Iso and turn-based.

All in all this is a pretty solid Fallout. I just hope Bethesda follows suit.

disagree with turn-based, that would take so much time to actually make it work that they might as well make a new game.. if you wanted turn-based combat, why did you even buy fallout?

anyway, random encounters and a more challenging game would make me happy

*twitch*

I'm sorry, that came out wrong

If you wanted turn-based combat, why did you even buy fallout: New Vegas?

there

This is somehow like demanding to get back to black and white TV :yes:
No, I like the first person real time approach, it makes the game much more immersive and lively.

- They probably could try to flesh out the VATS mode a bit more, even though I quite like it already. Though, I wouldn't mind returning to a dice roll based hit detection, but there probably already too many players of the FPS crowd here("Boohoohoo, I don't care if it is an RPG, it has to be my personal aiming skill that should count..."), who would go onto barricades, if someone dared to actually re-establish a real RPG concept here.

- What they really should think about, is increasing the VATS range for perks like Comando or Sniper.
As of now they don't offer enough to justify picking them. In my previous games I always took 'em, but in my current I didn't, and really, there's barely a difference.

- Other than that, de-nerfing the Sniper rifles would be appreciated. Not to pre-patch levels, but something in between. Just decrease the ROF a bit to keep the "Oh noez, close combat abuse"-whiners at bay, keep the DAM as it is, and apply a x3 crit multiplier, and I''d be very happy. I miss my trusted Gobi soooo much :sadvaultboy:

-My other big concern is Bugfxing, bugfixing, bugfixing.
For example, FIX all the quest item bugs! I hate carrying Motor-Runners helmet around all the time. Same goes the Medical Supplies, Legion Raid Plans, and various other useless items I can't get rid of. It is really annyoing.

- Next big thing are non restocking merchants. I spend quite a bit of time for doing Contreras' jobs just to realize that I neither get access to his enhanced inventory, nor do I get a discount, nor does he re-stock. Same goes thing for Alexander. Srsly, that can't be too hard, eh?

- Improving Explosives has been nominated lots of times already

- While there was a big improvement on Energy Weapons, the ammo requirements for some weapons still need to be reconsidered. Pew-Pew or the Tesla Cannons are still a no-no for someone playing in HC mode. Monetary aspects aside, the weight factor is an even bigger issue.
And no, I'm not buying the eventual "So take Pack Rat, then" excuse :nono:

Point taken.

Dead Space 2 has the right idea: severly limited ammo and healing items with extremely limited saves. Difficulty doesn't come from dealing with an enemy, it comes from managing your resources (that includes saves) to survive all the way to the end. Now i wouldn't want saves to be limited on a game like New Vegas, but limiting the other supplies i do want.

Sombreros.

Dead Space 2 however, is a Surivival Horror game, and not a CRPG.
Haven't played 2 yet, loved 1, but I can safely say, that I never wanted to see the game mechanics of a 15h shooter game transported to a game like Fallout with a potential playtime of 100h+ with character progression and all that stuff.
A game like Fallout is not about difficult and challenging combat.
For that, you have ample of other games, and if has to be in a Fallout game, then stick to corresponding mods.

Actually, it is to be at a level of difficulty that makes you actually think about strategem and careful usage of your Action Points in your turn(In the originals) I dont know how they could transfer this into the modern games in any way besides the limiting of resources.

You still have to put thoughts into your approach how to engage various situations, combat and non-combat related. You can't walk into the Quarry with a Varmint Rifle, low Gun skill, and hope to get out of there in one piece. Actually later you technically can, but only with extensive knowledge of the location and the weak points. But that again, requires thought and time.
A game like Dead Space follows a completely different idea of gaming experience.
Such a game is totally different in its scope and objectives. It is centered around surviving in a very confined space, where you're alone against overwhelming, horrifying odds, putting you in a constant state of tension, panic and fear.
Fallout is obviously not pursuing this idea. It has many more and other elements, one of them being scavenging in a rather big world.
There has to be a reward for exploring buildings, opening every locker, desk, and dresser, turning up every stone. Of course, a balance needs to be maintained. Too much loot, and it becomes meaningless quick, like in Fallout 3. Too few, and people won't bother looking anymore.

