I disagree I think Obsidian, Softworks, and Gamebryo are the real culprits of this problem.

Softworks for not delaying the product and allowing it to release with this many bugs :flame: :flame: :flame:

Obsidian for not doing enough to convince Softworks to delay the game :flame:

Gamebryo for being a bug filled engine :flame: :flame: :swear:

This... I felt Obsidian had the better story and lore that makes me want to play New Vegas way more then Fallout 3, so if they kept them on for that then Bethesda did the programming that would be awesome.

I think this is pretty much true. But the bottom line is, to suggest Bethesda completely drop Obsidian because of bugs is silly. Maybe you don't want them because you don't like their style (which is a valid opinion), but not wanting them for technical reasons is not based on reality.

I'm glad somebody holds the same ideas I do...this game lacked a lot of the story telling that FO3 had, I'm glad this was just a spin off, it could have and should have been a lot more. :cryvaultboy:

Wait. What's the protocol here? Someone already "This"ed in the thread. When you "This" something else, shouldn't it be "Thisser" and eventually someone will go all "Thissest"?

-Gunny out.

pfft, [censored]. Obsidian did a great job and I would love to have them making a new game. Well, I would have Bethesda making a new one aswell. The game has it flaws but it is alot of fun and they have probaby learned form their mistakes, so I belive most of the problems you found in FNV would be gone in a future game.

:shrug: I haven't had any major problems with NV. Some glitches, sure, but nothing game-breaking or serious. It's just as good a game as FO3 was to me.

"Don't let Bethesda make it", "Don't let Obsidian make it"... what's left, Interplay, a company http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titus_Software Superman 64, the worst game of all time (not to mention Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel, when they took over Interplay).

Sometimes I wonder if people would really be happy if Fallout never made a comeback at all. :facepalm:

I have no problem with Obsidian making another Fallout if it's more closer to Fallout 3's type of gameplay instead of New Vegas's set items and set enemies regardless of level. I like some of the features that Obsidian added in like Iron Sights mode. My bigger problem is with Softworks, they released New Vegas knowing full well that it was bugged galore instead of delaying it for a couple of months to polish it up. Even then it would be impossible to get rid of all of the bugs but it wouldn't be as big of a mess, instead of 200+ fixes it's only 50.

I prefer New Vegas to 3, looking back on things, I've completed Fallout 3's MQ 4 times, New Vegas' MQ 6 times.

I got Fallout 3 in March 2009, New Vegas the day it was released.

I really have no drive to play Fallout 3 anymore, I enjoy New Vegas much more.

This

This.



Exactly, every single thing is better in Fallout New Vegas.

So it New Vegas lacked a completely 2D story about you being forced into The White Knights of the CW, even if you are the most evil man in the world, to do battle with the bad guys with a giant robot to save some overly complicated machine to purify water when all you need is some dirt and rocks to purify water anyway.

:brokencomputer:

So what if it is a spin off? It is still canon and I am not sure if you know this but... Fallout 3 is also a spin-off because it has absolutely [censored] all to do with Fallout 2. New Vegas has way more to do with Fallout 2 then Fallout 3. I know what you are thinking "But Styles it has the big 3 next to Fallout so therefore it is a sequel." Thing is it does not fit the definition. All it does it take place after Fallout 2. So would that mean New Vegas is a sequel to Fallout 3 simply because it takes place after Fallout 3?

They have an issue with releasing buggy but great games they've admitted that its an isue and that they plan on working on it. Besides the bugs I prefer new vegas to 3 much more balanced and a whole lot more charcter and story, hopefully they'l get subbed out to make the next fallout with the creation engine man the possabilities f what a game it could be with a good engine coupled with good charecters and brilliant writing.

This again!

Fallout 3 was a milestone in what gaming could be. I love that game, everything from the music score to liberty prime.

I agree that NV lacks the epic-ness of 3, and it certainly lacks the post-apocalyptic feel...I mean who are we kidding, in 3 every moment is a fight for survival, while in NV--after awhile you actually have to try hard to find enemies.

