moneyz.
4. You mean how every city looks like a small town with walls? And every town looks like a small village? And how every small village looks like a small settlment?
5. Yes, quantity over quality right! 50 followers with about 3 unique dialogue lines and then they all become the same repetitive [censored].
6. >_> Actually, enemies spawn at the same areas in Skyrim too, it's just that they are now scaled to the players level again.
7. Did I hear dynamic? Oh... Yeah I just killed every guard in Markarth, wanna bet on a game from Steam (of the winners choice) that they will have respawned or been replaced and no longer attack on sight despite almost completely wiping out the entire town singelhandedly?
8. Is there anything good about a "random factor" apart from the general wilderness?
9. ...That's because in New Vegas the changes that happen after the battle are so great and so many that designing the aftermath would be like designing another 3 games, it's better to just cut it off and end the game.
10. Uh-huh.... Should we compare Fallout New Vegas and Fallout 3 to Oblivion then?
11. Which is not a point in it's favor for me. I don't like having to go through a [censored] one hour dungeon to clear one [censored] quest.
12. Nah, of course not, it's completely realistic to have a massive dungeon every 50 meters. :rolleyes:

there is a reason why new vegas was only 20 dollars a month after it came out. its a boring gameworld and its a very static predicatable gameworld,,you can count on the same two geckos or the same 2 powdergangers respawning in the same exact location with the same lead pipes...its really lame and if you think the dungeons are the same in skyrim, you haven't played it then cause the dungeons are all pretty different, first of all they are all really big, secondly they have various enemies in em, and they all look different, they aren't even the same. and talk about repetitive, new vegas has the same shack repeated 200 times.

» Wed May 09, 2012 9:35 am

there is a reason why new vegas was only 20 dollars a month after it came out. its a boring gameworld and its a very static predicatable gameworld,,you can count on the same two geckos or the same 2 powdergangers respawning in the same exact location with the same lead pipes...its really lame and if you think the dungeons are the same in skyrim, you haven't played it then cause the dungeons are all pretty different, first of all they are all really big, secondly they have various enemies in em, and they all look different, they aren't even the same. and talk about repetitive, new vegas has the same shack repeated 200 times.

Lets see, I can think of several...

1) Huge amount of media advertising for Skyrim that NV never had.

2) Majority of people who buy games are the kind who like simple, flashy, mindless stuff that requires no thought and that the advertisers tell them is kewl.

» Wed May 09, 2012 9:36 pm

there is a reason why new vegas was only 20 dollars a month after it came out.

That has no real bearing on the quality of the game's content, I've played plenty of masterpieces that didn't have great sales.

its a boring gameworld and its a very static predicatable gameworld,,you can count on the same two geckos or the same 2 powdergangers respawning in the same exact location with the same lead pipes...its really lame

Don't see how Skyrim is any different, the spawn points don't change. Heck the spawn points in Fallout 3 didn't change either, enemies all spawned in the exact same locations every few days, and often it was the same type of enemy that spawned last time unless you reached a much higher level before hand. I think people really tend to overstate how dynamic Fallout 3 was, the vast majority of spawn points were fixed with a fixed enemy type (IE Super Mutants, raiders, Enclave, etc) and the only changes that came about over the course of the game were due to level scaling, and until Broken Steel those changes weren't big. Skyrim isn't much different in that regard.

and if you think the dungeons are the same in skyrim, you haven't played it then cause the dungeons are all pretty different, first of all they are all really big, secondly they have various enemies in em, and they all look different, they aren't even the same. and talk about repetitive,

Not really, based on my experience with Skyrim only the main quest dungeons are at all diverse (although even those definitely look the same since there's only a small selection of "tile sets"). The optional dungeons you can stumble onto, and the side quest dungeons are for the most part unremarkable with few exceptions.

» Wed May 09, 2012 4:51 pm

1. First of all they are all really big, 2. secondly they have various enemies in em, 3. and they all look different, they aren't even the same. 4. and talk about repetitive, new vegas has the same shack repeated 200 times.

