Except the fact that it gives more reason to play the game before the end, and, isn't that what most are complaining about?

Sorry guys, no way am I going to read 8 pages of angry mob. Just gonna drop a quick line, you can return the favor by not reading it.

I'm gonna assume the MQ is very long and sends you pretty much all over the world. But yea, I don't like it kicking me out of the sandbox.

I just liked the fact that i can complete everything in F3 and still be able to explore every corner in the game. i assume you will still be able to, but with a dlc again. I basically like to keep my character and explore the wasteland, and i'm on console so i cant just get a mod to keep playing. So why not just play the game after the ending? There is always stuff to do in the game you have well over 100 hours of gameplay to complete all side quest and explore everything.

This just makes me think it is going to be the same type of ending as vanilla F3. Again i am still optimistic. If it is going to be awesome then i am just talking crap after a long day.

So what? Then I'll just do what I did in FO3 until I had my GOTY edition, wait with the main quest. The first game had a definitive ending, the second one only had a "poke around a bit" part without much to do.

Just my opinion on it. I still had quiet a bit to do before the end of F3. I'm just stating that i liked being able to explore after i beat the game is all.

I don't like it that this is what they're doing but I'm happy they at least warned us.

Ok posted this much earlier.
Posted Today, 02:42 AM

I have argued a lot since joining this forum about having a ending. And all most can say is "But I want to play more". Its a roleplaying game create a new character and play some more without all the equipment. Which a lot also complained about. Hating godlike characters this should solve that as well.
DLC's well keep a save or make a new pc. I have to pay for a dlc no if you dont like the game you dont. If you do like the game. YOU WILL WANT to buy the add on so whats the problem?

This post has been edited by Madocmayhem: Today, 02:44 AM


So from someone who has always wanted an ending because a story based game demands it. What is the furor about other than "obsidian have made an effort to give us all we wanted, But they just wanted the freedom to create a story without interference from the fans and end it as they see fit""


FO3's only unique feature was that you did/could die at the end. It was not the ending that I hated just the main quest in general.
I just finished everything I could find then started again and found some more end of problem!

money maybe one reason
the reason maybe that the xbox360 has no blueray
so that extra content would not fit on a xbox360 HD cd-rom
i not yet a had a ps3 game on more than one blueray cd

I don't really think that there will be any DLC for this game so in that case nobody will be ripped off. As we all know the game is developed by Obsidian and unlike Bethesda their games are not open ended but always have a definitive ending.

My issue is that the DLC that is added to end a story but as well let you play on, is not nearly as interesting as the ending that forces you to die or stop playing or just ends. Broken Steel was a great DLC but it carried on the ending and basically said that this DLC was the ending which the Broken Steel ended with you destroying a mobile base crawler whereas the original ended with you killing president Eden and activating the purifier. Which was more climatic than Broken Steel's ending. So what I want is an ending if in DLC even better than the original if you know what I am saying.

This doesnt really bother me, i tend to clean up and finish games before i reach the end of the story anyway.

It doesnt negatively affect my experience, i just start over and roleplay a new character who takes a completely different path, that way i get to see more of the game from a totally different perspective. I always thought that the fun of RPG's came in the actually roleplay and interations, not aimlessly wandering around. Id rather roleplay than eLARP

Actually, now that I thought about it... This might just be another sign of Obsidian ending the game better than Beth. Over 9000 endings my rear, if Obsidian closes New Vegas like BI did the classic games I'm perfectly fine with the game ending.

I OK picked this is alright, but i dont approve it. I dont approve of it, but its easy to bypass, just wait for them to release it and then do the last quest, or just find out the ending and then reload old save :shrug:, hopefully this means that we are going to a lot of dlc, which is a plus. I dont mind, as long as they evel cap it to thirty before the dlc im ok.

I don't like this fact either, in fact I hated the idea that they would "end" a game that should be endless until the player chooses to stop.

Gah - why did they do this again? Like you I'll have to stop at some point in the main quest and not end the game until I'm ready - I just thought they would have considered the feedback from Fo3 more, this was very unpopular and NV is gonna take a ton of heat for doing the same silly thing.

But none the less, I applaud you for how cool you have been under fire in this thread FTW. Professional posts all!

Miax

Don't understand all the fuss, really.
Would I have liked the game ending to be like Fallout 2 (including different reaction from characters etc.) ? Yes.
Am I disappointed? Honestly, not much.
I'll just make a quicksave before the ending sequence.
Geez.

By the way, the game is confirmed to have multiple endings, since someone was doubting it, and in the same interview!

Same here. And, infact, I'm happy about a conclusive ending. Makes me feel like I've actually accomplished something. And more over, I wouldn't have played after the ending anyhow.

