I know Obsidian is coming out with the Full add-on content which means probably no more DLC. But New Vegas had four DLC(expansion pack) and Fallout 3 had five. Obsidian should make a Broken Steel type DLC that the story is after the main game, extend gameplay and create backstory for The Courier. maybe 10-15+ hours with new characters,clothing, companions and weapons and perks.

Obsidian has said that they won't make a Broken Steel type DLC.

It would be extremely difficult to do this, given the four factional endings, and it would also potentially go against the ending cinematic you get. It's rather silly to tell the player what happens over the next few years and then give them a chance to screw that up.

All good stories have a beginning, a middle, and an end.

Broken Steel ruined Fallout 3.

Here is how.

The idea behind project purity was to instantly give everyone in DC clean pure water. It was to make all the water in the Tidal Basin and Potomac River. Instead the BoS end up running it, sending the water out in barrels, making everyone slaves to the BoS if they want clean water.

Since project purity was going to instantly clean up all that water, the Enclave saw it as chance to kill all the mutations in DC with their water born modded FEV. It would have turned DC wasteland into "A Graveyard." This doesn't end up happening with Broken Steel.

This makes the Enclave's plot in Fallout 3 pointless. Which means there was no point for the Enclave being in Fallout 3 and therefore the whole plot of Fallout 3 was pointless.

Enclave manage to destroy Optimus Prime with a super space weapon that for some reason they didn't have, when the BoS attacked Project Purity. No matter what you do, the Enclave get destroyed.

Yeah I know there area lot of "gamers" out there that couldn't give a crap about a logical and coherent plotline. No many just want more stuff to shoot and loot

The only way to have play after the end is to scrap the ending just like Fallout 3 did and that would destroy the main plot and story of New Vegas.

There will be no Broken Vegas for New Vegas or any other DLC.


This ^

Broken Steel was awesome. Fallout 3 had a bad ending not plot wise but how it ends. Broken Steel fix that so there is a point to buy the other DLC. With NV, it's like you beat it and you just trade it in a week later.

No.
Good stories (AND GAMES) have a beginning, middle, and end.

The ending was the only good thing about F3's story, it was the ultimate sacrifice for the good of the people of the CW.

BS ruined F3 and a NV DLC like that would be worse.

And its called 'replaying' a game once you beat it, making different choices. Don't just return it.

Fallout 3 had a better story than New Vegas. Hince why it won GOY and most people believe best game ever. Also, The Enclave's presence in the game isn't pointless in fact it captures the "there is more to the story than just you and finding your dad".

How did BS ruin it? You build your character up to not be able to do anything with him/her after? Bethesda made the right move with BS, most people would agree.

F3 had some REALLY bad writing.

I agree with the idea of the Enclave being pointless but I disagree about stories, NV had a better story.

The writing, background, and motivations in NV were very real unlike F3 which had really good background about people right after the Great War but terrible written characters two centuries later.

You can do ANYTHING for as long as you want with your character if you do not play the final mission. You can play for years without finishing the questline, exploring every location, selling every piece of scrap metal, and buying every bullet in the game. But the endgame quest is just that, the end.

Actually most people disagree, BS ruined F3's ending by making your last, main choice pointless with the virus only killing you for some reason.

So because more people like it, its better?

Billions of flies eating poop can't be wrong, must be the best food ever.

The Enclave don't make sense in Fallout 3 because their plan was negated by Broken Steel. The whole idea behind project purity was negated by Broken Steel. The game is full of plot holes and it is a pure good vs evil game and you can't join the bad guys.

You can believe it has a better story, that's your opinion but please don't use crap like game rating and "It got GOTY" to try to prove one game is better than the other. It has no credibility with me. Just means you care more about what other people think and you aren't able to form your own opinion. That graphics and things that go boom are more improtant then plot and story.

Fallout is a series that tells a story with each game. Each game has many out comes based on how you play the game. The next game tells us what is canon by confirming details of the last one. It isn't a never ending anything goes sandbox TES game. If you don't like games that end why buy the game?

Why make this topic in the first place? Did you think if just one more person complained Obsidian would crack and make a Broken Steel DLC for New Vegas? Its been said a million times that it isn't going to happen.

The "sacrifice" at the end of FO3 was [censored] given that there were no less than TWO companions who were pretty much immune to radiation. And Broken Steel was even worse. "We'll all remember his noble sacrifice, O WAIT, HE'S NOT DEAD LOL."

Two were completely immune (RL-3 and Charon) and one was mostly immune (Fawkes).

And you are correct, it is ridiculous.

How was the story better?

Was it the complete lack of player choice?

Was it the black and white/good vs evil factions in the game?

Was it the fact that you couldn't even help or interact with the Enclave if you wanted to?

Was it the lack of actual role-playing in the game, did you like that the story line was linear?

I don't see anything about Fallout 3's story line (especially with Broken Steel) that makes it better than New Vegas.

i agree that there shouldnt be one but a previous poster was wrong about the space weapon they for some reason didnt have. yes they didnt have it but if you adventured in fallout you can actually activate the space missiles yourself. all the enclave had to do was find one. which they did and lure the robot to one of the landing sites for the missiles. yahhhh..... and i agree just let it end. too many faction endings they wuld have to do too much. let new vegas rest. skyrims king now. and that will remain til fallout 4. you want them to put time into fallout 4 i assure you that. its going to be BALLIN.

I said it was stupid that they had the weapon and didn't use it before Broken Steel. Why would they let Optimus Prime take back project purity? They don't do anything until Broken Steel. Also not matter what you do.. the Enclave get destroyed. So its just bad writing.

In your opinion, you say NO. Like it's fact, but tbh I don't want a BS for NV, but BS did make Fallout 3 better, it's ending did svck, cause it was without warning, but hey that's just my opinion.....

