So,FNV isn't a open world game ?

Edit : for you ?

Sigh..

Seriously? You just want to argue don't you?

Fine. No, it's not.

If you take a certain route that's on you, not the game. New Vegas lets you go where ever you want just like three but the end result is it's not New Vegas that is the linear one, it's three and three having a different starting path doesn't disprove this.

That mutant infested city in F3 felt pretty steered to me. I remember being slightly annoyed while trying to traverse it due to the rubble forcing me to take a specific path around. Essentially the designers way of preventing me from taking a direct straight route. It was frustrating because I could skip-hop to the top of that rubble and see beyond, but invisible walls would not let me pass. Understandable imo. The designers don't want you to run a straight line to the end goal. Short games are less enjoyable.

Also the subways, featured pretty heavily and by their very nature were very linear, and also necessary to progress through some parts of the story.

I think NV managed that slightly better with its dot to dot quest / plot progression, in which players could always go off the beaten path at any time, and weren't actually physically prohibited from going anywhere, if the players were brave / foolhardy enough. We were more steered via encounter difficulty and quest goals.

Both games are actually about the same imo, they just choose to steer progression slightly differently. F3 via its level / world obstruction design and FNV via its main quest / encounter design.

New Vegas is very linear with it's world design early on, yes you could still head north but it's not designed that way. I personally don't mind areas that are higher in level but I don't like it when it makes the map more linear. I thought Skyrim handled this very well, certain areas had tougher enemies early on and other areas were easier. Could there have been more tough enemies, sure but I felt it worked out in the end.

Fallout 3 was the same, you could go in a number of directions much less linear then New Vegas but you could also get wrecked very hard early on by Yao Guais, Super Mutants, Raiders, etc. I'm hoping it's more like Fallout 3 where you can go in a number of directions but you also have to be careful early on.

You can sneak past the deathclaws by Sloan, either by just being real careful or by using a Stealth Boy easily aquired through the school in Goodsprings.

Or you can simply gather some dynamite and explosive charges from nearby Powder Gangers and kill off the Cazador's to the north.

Or you can go through Hidden Valley and simply dodge the giant radscorpions and run like the wind.

Or you can go through a pass in the mountain which is found by a rail-road pit-stop close to the east of Primm and either cripple the deathclaw (singular) guarding it and easily run past it or simply run like the wind and hope that the one slash it might get in before you get over the ridge (where it won't follow you) won't kill you.

Or you can go up a bit through uh... The super mutants infested mountain who's name I can't remember and simply hop down the mountain side once you're close to Tabitha.

Next time you play FNV, try those paths.

This is the exact reason I preferred NV over FO3, and why I felt it was the real successor to FO2 (apart from the setting).

There are just two bethesda fans. Those who love open world which has a depth of a puddle so they can just walk around and look at things and make own stories, with open endings and those who like a lot of side-quests, deep meaningful stories that effect nations etc.

Hope bethesda has found some middle ground that would be great for both.

I don't like New Vegas but I love Fallout 3. To me NV feels like a linear game and F3 feels like a do as I want game. I like choosing a perk every level and having more skill points to spend. I hope F4 has hardcoe mode for everyone that wants it, as for me I'll play on easy because I still die no matter what my level is in F3.

Judging from the FO4 trailer where the player character actually speaks, it might mean that Bethesda is taking dialogue serious this time.

I think so too. I mean, it's only been discussed on the forums for the past 5 or 6 years. I almost expect it.

I like FO3 more than New Vegas BUT i'm not going to lie

1. New Vegas is an open world game even with it's invisible walls. FO3 had them too they were just up on top of giant rubble piles.

2. 3 forces the main quest on you too because anyone you talk to or any where you go that is attached to the MQ advances it.

3. In 3 if you come face to face with a deathclaw under level 5 your done, or if there is more than one then it doesn't even matter what gear you have your dead.

Neither game is anywhere near as bad as the other side purports it to be.

I want the improvements that NV did as well as the exploration in Fallout 3 - to be in Fallout 4.

Yesterday, I tried to get to Galaxy News Radio with a few guns, a baseball bat and a police baton. Ended up running for my life towards Rivet City. That sort of feeling I got reminded me why I love Fallout 3 so much, despite the setting not exactly making sense.

But when I arrived at Rivet City, the general shallowness of some of the NPCs reminded me why I love NV so much.

Do read the comments on that one.

One said:

Nothing ever is


That must be sarcastic. It must be. Humans are smart, intelligent creatures, and all of them should find "puzzles" like that insulting.

Or that is what i choose to believe, at least

Jesus Christ, how...why...does this video exist?

The diference is simply that New Vegas don't have level scaling, this forces you to pretty much follow one path where the enemies get stronger and stronger.

Fallout 3 and Skyrim uses almost the same level scaling.

Some areas start out with strong enemies, other areas stays easy but it gives far better options.

One idea for Fallout 4 had been to use weapon and armor condition as part of scaling. Then you are level one enemies has junk weapons and armor at perhaps 10%.

As you level up their equipment get in better condition. This has the benefit of letting high level raiders to still be an challenge even if they don't use advanced armor and weapons.

The puzzles was made by nords to keep out other nords.

As few was opened they worked well. They get dumbfounded by curved swords after all.

The puzzles were made to keep the Draugr INSIDE, not other Nords out.

That explanation is dumb. I'm sure you can figure out why.

It isn't really.

Many of these old ruins are family tombs/crypts, putting dangerous puzzles to keep people out only makes it impossible for the family members to go inside themselves and give offers and visiting their dead family members.

However, Draugr themselves are dangerous, and have a tendency to rise at random times. You need something to keep them inside their tombs, else they will wander out and kill/get killed. These are basic things that Draugr can't solve, due to being dead and unthinking, which is why you never see Draugr outside unless their sarcophagus was placed outside.

I understand the logic behind it, it just has few flaws.

Firstly, the puzzle door that requires a specific claw. It usually has draugr on both sides of it. And it's meant to be that way, as there are resting places for them where they sleep, meaning they didn't simply wander out of the final room blocked by that puzzle door. The best solution would be to place that puzzle on the front door.

If you only need the combination, and every claw will fit every door, then it could be wiser to separate the two. The family whose tomb it is could keep the claw safe, and memorize the combination. That way, if a thief steals the claw, he still can't get through the door. But if the door requires both a specific claw and the combination, why not replace them with a single, simple key? If draugr can't pull a lever, could be that they can use keys..? And they're not supposed to be kept out of the final chambers anyways.

And there's always a shortcut out of the final room, and the way out isn't blocked by a puzzle door, or even puzzles. There might be a lever, chain or a plank blocking a door you have to pull, but if draugr can't figure out even those, there's no need for the slightly more complex pillar puzzles, that a 7-year old can solve confidently.

What can the draugr do? They can't solve the pillar puzzles, or the door ones, can't even pull levers. Why not replace the puzzles with levers?

I realize this wasn't very coherent, more like a madman's rambling, but that explanation does bring out a few questions. Only explanation I can accept is this:

The puzzles are meant to keep out 5-year old adventurers, but to allow slightly older kids inside, to get the treasures and glory, and to desecrate someone's ancestry.

edit: and there are dungeons that have draugr (and beds where they sleep until you come in) on the first room, not locked in by anything.

So you're saying some gamers are dumber than thousands of years old undead mummies?

Wait, that should be "as dumb".

Nah, i still rather believe everyone in that video was being sarcastic

You are not forced into that path at all. I have made it to NV straight from Doc Mitchell's.

You can also do many side quests along the way. Like the ones at Camp McCarren. By the time I get to Benny I'm level 10 and am in good standing with the NCR!