I'm going to agree with Antibody.

Oh yes, I've talked to him. He is undoubtedly awesome. But the building itself is terribly dull. Following around the cleaning bot to nab all the bottlecaps he throws in the trash is the only other point of interest. All of the awesome is in the front entryway.

Did you get 51 Sasparilla bottlecaps?

That's because Obsidian made a Fallout game, and not a Bethesda game.

That seems to be the excuse every original Fallout purist gives me when they've run out of logical answers regarding why the world is bad, and I'm very sad to see you actually say it. Because it doesn't make a lick of sense. If Obsidian was not trying to at least mimic Bethesda games, this game would not be open world, plain and simple. But it was, so it's obvious they were trying to mimic Bethesda's open world and failed at it. If they were TRULY trying to make a Fallout game, they would have used the map system from Fallout 1. But they didn't, because that's not what Bethesda fans were used to. So they attempted to copy what Bethesda fans like (aka tried to make a Bethesda game), but failed at it. You could throw all sorts of further excuses at me such as "They didn't have enough time" or "The engine wouldn't allow it" but at the end of the day, all we can judge is what Obsidian actually did, which was poorly mimic a major part of a Bethesda game.

But the world isn't bad - not per say. It's much more consistent in its setting than CW was. It's just less themeparky. You (and other Bethfans) don't like it and that's fine, but it doesn't make the world particularly bad (at least when considering what the game tries to achieve). And I wouldn't say Obsidian failed, as if they would've wanted to make a game with the goal of creating a big map full of random attractions and little to no focus on other things, they would've (it's not really that hard to scatter multiple random facilities all around the map and fill them with enemies and loot, and increase the spawnpoints on outside locations). Their design goal was just different than Bethesdas despite using the same framework - and it shows.

Well except it is that logical reason that is, indeed, make sense of it all as to why the world is what is was. Putting a whole bunch of illogical, worthless location isn't what Obsidian has in mind. Heck, its even arguable what is "love" in location in a sense in comparison of the two games. So far, many locations I visited in New Vegas were better put in through as to what there and how and why. Many of them are even serve as quest location.


Its all about engine and how Bethesda put them in charge of the game with the engine. Speaking of which, it is much easier to just use the existing one with Fallout 3 rather than try to blow out more time in finding a different, workable engine and make it to the deadline.

And lets be honest with two things. For one thing, the map system isn't expected. If that were the case, I would like it with an overhead, isometric view and all the goodies that were in the previous Fallouts. But that isn't the case, and more ways than one, there were able to bring that feeling of previous Fallout games WITH the engine they were provided. They manage a balance.

Another thing, I pretty much expected this backdraft seeing that a handful of people would not like Obsidian's approach because it wasn't made with Bethesda's style in mind.

The fact is that the map Obsidian made was a huge letdown to many Bethesda/ Fallout 3 fans. I've already stated my points multiple times here, and I'm not interested in continuing this argument, and never was interested in arguing in the first place. I stated my opinion and intended to leave it at that. But it's impossible to say "Obsidian did X wrong" without getting into an argument with someone here, which I find funny considering how much Bethesda bashing goes on here without consequence.

If it never was of your interest, why did you participate in the first place? These forums are here for discussion, and the subjects at hand are bound to create differences in opinions and arguments over what should and shouldn't be. That's how these things work. Backpatting happens when there are reasons and participants for it.

But the fact is as you said. And if the reasons for why things are as they are and why they are creating the effect they're creating are not worth of discussion (or arguing), it is indeed better to leave it at that.

And Bethbashing having no "consequences" while criticising Obsidian has being funny... well, who can you blame about that?

uhhhhh

http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/The_Devil%27s_Gullet
http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Ivanpah_Race_Track
http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Ivanpah_Dry_Lake
http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Goodsprings_Cave

no not worthless at all

and I could add many to that list

This was going on long before now. I remember back in March (questionable, but sometime around there) how everyone was saying New Vegas was going to be better in every way and I made a thread questioning the quality of the gameworld, because Obsidian was developing the game instead of Bethesda. I predicted from then that the gameworld wouldn't be as good, and I wasn't surprised, but you should have seen the people telling me that I am wrong and that Bethesda is mediocre at creating gameworlds. People have been set on not giving Bethesda credit for a very long time before now, as I'm sure you already knew, but convincing said people that Bethesda can do one thing better than Obsidian can be considered heresy because people are set on believing what they want without actually even experiencing or acknowledging something they don't want to believe. Then, someone will either bring up the argument of "more like a Fallout game", "not what they were trying to do", "exploration is crap, anyway", "I'd rather have fewer dungeons of higher quality", "modders can put useless dungeons in the game; writing is what really matters", and/or "I don't find collecting 300 useless pieces of garbage fun".

As for New Vegas not trying to mimic Fallout 3, bullcrap (I know you were arguing the opposite Antibody, so I'm not directing this at you). Fallout: New Vegas was riding on Fallout 3's popularity intentionally. The back of game case even describes it as the follow-up to 2008's game of the year, by which they are referring to Fallout 3.

Not the overall point of the whole matter. Many location that was presented by Obsidian were better indepth as to stories, quests, and location that would logically fit with the overall mainquest. Sure, some location are equivalent to landmark but it doesn't stop my viewing that Fallout 3's equivalent have many landmark but doesn't really hold anything interesting or "attachment" to such of a place either because it nothing but for looting, it wasn't directly in the Main Quest's path of direction, or it does not hold any logical sense.


I am pretty sure that was expected (not to mention people I see time to time throughout the internet mistaken that New Vegas was made by Bethesda); its a marketing thing, not to mention Bethesda would still get money from this sell. That doesn't mean New Vega is ganna "mimic" Fallout 3 100%. Many of the elements share due to the provided resource, but that where the similar tend to end.

Beth has been given credit for creating beautiful gameworlds full of stuff, but unfortunately people want more from their games than just a map chockfull of places that have little to no connection to anything nor too much incentives to go there. It is a bit saddening that with all their potential and resources, the only thing they really put focus on is the world and not so much the game and stories inside of it. And the criticism of mediocrity in gameworldcreating comes not from the amount of stuff and vistas, but from the internal consistency and the overall quality of all things combined - which all factor in whether or not the world well made. You can have a nice looking world with a ton of stuff to do, but if in the overall picture very little makes sense or has sense of connectivity and meaning, it does eat the appeal and respect of the the good things in it.



Obviously. Why else would the games be so similiar? However, the talk was about the gameworld and the core of it. The goal has clearly been not to create scattered and disjointed world with random attractions (the appeal of which are debatable) all over the place, but to create a consistent and mostly questdriven game inside the same framework (a framework, which in my opinion does not do too much good for the intention of creating a captivating RPG - but my personal peeves are another story) - if they wanted, they could've just created another interactive themepark of "cool" locations with little focus on writing and general consistency (but they didn't, and that's a good thing as it sets NV at least somewhat apart from FO3). And the text in the back of the box... it would likely be the same or similiar despite the game being wholly different, as NV would still be a followup to Fallout 3, and a continuation of the franchise.

Not yet, still working on that. Unless it unlocks an Oompa Loompa tour of the secret of Sunset Sarsaparilla manufacturing, then the fact remains that all the awesome is contained in Festus in the front entryway. If it DOES unlock an Oompa Loompa tour, I am prepared to rescind my statement.



I'm glad I'm a Fallout fan, plain and simple. Now I admit I have more fun roaming the Capital Wasteland than the Mojave, but that's simply because I'm more of a city boy and not really into the whole Western thing. I still greatly enjoy New Vegas, and don't really see any design flaws compared to Fallout 3's world (other than the stupid invisible walls).



Fallout 3 is chock full of places that don't tie into the main story at all, but what in it doesn't make any logical sense? I'm honestly looking for examples here, because I've been all over that map, top to bottom, left to right, and I've never once stopped and thought "now, that shouldn't be there...".

The idea of Fallout series in term of location tend to be the idea as ya progress through the main game, the PC would go in a "path" to a city and either mingle him/herself with their problem or just past along. These quest usually help tell where the PC should go next.

How Fallout 3 handle it, its all over the place. Using Megaton as the "center" it stretch out in random location that would other wise be part of the Main Quest. If one just follow the main quest, there are many place that can never been visit.

Then we talk about location with any illogical sense. We got a city with a bomb in the center of it, some crazy nuka woman living in a middle of no where, a bunch of kids living right next to the super mutant chamber, grown up of these kid have to travel far to get to big town (with the slaver smack in the middle), a handful of outpost is hardly consider an outpost with the lack of services or people to make it a livable town, the caravan route that always lead to no where, landmark full of raiders and a bunch of prewar foods, vault full of vault dwellers but the Vault they "live" in is beyond functionable/inhabitable, all take place 200 years AFTER the war. These are just a top off my head.

