i for one loved this game in almost every possible way. however they went and made the game have a permanent ending. OMG!!! there was a reason oblivion was so incredibly successful and that the DLC for Fallout 3 enabling continued play was so well welcomed. Sure, it lets you sit back and see what your choices ultimately led to, but Bethesda could have easily done this and then let you play in the new world you created. when i first played fallout 3 and beat the game i was mortified by how bad Bethesda messed up and i almost put down the game all together. and after the DLC i was fine. Heck, in the Fallout 3 DLC it still showed what your actions impacted and it then let you actually keep enjoying the game afterward on a character that was actually powerful because you wouldnt have to start a new game because your last character was stuck from a saved game at the end of the story. Furthermore, not only was it a letdown from the fact that there was an ending, but right before you just stop after winning, you get tons of amazing weapons and money making you think that you are going to be able to get that awesome implant or gun which would make the achievements and quests far more easy... and then you find out that you will never be able to do anything with that wonderful gear and your liking for the game in general plummets. To rap up this little rant of mine, i will reiterate in some alternate words... Bethesda why?

I don't know, it would be nice to see the consequences of one's actions at Hoover Dam, but the ending for the Courier is "and he lived happily ever after, more or less." So that's why the final ending of this game doesn't bother me in the way it did with Fallout 3.

welcome to the forums
ill summ this up for you, there will be no DLC to make continued gameplay after the ending, and FO3's broken steel practically botched the ending. the engine would be able to handle all the MASSIVE changes that the game would go through if the gameplay was extended. remember this is an old engine, heck it cant handle ladders. personally many people are fine with the game ending, but personal opinion is personal opinion. BS seemed like decent DLC until you got down to brass tacks and looked at it. massive enemy bullet spnges, over-powered weaponry, and a terrible ending (hey thanks for wiping out the enclave and the super mutants in dc, wanna get some camera's for us?).

Well they did warn you in game...so I don't really see the problem if it just "caught you off guard." Personally I kinda liked how the Battle for Hover Dam was the climatic finish. I really didn't mind how the game just "ended" in Fallout 3 either though.

Because Bethesda just published the game and Obsidian was the company that decided the game would end. Josh Sawyer has posted about this; they intended all along to end the game. They made sure there was a warning for the people who wanted to complete quests before the end. They have no plans to ruin their ending with a Broken Steel dlc.

Because they'd have to do some heavy alteration to the game for this to happen? Geez, what happened to common sense?

allright i understand that the game is finished and DLC wont come. So please do not insinuate that I'm stupid. im simply pointing out that having those unbelievably powerful characters after beating a game like fallout is very fun

Also, it just seems like being able to keep going in what you do is more fun than being forced to make characters over and over when you always get attached to your best profiles. Heck, in shooters the campaign can always end because that continued play is usually made up for by multi-player.

Oi, Multiple playthroughs, forced start?

It's called replayability, not one giant nonsense jack of all trades character, keeping one character doing everything gets boring, having to start from scratch is just more fun, plus comparing this to a shooter is'nt a good comparison.

This might sound like complete gibberish to you, but have you ever thought about simply making a save before confronting Benny?

True it does get boring but its nice to have that option dont you think. Also, haven't you ever just had fun screwing around laying waste to everything you see in that game with a bunch of awesome guns and the bloody mess perk

First, please don't try to blatantly insult me, second, of course i do this but it would be nice to not constantly revert back half the story line

........... :unsure:

New Vegas has Multiple endings. They are all great because it gives meaning to my actions. I get to see what happens. Fallout should not be a sandbox game. The game warns you its going to end. You can always load a save. You can do everything before the end of the main quest. Having play after the end would mean major changes to the game many times over to accommodate each ending.

It would be insanely hard to make all the outcomes,for fallout 3 there was like two endings,poison the water or dont,and from what I heard poisoning the water with the FEV only effects you and none of the wasteland people who drink it.If TES had an ending I would be pissed and sure I would enjoy playing after the ending for fallout,but Fallout is kinda about how you change the wasteland for better or for worse,on Fallout 3 being able to play after the ending made the ending ten times less meaningful.

