why couldn't you free roam after the ending of new vegas? : Fallout Series Discussion

» Thu May 03, 2012 5:59 am

I like conclusive endings. It means that they can write in wide-ranging consequences of player choice that would be unfeasible or excessively resource-heavy to actually put in the game. A Fallout ending to me is those slides, with narration, describing what you (possibly inadvertently) played a part in causing. I would never trade this away for the chance to tie up some loose quest ends post-ending. A well-designed RPG will lend itself well to replays - do what you missed with a new chacter.

» Thu May 03, 2012 2:21 pm

I like how New Vegas did it, Fallout isn't TES. They both don't need to be the exact 100% same game. Fallout should end, TES should be infinite in gameplay. Broken Steel ruined Fallout 3's ending which was actually decent from what Beth usually pumps out.

» Thu May 03, 2012 11:01 am

You see it in the ending slides! :biggrin:

I know, I was referring to seeing it in-game. That's not going to happen, as it would be way too much work. Which is kind of a shame, as it would be nice to see them in person.

» Thu May 03, 2012 4:04 am

What happens if you beat the DLC's?

» Thu May 03, 2012 6:51 pm

Honestly I think New Vegas should have let us freeroam after the credits, however it should have been like Fallout 2(been a while since I picked it up so it might even be Tactics or One) where it is just sort of an easter egg.

» Thu May 03, 2012 3:54 pm

What happens if you beat the DLC's?

You see the ending slides for them. But you can come back to the dlcs after completing them. (all but Dead Money)
So yeah, all but dead money can be free roamed. The main game just puts you back to an earlier save.

» Thu May 03, 2012 6:31 am

So as long as I don't beat the main story, I can beat the DLC's and can still free roam?

» Thu May 03, 2012 2:08 pm

So as long as I don't beat the main story, I can beat the DLC's and can still free roam?

Yeah free roam in the dlcs. Except for Dead Money, ones you beat that one you can never come back.

And just save before the final battle. And load it up after the credits so you can do anything you might have missed in the main game.

» Thu May 03, 2012 4:38 am

Why are the other DLC's not effected like this? Once you beat the others you're returned to the Mojave except for Dead Money?

» Thu May 03, 2012 11:22 am

Why are the other DLC's not effected like this? Once you beat the others you're returned to the Mojave except for Dead Money?

It's in case you didn't get any loot (you did pay extra for the content, after all). And even then, it's kinda boring (Zion in particular) because there's nothing to do there. And I don't know why anyone would want to return to the Sierra Madre afterwards. Despite all the writing about "Oh, finding the Sierra Madre's not the hard part. It's letting go." by the end of my stay there, I was thinking to myself "Seriously, [censored] the Sierra Madre, this place svcks."

» Thu May 03, 2012 10:15 am

Some people like playing after the end, some people dont. Some people like telling a story which ends, some people dont.

Fixed as in how you fix a male dog, whom you don't want to breed anymore, with a sharp metal object? Because that's effectively what happened there. :laugh:

i genuinely burst out laughing... with a mouth full of coffee...

» Thu May 03, 2012 3:49 pm

Why are the other DLC's not effected like this? Once you beat the others you're returned to the Mojave except for Dead Money?

Whenever you beat any of the dlcs you return to the mojave. It's just that in Dead Money you can't go from the Mojave back to the Sierra Madre once you completed it.

As the poster below you said, if you beat it and come back to the other 3 dlcs it becomes boring. It's only useful if you missed an item or a terminal or another note that added to the story.

» Thu May 03, 2012 4:25 am

So why is Dead Money different? It's "paid content".

» Thu May 03, 2012 2:36 pm

because of how you get there and how it ends mainly.

» Thu May 03, 2012 8:42 am

So why is Dead Money different? It's "paid content".

Because it's set up in such a way that the ability to return would be a contravention of its main theme, which would defeat the point of having completed it in the first place.

» Thu May 03, 2012 2:15 pm

Because it's set up in such a way that the ability to return would be a contravention of its main theme, which would defeat the point of having completed it in the first place.

Contravention is, in French law, an act which violates the law, a treaty or an agreement which the party has made. It designates a minor infraction only, as opposed to a delict and a crime. Any infraction to a law or regulation (enforced by the executive agents of the State), that is not punishable by more than a 3000€ fine for a person, is classed as a contravention. The fine may also be matched with an additional sentence (peines complémentaires).

Don't really understand what you are trying to say. Unless you mean contradiction. :banana:

» Thu May 03, 2012 4:11 pm

Because, war, war never changes.
and neither does the Mojave, get used to it.

» Thu May 03, 2012 12:00 pm

Becuase unlike Fallout 3, New Vegas actually had choice in the endings (Four major endings plus loads of different variations on minor quests and storylines)

Would have taken too much time and effort on Obsidians part to have created a post-ending world that could reflect all of your choices.

And Broken Steel fixed nothing. It broke the levelling system that it tried to balance out with bullet sponges, gave us a selection of rediculous cheat perks and gave us a really stupid 'final mission' ie: Collect an endless supply of cameras and batteries. It railroaded us even further into helping the BOS (Something we'd been forced to do in the main story) and invalidated our heroic sacrifice at the end of the main story so that we could become little more than an errand boy/girl.

I can't say it didn't do that. But the level cap of 20 was way too low, and Broken Steel actually added in a ton of true END GAME gameplay.

Considering FO3 was not really a FO game as much as it was "oblivion with guns", the open free roam of BS actually "Fixed" that game.

FONV is more of a true FO game.

» Thu May 03, 2012 6:15 am

The truth is, a more expensive and impossible game to make would have BOTH a MQ ending, and then additional gameplay after. The gameworld would be changed, and reflect the ending, but then contain side quests and free roam.

Considering the time and money it would take to do that right, most games just don't even attempt it.

» Thu May 03, 2012 4:01 pm

it cant be done because the ompact that you can have in the mojave is way to much. Especially in a pro legion way, if you do it all with their best interests in mind then their will be loads of legionaires and nearly no ncr troops around. And theres also anarchy where yes man becomes more "assertive" without saying what he will change about himself.

» Thu May 03, 2012 6:11 pm

Wouldn′t hurt to have a different ending. It felt a little bit like ending a movie in the most intense part of the film.