He was stating an opion and didn't say it was fact.

Also the ending svcked because there was no warning? I believe it svcked because we had companions that could easily go into the radioactive room and turn on project purity. Yet we are only given two options. We go in and die, or send in Sarah. That and the game is total good vs evil and we didn't get any info about what happens to the people and places we interacted with. We did get some info about how the Enclave turn DC into a graveyard, but thats about it.

New Vegas has a warning and its common knowledge that the game ends just like all Fallout games do, and people still wine and cry and have the mother of all temper tantrums that the game ends. Thinking that some how Fallout is just a spin-off of the TES series or something.

Man you two are in every thread to agree with one another lol, and to me sating NO. < full stop, it's like ~No. anything you said is invalid if he was like Sorry but I disagree and here is why, yeah that's more like an opinion pal, but anyway, what companions, they were based on choice, I for one don't use companions, so what companions can go into the machine for me? None is what, and I never played a Fallout before 3 my friend, so it's not common knowledge, more ignorance from you once again pal, though yes lot's of people whine about it, but this guy was enquiring, though a year later is a little late to enquire after the 400+ threads about NV BS. but hey can't slant a guy for wondering, and generally it svcked with no warning, I remember the first time I finshed it, I was like TEH FU???!!! But I still to this day get more enjoyment out of FO3 GOTY than NV and all it's DLC, but that's just me, not slanting NV it's brilliant, but that had some poor elements too, as do all games, maybe it's writing was better, but even on better writing some of the characters were hard to get attached too, much harder than the likes of Gob and Jericho, and Whinthrop, I just couldn't get down with any NCR NPC they just annoyed the crap outt'a me, y'know'?

It was easy to pick up and discard followers in Fallout 3 because they had no substance to them. General meat shield/pack mule robots do come in handy though if that is all you care about. Fallout 3 was BGS's first attempt at a game focusing on role playing instead of sandbox messing around. I give them some slack for botching the story and I can imagine that Fallout 4 will either have less focus on story flexibility or they will try damned hard to make it an RPG.

I am glad that NV does not have a BS add-on and there will be no more DLC for it because the contract with Obsidian only carried through 4 DLC packages.

Point is there are companions. If you don't use them, fine but the option should have been there. You free Fawkes from is cell that he's been in for a very long time. He tells you he will do anything for you. "Hey Fawkes can you go into that room and turn on project purity?" "I'll do anything for you but I won't do that." paraphrasing.

So you don't do any research on a game before you play it? After you played Fallout 3, you didn't think to check that New Vegas also end or not? (Open question, so not directed at you DD) I can understand being upset that Fallout 3 ended. But I don't see why people wanted there to be no ending. Or why they complain that Fallout New Vegas also ends. Fallout is a series were the games end. They tell a story. Each adding more info as they come out.

There are people that say they couldn't "get into Fallout New Vegas" as well, until they played the Originals and had a better understanding. Even though the game was intended to be made so that you didn't have to play the originals. Many on here and believe it or not many of the "Dinosaurs" started with Fallout 3 and then played the Originals.

People can have a way of stating opinions with passion and it can seem like they are trying to pass their opinions off as fact, but you just have to role with it. If they say "you are wrong and heres why" without providing facts, then yeah that's going to far. But Sebor didn't do that.

1: Or in my case, New Vegas -> FO -> FO2 -> crushing depression FO3. Does that make me a dinosaur? If so, I'm going to enjoy this...xP

2: Yeah, I can see that. I agree with you & Sebor13 because I view RPGs as games where the player writes a story about the character. Even the greatest story must end, ere it grows dull and pointless. FO3 was a massive disappointment even without BS for me because of that, & when I loaded BS, I quit on the game when I figured out what BS did.

-Nukeknockout

Fallout 3 was my first Fallout game, I still haven't played 1, 2, Tactics or BoS, but I might one day. When I played through Broken Steel I really enjoyed it because not having played a game like Fallout 3 before I was disappointed that the story ended. I even remember defending it on these forums when I first came on, but now I'm really glad that they didn't make a similar one for New Vegas. The story of Fallout 3 compared to New Vegas is pretty sub-par, but I'm still kind of glad that they made a DLC that allowed you to continue on from that disappointing ending so you could choose your own ending. In retrospect(because I haven't played it for a while) the clearly defined moral lines were and the forcing you of working for the BoS against the Enclave was definitely the wrong move for Bethesda, but when it really comes down to it I really loved exploring the Capital Wasteland, without thinking about this linear(and as was said sub-par) story so I could admire the things that Bethesda did really well.

This being said I am so glad they haven't made a Broken Steel type DLC for New Vegas because the story, characters and dialogue are all just too good for that. For this story to have any meaning it has to end.

Note: As I have said many times on these forums, this is my personal opinion.

How about Fallout: New Vegas: Resolutions, then? Instead of ending the story with on a narrow rail of quests that lead to a single end, you unlock a series of content according to what the end movie would have shown and what you have done in the game. Clean up problem areas, make up for your sins, or make things worse for the people you already hate, such as the remnant legion and the idiotic powder gangers. Oh, what fun to track and round them up and trail-of-tears them back to Nipton where they will be allowed to 'hang around.'

Answer important questions, such as a funny and tragic story to why Baldie let you go into that bunker and not bother to check later to see that you did the opposite of what he asked. Obsidian is good with interweaving story between areas, but this way shouldn't be that burdening for them because they wouldn't be pressed to tie everything together so tightly. In other words, a sandbox of things you can do to improve / make worse the world and society with no main story. An afterglow. All previous DLC required and bundled into an Ultimate Edition.

Would you buy it?