Did you listen to the ending slides? There's tons of changes to the Mojave Wasteland, the game itself would have to be seriously altered after the end to reflect those changes. Fallout 3 was a very simple two-dimensional ending. You poison the water with FEV, or you don't. That's nowhere near as extensive as what happens in New Vegas.

I am going to tear your argument apart.
Oblivion was sccesful because of morrowind, and itwas a huge game, new to many people, so they liked it.
Fallout 3 dlc was popular because people [censored]ed, the only fallout experience they had was 3, they played oblivion and couldnt come to terms with an ending. If it was supposed to be open ended it would have, and BS contradicted the ending "sacrafice, fatal rads" nah he lives.
"OMG I cant do one [censored] mission teh game is ruined forever" choice and consequence, save reload and keep playing, no reason to ruin the story for everyone else. If only the people [censored]ing about the ending acually put the game down all together then BS wouldnt exist.
Trolololol Impact you mean the cop out, enclave dead regaurdless, me working with the BoS regaurdless, fev only hurting me regaurdless. Yeah great impact. If you cant tell I found any "impact" pathetic.
Yes because I could never enjoy the game and do what I did before BS on my reloaded character, and just ignore the last mission.
Didnt need to keep playing, I already felt like a [censored] god.
Yes I could sell some crap and add the caps to my 20,000 after all implants.
Yes Bethesda why? Oh right, probabally because you arent developing it this time.

Insteead of asking for dlc why not ignore the last mission ? It takes lest effort, is free and dosent ruin the game for others.
You know what I hope Bethesda gives the rights to Obsidian, [censored] it I can tell bethesda will bend over backwards like they did with 3, obsidian however value the story and wont, I can only hope Obsidian will then make fallout the way it is supposed to be, and not ruin it with crappy, shallow dlc, because people cant reload. Thankfully NV has been spared the abomination that was BS.

Oh and unlike 3 this has many endings, now if BS [censored] up the few choices, no way could they get the choices done in a dlc.

Broken Steel wasn't Botched, yes the ending left something to be desired and things got way to powerful, I mean really how many unique Flame throwers do you really need? But its saving grace is that it raised the level cap and allowed you to continue to play after the main quest was over. Fallout New Vegas needs this as well. The only reason I can figure as to why Obsidian ( Its important to not NV was made by Obsidian not Bethesda. didn't do this from the start is that this was there Fallout swan song and they wanted it to be more like the Fallout they made 13 years ago. 2 things need to happen with New Vegas.
1. Raise the Level cap to 40.

2. Allow game play after the main quest, To do other wise is a slap in the face to there Fan Base,

The gameplay impact 'changes' from how you went through the main quest in Fallout 3 and introduced by Broken Steel were minimal at best, if not practically non-existant depending on your choice at the end of the vanilla main quest.

If you do it one way, there are absolutely no changes to the game whatsoever period. (Yes I am not taking into account the additions/location alterations made by Broken Steel as they are not affected by what you do in the main quest line.)

If you do it the other way, the changes are minimal. Four NPC's die and something becomes lethal to you and that is it.

The other 'choice' at the end of the main quest does not make any difference what so ever in the post mainquest gameplay.

As for stupidly powerfull weapons and armour, a lot of gamers actually enjoy being challenged and don't want to stride around the wasteland like some demented godling briefly interrupted by irksome flylike foes sacraficing themselves upon the weapons of the character or constantly running into bullet sponges which force them to use the stupidly powerfull gear just so they don't waste insane amounts of ammunition/stims to get past them.

Fallout has as a series ALWAYS had a definite ending. Fallout 1 had a definite ending, Fallout 2 had a definite ending (Ok there was an option that let you continue after you completed the game, but that wasn't 'part' of the main game so to speak), Fallout Tactics had a definite ending, Fallout Brotherhood of Steel had a definite ending, Fallout 3 had a definite ending (the Vanilla game, without the Broken Steel DLC, even though the ending was decidely Meh compared to the usual Fallout endings) and Fallout New Vegas has a definite ending.

I believe from the way the statement was worded that one reason Obsidian decided against allowing us to continue playing after the end of the Main Quest was that in order for them to do it to their satisfaction they would have required at least double the time if not quadruple the time to be able to take into account all the permutations that can and do happen in New Vegas to get a post ending gameworld that is consistent with how the player went through the game. That takes into account the TWENTY FOUR possible ending segments (there are actually 27 but three are negated due to being main factions) of which each has anywhere between FOUR and THIRTEEN permutations.
Now if they had decided to just allow people to continue on without taking those permutations into account, there would be people complaining that the post ending gameworld hadn't changed according to how they played the game.

