you guys their paper UK review of fallout: new vegas isnt all that bad and biased as their video review.

Heres a link http://uk.ps3.ign.com/articles/112/1128829p1.html

That was a good review, in fact it's one of the few intelligent reviews of New Vegas out there, and I was glad to read it. I do, however, disagree with their rating about sounds, here's the quote:

"The limited music and sound effects have a Western, cowboy flavour, but ultimately the wasteland is a silent and desolate place."

I always loved the New Vegas soundtrack, and while the radio stations definitely played a lot of Western style music, I didn't see it as limited or dull in any way. I mean Frank Sinatra, Marty Robbins, Dean Martin, Peggy Lee, Eddy Arnold, and The Ink Spots aren't dull or limited as the quote above implies, right? Even the background music is great imo, it adds a lot to the experience of walking around the wastes, just as it has with every other Fallout game.

Yeah who ever wrote that might not be around much longer in the review business because its far to intelligent for a game review.

It sounds like a joke, but sadly, it's not.
Usually a review consists of
Things that go boom: 4/5
Big boobies: 3/5
Flashy cars: 4/5
No dialoge: 5/5

This games is AWESOME!!!!
Our rating:10 gagillion stars
(IGN)

I agree with this, what music and effects do you hear in the Wasteland, not the Strip or Freeside actually in the middle of the desert with no town for ages.

Do you have the game for PC? The whole "music" folder in the data files has all of the background music that plays when your wandering around in the middle of nowhere.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=8UStl_50LTQ#t=24s

Edit:http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=bELxi2cLsoE#t=87s

I know, right? Look at what jessica chobot(hot ign reviewer) about fallout: new vegas in the ign youtube review. The thing is that was also a review from ign but a british one.

I hate that woman, with a passion.
She try's to seem like she's actually giving a crap about whatever games she was told to play, but when you really listen to her it becomes obvious she's only in it for the attention/ money.

Reviews should be done by REAL players, not payed actors.
(screw IGN)

I found it funny when I read the IGN review of Fallout 3 alongside the NMA review of Fallout 3.

I find ALOT of things to be funny when IGN puts their 2 cents into it.

Nope I'm on Xbox, I play with my volume at 10 -12 and only sometimes do I hear crickets but other than that the Wasteland is just dead silent, until I get to the Strip walls and inside it or into Freeside with the smashing bottles and stuff.

That is the difference between a review based on 2 hours of game time vs one that was based on a complete playthrough.
FNV needs playtime to show its real strengths, just by scraping on the surface one could easily deem it as a mere add-on.

I think the music volume is set very low by default, so you might have to turn it up in the audio settings to hear background music. I didn't know there was background music at all until I messed with the audio settings of the ps3 version.

I literally shouted 'YES' when I read this, this is the core of why I love this game.

Disagree with the bolded part. Freeform exploration isn't one of the game's strong suits. The game works best, especially in the first ten hours or so, if you follow the quests to new locations. (Which, admittedly, the game does really well.)

I don't know which version of the game the reviewer was playing, but the hardcoe mode in my version of the game isn't anywhere as harrowing. FNV's hardcoe mode is a step in the right direction but doesn't really deserve its name. Sadly this part does seem like the reviewer didn't actually spend much time in hardcoe mode.

Pretty good review overall, like freqnasty said it does seem like the reviewer genuinely spent dozens of hours playing the game instead of two.

Just readed both and some how i came to the conclusion that IGN doesnt speak about negatives if its one of the industries big names and then when its sequel, made by a diffrent and smaller company with a ridiculuos time limit, those mistakes are suddently noted and gave a lot of time to discuss.

New Vegas deserves a -1000 review. It was just so horrible.

It would be nice if they managed to blend the fast-paced action with intense and important dialogue options. While I can definately understand the hate for drawn-out dialogue (I usually just end up skimming through the subtitles and skip the actual talking), I still want some important dialogue moments that are not only important, but are so well structured preformed that they actually make you want to listen.
Something closer to Mass Effect, as opposed to Skyrim.

As far as we know for certain though, you can threaten people to give you info that they want you to pay them for by pulling your gun on them, and you can also interrogate captured bounties before you ship them off, at the risk of killing them if you mess it up.

Hahahahaha!!! That's a spot-on IGN review

I'm -as many others here, too- actually very thankful for all of that "drawn-out dialogue".
It is what sets the game apart from all the watered down IPs you've mentioned.
The game is not to be blamed for your limited attention span.
There is hundreds of other games suiting your less talk, moar shootz taste.
No need to have this one dumbed down, too.