Yeah and all the actions it showed you were [censored], the only person affected by the posion is you, not even a single [censored] mention of it anywhere by the Brotherhood, they still kept going on with thier [censored] story even after I'm sure people complained. BS was [censored]. They didn't even remove the ending slides because they couldn't get Ron Pearlman back to do more so they just left them in, even though they had nothing to do with what followed. :rofl:

I love how people keep joining to make one post about not being able to keep playing, play the game better and get money and weapons beforehand. No DLC should be made to keep playing, it would inevitably be [censored], that's why they had a closed ending. If you don't care about story and just want to keep playing with your awesome toys and blowing [censored] up then go back to CoD.

OP Fail.

We need only look at the poll to see the fan bases opinion.


Game, set, match?

I am going to take your paragraph and tear it apart cause it looks like crap. :/ Learn to spell man before you insult someones opinion. I would like the option to continue, but I would be more happy if they remove the banning from the casino's, or atleast let me make more money! (100,000 Please <-- Uber Overkill pointless number)

1st monkey " face palm".
2nd monkey "ear palm"
3rd monkey "tries to stay silent"

This was already known.
BS was not warmly welcomed all people wanted was a less linear main story not an extension without any satisfactory ending ( imo ).

Most people here pretend they were happy about NV ending, but a few months ago the mere suggestion from me caused a resounding no to form.
Since however I'm now in the majority all's forgiven.

There is no continuation after the Main Quest because the end-slides tell the tale of the places you visited impacted upon.

Not only would they have to account for which faction won, they'd have to design quests that would either disregard those changes or who had permutations for each faction. It is too much.

I'm okay with the game ending in general, however the one ending that I've seen (for Mr. House) I was somewhat disappointed in how it ended. I felt that even though I had survived the final battle and killed everyone, (with a little help from my friends) that was just it, BAM!!! game over that's it, no more. Maybe I'm just crazy (please don't answer that) but it seems that a winding down period would've been a little better.

I wouldn't call the ending a failure, but somewhat of a letdown in an otherwise great game that far exceeded FO3.

EDIT: before someone suggests it, I am not talking of the ending slides being a letdown, The initial period after the final battle is just so abrupt.

Whenever someone goes on to say "A definitive ending inf New Vegas RUINED the game!" Uwe Boll gets a pay check.

Seriously, what is up with all of you not seeing the big picture? It's not like Obsidian didn't want to make the game not be open ended, it just logical sense to end it when you put into account of the multiple endings of the game. If allowed to Obsidian would have let the game continue on after any of the endings and have additional quests regarding the endings you got. But since Obsidian has a thing called a deadline they had to go on without a world where you get to play after beating the game. The amount of time needed to write the multiple after ending settings would have taken a long time and probably would have pushed New Vegas to be released in 2011 if this were done.

To put simply, it's a matter less of "It's Obsidian's choice" and more of "It's ALWAYS been like this". To my memory, most if not all Fallout games had a definitive ending. Something tells me most of the whiners are either new to the Fallout games or came from the Elder Scrolls.

Why don't you show some respect because a lot of people here are not from english speaking countries and it is their second language and the ability to spell does not negate someones argument. Why don't you learn how to use paragraphs and I saw plenty of spelling errors in your arguments.

I can see what you mean-though I haven't actually gotten to the ending just yet, I'm doing most of the side quests first(and that, naturally, is going to take a while). I'm thinking the goal was to make the gameplay ending as epic/interesting as possible-with the ending slides acting as the "winding down period" and resolution. Based on how the typical story goes in any media of fiction-exposition, climix, resolution-it would make sense. Though, of course, it's your opinion. :] I'm sure there are some others who'd agree with you-I'm not sure where I'd stand on the matter yet, as I (again) haven't gotten to that point.



It could be that a large number of members here have no experience with the previous Fallouts-only Fallout 3. Thus, they didn't really know what the ending would be like or what it's quality would be, and stuck to what they knew (and open-ended game) as a result(I was on the fence about it, myself, for that reason). Until they actually saw what it would be like in Fallout: New Vegas. Or it could be that the shininess of Fallout: New Vegas being new is currently having an effect, still. Or it could be that they realize an open-ended version of the game would be of crappy quality, since the developers have no way of properly continuing the game based on all the possible actions a character can make.
That, or the population of the forums is more sheep-like than I thought.
-
But to the original post-even if I wanted it(I really don't), it would be impossible to accomplish with Fallout: New Vegas. Someone clearly explained this earlier-something about 24, technically 27, endings? If the developers were expected both change Fallout: New Vegas to an open-ended game and make it actually decent and following each character's story accurately, it would be impossible. And I'm far, far more content with an ending that gives meaning to the ridiculously huge number of actions(most of which ought to have a serious impact on any group) I make than a game with a very generic ending and very generic continuation.

One other person made a serious point that I think might have been the biggest disadvantage of the open-ended Fallout 3 and how generic the character ended up being(pretty much just "good," "neutral," or "bad," and often with the karma given seeming a little off). Fallout 3 lacked the ability to be replayed in comparison to, say, Fallout: New Vegas. Yes, you're character had their S.P.E.C.I.A.L. and skill stats to account for, and could make moral decisions. However, the decisions were pretty basic, pretty obvious, and in the end didn't really effect much anything. Especially since the ending was so similar on every account one could possibly have. And with the S.P.E.C.I.A.L. and skill stats, eventually you could very easily max all of them-or get very close to it-even if you weren't trying.
To keep it simple, you ended up with one generic, Godly powered blob of a character. Not entirely, but pretty much. On a second, pretty much "crack" second account, I purposefully made certain parts of the S.P.E.C.I.A.L. stats at the level of one and others at the level of ten just to see the gameplay impact and make my character more unique. In Fallout: New Vegas, I can't even get away with having anything at the level of three without some serious repercussions-which I like.