That said, the notion of "We don't do that in the core game" sounded to my ear like there could be an unlockable freeplaymode of sorts - and, with a risk for repeating myself from previous threads, I think it would be only logical if it was unlocked after completing the game in hardcoe as I personally don't see anything else worth advertising as "a treat" for those who do complete the game that way. Just a thought, though.

While I dont particularly mind it ending, I would prefer that it continued. Personally I am playing Fallout 3 right now and I am 14 hours into this character and havent even touched the main quest, so I only need to beat it three or four times then just play around with mods.

I agree, i didn't see what people's problems with Fallout 3's ending was either. You can't always get an ending that lets you carry on, it's like asking for a movie to carry on when it ends. It's silly.

I am happy Multiple endings and an overall ending. I can see the point to some people wanting to continue to some extent. But I like most here I presume have played FO3 so many times with so many characters. That carrying on with one character becomes a moot arguement. Having not missed a thing (or at least a thing I have not heard or read about).

And if the game didn't run unless you inserted more quarters, you might have a point. But FO3 ran fine without BS. (Personally, I think it ran better, because it screwed up a number of minor things like game balance)

Ending FO3 didn't erase the files from your drive so that you couldn't run it again until you bought the "unlock game" DLC.




Why?

Seriously, why?

All this ranting about something people don't know any details of. No-one knows *how* the "story ends". No one knows if it's satisfying, if it's dumb, if it even leaves any possibility for the story continuing, etc.

All baseless knee-jerk ranting.

/sigh

(I'm reminded of the people who fill up game forums with "the new Final Fantasy will svck" when all that's been released is "hey, we're making a new one!")




And this is the most frustrating part! Fallout 3 was like that! Without any DLC!

All you had to do was not finish the final stage of the final quest, and you were free to wander endlessly until you chose to stop.

And "immersion" arguements don't hold any water, because nearly every RPG has the same silly "oh, there's a dire threat that will destroy us all immediately! Go stop it quick! Oh, but feel free to spend three months doing sidequests first. No rush."



-------
Edit: And, you know... it doesn't help that the guy who made the poll wrote "Mad - I don't want to pay to be able to play the game." for the negative response. It's a biased choice that implies things that can't be proven and/or personal opinion. It's leading.

(Kind of like those impossible political survey questions like "When did you stop beating your wife".)

[censored]. Not good.

Hmmm this is really open to opinion and personal perception. For me and alot of folks there was a sense of incompleteness when we couldn't finish the main quest and then explore the aftermath. Certainly we all did exactly as you describe - finish the game, reload an earlier save and continue on.

By contracts the ending of Broken Steel was great for me, the main tasks complete I could go out and just explore and enjoy the changes to the world as a result of my actions. The "immersion" was better for me in this case. Given the volume of complaints about the Fo3 ending when the game came out, I'm not alone in this view but nor does that make my view "correct". In actual fact there is no correct answer, the game makers are doing what they want to do and some people will love it, some will not. Its not a "game changer" for me by any means!

Miax

I feel J.E. Sawyer is a god to me now because he answered my prayer on this. So much so I will get a six change and become his [censored]. If he decreed it.
Come on who really is not going to buy this game just because of an ending?
Or are people just acting spoilt because they did not get everything they wanted, And trying to force a late overhaul with possible delay issues to make them happy over an issue thats meaningless?

Bah, I really don't get all the fuss (nor did I with FO3). I prefer the game to have an ending if it means a more epic story with some closure. If it meanders on pointlessly until you get bored, that's a pretty anticlimactic end to the courier's tale. Not having an ending can hamper the devs' ability to tell a good story.

I am happy to take the main quest at my own pace, finish it when it seems natural for my character, see the big finale, and then if I want to roam around some more with the same character, I reload my last save before the end and go on my way.

I'm more interested in trying the game again with a different type of character than just wandering the gameworld forever with a maxed out character who has no quests left to do. Once your character has done everything else, the open-ended fetch quests at the end of BS are not compelling enough to make a never-ending game. I've spend several hundred hours exploring the Capitol Wasteland, but it's more fun when you are within the context of the game's story (even if you are ignoring the main quest for a while).

I myself am a colsole player, and I have recently bought the Fallout 3 GOTY edition and the bugs are unbelievable so I am hoping that Bethesda will fix these in NV and the Broken Steel Add On was a significant downward path on the Fallout 3. So I plan on RENTING Fallout NV and checking out the game and (if any) bugs. I will complete a game of Fallout/Elder Scrolls size in about 4 days so if the game is any good, I will be checking ratings on IGN.com etc to see what the possiblilty is of a GOTY edition in 2011. But the fact of having a conclusive ending is an unbelievable money scheme, and because consoles don't support mods, I will have to pay ￡50/￡70 for the GOTY edition. Definate anger inducer for me... :banghead: