Not to turn this into a Console vs PC / Pirates discussion (please dont)

But its the percieved threat of Pirates, and Cash cow that is consoles (60$ a pop a game what?) that have Devs making more games for Consoles, I can't even tell when a worthwhile Media Pasty PC exclusive ever came out Consoles get alot of the love and the only saving grace I feel for PC is its Superior hardware and Game modability (when that game is modable)

So, you haven't had to upgrade your PC in years...are you're running DX11? As posted earlier, that's a fairly invalid point. Crysis may look pretty but it's gameplay is completely mediocre.

Its gameplay is not the point, it is the tech limitations of the consoles. Butt hurt? gameplay is a matter of opinion, it was better then most linear , endless spawning enemies, shooters relased on console.. It allowed for a plethora of ways to play.

What this man said.

If this were the Steam forums you would be getting +rep-bombed from me.

I think you need to entertain the idea that we passed the threshold a few years back where futher improvement to graphics don't really matter to most gamers anymore. Any game that comes out now is going to have sufficiently sophisticated graphics that users aren't focusing on the graphics but only the game.

Honestly, more sophisticated graphics than we enjoy now start to tug at the edges of photorealism and its uncanny valley. I personally prefer going cartoonish and using more of a graphical style. Team Fortress 2, for example, has achieved a flawless visual presentation in my opinion - adding more polygons would do nothing to improve the graphics, because the art style is already faithfully rendered.

This is especially important when we're talking about games that dabble in intense violence and gore. The more photorealistic the graphics get, the smaller the population of gamers is that will be interested in seeing that violence portrayed realistically. Most sane people are not particularly interested in spending each evening simulating as realistically as possible a decapitation spree, for example.
And that's where consoles sit right now. Gamers aren't screaming for new consoles because they don't see the graphical presentation of their current one as flawed. So much so in fact, that the top selling console for the last several years, the Wii, has the lowest graphical capability among this generation of consoles.

I forgot the other parrallel:

FO3 required you to get a GECK in order to complete the water purifier.
FO2's story started with you needing to secure a GECK for the survival of your tribe.

There is MORE in common between the first two stories than not. In fact, I'm struggling to see the originality of the FO3 story aside from the 'Have you seen a middle-aged man?' section. :facepalm:

Even that I could stretch into being 'duplicated' by FO3:
FO3's story starts with you looking for a family member.
FO2's second half of the story starts with you looking for your extended family members (tribe).

Too much of a stretch?

This is all about testing... A few people can not test and break a game like the millions of people that are playing it now. Thats why there are beta's for multiplayer games so players can break the game for the developers and they can fix any problems prior to release. But its not really possible to beta test a single player game. Especially one as long as Fallout. It's just not logical. Every game is gonna have a bug and the bigger the game the more the bugs. Even Fallout 3 had its fair share of bugs. Don't blame this on the developer or the publisher.

Nah. All you need to do is look at the UI of Oblivion and Fallout 3 to know that they were primarily made for consoles. Morrowind, on the other hand, was primarily made for PC and ported to Xbox later, with no UI changes (other than mapping stuff to controller buttons).

And I'm sorry to tell you all, but Fallout 3 was not that good. It really only received so much praise for being titled "Fallout 3", and along with that being the first "non-spinoff" Fallout game in some odd years. FONV didn't get all those extra oohs and aahs because FO3 already took them just a couple years ago for the aforementioned reasons.

All I know is the game better work. I'm getting the vanilla version in an hour...can't take any more disappointments.

All I'm going to say.


There are no exterior shadows.

Not mentioned in OP's post was the huge font used for all the written stuff. I guess you can read it easily across the room on an old TV, but it reminds me too much of the old people version of books.

One thing porting to consoles has done to Bethesda is removing the mini map from Morrowind. I liked that map, but that level of detail, I guess, doesn't work well on consoles.

For many, many years at least several games were made on most popular game engines. It's only been fairly recently that people expect a groundbreaking new engine every time a game is released. You're either fairly young or have a short memory.


DX10 doesn't add much to the experience, and DX11 is so new that very few games are using it and most gamers don't have the hardware to take advantage anyway. You're way over reacting to the DX version.


This I agree with.


I'm about 18 hours in and have only seen very minor bugs...same as I expect from any Gamebryo game.


Not seeing this issue.


So far I'm finding the quality of almost everything to be higher than that of Fallout 3. I strongly disagree with this sentiment.


Yeah, it does show. The characters in NV are actually interesting, I feel like it's my story rather than some cheesy movie being spoon-fed to me, and I'm given a ton of choices that actually have weight. If NV is the TV spin-off then the TV series is more interesting than the movie in my opinion.

Let me show you guys what I am talking about.

Misplaced eyeballs:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q24grxb9RHg

Moonwalking dog:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sMa-CGhXahw

Invisible computers (I love the looks they give you):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdWq722GkZw

Head in ceiling:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=enw_SrsPfNA

And my personal favorite:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ToKIkw3LIoQ

These are seriously funny to watch, but it does back up my point.

Bugs are a fact of life in modern gaming. Videogames have become more complex, super-expensive to make the biggest ones, and there are too few beta testers. While unfortunate, the best way to spot bugs is through the sheer weight of numbers. I made an earlier topic that asked if demos might be a way to get large numbers of people to find bugs, but no one replied with their opinions, so I guess it wouldn't work for finding the bugs before release.