Fallout 3 for me. I like New Vegas plenty, but nothing in it comes close to matching the majesty of the DC ruins, which I could happily spends weeks in just exploring and scavving. Also, whilst fewer in number, I think the Fallout 3 quests are generally more interesting and fun (too many boring fetch quests in Vegas for me), and whilst the main story is perfunctory at best for the most part, it's easy enough to completely ignore while you do your own thing. The main quest in Vegas however, or more specifically the second act, fills me with dread at the mere thought of it, and yet I am drawn inexorably along it whether I like it or not.

(Incedentally, when did the criteria for what a good game is come to include things like "a believable economy" or "plausible socio-economic structures"? I can honestly say I've never been playing, say, Mario 64 and thought "this is good, but you know what'd improve it? In-game representation of the agricultural industry of the Mushroom Kingdom".)

Fallout 3

never had the DLC loading error in fallout 3.

I voted Fallout 3 and here is why...

The glitches were terrible and constant, not unlike Fallout 3, but they were more persistant in NV.

The story in NV was better, but it had less high/low moments and the voice acting in FO3 was far better.

The faction armor was quite annoying given the loading glitches in NV when you open your Pip-Boy

The items in NV were much more varied and useful, but without adjusting the weight limit it bogs down the inventory.

Fallout 3 was just more fun to play for some reason. In NV I have a constant worry of saving all the time, and the best armor in the game (Remnants Power Armor) has so many glitches surrounding your aquisition of it.

The animations in NV are just plain terrible, and thats coming from someone who has accepted GameBryo animations!

New Vegas overdoes the law of threes WAAAYYYY too much

law of threes states:
two is too little, four is too much, three is perfectsauce
however Vegas does this ad nauseam

hey how many main factions are there?; 3

hey I need to collect bounties on fiends, how many?; 3

hey Julie Farkas wants me to do some quests for the followers, how many?; 3

hey how many The Strip Casino Families are there?; 3

hey how many types of components must I fetch fot the BoS to fix their airco?; 3

hey the Tops casino needs new talents, how many?; 3

hey the Atomic Wrangler needs new hokers, how many?; 3

hey the Atomic Wrangler needs me to collect debts, how many?; 3

and the list goes on (but more then three!)

Maybe 3 is their lucky number.

As the Book of Discordia teaches - All things happen in fivesm or are disvisible by or multiples of 5, or are somehow directly or indirectly appropriate to 5. There are 5 endings (NCR, House, Yes Man with Securitron Army, Yes Man with no army, Caesar), You've listed 8 examples - eight is 5 letters long. The Wrangler asks you to get 3 hokers and three debtors and Tony at the tops wants 4 acts 3+3+4 = 10 which is twice 5. The Lucky 38 and Vault 21 are on the strip. 38+21 = 59, 5+9 = 14, 1+4 = 5.

Patterns only exist where you choose to see them.

Nonetheless the pattern is there, whether you see it or not though is down to you, but it still exists does it not? Its what you choose to see or notice thats the real key to it. If you don't see it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Now that you mention it, what do they eat? Are they a society of fungus cannibals? Do they ritually sacrifice Mushroom People and serve them on a steamed platter to the Princess? That's it, I will never play a Mario game again until these issues are resolved!



I feel this too. I have like 20 saves on just my first play-through because there are so many choices that you're just not sure how something is going to turn out sometimes. I had to revert to an older save and lose about 12 hours of playtime because one thing I did completely screwed up the outcome I was looking for, and I thought I was doing the right thing the whole time.

Choices are good, but when they become so convoluted that you're basically playing 'Inception: The Video Game' where you're doing a quest within a quest within a quest with an unclear outcome, it makes you long for the straightforwardness of Fallout 3.



I didn't notice any difference in the animations, but the AI pathing is terrible. Half the time I walk into an area, and people are just walking into walls and sometimes they're all massed together running into each other.

It doesn't mean there's actually a pattern at all, just selectively presented data, or if there is that there is anything behind it.

If I could be bothered, I'm sure I could find 8 or so examples of other numbers being used.

Actually it does mean that, plus you state yourself that you could find more if you could be bothered thus there's more than one existent pattern there which means they exist to be found, they are there and that means they do exist because if they didn't exist you wouldn't be able to find them yet you state you could find more, which means...they're there. They exist, its just a person's perception that negates there existence if they don't see the pattern but still its there existing ready to be found.