they completely ignored EVERY, thats right EVERY thing that obsidian did with new vegas. I feel like I am playing a shell of a game compared to nv. right off the bat in newvegas they had cool weapons m1 garand, m16, m4, grenade launcher ect. this game has nothing and its now a shooter with rpg elements not vice versa. it is a good game overall but a garbage rpg. I cant wait till obsidian makes a new fallout and once again blows away Bethesda away at thr own game. Even if you didn't like nv you have to admit it has wayyyy more weapons, armor and rpg elements and overall interesting stuff.

if nv was reduxed for next gen and given the new graphics and redid a few things I think it would be a way better game still...

don't give me the "don't like it don't play" childish response that I know yall will give. I paid 60 dollars for a game that is a huge step down from the last installment I don't understand how the game is 400+ hours of content I have no reason to go back and play this game after I am done besides dlc. whatever tho I am hoping this game will be like call of duty n has different makers of the game that this is just bethesdas take on fallout and obsidian gets to make the rpg that fallout is supposta be.

overall it does still give content for your 60$ and id give it a 8 out of ten as an overallgame. but it really is low that they ignored what fallout really is and made it more for the adhd millennials and the huge fact that they said FU to obsidian and the great improvement they did to the game. As someone who has never played 1 or 2 I would agree with a lot of stuff they say in the no mutants allowed website about Bethesda and the way fallout has been taken

I declare "Chuck's Law"

If anyone declares Fallout 4 a shooter or dumbed down then their review is automatically to be tossed out and ignored.

Shooters are fun, can have intelligent writing, and be amazingly well-written.

This game avoids the classic shooting fun of Fallout 3, one of the greatest, "Shoot, Talk, and Loot" games of all time to focus on resource management and diplomacy and other stuff completely irrelevant to shooting.

Also, a strange damn near incomprehensible perk system versus the elegant simplicity of the skill system.

Seriously, it's like when people say the two they just turn their opinions into white noise to me.

You CAN'T make a game combining the Sims with Fallout and say it's a shooter not because it's BETTER but because IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.

I wouldn't get your hopes up OP. New Vegas was coincidental and likely not something going to be repeated. After Fallout 3, BGS was busy working on Skyrim and they didn't have anything coming out for a few years. Bethesda Softworks thought it would be a great idea to contract a Fallout game to Obsidian, who was largely made up of ex-Black Isle employees. Thus, they got to do a spin-off game to preoccupy the dead time before Fallout 3 and Skyrim. This is no way suggests Obsidian will do another Fallout game, as I believe it's doubtful. Obsidian isn't even really doing much in the way of AAA gaming these days.

As far as New Vegas, I thought they overall improved on the Fallout 3 model, besides the setting and environment. The Mojave Wasteland was terrible, boring, and uninteresting. Aside from a few interesting gems, the game was just not interesting to explore like BGS games. Sure, the story was better and so were companions, factions, etc. I actually didn't care for the weapon system because, like Fallout 3, all conventional weapons (small arms) became obsolete to laser weapons and plasma weapons at endgame, wasting all of my progression into small arms.

Fallout 4 overall is a huge step in the right direction from Fallout 3. Saying it's "less of an RPG" is debatable as BGS has actually added more RPG components to the game such as an actual crafting system for weapons and armor and settlement building. That's far more of an RPG system than anything Fallout 3 or Fallout NV achieved, regardless of how you feel about the game. I think Fallout 4 is a great game. I just want BGS to patch the bugs so I can continue the main quest as I'm stuck from progressing.

your complain won't make de developers travel back in time and re-do the game to your liking, it's already done, you say you wait for obsidian to make a new fallout game, ok, then sit down and wait, anyway, fallout 4 is a good game, rpg and fps, many characteristics were improved, and you can still enjoy your adventure in the wasteland, just give it a try, anyway, i'm sure the devs will listen to the feedback for future games and/or dlc's

I don't honestly even see the differences.

