What would Fallout NV be categorized as? : Fallout: New Vegas

» Thu Feb 25, 2010 2:54 pm

Troika, seriously? You're citing Troika?

Buggiest games in the history of PC gaming? Possibly.

Obsidian also release buggy games, so, Troika programmers are the less of my worries at that time, my worries was if the IP will be saved

Personally I thought Van Buren looked poop. I don't think it would have sold half as well as ye olde fans want to believe, either.

But it was never released, only a tech demo exist, but that demo doesnt even consist of the Orginal Main Plot of the game, so I dont see the "point" of the "fans" yelling WE WANT VAN BUREN.

» Thu Feb 25, 2010 2:49 pm

Obsidian also release buggy games, so, Troika programmers are the less of my worries at that time, my worries was if the IP will be saved

IMO... Bethesda's FO3 should have been a greatly expanded Operation Anchorage (a prequel, and not a simulation).

» Thu Feb 25, 2010 2:56 pm

IMO... Bethesda's FO3 should have been a greatly expanded Operation Anchorage (a prequel, and not a simulation).

We need a DLC about the invasion at China

» Thu Feb 25, 2010 10:38 am

being fuscitious,

:laugh: :laugh:

Amazing, and in a thread so otherwise filled with regurgitated vomit, too!

» Thu Feb 25, 2010 5:29 am

It is more of a direct sequal to Fallout 2 than Fallout 3, i consider Fallout New Vegas to be "3" and Fallout 3 to be more of a spin-off.

Yeah.

Fallout 3 was like "Fallout: Universe" or "Fallout: Sandbox".

I think they should run two games parallel Fallout 4 following 3 and whatever other game following Vegas.

» Thu Feb 25, 2010 11:31 am

Newsflash: Your no more forced to kill things in NV than you are FO3.

What are you talking about? You are forced to kill people all the time in Fallout 3. Talking your way out of killing is a rare option. If you are good, you have Talon Company sent after you all the damn time. Raiders and Slavers are all over the damn game, popping up all the time. Enclave as well. Seems to me you don't know what you're talking about. Looking at Fallout 3 through your rose coloured glasses. Alot of characters are hostile bad guys that you can't talk to.

New Vegas gives you options to get out of killing all the time! You can even talk your way into the Fiend's Vault!

» Thu Feb 25, 2010 3:42 pm

Have you seen the videos for Skyrim or the screenies for Rage? That's what I hope Fallout 4 looks like. All Bethesda's "blockbuster" knowhow brought into play. As for story - well I'm sure they've learned from experience, and working with Obsidian, so you can bet the story will be all you want too. Since they revived the Fallout franchise, it's money in the bank for Bethesda - they aren't going to kill it off by releasing a lesser game. Seriously. Commercial suicide.

Just please no more desert - my eyes hurt

» Thu Feb 25, 2010 1:19 pm

they aren't going to kill it off by releasing a lesser game. Seriously. Commercial suicide.

But what is "a lesser game" in this context?

» Thu Feb 25, 2010 8:04 am

Accepting Fallout 3 as canon is like me eating a poop sandwich, but I already accepted it, meaning that I ate a poop sandwich (not really). It broke lore on way too many places too be taken seriously. Why can't people understand? We don't hate Fallout 3, we hate the way it destroyed canon and lore.

I consider Fallout New Vegas to be Fallout 3, as it is a direct sequel to Fallout 2. Fallout 3 is more of a spin off with a "3" next to it.

I ve asked you how it broke canon and lore sooooo bad like 3 times now in threads in the last 2 weeks. You came out with some piss poor answers once that even older fans answered most of them. You r still going on, but you never give up what they did. Please tell me I want to know.

» Thu Feb 25, 2010 11:52 am

You kinda explained why the Enclave was in FO3 and I was wondering what bethesda's reason was for adding in these other original factions

Well it say Lyons bos was sent out in 2254 by western bos to#1 find mid west bos and send them back#2get to DC and see what great tech was in the capital. Who knows maybe a 40ft tall robot was in the Pentagon. So they sent them out to track down a rouge bos chapter (Which it says did not happen) and to do what bos does look for tech. I m not seeing the problem........... Where is the problem... Says a smaller (than mid west bos) but hard group led by Owen Lyons and his right hand man Scride Rothchild. I m trying to understand the problem with this, but I just don t see it.

» Thu Feb 25, 2010 11:46 am

It is a MOD :hehe:

Just kidding, I'm not familiar with fallout universe, I enjoy these game and that is enough for me.

» Thu Feb 25, 2010 7:41 pm

Have you seen the videos for Skyrim or the screenies for Rage? That's what I hope Fallout 4 looks like. All Bethesda's "blockbuster" knowhow brought into play. As for story - well I'm sure they've learned from experience, and working with Obsidian, so you can bet the story will be all you want too. Since they revived the Fallout franchise, it's money in the bank for Bethesda - they aren't going to kill it off by releasing a lesser game. Seriously. Commercial suicide.

Just please no more desert - my eyes hurt

You mean graphic wise right?, because Fallout is Fallout, it doesnt need to look like RAGE, and neither like TES V, (we need to avoid the Skyrim with guns jokes, just saying)

» Thu Feb 25, 2010 5:57 am

yeah, I mean graphic wise.

» Thu Feb 25, 2010 3:54 pm

Bethesda are the ones making the decisions on that now. Since it was named fallout 3, and not Fallout: The Abomination, then by all means that is a sequel. Fallout: New Vegas is not a sequel, but a spinoff, it's time to either accept that fallout 3 is canon, or move on to something else. There's been enough complaining by a few die hard fans that Bethesda has totally ruined their beloved franchise. I for one am tired of hearing it, It's as ridiculous as the Morrowind vs. Oblivion threads.

