I personally like the way they made the player have to travel the wastes and learn the game and work for it to get to the New Vegas Strip, at least the first time before you learn any of the sneaky ways to circumvent the monsters in your way to the north of Goodsprings. Curious what everyone else feels about that.

I too enjoyed it. Made me realize "oh woop, I'm not an all-walking badarse yet", unlike in Fallout 3, traveling a bit into a corner can seriously ruin the entire campaign, that and you lose some nice gear.

I like that there's a structure to NV (unlike in 3). Even if you aren't interested in carrying on with the main quest - as I wasn't - your heading point is still Vegas (and the map shows pretty clearly whereabouts it is).

I think the idea that it's linear is a serious misconception though... I think it's realistic in that when you're lower levels you wouldn't stray away from the roads. Leave that for later. As for the north/south at Goodsprings, I think it's fine. Either way your journey will be effort - one because it requires major strategic planning (and also a lot of lumbering back to Goodsprings for health supplies), and the other because it takes a long long time.

I can't imagine how it (the opening of NV) was in any way linear. The only forced moment was the 5 or so minutes you spent in Doc Mitchells house creating your character and that's it - afterwards the player is only nudged towards a narratively convenient path, but never forced anywhere. As opposed to the paradoxically too long (gameplaywise) yet at the same time too short (storytellingwise) forced Vault 101 intro in Fallout 3.

The world in NV seemed also much more credible with danger being present from the beginning, and not conveniently hidden at remote locations. The world didn't feel like revolving around the player.

So yeah, I voted "it's fine."

I like it, forces you to think about your approach. Your never forced to do the U Shape some people call "the tutorial". You can skip the NCR outpost, and Nipton entirely and head east through the coyote infest area, then to the BoS bunker. From there if you can make it through the scorpion gulch, to Nipton, your home free. It helps if you kill some powder gangers along the way so you can blow up the scorpions with dynamite and powder charges.

On my latest test with a low level character I got lost running through the scorpion gulch and ended up in the centaurs area of black mountain. That's ok, they're slow, just like the bark scorpions. I ran past them and opened the gate, down the road to the opening in the rocks where the bear traps lead upward. Went up, avoided the rockslide, through the opening in the mountain and was home free. Did not get stung once, or encounter any supermutants (except Neil).

I like the intent of the railroading NV does early on (encourage the player to follow the story, but don't force them), but I think it could have been implemented much more transparently. As it stands, it's like playing D&D with a DM who will arbitrarily kill your characters if you don't follow his story the way he wants you to. Even if there are ways around it, the whole thing still feels very contrived.

I like the way they handled it, it seemed a quite natural that there might be an area like that keeping travelers from going through to Vegas.

It was handled perfectly imo.

No complaints here. I actually felt it was very helpful especially since NV was the first open world BGS game I played. After the first couple playthroughs I do indeed start to skip that first part of the game.

The simple fact that the option is there for people to skip it should wash away all the complaints people have of it being "linear".

Perhaps the game isint linear but your way of thinking is.

I used to be in the "it's fine" camp.

However, lately? I have a criticism of it. Albeit perhaps an unrealistic one.

Let me start off by saying it's not that there's anything wrong with the start, but rather that the alternatives could be better. I personally love the Roleplayer's Alternative Start mod, and I began to realize that the reason I like is was because it was less predictable and systematic, while being more refreshing and randomized. I like that it was possible to actually start with a character that had 0 speech, or that yes, I could have a character with better firing speed than average WITHOUT taking Fast Shot. It added new variety and made each new playthrough unique. Alongside that, it really stressed the diversity of characters, because when they (typically) started near New Vegas, one would be able to complete the quest High Times with no problem whatsoever, while another would struggle to even begin it. I simply feel that that mod adds more diversity and depth in that, say, if I wanted to start with ~7 speech or 57 guns on a character, that might be impossible with normal gameplay, but roleplayers alternative start allows for it. It adds more dimensions, which means more depth and more customizations. This is NEVER a bad thing for an RPG as long as it remains balanced and not stupid overpowered.

I believe the start, while not bad in and of itself, was bad for a roleplaying game because it funnels every character down the same path. Because every character spend their first ten levels walking the same path that's DESIGNED to be completable by any character, it diminishes the importance of certain skill levels and character differences later on. 10 levels is more than enough for example, to get 25 science and lockpick. 10 levels is more than enough to get 30 medicine. So while roleplayers alternative start sticks my character RIGHT THERE ready to do the King's quest with a Medicine of 9, sorta forcing a fight with Orris, the standard start on the otherhand gives me ample time to bump up my medicine.

Yes, I realize that no one's forcing me to increase my medicine, but my philosophy with RPGs is: the more dramatic the differences, the better. FFS, you could give me a trait that literally makes it impossible to crit, but awards 15% more damage in return, and it's STILL a good RPG mechanic on the grounds of offering diversity alone. It's not that roleplaying is made impossible by the start, it's simply that roleplaying could potentially be done better without it.

So again, overall the beginning was fine. As far as game design goes, there's nothing inheritly wrong with it, it simply feels like it's in the wrong genre. And yes, I realize plenty of RPGs (if not all) have some sort of beginning everyone has to do, but I personally would like to see more varying beginnings. I think it'd be awesome if future games adopted an approach similar to Roleplayer's Alternative Start. How nice would it be if, for example, New Vegas gave us the option of doing a "normal" playthrough, or a "custom" playthrough, with the normal playthrough putting us in the shoes of Courier Six, while a custom one gives us various preset backstories (some specific, some incredibly vague) while the game provides new content and a new way to tie our non-courier back into the main questline.