*Remembers all the times dying horribly in FO1, 2 and Tactics*
...
I'm sorry I dozed out there for a second.

Yes, that is of course true, but we are talking about the hardcoe mode; optional for players that want higher challenge that it's current implementation does not provide.



Like in New Vegas :hehe:

Vehicles. Less invisible walls.

I would like to be able to remove mods. In reality, things like scopes are connected with a Picatinny Rail and would be as easy to remove as they are to add.
That and lots of random encounters.

Have ground textures that actually look like sand cause, holy crap the games in a desert, and not just a bunch of recycled ones from FO3

You encounter: an Enclave Patrol.

You were hit for 31 points of damage.

You were hit for 31 points of damage.

You were hit for 19 points of damage.

You were critically hit for 78 points of damage and killed.

Seriously? This coming from a guy who defends a faction from Fallout 3.

NV's main story is about as deep as a hotel pool, and while still good, it does not maintain my interest as much as Fallout 3, which was Epic and Deeper than this story. While i have changed my reasoning since your posting, my reasoning is still the same, NV's story is still not as deep.

Oh. So a 19 year old brat who looks for daddy is deep. Right.

Let's see those 'deep' arguments then. :turned:

So have you, or have you not changed your reasoning?

What makes NV story so shallow in your eyes and FO3 story deep? I really can't tell. Boy looks for daddy and helps the good guys is deep, while having a detailed - and often individual - impact on the whole region, its inhabitants and factions for years to come is shallow?

I'd say, if NV is a hotel pool, FO3 is a stain of moist. :shrug:

Sure it is. The first thing Tim made was the engine that modeled GURPS skills & combat. They settled on a setting and story later.
Fallout combat could see the PC outnumbered 9 to 1.

The combat in the Fallout series was a highlight [for me] along side the detailed holo-tape logs.

**This was something that really disappointed me... I never found anything even remotely approaching the West-Tek facility level (FO1) in Fallout 3.

Fun trivia.... Holo-tapes are 4 terabyte media. :laugh: ~it says so in Fallout (1)

I'm not trying to cause a fight here, i am just trying to say, a story about revenge, then having to force to pick a faction in order to be used to lead an attack on Hoover Dam because of how you got your revenge? That is IMHO, not a very deep story. While being told you were raised in a Vault, then scouring the wasteland for your father, only to have him die for you to save you, then you sacrifice yourself so you save others, that is IMHO a deep Story. We are all entitled to our opinions, and i respect all of yours, But good grief, you people bash and bash a game that runs on basically the same engine and has basically the same elements as the game you marvel over, it only has more guns, more mods, and different people in it. Seriously, i have been saying since i have been blue in the face under my armor, if you do not like a game, don't ruin it for those of us who do like it, just don't play it anymore and play the games you like.

We are all advlts here, we need to act like it, i sure am by simply trying to avoid arguments as much as possible. I love fallout, I love all of the Fallout Games, no matter how shallow or deep they are, lousy or great... :fallout: But if were going to stay a powerful force in the gaming community, we cannot be tearing apart and nit picking every little [censored] feature in every game, just enjoy them for what they are, flaws and all, in my case, my favorite is Fallout 3, and i will not deny it. If it makes me a less of a person for telling the truth for being honest, i understand, but honesty has it's own rewards in the end, and being someone who unites and does not argue all the time is better than someone who divides and spams with arguments over little things. ( and i am not pointing fingers, i am better than that.)

Indeed :foodndrink:

IMO, Its not the engine that makes it good or bad... its what you do with it. What I have seen (of FO:New Vegas) has felt more like Fallout to me than Fallout 3 (even though neither one felt enough like Fallout to me).

Fallout's engine has nothing on Fallout 3's, but I consider FO1 a better game and a better RPG. :shrug:

Paladin John, you forgot that you had no choice in your actions in Fallout 3, you had to find your Dad and he could only die in that set spot and you had to help the BoS, nothing you did could change this, in NV, if i hate House, i can kill him, if i like NCR, i can help them, if i decide i like Legion more and i havent pissed them off, i can cut away from NCR and help Caesar, FO3 wasnt deep, just linear.