So as a result, this generic, God blob character ends up bringing about little actual change in the game world no matter what. More so, instead of having a nice, clean ending for them, they continue until you slowly grow too painfully bored to bother with the aforementioned character anymore. It's a far less pleasant ending to a character, in my opinion, than an official ending.

I was pretty pissed when I first heard about the final ending, but having reached I actually think it's a damn good idea. In order to make the game playable afterwards, they would have had to make sure the fnal battle didn't change anything in the Mojave, which would have been crap. The ending, as it stands, is excellent and deeply satisfying. Besides, it's not like there isn't any warning, so if you want to carry on playing, just preserve a save.

Why do you have "No" and "Of Course not"? They both have the same meaning.. It's like having this -

Do you like Bananas.

1: Yes.
2: Of course I do.
3: Absolutely.
4: I love them.
5: No.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sa9KcZ_EWwY

@OP I like the ending, my actions had an effect larger than I had imagined! The implications of your actions really snowball and make a real difference.

Baaahh, sorry could not resist and my post was just me venting tbh, it's related to my first posting here and still hurts when I sit down to type.



Agreed, NV the work on stats has improved both within gameplay and dialogue both hidden and obvious.
Many talked about charisma as being worthless so I'm trying a charisma 1 run, without speech or barter.
Since I'm roleplaying him to be unsettling at best I thought not having sucess at even low levels in speech would not mater.
Now I'm seeing more of the game and sometimes missing shortcuts or beeing able to perform certain dialogue options.
Add in that even basic ammo cost twice as much at the start of the game ( without taking faction rep into account ).
Every stat has an effect of some sort more so than you would presume.

Edit: sorry for cutting your post up, I was trying to save room and address certain points, if it comes across as rude I'm sorry.

obsidian made new vegas when will people learn

There's always going to be someone ignorant of it, or ignoring the fact. Though I am a little surprised at how commonly the two seem to be mixed up, since I'm pretty sure Obsidian's name is on the cover of Fallout: New Vegas and know it's at the very beginning of the game, before you actually see the start menu.



Forgot to reply to this, at first.

But yeah, that's fine. I just wanted to throw my two cents in on the subject-though it really was probably unnecessary.

And indeed-the game improved immensely on Fallout 3. Which I also had a lot of fun with, actually-though I think I might just be enjoying this game more(and not just because it's a new game for me), just because of all of the improvements. One of my favorite being the reputation system, that was badly needed.

And I really don't mind-I don't see how it's rude, really. It's not like you took anything out of context.

I don't mind that FONV ends. I wouldn't have minded if FO3 had simply ended except for the fact that they forced you to die in a situation that normally you would be able to escape from (at least in my opinion).

Oh no grammer nazi, well that just negates my entire argument because of spelling errors and poor punctuation.
I may have [censored] spelling, but heay atleast my points were relevant, maybe you should try and counter my points instead of focusing on spelling. Spelling isnt relevant to my points, if you have nothing to counter my points, and havent got anything to add to the conversation, dont post.


I am however from an English speaking country, my spelling and punctuation just svcks.

Achievement - Break all casino banks. :mellow:
Kinda hard to do with an overkill number don't ya think?
And it can really unbalance the game as well.

I like the ending. I like starting over with completely different characters and allying with a different faction each time. I also don't do everything possible to do on each playthrough, so I have new things to discover each time I start a new game. If you want to keep playing with your character, just don't go to the final battle.

Kids these days... "BUT I WANT IT!" Fallout is an RPG that focuses on specialisation, you do a few things well, but cant do other things satisfactorily. It gets you into the game and into the perspective of the role you are playing. Yes, you are supposed to role-play in a Role-Playing Game (RPG doesn't always meann rocket-propelled grenade) so do that. Endings are good, as no post-ending gameplay could satisfactorily reflect the consequences of your choices and actions. Level caps enforce specialisation of a character.

I loved the ending slides for the House ending, I feel that Obsidian did the ending boards very well, they left me with a sense of 'despite the bad that happens now, the future will be alright'.

Except for that trouble brewing over yonder in Fallout 4, of course.

They are lying! It never ends well, otherwise there won't be a sequel :tongue:

I really, really hated the ending of this game but it was not mainly for the fact that its final, although that was a factor.

I played the neutral vegas ending and I was sent as my final mission to, "Kill Legate Lanius." That is my mission. My character the whole game was built to be a rifles and energy weapons sniper and by the endgame mission I had 10 perception, 9 agility, 100 stealth, 100 guns, 80ish EW. It was easy to sneak into his camp and sneak up to and silently kill all of his sentries, lock his dogs in the kennel, etc., etc.

And then I get to his area and Legate Lanius is now in plain sight so I headshot him with my Gauss Rifle from concealment. No sneak crit, no appreciable damage, then he and his guys run out and kill me.

I heard later that you HAVE to talk to Legate Lanius first, otherwise he is effectively unkillable.

WHY?!! What was my stated mission? "Kill Legate Lanius."

What a huge disappointment to work so hard as a sniper to get to this stage and have all my advantages stripped away completely, and I'm forced to make an arbitrary, contrived and dumb decision to reveal myself and talk to a guy I was sent to kill.

So I reloaded the game and used ~killall~ and did not enjoy the closing credits one iota. And that was that.

I'll replay the game despite all of its other shortcomings only because there are a lot of good side stories in the other quests and companions, a lot of great gameplay there. But the ending I don't even know if I'll bother finishing it again. It's just contrived. Its DUMB.

Lolz you do have the option, it called, save the game before finishing the main quest. Finishing the game to see your ending, then LOADING you game from before that time and playing it forever....XD