The AI is the same as ever, enemies just run directly at you unless they get stuck. Enemies with only melee run amok and wild just like in Oblivion when you jump on a rock they can't get to.

Also, while the dialogue is improved from FO3, it's still not very good. How many people do you know in real life that would tell you all about their problems and life story after a 10 second chat?

Disagree with the review all you like, but avoid the name calling or warns will be issued for flaming. :stare:

I'll continue this.

Nuh uh, Halo is.

It's for flavor. Obsidian took the time to come up with back stories for almost every NPC you can talk to. Most of Fallout 3's characters were 2D and boring.


The AI is the same. That's because Obsidian is using the exact same engine as Fallout 3s albeit slightly (slighty, ever so slightly) improved. This should be the last game that uses it.

Oh my god when I read that I laughed so hard I think I burst one of my organs.

MW2 is a dreadful game. It has so many bugs I could read the bible faster than a list of them. Have you EVER played another FPS? In your entire life? Ever? Plus Fallout is in a whole other genre, its also an open world, rpg, sandbox. Is MW2 any of those? No. Its like comparing Mario kart, to to grand theft auto, simple because they both have driving. You see how rediculous that is?

Guys, ignore him, he's obviously trolling although he may not realize it.

He's not trolling if he doesn't realize it. He would be trolling if he was doing it on purpose. Besides; I have seen many of his arguments used by others who weren't trolling. Maybe some of those people will look on this thread and see the responses to it.

Whatever bugs MW2 has I can't name too many off hand. Fallout New Vegas is full of them, though. In any other game I haven't seen enemies bug themselves in the ground and get released and come back with godmode on. It's pretty game breaking.

I think we all agree that New Vegas has a good bit of bugs. However, behind those bugs is a very very very good game (in my opinion). I've had two crashes in the 20 hours I've put in the game so far and one small texture bug that was fixed when I restarted the game. That's it. I have very much enjoyed New Vegas. This is why the best advice to give somebody interested in the game is to hold off for a bit, wait for a couple of patches, and then definitely shell out the money for the game. It's not like the patches won't be out for two months. They've already released two for the PC.

Fallout 3 was also loaded with bugs to the brim as well. Completely loaded. The only problem is that New Vegas has a few more major bugs.

What I don't get is how he didn't even take into account the mere depth of New Vegas in his review.

Also, you are comparing two different genres, in a fps such as MW2 a very large majority of the development is dedicated into the combat mechanics.

However, in RPGs combat mechanics are only a portion of development is dedicated to combat mechanics, the rest is split up into: dialogue, story, character development, quests, outcomes, items, etc...

So by comparing the combat mechanics to two totally different genres is simply ludicrous... Especially when the fps you are comparing it to has no similarities to the game at all.

Fallout shouldn't be compared with ANY FPS. It's not a FPS at all. Yes, you can shoot in the first person but if you define the game by that then Modern Warfare 2 is a first person running game. Yes, you do shoot in Modern Warfare 2 but I like to define the game based on the fact that you also run around... Seriously, the shooting mechanics in Fallout aren't at all intended to be like ANY first person shooter.

LMAo, The pinnacle? its the most casual, noob friendly shooter, that had had the same linear, heavily scripted, spawning enemies. Its a noob shooter. your a joke if you think COD is the pinnacle of anything. Every gun can be picked up and easily weilded as all weapons handle all the same, Its not realistic, its arcade trash for 10 year olds.

Also, Fallout os not a shooter is an RPG with much more complex elements. Go play your kids game COD. Many better shooters around.

umm, no halo and COD are both noob friendly arcade shooters that appeal to the masses, They have nothing in the way of realistic balistics, recoil, ai, game design......................

He was being sarcastic.

What kind of review (Or clown) compares a RPG to a shooter, then pretty much only compares the shooting? How about we compare the dialog, story, variety and depth of gameplay to COD? COD is for idiots IMO, it a derivative game that has zero depth. Games for the idiot masses.

Stop feeding the troll people.

HUH? name one thing done better in fallout 3? Vegas is a far superior RPG in every way, in design, story, mechanics. Fallout 3 is an overrated game just like olivion was. Vegas is the only fallout game since 2. 3 was a joke of an RPG like almost all bethesda rpg's. Vegas puts the ROLE back in Role playing game.

