I loved FO3 but the ending was pretty weak. Hopefully they do something epic for NV. I wonder if there will be a special ending for beating hardcoe mode.

i doubt there will be a special ending for hard core mode. the core game is going to remain the same, its just going to add a few things that will make the game more immersive, but also more difficult.

there are many different endings. and the guys who made the original fallouts are making this one. so the story should be better

From what I've heard, it's going to be like the first two games, where you find out the consequences of your actions on all the settlements and factions you encountered. So yes, it's going to be better than the ending of FO3.

They have said that depending on many many things you do and choose throughout the story the ending can be different. They dont specify on how different. Like in Fo3 (without BS), the only choice u had was you or Sara. I think for them it will be more like, who you kill at the end, where, and why. All those could be different depending on what faction you side with, and what things you do within them.

Agreed with all above posts. They give you an ending that is based on your actions unlike Fallout 3 where it was more three-sided. Then you have a long cutscene after that. IMO, it's a lot better than FO 3's ending.

Yes. The ending to FO3 was awful. In New Vegas apparently the original team members from the first two Fallouts brought back the slideshow endings that told you how all your actions had effected the world and places you had been in detail.

Just check out one person's http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCmZySvYiXk to Fallout 2 based on their personal choices in the game. I hope to see the return of this level of detail to the ending of New Vegas.

I liked the ending of Fallout 3. It's people who can't appreciate good narrative who balk at it.

The Lone Wanderer grows up in a vault, learning the virtues of compassion, mercy, and justice in a world where these have been all but abandoned. In the end, he sacrifices himself to purify the tainted waters of the Earth so that others can drink of it. Martyrdom to cleanse the world of man's evil deeds. Sound like somebody you may have heard of? That's right, the Lone Wanderer is Jesus.

It would have been a great story if I were watching a movie or reading a book. But as a game narrative, it just railroads you. You have few meaningful choices to make during its entirety.

The martyrdom at the end wasn't necessary. It was forced on you for "dramatic impact". Anyone that played the game prior to Broken Steel knows how screwed up it was. You were likely to have Fawkes, the conscripted ghoul companion, or a robot companion with you, all who could safely enter the chamber and input the code without dying. Instead, when asked, each told you it was your destiny. The game was forcing you to die, regardless of the fact that Fawkes had done essentially the exact same favor for you just a little while prior in retrieving the GECK.

And if you chose to draw straws with Lyons to enter the chamber, like any normal two people would, and she ends up going into the chamber, the game calls you a selfish monster. And even with Broken Steel, where they fixed the companion issue, if you use one them to enter the code, like Fawkes, the game ending still berates you with "but the son did not learn the lesson of sacrifice from his father". [censored] you. I'm not martyring myself for your dramatic purposes no matter how much you want it game!

Bethesda even admits that they started writing the story with the ending scene in mind, which explains why everything went wrong with the story. In an open world game supposedly built on players' choices and consequences, you can't put a single definitive ending in place and force everything towards that one inevitable ending. Bethesda left no breathing room.

Anyone that has played a pen and paper RPG with a DM or GM more concerned with telling their grand epic story than creating and guiding players in their own narrative knows what I am talking about.

I'm finished. Like I said, in any other medium, the story would have been great, but it wasn't one suited for an interactive medium. And how about this for a shocker? I don't want to be Jesus.

You could nuke megaton, massacre underworld, cast anarchy and bedlam in your wake....but chose to suicide at the end and it would give you the "good" martyr ending.

I will cry if it ends similar to 3.....I want to explore, dammit....
NOt die horribly and never see my efforts come to fruition until a year later with some expensive DLC....>:/

There is no exploration after the end of the game. The game ends and brings you back to the start menu. It's been confirmed multiple times.

Just as long as the game dont end like fallout 3 , i will be happy .

:'(

Why, befesda?
WWWWWWHHHHHHYYYYYYY!!!!?????!!!!?!?!??!?!?!???!?!?!!!!??!?!?!???!!!?!!!!???!?!?

The ending to FO3 was definitely anti-climatic.

To my guess would be, they want you to spend more time playing the game instead aiming to finish the game.
Like in the video, they say there a point where it autosave the game before the final ending so you can load the game and go back to doing whatever before the ending :hubbahubba:

HAHA thats an understatement I didn't even know it was the ending until Ron Perlman started talking and i'm like oh that was weak.

Eloquent, i can't even think of anything to add.

The main story in FO3 was pretty stupid. It's been 200 years since the war, how could people possibly survive for that long without clean water and food? They should have set it much earlier in the FO timeline. If the game had been set 30 or 40 years after the war, then the situation in the DC area would make a lot more sense.

If I remember correctly, I think we will get a question asking if we want to load the pre-end autosave after the final credits have rolled. As something was mentioned about the gave automatically creating a save just before the point of no return.

and physically impossible, the mutation couldnt have taken hold, so there goes all the mutants, mole rate, giant ant, death claws, gouls, and every thing else, the radiation would be so horrible that you would be goulified in 13 seconds, and civilization wouldnt be as prevalent.

All true. But then, again, this is typical for Bethesda. Their games may offer a lot of exploration and so forth, but when it comes to the main quest, they've always been a bit http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?cat=14-ish, because there isn't much choice about it...



There's at least some clean food and water around - just not in abudance. And of course, people may simply have adapted to worse living standards. But above all - it's fiction. A real post-apocalyptic world would probably not have stuff ssuch as radscorpions, feral ghouls and so forth in it, would it?