But NV does some amazing things, for instance power armor doesn't completely fall apart after a fight with some muties, and light armor practically had no health. Weapon maintenaince was a huge hassle (no jury rigging).
Crafting in NV is awesome, I don't even use stimpacks ever, I survive solely on what I make and I truly feel like a survivalist that way living off the land like that. There are lots of cool weapons from A-Z to play with, unfortunately not too many enemies to use those weapons against.

Tell me what was not biased about that, you are generalizing. If NV is really the s*** then why did 3 win game of year when NV did not? 3 was far better for it's time than NV, NV is more or less the same without the white knights of CW and giant robot. Maybe if if they used skyrim's engine in NV. Then maybe 3 would be out of it's league but it's not. No one said it lacked a 2D story, yea their were more options but it was rushed and lacked caress.

No

^ yes to creation engine

If new vegas had kept the story-quality it has but maybe had the engine of, say, Bioshock2?
I don't think too many people would be complaining.

It's such a shame that a good game gets let down so much by a severely outdated engine.

Another one of these threads? They're getting about as common as people threatening to "never buy another Obsidian or bethesda game ever again" threads.

I'm never ever goi... Ooh a new DLC!

From what I've gathered, if you were a Fallout fan before 3, in general, you'll prefer New Vegas. Being that I have very little problem with bugs in New Vegas unless I put in a pile of Mods (especially any texture replacers, as every time I use one those, be it body replacer or simple textures, I get a 3-fold increase in load times, and start to get program lockups while loading), I'm willing to say that I have no issue on the purely technical side.

On the gameplay side, I find NV to be far superior. The return of DT makes armor count for a lot more...like it did in 1 and 2. I'm still not satisfied with the treatment of Power Armor, though. +1 strength for wearing a powered exoskeleton designed for use on the battlefield? I'd personally say +2 for T-45d, +3 for T-51b, +4 for APA/APA2. Having your soldiers be able to tear a heavy door off it's hinges, or push a vehicle aside (or flip it over) without using up explosive ordinance is a battlefield asset. Particularly in urban environments. Removing leveled enemies and returning to the F1/F2 system of placed enemies is also an improvement in my book. I don't want to have to wonder how the citizens of a town survive those level 20 raiders and molerats. For that matter, I don't want to have to try and explain a level 20 molerat. What did it do, complete all of it's digging for roots quests? In both games, I'm pleased that you can loot your enemies of their gear. I can't count the number of times in the old games that I'd gank someone because I really wanted their Combat Armor, and not be able to loot it, even though I killed them with a bare hand strike to the eyes, or a precise blast to the eyes from my laser. I always tried to explain that away as it not being in my size...but then I couldn't explain why I wouldn't take that expensive armor to sell it. I like how Reputation and Karma are seperate in NV...like they were in 1 and 2.

As for the storytelling? I find NV to be leagues beyond 3. Three was rather forced, and had multiple things that just didn't really make a lot of sense. NV still has some forced stuff, but not nearly as blatant. Furthermore, the setting is far more believable in NV. For example - there is no reason Little Lamplight should have survived. NONE. With how rude those brats were, and them kicking everyone out when they got too old, it should only have been a matter of time before raiders or supermutants or Talon Company found out where they were, and paid them a very, very unwelcome visit. And their gates wouldn't mean squat against a couple good grenades, or an angry supermutant. And lets not forget how close to the supermutants those kids really were. You know, sitting on the path to the back door to their base. That's just one example of the mindboggling things in 3.

I don't want an FPS arena. I want a world to play in. NV delivered that. And I don't miss Leveled Spawns. Sorry, but a group of powder gangers in full combat armor mkII wielding AMRs, Miniguns, Plasma Casters, Gatling Lasers, and Super Sledges hanging out just outside Goodsprings...purely because I reached a certain level?! It's nonsense, and I'm glad it's not here.

I noticed that the vast majority of people who played the first two games love New Vegas. Don't get me wrong, I love the story and how there are so many factions...but you have to admit that fallout 3 feels so much more post-apocalyptic.