It's not quite that simple given the large number of variations the New Vegas ending can have depending on your actions up to the end of the main quest. If they just let those who wanted to keep playing do so without changing the gameworld to reflect that players actions, I'm pretty sure there would be a lot of the people wanting continued gameplay after the main quest on the forums raging because the post ending gameplay does not reflect their choices in the game.
I'm reasonably sure that Obsidian decided against post ending gameplay for several reasons one of which I think is that with the timescale they had to work with they knew they could not take into account the characters actions throughout the game and thus couldn't create a 'seamless' post ending gameworld. Also the game would have to keep track of the various ending segments you can possibly get, of which there are a total of 27 different segments you can unlock, although one of them is negated by one of the others, so there are a total of 26 ending segments you can see at the end of the game. On top of this each of those 27 segments has anywhere between 4 and 13 variations to them. Trying to keep track of all that would increase the games programming complexity by at least an order of magnitude and on top of that the more complex a program is the greater the chance of more bugs and glitches.



@WestoftheRockies. The Vanilla version of Fallout 3 had a definate ending so your example is incorrect citing it as a free roam style game. Mass Effect 2 while it may let you continue playing after the end of the game, it's post ending gameplay leaves a LOT to be desired.

I was just thinking maybe they could let you still explore the mojave searching for side quests without any of the changes after the end. Sounds pretty silly to me but maybe it would stop some of the people complaining. Having the choice there wouldn't do any harm?

I am continually amazed that it is viewed as a mistake. It is (and always has been), a major ~even lauded, aspect of the entire series.

I am continually amazed that it is viewed as a mistake. It is (and always has been), a major ~even lauded, aspect of the entire series.

I am continually amazed that it is viewed as a mistake. It is (and always has been), a major ~even lauded, aspect of the entire series.

Welcome to the world of hand holding in Video Games. Not to be wearing my nostalgia glasses, but time was, the game would end, you'd feel accomplished beating it, then you'd start over. Now you have to make it unending, even though the after game content is usually mindless killing with no real purpose than to shut cry babies up. New Vegas should remain a fixed and absolute ending. Otherwise the aftergame Broken Steelesque DLC would just make New Vegas laughing stock number two. The only REAL mistake was Bethesda caving in to community pressure, the result? a half done DLC that borked the game.

No point to continue the game after the MQ is done. Entire factions vanish as a result and thus little to do.

No, grinding re-spawning enemies isn't continuing.

i agree, the game does need to end because there isn't much to do anyway once the main quest is over.. but as far as the factions "vanishing", thats just end game slides...you can make up any story once the game is over and use that as an excuse to not actually incorporate anything more into the game cause people like you would say, "oh everything changes after the main quest it would be impossible for them to put all that in the game, ROFL....like i said before, games much better than new vegas let you keep on playing after the main story... practically every bethesda game since their games don't have endings, and their games are pretty top notch, and lots of others games, the stalker games let you keep playing, mass effect does and its a decent franchise, and plenty of other pretty good games, so its not a mark of a good game to have a short story then have the game end, it just means they didn't take the time to put in enough content.

i agree, the game does need to end because there isn't much to do anyway once the main quest is over.. but as far as the factions "vanishing", thats just end game slides...you can make up any story once the game is over and use that as an excuse to not actually incorporate anything more into the game cause people like you would say, "oh everything changes after the main quest it would be impossible for them to put all that in the game, ROFL....like i said before, games much better than new vegas let you keep on playing after the main story... practically every bethesda game since their games don't have endings, and their games are pretty top notch, and lots of others games, the stalker games let you keep playing, mass effect does and its a decent franchise, and plenty of other pretty good games, so its not a mark of a good game to have a short story then have the game end, it just means they didn't take the time to put in enough content.

the stalker games let you keep playing

at this point you're just beating a dead horse

Welcome to the world of hand holding in Video Games. Not to be wearing my nostalgia glasses, but time was, the game would end, you'd feel accomplished beating it, then you'd start over. Now you have to make it unending, even though the after game content is usually mindless killing with no real purpose than to shut cry babies up. New Vegas should remain a fixed and absolute ending. Otherwise the aftergame Broken Steelesque DLC would just make New Vegas laughing stock number two. The only REAL mistake was Bethesda caving in to community pressure, the result? a half done DLC that borked the game.

:clap: :clap: :clap:

Could not have said it any better myself.

/dead horse beating

I do agree with you. Im not that bothered about the game ending, it gives you plenty warning this time which is good.
I was just thinking maybe they could let you still explore the mojave searching for side quests without any of the changes after the end. Sounds pretty silly to me but maybe it would stop some of the people complaining. Having the choice there wouldn't do any harm?

I am continually amazed that it is viewed as a mistake. It is (and always has been), a major ~even lauded, aspect of the entire series.

People new to the series played Fallout 3, they expected New Vegas to be similar, it was not. Some of them are disappointed.

Yes, and they removed it with Broken Steel because people expected that a Bethesda game keeps going after the end. I'm guessing people like me who hadn't played a Bethesda game before that didn't mind the game ending. Atleast i didn't.