First thread: http://www.gamesas.com/topic/1352024-couldve-fonv-been-different/

Original post:




Last 5 posts:




Now debate!

I agree, Fallout: New Vegas could've been much better if they acted as if it was an expansion pack or something, instead as an actual game. One thing that I like though, is that the developers of the game tried to reach back to the roots of the series with this game.

Why would it be an expansion pack? It's not really connected to Fallout 3 at all and is a bigger game.

That's just my opinion.

Probably cause (s)he feels that because it uses the same engine and the same basic core gameplay mechanics as well as the exact graphics to the point where a lot of models are copy pasted from Fallout 3 it's basically the same.

Why did we need another one of these? The Op wasn't even serious with the first one.

Probably the only thing that's different is the storyline. Why make a whole new game if you're only going to change the storyline? That's like saying I'd replace a whole car just because of its color.

The differences:
Fallout New Vegas has:

* 4 main quest paths, one of which splits again near the end
* Speech checks based on fixed speech instead of %
* Iron sights
* Crafting expanded a lot
* Different ammo types
* Reputation system.
* Companions have personal quests
* Damage Threshold instead of Damage Resistance
* Weapon mods
* Companion Wheel
* Companion perks
* Traits
* More weapons
* Can use faction armor to disguise yourself
* Every single NPC can be killed but two
* Survival skill, no Big Guns skill
* Can coat melee weapons with poisons
* Lots more perks and changed perk ratio to 1:2 instead of 1:1
* Almost always has more than one quest solution

And lots more.
Not to mention that the gameplay of both are radically different, where Fallout 3 is more about dungeon crawling whereas New Vegas is about interacting with NPC's.

Well it doesn't make any sense, opinion or not. Also funny to note that one of the major complaints by Fallout fans (real ones, natch) is that Fallout 3 would've taken less crap if it didn't try (and fail) to insert itself into the Fallout franchise and just called itself "Post-Apoc-Hiking-Simulator" and dropped the attempts at emulating the already established world and tropes.

gamesas will never be able to make a Fallout game.. It's just not in their design structure look at Skyrim for example you can do everything on one play through same with fallout 3... In New Vegas Obsidian fixed the design error. I personally think the fallout series will never be nearly as Fallout-ish as the first two. But Wasteland 2...

Bethesda can make a Fallout game. They just need to do one thing and that is wrap their minds around the fact that Fallout and TES are two completely different series and should be as far apart from one another as possible. Really the only thing they should have in common is the game engine.

I think Bethesda took a step in the right direction by getting Obsidian to make New Vegas. I just hope they learned from it.

No, it's like they made a sequel to the game and improved aspects of the engine; if you really feel this way then all sequels/parts of the same franchise made relatively close together are just "expansion packs". BioShock 2? A expansion pack of BioShock 1 obviously.

well we can play wasteland 2 its more promising than fallout 4 or another bethesda fallout.
(sorry about my bad english)

Yup.


Doubtful.

Why make a whole new game when all that's changing is the storyline? Ha!

And no, making a whole new game by replacing the graphics is like replacing a whole car because of its color. The storyline is the core of the game. Even the most basic of games have a storyline. The exception being games like Pong.

Instead of just Negative Nancy, how would you have made FO3?

I thought the gameplay was the core of the game? Because you know its a game.

Of course Story is a strong second in my book, but if its story you want to be the core then you should read a book.

Like that: http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Portal:Van_Buren

Except with the skill list of course, that is one of few if not the only part that I disliked about VB.

Kinda hard to compare to something that never got made.

What I am more looking for is what was so wrong? The main problem I had with FO3 was some of the writing, the way the Enclave was handled, which is actually a criticism I have with FO2.

But first person view, real time combat(+ vats), do not bother me. And ya know what, people would have whined and cried about VB as well, because that is what they are good at.

I have had my gripes, but I like all the games, have fun, and expect improvements. Like any consumer of a product.

Oh I'm certain you can search my posts and find a few answers if you're really that curious. Believe it or not I do get tired of pointing out the flaws with that joke of a game.

I fail to see how the game itself would have been better as an expansion, as that would mean less content and being more constrained by what Fallout 3 is. I'm sorry, but this game has more than enough to warrant it's own game and price tag. To say otherwise is a gross oversimplification.

Why make a second one? OP was obviously trying to get some reactions.