New Vegas has better characters, story, and some old favorites but it's the same game as Fallout 3!

Next AAA title Obsidian is going to make, is probably for Paradox Interactive. Paradox Interactive has recently bought White Wolf, and along with that, World of Darkness and the rights for VtMB. So likely next game Obsidian is involved in, is VtMB 2 .

https://twitter.com/obsidian/status/659784786479738880

Dont like it, dont play.

I'm going to stop right here and call BS. The new system is hardly incomprehensible and the old skill system (FO3/NV) was far from elegant simplicity.

Under the old system you had the SPECIALs, skills and perks. The SPECIALs mostly affected things like your HP, AP, XP gain, etc. Perks were little bonuses you could get to enhance your gameplay and character, unlocking when you reached certain requirements like SPECIAL, lvl and/or skill. Skills were a 100 point system that affected your ability to do things. However, it wasn't really that simple. Those 100 points only obfuscated what was really going on. Most skills only really benefited you when they reached certain thresholds. Those thresholds were often only ever 10 points or even 25 points like with locksmithing. That meant you had to invest nearly two levels worth of points before you saw any tangible return on your investment. If you didn't like the idea of sinking all of your points into a single skill, it would take you more than two levels before you benefited from it. This meant that it was not uncommon to invest points into skills for no benefit or return. Then you had your perk point to distribute, but if your skill was sitting just below the required threshold, you couldn't get the perk you wanted until the next level or so. That is not what I would call a good design and is far from elegant or simple. There are multiple things to keep track of and level up.

Now before talking about the new system, there is one point that needs to be made clear that people seem to be ignorant of. THE SKILLS WERE NOT REMOVED. What has been removed is the 100 point system, but that has only served to lay bare what was already going on underneath. Removing that system has made it clear and obvious what each step is and what the benefit of reach each step will be. In addition, by removing the 15/17 skill points and 1 perk point each level (or every other level) and replacing it with a single point to spend, they have simplified the system. You now can see exactly what you are getting when you invest that point and you are getting an immediate and tangible benefit for it. In other words, the new system is simpler, more clear and easier to understand. Of the two, it is by FAR the more elegant and simple.

This is a very clear example of streamlining, cutting out the excess complexity for a system that is simpler, easier to understand, more flexible and simply works better.

Been asking myself that question for almost a decade now.

Okay that's one vote for the dislike column. Thanks.

Obsidian is practically guaranteed to not make another Fallout game. They were supposed to get extra funding near the end of their project, but they missed the (relatively high) scoring standard by less than 2% and so they were cut off and had to release it "unfinished".

It'll be a miracle if Bethesda decides to try again, let alone if Obsidian goes through the offer at all.

That isn't what happened at all.

Obsidian made the game, with the budget they were promised, failed to meet the 85 metacritic score, and thus didn't get the royally bonus afterwards.

Them not getting the money had nothing to do with the game's development, or it being finished or not, as they only would have gotten the money after the game came out.

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/02/12/and-heres-obsidians-idea-for-fallout-new-vegas-2/

“We talk to Bethesda all the time,” he said. “And I think the challenge here doesn’t just apply to Bethesda specifically, but to a lot of publishers in general. But basically, what does all the [current] console crap mean? The challenge in this period of time has been, you have this console transition, and it’s strange that they’re still not announced. But that always creates a disruption in the industry. And now you mix in [the emergence of] mobile and F2P stuff, and it’s left a lot of people reeling.”

“So that’s a lot of the conversation we’ve had with publishers. ‘OK, how do we get back to normal – whatever normal is going to be.’ That’s just the process right now.”

Meanwhile, I also managed to pull Bethesda’s Todd Howard aside and get his two cents, which basically amounted to a reiteration of Urquhart’s sentiment. Nothing’s set in stone, but New Vegas was great, and having another go at it certainly makes an awful lot of sense.

Oh Fallout: New Vegas, you were always my favorite. I fear we will never see your like again.

I stand corrected.

