Yes.

I felt that I got my money's worth out of every one of them.


My favorite pastime.

I liked it from the the start. It's a awesome game. One of the best rpgs and games I played.
Way better than FO3.

The dlc are almost all good.
I say almost all because one of them svcks, royally.

Honest Hearts, Old World Blues, the Gunrunners Arsenal, Lonesome Road, all good.

But Dead Money.
Broken, repetative, garbage.
But you do get 5 levels from it.

So if you want all 50 levels for you characters, get it.
But it's worthless otherwise. I could'nt even complete it.
It broke in the same place twice.
And the rewards so ar'nt worth dragging yourself through that rubbish.

Get bundles if they do them. DM will hurt less that way.

What's broken about it?
What's repetitive about it, especially when you compare it to Old World Blues?
In what way does a beautifully crafted storyline, a set of well-developed and interesting characters, a unique, challenging environment, and a set of great weapons resemble 'garbage?'

You're posting the umpteenth gripe Dead Money is broken without backing this up with facts?http://static.fjcdn.com/comments/Oh+you+re12+Please+tell+me+more+about+how+_9a931ae6a7dc1a33138dd214e155d4e7.jpg.

If you mindlessly do the DLC without paying attention to the story and environment, then yes. Dead Money svcks.

The people who rage about how terrible and broken DM is are the people who cannot adapt and simply want to mindlessly kill stuff until they make it to the end, happily ever after, done.

I never said that FO3 has more choices than New Vegas, because i know that is not true in any way. I like Fo3 better and i stated my opinions and the back story of my character isn't really important to me because i prefer to have my backstory already chosen and in FO3 i really liked the backstory. What's important to me is what i do afterwards and i also said that Fo:NV endings weren't really to my liking at all.
So i still think that the people don't benifit at all. I couldn't care less about the NCR or The Legion i do care about the people of the Mojave and House is the best bet for them in my opinion. And i do feel a stronger connection to my FO3 char rather than a random courier. But that's just me. I still like FO:NV just not as much as FO3.

I liked both games. I have sunk God awful amounts into each one.
They both have pros and cons. And while I love fonv to death I do consider fo3 a rpg and a decent one. While it may not have the impact of choices or amount of factions to join, I did greatly love that most quests had at least 4 different ways to complete and if u forget about the main quest and do nothing but side quests it is very easy to rp in the game. Granted I have been spoilt by the alternate start mod, it still offers choices and there are some shapes of impact if just small or very small areas. Fo3 nailed the atmosphere and landscape design and clutter down pat. Yes it has flaws, but it can and is to me an enjoyable rpg.

But yes I love fonv greatly and im the type where multiple factions trumps exploration. But its comparing apples and oranges.
One has incredible atmosphere all around, landscape and clutter design, jaw dropping or WOW! Moments, and some scary moments all bundled up with an annoying DJ that plays songs that just fit perfectly and clash perfectly with the game.
One has incredible story, very well done balance, multiple factions and an In your face type consequences and choices, better combat, and so forth.

Where as one excells in one area, its a weakness in the other game. Whats a weakness in one game, has been improved or done soo much better in the other. Oranges and apples, Ying and yang.

Fo3 seems to be bethesdas last good game and fonv is obsidians jewel of the rpg wasteland of todays market.

It had a better atmosphere, more accessible story line, and better exploration. I also found it difficult to get into NV after playing F3, I traded it in but was recently tempted back by the Ultimate edition, I am really enjoying it this time round and loving the DLC, but for me F3 is still the better game...............

Dead money was frustrating but that added to it.As for gun runners arsenal i'm annoyed with yes I know the guns realistically shouldn't be thrown at you but at the end of the day you're paying real life money and in game money for guns that are overpriced in which is effectively a gun pack.

True... That's true. But well it's more content. The more content the better.

the dlc's are worth it. too many dlc's are not worth their price and/or don't offer anything beyond some cosmetic change and stuff to shoot; but not FNV's. they are four well done stories that will give you four entirely different experiences; from each other and the main game.

