I registered just so I could ask this question because I am truly baffled. (If posted before, I apologize but didn't see this info posted anywhere). Why is the Gamerscore attainable for the DLC for Fallout games such an odd number?? Do they have anything to lose by offering a full 1750 when all is said and done? Fallout 3 ended with a strange 1550 and now NV is offering 140 (!) points to each DLC? I know some people could care less about their gamerscore but that still doesn't explain this practice. Can someone who is actually in the know give an intelligent explanation as to why they don't just make each DLC pack 175 GS (with an added 50 GS on the last pack) or at least something close to that?

First: Welcome to the forums!

I can't really say why they picked odd numbers- it's likely just what it came out to be when they were creating the achievements.

Side note- This thread should be moved to the spoilers section.

That's determined by Microsoft. We use the maximum amount they allow us to do per DLC pack, per calendar quarter. Don't like it, take it up with them.

Strange, considering that no other game has this exact amount all totaled that I am aware of. I have never read anywhere that 140 points is the max per quarter (last I saw it was 250 per quarter). But thanks for the informative, if not somewhat brash response.

@Chosen one: Where is there a spoiler anywhere in this thread?

Why even question this? I dont get the whole gamerscore thing.

Because inquiring minds want to know? Why question anything? You may not get it (and I alluded to that in my first post) but some people are truly curious on other forums I belong to. So instead of playing guessing games like so many others like to do, I thought I would go straight to the horse's mouth for an answer. What is wrong with that?

wow

first post on the boards and you get the Senior Producer to respond to your thread personally

New Achievement Unlocked: From On High
Get a Member of the Bethesda or Oblivion team to post in a thread you created. +50 Forumscore

:celebration:

Hopefully he understands that I am asking from a fan's perspective and that I am not just some troll looking to complain. I own most of their games and the DLC to go with it. This DLC oddity has just been nagging me for some reason. I know I am not alone here, maybe the others that have wondered the same thing are snoozing at the moment and will voice their opinion eventually.

Does anyone actually pay attention to that stuff?

Achievements and the like had potential, then Microsoft went and gave them away for literally everything. "Pick up a Nuka Cola - 50 points." Wow man, you must've worked hard to get that one.
Achievements should be bragging rights, otherwise they're pointless.

really? I'm willing to bet that those that care about Gamerscore at all care only to get a higher, and higher score and less so about why a particular achievement or game has a particular gamerscore in total

but hey, free country right? [Logan]Knock yourself out bub[/Logan]

What does Gamerscore even do?

i can honestly say this has never even begun to cross my mind

You understand that Microsoft doesn't choose what the achievements are in each game, right? The developers do that. And yeah, sometimes they give away points because they are required to have 1000 points in a full title, and 200 for an Arcade title (and 140ish for DLC, it would seem) and the developers just really don't care about them, so they give out 100 points for turning on the game. That's why every GS hound has Avatar:TLA in their game library.

I never understood the point or reason behind the gamerscore. Someone want to enlighten me on this? Can it be used for anything or is it just a, "Lokz at mah scoraz!!! I rox so hardz!!"

I'm being serious I don't know what the benefit of the gamerscore is.

Thats the jist of it. Back around when I first got my Xbox me and my freind started having gamerscore competition. That lasted about a year then i found fallout 3 and stopped playing other games so he beat me and i frogot about it. Plus it is good to strive for 100% completion in games and thats just another thing to get.

I guess I was expecting too much by hoping people would actually discuss the topic I created instead of just slamming me for asking an achievement related question. I never claimed to be some kind of score [censored], I merely asked a question as to why the score was so odd compared to other games. It's a valid question and I asked it respectfully. I didn't go on some kind of rant or slam anyone's response. You guys really know how to welcome new folks to the forum. Is there anyone at this site that actually likes to discuss topics objectively or should I just give up? On second thought, don't answer that.....I already know.

that's exactly what it does

or in other words: e-peen

I was interested.

It's possible to not give a damn about your score, but still be interested how it works. Question has been answered though, so I am happy. Thanks OP, and thanks jason.

Hmm... I never realized that. On PS3, the formula is a bit simpler; A couple Bronze, 1 or 2 Silver, and 1 Gold.

What really annoys me are those games that give wierd GS points for certain achievements (ie 1 point, 17points, etc...) and then even it out with another achievement later on. Which means if you don't get BOTH achievements, you have a wierd ass gamerscore (20,502 for example)