Still think that another Obsidian-made Fallout game is a ways off. No matter how much I want them to make one...

VtMB is one of my favorite rpgs. Especially playing as a Malkavian. Would be nice to see a VtMB 2.

Well, this is how I see it:

Between Fallout and The Elder Scrolls a new installment for each franchise is a long way off. So last time around Bethesda outsourced development of a "filler" title to other developers. They outsourced Fallout to Obsidian in between Fallout 3 and 4, and TES to Zenimax Online in between TES V and VI. Seeing as how TES Online isn't the smash hit Bethesda probably hoped for my guess is there won't be a Fallout Online soon. So a "filler" Fallout title to kill the time while Bethesda works on TES 6 between Fallout 4 and Fallout 5 seems likely. And who better to run it than Obsidian?

can't call myself and Obsidian fan, but I also can't say I didn't enjoy the array of options NV at its base (nevermind the DLC) offered. FO4 pisses me off much like Skyrim does, all these Welcome advancements and even some snippets that prove they (beth ) Listened, Power armor not being Clothing, VATs not stopping time, smoother gunplay for a game that primarily has guns, Creature diversity etc etc

and then BOOM streamlining and asinine design decisions every where.

Its like....dude, I was almost happy, I was on high and you killed my Buzz, WHY you do this.

And that smug Crit sign that appears on the bottom doing what you cant do in game, hold two pistols.

PS, unrelated, can someone link me to a discussion about Companions here on the GEN board?

Yawn.....another poster complaining about a video game.

In other news, I dislike Budweieser Beer, hate Ohio State University (Go Blue), can't stand the Halo franchise, and think New Vegas blew.

And guess what....nobody cares.

Yep, they completely ignored FNV and went towards the opposite direction. Shows on metacritic user scores and no, it's not all trolls and "haters" ganging up only on FO4 as some people would like to imagine, because it has an incredibly lower score than pretty much everything on the top 20, while the normal score is even bellow FFXIV and that's with a lot of "over-hyped 100" reviews.

They sold a lot pre-orders and first day copies because of the name, but there is a lot of negativity going on about this and it will not be costless. If TESVI and FO5 are gutted even further in the same way, better that they stop there and develop a new Rage/Wolfenstein or something.

funny, everyone says "new vegas writing was better", but they failed so hard to make the legion anything but pure evil, where as Bethesda, the company everyone seems to keep saying has terrible writing successfully made a grey/evil faction with the institure. They also mangaged to make a war that actually had a MASSIVE effect on the playerbase that people still argue who is the better side.....yet all you hear about is how dumb it was.

But the legion being "evil" is just your point of view. they didn't kill to kill, they operated as a Might is right doctrine and didnt split hairs about it. Mean while the NCR being viewed as "good" had alot of less than stellar motives behind the scenes.

it goes both ways, funny how that goes.

A lot of people like to point out the whole NCR vs. Legion plot without realizing the details behind both factions. Not to mention how it seems the alternative options such as House and Independence are always ignored in the cherry picking.

I won't deny the Legion most definitely play an antagonistic role that is hard to justify, but there are plenty of actions committed by the NCR and other factions that make them no better if not worse in some areas compared to the Legion.

Indeed. It's not only about the story itself. Through its branching, consequences and through the dialog system, you felt free to RP anything and do anything in a living world. FO4 is a step towards the opposite direction.

LOL.

I adore New Vegas (and especially its DLC)--it's in my top 3 Fallout games. But it gets way overrrated, mostly by the bitter, melodramatic NMA types.

Anyway, I am also loving 4. It's a bajillion times better than 3. Loving both New Vegas AND Fallout 4, how is this possible!? ˉ\_(ツ)_/ˉ

So says every mass murdering dictator in history. There wasn't really a lot to like about them.

I've not found out too much about the Institute yet, so I can't really compare. But they did a decent job with Kellog. And there's a fair few nice touches to humanise even the random raider canonfodder. The race track for instance (I won't say more than that).