Fallout is in Bethesda's hands now, accept it or move on to another series if you don't like it.

This

» Thu Feb 25, 2010 7:49 pm

For some reason this thread remind me of the C&C early days at EA, where the "fans" "decided" what is "canon" and whats not :facepalm:

» Thu Feb 25, 2010 1:01 pm

I would've never expected you to say something like that. Ever.
How do you expect people to fairly look at your posts when they know that you speak with such bias?

Fallout 3 is Fallout 3. Fallout New Vegas is not. (And if we really wanna push the issue, we could say NV wouldn't even exist if it wasn't for FO3..)
It's time to accept it and move on.

Exactly and mako you're just as bad as westoftherockies (no offense west

)he's super bias to fo3 you're super bias to fonv and the originals and on topic i would say fonv is a spin off.

» Thu Feb 25, 2010 3:49 pm

Exactly and mako you're just as bad as westoftherockies (no offense west

)he's super bias to fo3 you're super bias to fonv and the originals and on topic i would say fonv is a spin off.

You could have just said they are super biased towards Fallout. That's easier. And shorter too. :fallout:

Newsflash: Your no more forced to kill things in NV than you are FO3.

See guys? These right here are the kind of people I'm talking about.
It's these kinds of posters this forum would be better off without.

Yeah right, tell me, can you get into GNR without killing the so-called Behemoth miniboss?
Talk your way into the purifier?
Talk your way out of fighting with either Talons or Regulators?

Hell you can't even use disguise like in Fallout 2 or NV.

Get your godamn facts straight before trying to "lord it over" us, lowly Fallout fans.

» Thu Feb 25, 2010 6:50 am

What, you mean series fans? That's not a nice post, and I doubt those you mention would suggest the same of you.
What you quoted was basically the truth. The IP went up for auction and was bought by the highest bidder. One of the original devs commented that it was as if the ex-wife sold their kids.

**Come to think of it.... Is it possible to get into GNR without the player defeating the... well, guard?

I only played through it once... so I don't know, but I would assume the BOS couldn't do it alone.

The bos can kill the super guard so the player doesn't have to shoot but if you mean with absolute zero interaction than well no obv it's scripted and why would the behemoth just go away when it walks in and is getting attacked it just wants hugs.

» Thu Feb 25, 2010 6:18 am

The bos can kill the super guard so the player doesn't have to shoot but if you mean with absolute zero interaction than well no obv it's scripted and why would the behemoth just go away when it walks in and is getting attacked it just wants hugs.

An original premise of the series is that there should be three paths, (of which brute combat is usually just one; with stealth and diplomacy usually being the other two). So there should be a way to get it to walk away (or otherwise neutralize it) without using direct combat.

» Thu Feb 25, 2010 9:48 am

An original premise of the series is that there should be three paths, (of which brute combat is usually just one; with stealth and diplomacy usually being the other two). So there should be a way to get it to walk away (or otherwise neutralize it) without using direct combat.

Well you could try be stealthy but aren't the east cost super mutants suppose to be quit stupid and in fairness to Mr behemoth he does get attacked first.

» Thu Feb 25, 2010 8:48 pm

Well you could try be stealthy but aren't the east cost super mutants suppose to be quit stupid and in fairness to Mr behemoth he does get attacked first.

Actually, he initiates the attack first by killing Initiate Redding.

@Smert- You have a point, but can we avoid killing or firing a gun at Hoover Dam? (WITHOUT a companion) Can you convince a faction who wants you dead because you dont support them not to attack? point is, don't be so quick to berate a game. While lacking in some lovable Fallout traits, I'd say Fallout 3 is just as Fallout as the older versions. Then again, I've got no real bias either way :shrug:

» Thu Feb 25, 2010 5:59 pm

An original premise of the series is that there should be three paths, (of which brute combat is usually just one; with stealth and diplomacy usually being the other two). So there should be a way to get it to walk away (or otherwise neutralize it) without using direct combat.

Do you not think it would be wrong to have every situation with those three paths? In an environment like fallout surely you would come across moments where action was necessary?

» Thu Feb 25, 2010 9:38 pm

Do you not think it would be wrong to have every situation with those three paths? In an environment like fallout surely you would come across moments where action was necessary?

True, but violence doesn't ALWAYS have to be a solution. Just because it's Anarchy in a wasteland, doesn't mean we HAVE to resort to violence. Personally, I enjoy talking it out over fighting. :shrug:

» Thu Feb 25, 2010 10:24 am

True, but violence doesn't ALWAYS have to be a solution. Just because it's Anarchy in a wasteland, doesn't mean we HAVE to resort to violence. Personally, I enjoy talking it out over fighting. :shrug:

Im not saying we should have to use violence. Im just saying you should expect some moments when violence is the only option.

» Thu Feb 25, 2010 9:17 pm

Do you not think it would be wrong to have every situation with those three paths? In an environment like fallout surely you would come across moments where action was necessary?

Actually... no; but it would be wrong to have them be all too obvious ~and in many cases it might damage the game's believability (I'm not in favor of that; though I am partial to mechanics over 'immursion', usually).

Im not saying we should have to use violence. Im just saying you syould expect some moments when violence is the only option.

I agree with you here; but IMO those times should not be in the main quest. If you play a diplomat who cannot find a diplomatic means to the end; and cannot survive the required encounter... Does that not mean that one of the three paths is flawed?