1. That I know, I criticized that in my previous point and said it was not a good thing.
2. Well obviously not every dungeon has the exact "same" enemies in them, like every dungeon has draughr in them. But what I mean is that a draughr dungeon is and always will be a draughr dungeon. No matter how many times you clear it out and nor matter the level you enter it at. The only thing that changes is the rank of the enemy, but frankly, Bandit Marauder is just regular Bandit +6.
3. *snort* (/tries to hold back laughter) No, they don't. A cave is a cave, a draughr tomb is a draughr tomb, a mine is a mine, a ice cave is an ice cave et cetera, at some point it will get tedious. They might be decorated differently in slight ways, but Draughr dungeons always has the draughr decor lying around.
4. You know why I don't think it was bad for New Vegas to have repetitive shacks? Because they were just that. Shacks. A small room with a minor thing of interest to loot. I'll take repetitive one-room sized shacks over repetitive massive dungeons anyday. Because with shacks you can enter them and be done with them in 10 seconds. With dungeons you need to invest 20 minutes, sometimes more, to fully explore it. And since every other quest is located inside dungeons the repetitiveness shows it's ugly colours early.

» Wed May 09, 2012 7:46 am

Indeed, I can vouche for the "seen one dragur dungeon seen them all".

REally you only have "cave", "Ancient ruins", and "Old fort" Tile sets and thats it. Having played through the companions quest line, and winterhold, along with the dragon priest mask and a chunk of the main quest line they are really starting to drag on....

» Wed May 09, 2012 8:11 am

the story? a story is mainly just a backdrop for the fun stuff like using different weapons, taking perks to make your character better, sneaking around stalking and fighting enemies, interacting wiith npcs, exploring, collecting good gear, ...there's a lot of elements to a game,

I can agree that there are a lot of elements to a good game, but in a RPG the story shouldn't just be a backdrop. In my opinion it should be well written and involve a lot of player choice. Skyrim's main story line is not well written and involves little to no player coice. The main story line in New Vegas is very well written and is almost centered around player choice.

the story is the least of em....

If that's what you believe then go play Just Cause 2, trust me, the devs obviously had the same opinion...

and skyrims story is pretty good actually, there's lot of factions, endless quests you can do for each faction, you can become the leader of many of the factions, you can pick sides and choose what to do....

Skyrim's main quest was awful imo. Good at first, but awful towards the end.

The civil war quests weren't bad, but they were essentially taking over cities and all combat centered. I did like how there weren't clear cut good vs. evil factions though, that was something Skyrim did pretty well.

The various guild/college of Winterhold/companions quest lines were all dull and repetitive. I'm not even going to go into the reasons why, it's just obvious.

the story serves the purpose just fine, its not what makes the game so fun, its everything else. the world is dynamic and immersive. in a way which most open world games can't come close to.

The world is dynamic? :ohmy:

Let me tell you a story: Once upon a time I walked into a tavern in Riften and brutally murdered an innocent man sitting on a bench near the door. I was in plain sight of 4-5 NPCs and I wasn't in sneak mode. None of them made any comment and my bounty was not raised.

In a dynamic game world someone probably would have reacted to the sight of a random bar-goer being hacked to pieces by a guy in Daedric armor.

» Wed May 09, 2012 11:18 am

Indeed, I can vouche for the "seen one dragur dungeon seen them all".

REally you only have "cave", "Ancient ruins", and "Old fort" Tile sets and thats it. Having played through the companions quest line, and winterhold, along with the dragon priest mask and a chunk of the main quest line they are really starting to drag on....

there's just not a lot of content in new vegas, very few quests, nothing respawns, not a lot of buildings in the game, everything is really small, the biggest buildings have no action happening in em...there's no good battlezones to fight and stalk enemies in on the map at all, you're just kinda out in the open like cowboys and indians...there's not even a lot of enemies in the game except for scorpions, geckos and deathclaws, not really any towns to fight in either....towns would of made good battlegrounds for bandits and factions but the towns aren't used for much and not really designed well, you get a 10 second fight out in goodsrprings and a small one in primm or whatever and thats about it for the game as far as town fights...no super mutants in the game except for black mountain and that is crappy location for a fight out,,,,just a zig zag road with a building at the top, not much else, thats it for super mutant fights. there's a reason new vegas was only 20 dollars to buy a month after it came out.

» Wed May 09, 2012 12:39 pm

Wait not alot of content in New Vegas? That begs the question did you even play new vegas and all it options? Seems to me by what you keep on saying the "Best possible RPG" for you would be dumping you in a big pit to fight off endless waves of bad guys. I'd say go try out The witcher 2 with it's black patch thingy because thats just what it adds. A separate arena battle against endless waves of enemies.

» Wed May 09, 2012 12:28 pm

there's just not a lot of content in new vegas, very few quests, nothing respawns, not a lot of buildings in the game, everything is really small, the biggest buildings have no action happening in em...there's no good battlezones to fight and stalk enemies in on the map at all, you're just kinda out in the open like cowboys and indians...there's not even a lot of enemies in the game except for scorpions, geckos and deathclaws, not really any towns to fight in either....towns would of made good battlegrounds for bandits and factions but the towns aren't used for much and not really designed well, you get a 10 second fight out in goodsrprings and a small one in primm or whatever and thats about it for the game as far as town fights...no super mutants in the game except for black mountain and that is crappy location for a fight out,,,,just a zig zag road with a building at the top, not much else, thats it for super mutant fights. there's a reason new vegas was only 20 dollars to buy a month after it came out.

You are aware you're losing credibility every time you post right? Perhaps you should play Fallout 1 and 2. It'll give you a better perspective on the Mojave.

Money is not an argument as to how good/bad a game is. Black Ops is still 60 dollars so it must be greatest game in the world right?

No wonder Skyrim is so simplified.

» Wed May 09, 2012 5:09 pm

skyrim is a way better game...right off the bat, new vegas is a desert and not many buildings or dungeons in it...none of the enemies respawn for the most part..and when they do its the same 2 geckos or powder gangers with lead pipes, hardly any super mutants to fight or any good human enemies for that matter, there's not really any good battlegrounds in new vegas either, its just desert, no place to hide or stalk enemies...FO3 had all the city areas to battle it out in, hiding and sneaking around etc...but the new vegas game world is just too static, boring and not dynamic, no random patrols or random encounters to speak of...there's not even a comparison....as far as open world games, bethesda wins hands down every time.

So all you care about is dungeon crawling and fighting?

RPGs are not for you then.

» Wed May 09, 2012 6:55 pm

the story? a story is mainly just a backdrop for the fun stuff like using different weapons, taking perks to make your character better, sneaking around stalking and fighting enemies, interacting wiith npcs, exploring, collecting good gear, ...there's a lot of elements to a game, the story is the least of em....

...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNydBMu1VfI&feature=plcp&context=C37979b8UDOEgsToPDskL1pHqXmOh79K6OCgWDud-OYou are banned from playing all Fallout games minus Fallout 3...Good Day.

» Wed May 09, 2012 10:50 pm

Wait not alot of content in New Vegas? That begs the question did you even play new vegas and all it options? Seems to me by what you keep on saying the "Best possible RPG" for you would be dumping you in a big pit to fight off endless waves of bad guys. I'd say go try out The witcher 2 with it's black patch thingy because thats just what it adds. A separate arena battle against endless waves of enemies.

every cave in NV is small, all the shacks are small, nothing is big, just an open desert, what you see is what you get. not like skyrim where the area is packed with forts, dungeons, towns, villages, caves, lots of random events, enemies cruising around, tons of different things to fight...like 100 times more stuff going on...the same 2 powder gangers will respawn in the same part of the map with the same sticks of dynamite and lead pipes very predictable...so its just not a dangerous world to cruise around in...most of the legion use some type of melee weapons, thats weak, they live in tents? lol geez....thats kinda cheezy...the ncr all live in tents pretty much too..i mean come on..if you want to fight em, you're what, battling it out like some cowboy at a campground? i like my battles to be in good places not campgrounds. seriously, new vegas is not a good open world game...it prob should of not been made to be an open world game, cause its just not filled up with much stuff.

» Wed May 09, 2012 6:27 am

every cave in NV is small, all the shacks are small, nothing is big, just an open desert, what you see is what you get. not like skyrim where the area is packed with forts, dungeons, towns, villages, caves, lots of random events, enemies cruising around, tons of different things to fight...like 100 times more stuff going on...the same 2 powder gangers will respawn in the same part of the map with the same sticks of dynamite and lead pipes very predictable...so its just not a dangerous world to cruise around in...most of the legion use some type of melee weapons, thats weak, they live in tents? lol geez....thats kinda cheezy...the ncr all live in tents pretty much too..i mean come on..if you want to fight em, you're what, battling it out like some cowboy at a campground? i like my battles to be in good places not campgrounds. seriously, new vegas is not a good open world game...it prob should of not been made to be an open world game, cause its just not filled up with much stuff.

The reason why the Legion and the NCR are mostly in tents is because they are both armies that have been sent from much larger territories to take over the Mojave. Tents are used by armies as quick, easy to build and effective shelter did you really expect them to start building highrises as soon as they got to the Mojave?

Everyone who posts in this forum(the New Vegas forum) really enjoys playing New Vegas. Every extra comment you put down saying that you don't like New Vegas and you think Skyrim is far superior is not making you any friends and is just making you seem like more of a dike. I'd suggest that you stop going off topic and start a new thread if you feel the need to vent.

But, honestly if you don't like New Vegas then why are you dedicating your time to say so on the New Vegas forum?

» Wed May 09, 2012 10:28 pm

Edit: First Time For Everything: Double Post

» Wed May 09, 2012 8:31 am

Maybe you need to put fancy graphics and dragon shouts behind you and put New Vegas back in. The first time I played it I was like "WTF did I just waste 15$ on??!?!!?" but then after a few hrs I decided to give it another shot, after I got past seeing scorpions half glitches into a wall I realized it was t half bad. My first playthrough consisted of killing key npcs' without knowing it and pretty much going through it as a fps. It was really when I turned on hardcoe mode that it grabbed me as an rpg. It made me slow down an actually listen to what they had to say(rather than blowing their legs off

Once you slow down and forget about fancy looking northern lights that you enjoy new Vegas, it also seems that whenever I start a new character, the playthrough is always different(to a certain degree)
Iv completed NV 8 complete times now and I don't dare think of the hrs that still await me.

Skyrim on the other hand was different. I was interested from the start although that excitement soon faded as the "fetch" quests racked up. The first thought that came to me when you first get to go "explore" after Helegen was "wow I wonder if this is what Fallout 4 will look and handle like?" and anyone that plays NV as much as I do would undoubtably love to play NV with the skyrim level of graphics applied. Even when I was in the narrow passageways I couldn't help but imagine what the subways and vaults will be like? Really skyrim is a pacifier untill we get our Fallout back. Hopefully no more than 2 yrs.... Maybe well get lucky and get a sequel of sorts to NV before F4 is released(I wish) because that would really make me happier than roaming the narrow streets of D.C. Again.

» Wed May 09, 2012 9:54 am

I do. Must say it is jarring when the camera zooms into people's faces though, I got used to it not doing that in skyrim.

» Wed May 09, 2012 7:08 am

I have played Elderscrolls for 800 hours. Fallout games for 400 hours.

I now sit and cry when I realize that it should have been the other way around. Beth dropped the ball on ES many, many years ago.

It is now just a boring hack and slash game with no role play soul whatsoever. Oh look, a huge, beautiful world with the same combat and quests every five minutes.

Wolves, bandits, draugr, repeat. Wolves, bandits, draugr, repeat. Boring.

Can I use magic?? Oh sorry, we dont have that anymore.....

» Wed May 09, 2012 7:59 pm

Yeah im still playing NV don't get wrong I was looking forward to Skyrim so much but in the end it did nothing for me, I wanted to like it but less than two months in i'm back playing NV, I don't know what it is but NV has that something that draws you back time and time again. I just spent 3 hours on NV last night wondering round with a rebar club and a few hand grenades and had more fun and felt more involved than I did playing 100+ hours in Skyrim.