Fallout 3 is the worst fallout of the series.

A lot of people seem to argue that MW2 is an FPS and as such can't be compared to an RPG. That argument is wrong. Combat in Fallout is a huge part of the game and could seriously improve by taking tips from MW2. Running in Fallout feels like skating, you move ever so awkwardly, in MW2 you move smoothly and it's very easy to get used to it. Fallout tries to mimic FPS games but compromises in the wrong places resulting in awkward combat. Some random enemies like giant radscorpions have insane amounts of health while some big bad bosses of the game drop from one good headshot. Enemies jerk around awkwardly randomly making them hard to hit at times, but most of the time they just run directly at you. Where's the difficulty when they should be taking cover and trying to flank you? I can understand super mutants rushing you straight forward but humans would never fight like that.

Well, one thing in Vegas, and it's a really minor thing, is that a lot of the peoples' faces look strange. Fallout 3 had better faces for most of the characters. I mean, NV has some people who look normal, but I've noticed a lot of the less important NPCs have weird facial configurations.

Beyond that, yeah, I'm having trouble thinking of something that Fallout 3 did better than NV.



I wouldn't go that far. Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel (ie FO:BOS or FO: piece of [censored]) is the worst.

No it cant be compared bc simply the mechanics are totally different mw2 relys on where u put the sight the bullet will go but in FONV the mechanics are based on stats thats why even with ads the bullet doesnt always hit. and FONV is a rpg 1st and shooter 2nd which means it runs on more on stats instead of actual skill and the 'skating' is due to the engine and coding. I can agree with the AI issue but thats prob due to the outdated engine

the speed? Improved the damages ? by adding one man army and danger close so everyone can noob tube ?
mw2 feels unbalanced from bullets to rockets.
fix recoil, by fixing the recoil you mean removing the recoil ?
Well the graphics look alike to me maybe small uppgrade
no comment on bobbing since i have no idea what that means: D

(No offense i love mw2 got 30+ playtime , i even got a nuke today lol)

But damm i watched the whole reveiw and this dude did not really reveiw it , it was more of a let′s tell the people about every single thing that is bad about the game and not mentioning the good things.
Most game′s offer 20 hours or less some even less then 5.
You played New vegas for 50 hours and then give him 2 stars... so you where bored the whole journey ?

comparing FNV to MW2 isn′t really making it fair since mw2 is a online game.
like banana versus house ?
FNV is offline and MW2 is mainly online ?

This reveiw get′s 2 out of 10 from me 1 point for making me feel good about myself not being so stupid and the rest is pretty much for thinking paying for a hoker is supposed to be like hitting on womens in real life.








ARE you kidding me "I" have never seen a rpg that plays like a fps and is as smooth as a fps is.
In mw2 everything is scripted from mission to mission , in fallout everything depends on what you do and how npc′s react to you.
i agree that fallout engine svcks bad and should be updated but if bethesda would make a fps it would be as smooth as cod but i have seen many clunky rpg′s but ALL of the fps i have seen are smooth and there is a reason for that. (i just not sure why lol)

Yes, forgot about BOS. The faces are terrible in all bethesda games, they must have the worst animation artists in the industry, lol. They were just as bad in Fallout 3.

Of course you're going to be disappointed if you try to play Fallout like a multiplayer shooter.

I'm not sure if FO3 actually did better in that regard as I remember many characters looking incredibly dumb.

The beginning was much, much better in FO3 though. New Vegas has nothing for the player to cling on. You get shot in the head, wake up two weeks later just fine. How many people in real life would go on a hunt killing hundred men to get revenge? Yeah, not really anyone. Being forced out of Vault gone bad and going after your father is much MUCH better in that regard. Also, going back to the vault and being rejected was a very memorable moment in FO3. Nothing like that in New Vegas unfortunately. New Vegas has tons of more stuff but it's all very mediocre and you won't really remember much after finishing it.

Nobody said FO:NV was going to be realistic. Do you really think humanity, after suffering a nuclear war in 2077, would remodel with a 1950's style look and have super mutants? Hell no it wouldn't. It's nice in a RPG and gives the game its flavor. You keep shouting realism realism, but MW2 is nowhere even close to being authentic or realistic...