Dead Money raises cap to 35 and I bet another DLC will go up another 5 :sadvaultboy:

playing after the end would mean removing the endings which would be a real slap to their fan base.

What is so difficult to understand about not entering into the ultimate conflict of the game until you have explored the Mojave to its fullest. I see absolutely no reason why you would NEED to be able to continue after finishing the END game sequence. It just means that you lack the ability for delayed gratification and want to see the end NOW or you just randomly wander around with no sense of purpose (in other words not role-playing). "WAAAAA! WAAAAAA!" is not a good enough reason for them to spend time and resources continuing the game after its ultimate conclusion.

I respectfully disagree, Broken Steel was definately botched (in my opinion) becasue it shattered the already tenuous gameplay balance and forced those of us who wanted to be able to create distinctly different characters to seriously gimp the SPECIAL allocation of the character regardless of the concept of the character (aka you have to minimize intelligence in order to try to reduce the insane amount of skillpoints thrown at you with the increased level cap) or end up with characters who are basically carbon copies of each other skillwise and are J.O.N.T.M.O.A. (Jack of No Trades, Master of All) wasteland Godlings.

For Point 1, we are I think already powerfull enough with the level cap at 30 (a bit too powerfull at 35 with Dead Money), Having 40th level would be another step towards JONTMOA Godlinghood again, which at least for myself is utterly against what a cRPG/RPG is all about (Which is to have characters who can do somethings well but not other things). While being able to do everything well is I admit good in Action/Adventure based games, it is not for RPG games.

With regards to Point 2, it is not a slap in the face to the Fan Base for the FALLOUT series, because as I pointed out in my previous post every single Fallout game to date has ended. Ok it may be a slap in the face to Bethesda's TES open ended game world Fanbase, but Fallout is not TES, it is a completely different game to TES and I think should remain so.

I like games that have endings, gives me a feeling of accomplishment.

After finishing the game the first time and saw the results of my involvement with the different factions I was a little miffed that I missed so much of the game as I rushed to the first ending. It gave me incentive to do things differently and with greater deliberation.

I am now playing a character that has done none of the main quest beyond Nipton. She hunts legionaires as I hate those cretins. Last nigh I reached 28th level and still use the varmint rifle I got in goodsprings. There is plenty of life left in the game, I see no need to get bent because I didn't pay attention when the game told me that it was going to end if I continued what I was doing.

Obsidian made the previous falllouts (well black isle did) but alot of their fans are old fallout fans, your slap in the face part is wrong. Also the choices in the game are huge, they would need to recreate places multiple times over, essentialy making a new game (or several), cant be done in dlc, stop asking.
The level cap dosent need to go up, I am in dead money and alredy feel like a god, only barter surviva, unarmed, melee are left on one character iirc the rest are atleat 70.

Here's the thing about Oblivion or Morrowind does anything really change after you beat the game? no. The world hardly changes at all. With Oblivion the world is exactly the same after the main quest as it was before. The only difference is a few less NPC's. The side quests largely have nothing to do with the main plot line, not so in NV.

The ending to New Vegas vastly changes the political landscape. What are you going to do in a Mojave dominated by one faction. Most of the quests in the game are from or deal with the various factions around new vegas and there interaction. After beating the game the only thing there would be left to do is run around and kill things. As the vast majority of side quests would have either resolved themselves or automatically fail as the giving faction has left the Mojave.'

Why put a bunch of work into an after end game when there would be nothing for the player to do but wander around and kill things. You can do that before finishing the game and have more options as to who to kill.
Plenty of you *&)**)@% about not being able to do it. But none of you can say HOW they could do it in a game like NV.

I'm fine with the way it is.
There's nothing wrong with a game having a ending that actually ends the game.
In all the open-ended games I played I would just slowly lose interest in the character and stop playing eventually (after I had finished all the quests that I wanted to do with that character).
Better to simply restart with a new character and try something else (for me at least).

Btw. how much great gear do you get in the final battle in New Vegas? I cannot remember anything I could not get and use before.