OP: i can't say whether you'll like them as much as i did, but i can say you will get your money's worth. as you can tell, there are some polarizing dlc's, dead money being the main one. my advice for DM is to take the light step perk and try to avoid other's opinions on it until you play it yourself.

the fo3 vs. FNV debate just shows what a passionate fan base fallout has. too bad bethesda doesn't make rpg's and, in case you didn't know, fo3 is the inferior game. it's a great game, just not as good as the beacon that is known as FNV. my god, the story in fo3 is just so stupid. i will say the world is well done (though completely non-sensical) except for the endless miles of train tunnels. i found nothing more tedious than those stupid tunnels.

GRA: my only gripe is that the attachments were not permanently in vendors inventory. i had no problem paying the exorbitant prices, but i did feel cheated when i had to hunt all over for the mods. for $4, i felt it was a good value that has added some extra fun to my playthroughs. there are some really nice weapons in there.

1. I liked it but I think NV's is better.

2. I cannot fathom where people pulled this theory from. Needless to say, I disagree.

3. This may be true, still though imo New Vegas wins again. I'm still discovering things in the Mojave. I can't say that about the CW.

4. Funny enough, I had the exact opposite problem. It bothers me a lot.

On-topic: OP I'm glad you gave NV another chance and saw its greatness.

What did I just read?

I enjoyed them both.

get all of them, dead money is the best DLC iv played yet (Granted, it actually fit the play-style i love most [sneaky] but it still put me out of my comfort zone on a few things [which is why i fell in love with it])

Best DLCs ever, very well written each and every one of them.

I quite disagree with your views on Dead Money.

Dead Money is probably the most well written, complex, and most thrilling of all the DLCs for NV. Now I can understand if you don't like it because it was broken, as in glitched up or missing content that was vital to progression... However if it because you sped through the dialogue by mashing buttons then I have no sympathy.

And how is it repetitive in any way? It, like every other NV DLC is far from New Vegas itself from content, textures, dialogue, people, quests, atmosphere, ect ect.

This DLC above all that I have played so far actually requires you to think and take in your surroundings. This DLC is not met to be sped through, for if you do, you won't understand anything if/when you do get stuck or complete, and you won't be able to enjoy it as much as it should be.

But like I said if you don't like it because you have completed it and took it in fully and understood what was happening or it was broken or corrupt from download with missing vital content, then I am sorry that you missed out on a great DLC.

Don't even waste your time bro. He always says the same thing, then when someone counters their claim with a valid point, they never bother to defend their post as to why 'Dead Money is broken'. So you're arguing with someone who is making a false arguement likely because they couldn't beat it properly so they resort to 'I couldn't beat it therefore it's a horribly made DLC' arguements.

*Sigh*, I guess so. I just don't get how he can love New Vegas and all its addons more than Fallout 3s and not like Dead Money.

Because Dead Money is the odd man out in, what I feel, is a good way. Dead Money discourages a common trope of New Vegas' game play. Mindless herp derp shooting. Dead Money strongly encourages using thinking, stealth, and caution. Admittedly I just say '[censored] stealth, I'm a bawhs' but I do use the other two. On my abandoned Normal mode/hardcoe mode playthrough, that was a painful playthrough of DM, but I managed it. Anyone who always play through DM this way wins my respect, because that's just to much work for me. (I'm horribly lazy)

In short, I think Dead Money is the odd man out because it forces you to try a new playstyle, and many people are creatures of habit and feel helpless at being forced to adapt to their new environment.

I found FNV incredibly slower paced than FO3. The spotlight falls almost entirely on story and character drama, rather than exploration and action. I enjoyed the game very much, but found it contained less of what I was looking for, comparative to FO3.

Lonesome Road and Honest Hearts alleviated my frustration, somewhat. Found some terrific fights and exploration in LR.

Although I'll eventually return to OWB, I put it down because it was a bit too wacky for me.

I've only experimented with Dead Money (didn't inhale), and must return to it when I'm in the proper mood. Based on my limited knowledge, it sounds terrific. Again, I gotta be in the proper mood to play it. Candidly, although the tension level is rather high, it's also rather slower paced comparative to other offerings.

Cheers!