I'm kinda speaking in general here, but I personally would love if RPGs tended to have an approach like that in the future.

I think its just fine the way it is. More than fine, in fact. I consider the start/tutorial to be the part before you can start roaming the world freely. New Vegas basically has the character creation part in Doc Mitchell's house, and....that's it. After that, you are free to go wherever you like. Of course, the game clearly wants you to head south and loop anti-clockwise around to New Vegas, but that's more due to story considerations rather than anything else. And its not as if they don't give you choices to make along the way, rather than it being a linear grind that you have to just get through. The whole game is driven by its story, and because its so detailed, and has such diverse factions, the writers wanted to introduce you to them before opening up the world properly. I completely understand why they did this.

Compare this to other Bethesda open world games - Fallout 3 and Skyrim, for example. Neither are story driven at all, so once the character creation and opening tutorial is over, the game starts properly then. But I consider these two games to have much longer tutorials - growing up in Vault 101 and escaping Helgen. Both easily take around an hour to complete, and have minimal choices to make along the way. I consider this type of intro much more onerous than the one New Vegas provides.

I thought it was fine, perfect actually considering how many times iv replayed the game. In fallout 3 i had no choice but to endure the same old 20 minute intro before heading into the wasteland "eventually i found out you could autosave before exiting 101." I have to admit though i did enjoy the cinematic Bethesda style intro over the new vegas one first time i played but non the less its fine.

Your never pushed

You still can go anywhere you wanted

Goodsprings makes a decent supply stop

I also thought the way Victor encouraged you to head to New Vegas felt natural and creepy at the same time. I remember thinking someone big is watching me and theirs something waiting for me in Vegas.

They did it just fine. I mean, they made a hood back story as to why you'd want to go to Primm, but they never actually force you to go there. There are dangers directly to the north, but I don't see it as purposely blocking for the sake of blocking. I had a character that wandered to black mountain before reaching Primm

Yea, I get the same creepy vibe from Victor. He definitely gives off the feeling that there is something more waiting for you in New Vegas than simply revenge. He builds a good deal of anticipation imo.

My first play through the only times I saw Victor was in Goodsprings and inside the Lucky 38, and he acted as if we saw eachother a few times. But,like,we didn't. :I

I don't feel that the game rail roads me to follow the intended path. It will let me kill myself trying to find other ways to get to the strip, but it will also give me a chance to make it. Also, the intended path can be fully explored or rushed through as the role demands.

I like the path of the first act, I follow it with almost all my characters, even the ones who have no intentions of doing the MQ. Besides, this little thing with Benny is personal and has nothing to do with the MQ. By following this path, I will reach the strip at level 7 to 10 and I am ready to start what ever it is I want to in the game. The times I have short cut the path to the strip I have regretted it as I have to spend time grinding up some levels to get the skills I need to move forward.

The same for me. I've always followed the path as well, although sometimes I do just sneak by most of the combat parts to get to Novac first, or maybe get to the clinic and buy an implant early on. But I always do the goodsprings tutorial right off... guess I like Sunny too much to skip that.

But even those times when I do that, I always quickly go back and finish up all the areas and quests I skipped- I find them all fun and enjoyable, no matter what kind of build or RP I'm doing.

New Vegas feels... empty... If you don't do the sidequests

I found the sneaky way north on my first trip anyway; I followed the foothills of Black Mountain to the Repconn HQ. The Deathclaw Alpha Male spawned right in front of me on the way there; luckily I was on a rock where his AI couldn't detect me. I had to use every last 9mm, 10mm, energy cell, and half the durability of a recharger rifle to kill him.

The way New Vegas is set up is just fine. It is possible to make it north from the start of the game. It just requires creative thinking. It is possible to get two stealth boys in Goodsprings alone.

Those that complain are those that don't think, they just react. "I have a 9mm and a couple of stimpaks! I should be able to kill anything there is!" So naturally they get pissed when they come face to face with a bunch of deathclaws.

Actually, I complain because I can stand on a rock up near Sloan and see from one end of the map to the other, in the real world a visual distance of perhaps a few hours walk, and yet there is a bunch of monsters in the middle of the map in an obvious design feature saying "We want you to go the way we have set up...and despite this, we ARE open sandbox developers...even if we did lose our creative ability here".

On the contrary, Obsidian never said they were 'open sandbox' developers. They are story-driven-world developers, and if the story is best served by channeling the player in a general direction at times, then that is what they will do. Looking for a sandbox, go to Skyrim. They have all the beautiful, mindless, crappy-story-no-consequence sandboxing you could ever dream of.

Hahahaha. Very true..... agreed.

Name one studio that has ever done a better job at giving an open world as much reactivity and consequence than Obsidian.

I thought as much...

Story-driven-world developers?

I currently have three quests in a run-through unable to be progressed because I don't have 'lockpick skill 50'...No story, no driving, no progression. Fail.

But, point taken. They created a world that you can see from one side to the other, then put monsters in the middle that served no purpose other than to channel players to go down a particular path...Metro did a better job of that, and it was prettier, sorry.

Perhaps if Obs had spent more time ironing out the inherent problems, I may think better of their work, but I'm afraid that judging it by the standard of 'does what you are doing make sense' and 'does the game flow', I'd have to say that's a 'no'...and it starts right at the beginning with the deathclaw blob in the middle of the map.