In any case, the value of New Vegas is in Obsidian's storytelling capabilities, not their technical expertise with the engine. Obsidian tends to get stuck with aging and somewhat creaky engines, so it isn't surprising for them to get a reputation of bugs. Hopefully, they will secure alliances with companies that have good engines and are willing to let Obsidian to perform their magic. I am kind of hoping that Bohemia Interactive asks Obsidian to do some storytelling for an Real Virtuality 4 engine game. That is because their engines are really good at simulating huge tracts of land, AI, and has all kinds of vehicles to play with - which might be a good foundation for Obsidian to work with. Bohemia Interactive could really use an alliance with a non-simulation videogame developer, since Bohemia itself specializes in military simulation, which limits it to a niche, Getting someone who can help them expand into other areas of the market, or to increase the appeal of their niche would be very useful to the videogame industry, I feel.

it might be a port, but most professional review sites agree the game is better for PC.

I couldn't have said it any better.

No. Not even close. The games are dumbed down and made easy because a controller is a terrible shooter interface. You cannot spin and headshot enemies, accurately track moving targets while shooting them and a host of other weaknesses. Microsoft actually did open up console/pc multiplayer games but had to shut that down as even a fool with a mouse and keyboard could own almost any controller user.

I am enjoying FNV as a shooter. It's a chore shooting enemies many times in the head but it's good practice. I will not use the babies tool VATS so it's kinda tough in spots. This on hardcoe hard.

I play Salker otherwise and it's relaxing strolling through this pleasant landscape with fairly easy monsters and opponents. Great fun in Vegas too. The voice acting is the best I have ever experienced in a video game. I listened to that sick Legion commander who sacked Nipton a few times he was so cool.

Are there any actual weapons in this game? I'd kinda like an assault rifle please. With a a scope, you know, execution machine. It's all I use in Stalker and I'd feel better if I had one. Then I would not have to pull the damn trigger a million times a day.

I have Fallout: New Vegas on PS3. In the 30+ hours I have already put into the game, I've only had 2 freezes. One of them I got stuck in a loading loop, the second one I was walking and the game froze. I had a radscorpion kind of get stuck in the environment early on. It kept appearing for a split second then disappearing, and was chasing me but I couldn't attack it and it couldn't attack me. That is all I have had happen so far. Runs just great on my slim PS3. I think a lot of people like to come on forums and exaggerate their problems, and hear themselves whine.

then maybe you should look at those *exaggerated* bugs in the youtube links provided in the previous page.

Pretty well what I have experienced on my PC really. Not bad although I've lost maybe 10 hours to the save bug. It's pretty good for brand new really. I've only seen the floating thing on some settler/thug gibs in Freeside.

i knew this game was going to have issues when i got it cause i originally was going to wait for the first big patch............but i couldnt wait any longer. from a gameplay perspective this game is nearly perfect and surpasses FO3 in difficulty, quests influencing the world around you, they added things from popular mods like weapon kits and eat/drink/sleep and other things ive noticed as well. im finding so much stuff to do in this game im kind of overwhelmed and the enemies are not pushovers like they were in FO3. the formerly useless attributes like charisma are VERY important now especially if you use companions. they also werent kidding about taking awhile to get to vegas. currently im running all over creation to find a stupid speech magazine cause im a couple of points short for a speech challenge. in FO3 i would simply look up the form id and punch it in the console, but this game makes me WANT to search all over the place for it and not use the console. maybe its simply cause im playing it through but i have a feeling that this game will still be amazing when i make my next character who will have high charisma, speech and intellegence and side with the legion as sort of an evil mastermind.

however, from a technical perspective this game is an abysmal travesty. the engine looks like utter crap. im not just referring to the limitations of consoles cause there are console games out there that look much better than gamebryo. i had to revert to an earlier driver cause when i updated to the latest ones (nvidia) i started crashing every 10 minutes. i was crashing earlier but only about once every couple of hours. while i applaud obsidian for addressing many gameplay issues i really am disappointed that they didnt have a pc specific UI. im dying without darns UI mod right now. as for performance it is so unoptimized its almost laughable. i have a 285 card (no OC) which can run far cry 2 and crysis and metro 2033 on max settings and get great framerate. just turning causes stutter in this game. i dont recall this happening with FO3 as much although i played that game heavily modded for so long i dont remember what the original game was like. i realize that obsidian was using bethesdas engine and they probably didnt have much influence on it but i was just expecting something better.

overall im happy with the game but im really wanting the texture replacer mods that i had for FO3.........the difference makes my eyes bleed.

When I was looking for the youtube links, I found so many interesting material for Fallout 3. New Vegas might have a trailer or two but Fallout 3 had things like this:

A black and white 50's style commercial for the vaults:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pAN0ByjSsV4

Or this one, that set the atmosphere so perfectly:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uxSdbSNckTQ

A TV show clip:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xaov5rGzH1Y

A pip boy commercial:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wu_YENZQCc4

The Fat Man portable nuclear catapult:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=plXEtiBvfZQ

While New Vegas... has this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=85UR_z7ZYmo
What is that? It reminds me of Borderlands.

it is so not for xbox 360, because you can't get any mods on it, that is the main reason that people liked the games, they even included popular mods in FO:NV

Wait. What? :confused:

I was awaiting the next patch before buying the pc version.

Seriously? :facepalm:

It's not all about you PC gamers anymore, and you're going to have to get used to it.