First person.
Sandbox world.
Too few quests and NPC's.
Scaled down settlements.
Real-time only.
Perks being dumbed down.
Removal of traits.
SPECIAL being dumbed down.


Next to everything was wrong.

So again: That--> http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Portal:Van_Buren


The Keshik, if people want to debate it further they can, if you don't want to then you don't have to participate, whatever the reason for OP creating the thread in the first place it exists, people had things to discuss and it reached post limit, so I created a new one for people to continue discussing in, when the discussion dies out the thread dies out, until it's necro'd again by me in about a halfyear.



[edit]

So evlbastrd, I'd make the game turn-based from an isometric viewpoint, I'd have a map node system instead of a sandbox map, I'd have the game revolve around quests and NPC interaction, not dungeon crawling, I'd expand the dialogue skills, improve SPECIAL further and refine it a little, add more Traits along with the new Disadvantages, I'd keep perks at 1:3 ratio and 1:4 with Skilled picked, and I'd expand cities and towns so there is more in them, both in playable area and content.
I'd also make BOS a very small faction, showing how they're dying out, and have no official Enclave, only ex-enclave people.
And I'd make sure Power Armor is rare, along with energy weapons and make them far more potent.
Oh and I'd place it near the first two games' area and not on the other side of a continent.
I'd cut back on the 50's influence and show new cultures instead.
I'd make sure any and every NPC can be killed without the main quest being incompletable.

Okay I bit, and mainly what I saw before I got bored:

You hate Beth. You hate FO3. You hate Skyrim.

Beth copy pasted Fallout for FO3. Why? Cuz there are BoS, Enclave, and Super Mutants.

Consequences? What consequences in FO1 and 2? You can kill every person in the game, and it matters nothing.

In NV, you can kill every single person in the game, nuke two of the major factions, and it means nothing.

Why do I care about the main quest in NV? Why do I care about the Mojave? I am a courier who got shot in the head, and soon as I kill Benny, I care less about House, NCR, or Legion. Nothing draws me into this power struggle in the Mojave, and I fail so see why my character should give a crap. Oh, cuz mercs may be sent after me? Boo hoo, bring em on?

FO3 doesn't follow canon? Cuz it has BoS? Enclave? Super Mutants? FO Tactics has BoS, not on the WC, does that not follow canon? Games create canon.

I really do not see what the consequences are you speak of. At least if I'm a murderer or slaver in FO3, I get hunted by bounty hunters. They can do better with this, but there are no real consequences in any of these games, and NV...har.

Oh no the first citizen won't talk to me. That okay, I don't want to talk to her, either, but it will be funny when I paint her office red.

I like all the games, and I find things lacking in all. Nothing is perfect. Would I prefer better writing from Beth? Yes. But to act like 1, 2, NV, and Tactics are perfect is a joke. I have fun.

1. Kill people in The Hub: Lose the best merchants and tons of quests, I think you'll lose access to information about where to find a water chip too.

2. Well, apart from losing out on every single quest, every but one merchant and not having a single companion.

3. Read the note that Doc gives back to you, if you do not succeed in the objective of your contract you will be targeted by mercenaries, considering you have been, until now, a mailman, that's something to be scared about. Also since Lonesome Road hints to you being from NCR's lands you don't know of many other places so where are you going to run when you have a bounty on your head? Which will only grow larger the more mercs you kill/escape from.

4. You don't have to. You can side with Legion out of fear for yourself, you can side with NCR in order to keep the "order" you're used to, you can side with house purely for greed or comfort, you don't have to care about the Mojave let alone the nations, you can simply care about "you".

5. I think there is an explanation for why they are in that area, an explanation that makes sense, but I'd rather have Styles take care of that explanation. As for Enclave and Super Mutants? It doesn't follow canon. FEV was not supposed to be in a vault, it was not supposed to be ANYWHERE but Mariposa and West-Tek, and Enclave's main base, the base where the majority of their personell was at and has been since the great war got nuked to oblivion. It doesn't make sense how they could reappear in such great numbers at CW.

6. ....Kill NCR: Get Rangers after you. Kill Legion: Get Legionnaire Assassins after you. Kill Powder Gangers? You get a scripted moment where they come after you.

7. You don't care. I do.

8. Of course they're not perfect, but they are far superior to what the set out to do in comparison to Fallout 3 which abandons that design goal completely.