You need to realize that many of the assets from Fallout 3 have been reused. Having learned from many of the pitfalls of the previous game, they could have added a lot to the game. To me the game looks a bit less realistic than Fallout 3. Maybe it's because Istvan Pèly is no longer involved with the game. I haven't seen anything interesting so far. Just the old repetetive stuff: you shoot at a guy's head and his neck gets chopped off, or his limbs come off, ya know?

You should also check out the new screenshot, it shows how you can knock out a supermutant with boxing gloves!

To you it says that. Don't assume to others. I can adapt perfectly well into seeing the "chess piece" as my avatar. Others seem to be able to do that, too. ^_^

AFAIK Leonard Boyarski is lead artist on Diablo 3.

At minimum... on a technical level, they've had over a year to note engine problems [big and small], so I'd expect improvements.

Did it ever cross your mind that some people like isometric turnbased games?
It's like how some people like going to the opera, or horseriding, or swimming in a lake.
I don't like any of those things, but others do.
And I don't go bashing those things or the people who do them.
I just have understanding that it isn't my cup of tea and leave them alone.
(Should've used another word than 'bash' but my vocabulary ain't the greatest, not even in swedish...)

Maybe they are plated boxing gloves.

I think it would be more accurate to say it will be a progression. Improved this and that, more fallout for your money and so on

Yes, i know that new vegas will be much better than fo3.

Even just the special/trait system tweak makes it a lot better. It is a shame that fo3 broked the system that was already nearly a perfect. As it is said, dont fix what isnt broken.

Now that will be fixed, the biggest downpoint will be erased. This makes playing this game a lot funnier. If they really implement that many paths to archieve a goal, then it would be nearly perfect game. fo3 had too litle amount of weapons too and that will be fixed too. ammo types, threshold... Yummy! :goodjob: :celebration: This will be the best game ever. :woot: Well not good as doom, but almost.

I enjoyed Fallout 3 but didn't really like that the main quest was primarily Fallout 1 + 2 combined and set on the east coast.

New Vegas I'm very excited about as it is expanding the west coast story and working partially from the Van Buren design plan. So in my mind the game will feel much more like a sequel to Fallout 2 than Fallout 3 did. As for whether New Vegas will be better than Fallout 3? I can't say until I play it. But the level of hype for me personally is in NV's favor.

Well they still have one more thing though, settlements, towns and faction interactions.
In fallout 2 there was alot of stuff going on, this place had a quarrel with that place and that place had an alliance with that place and this place had good trading relations with that place and so on.
In fallout 3 there was almost nothing, Rivet City seemed oblivious to Megaton's existence IIRC.
The only things were like "Hey blow up megaton for tenpenny tower", yeah, that's a really deep history of the towns relations...
"Hey we're slaves and we want to move into DC were some slavers reside, go kill 'em for us!!!!" uh-huh...

All of the relations that were there were basically "Kill the other guys".
Let's just hope for more developed relations between settlements and factions other than "Kill these mofhuggas".
Something like faction A like Faction F because they have a good trading going on, but A are also grateful for what P did for them in the past but F are working out a deal with Y which are pissed off at P and are at war with them.
Now F are in a bind because they can't be on both A's and Y's side.
It's not the greatest explenation and it's really simplistic but at least it's something.

The engine for FO3 was already built....since Morrowind...in 2002. FO3 team only had to do some minor upgrades to graphics, then create a whole whack of new content. From what I've seen in screens, the amount of new content for NV looks like about 15-25% of the content in FO3, if not less. So who knows, it's not how long they have, it's how much passion they have for what they do.

The gameplay was definitely improved, but the storyline is a matter of taste. Personally up until the ending (which was largely fixed by the restoration patch) I thought KotOR II had a terrific storyline that was much better than the cookie cutter story of the original KotOR. I'd go into details, but this isn't KotOR discussion; regardless I'm not concerned about New Vegas because of KotOR II - if anything I see their work on KotOR II as a good sign for NV.



The problem here is that you're comparing two completely different types of RPGs, and (in a previous post) are essentially saying that every RPG should follow your preference. In Fallout 1/2 your character was your avatar as well; camera perspective doesn't really make much of a difference in that regard. When you play an RPG you're playing the role of a specific character, that's what RPGs are about. Some people find first/third person cameras more "immersive", but that's just a matter of taste. Personally I've found that either perspective can be equally immersive if the game world is structured well enough, and if the writing is any good.

As Blizzard said when they were challenged by Bethesda on making Diablo III top down, it's a design decision. You may not like it but top down is not going anywhere, nor should it. In my experience even the most simplest of top down games (The Diablo series for example) tend to require more tactics than first/third person RPGs which tend to focus more on action than strategy (especially in this day and age where statistics are becoming less and less meaningful), so I find top down RPGs far more appealing. Does this mean that I believe every RPG in existence should be top down? No, there's a place for both types of RPGs and I'll happily play them both despite having a preference.

As I understand it Fallout NV still has first person mode. Does it not?

Yeah, in the gameplay preview there was both first person and third person gameplay. I prefer first person personally... Can't wait for down the sights

As far as I know, I'm pretty sure we've seen some screen shots and videos from a first person perspective.

Given how we lost the item and world descriptions, plus the critical descriptions, I'd say this is a net loss. The problem with "immersion" of this sort is that it's exceedingly shallow and will only cater to one of the senses, while a well-written description can cater to all of them.



I'm not so limited in my imagination as that. I'm able to view the character abstractly and recognize that he is "me," or rather, my avatar in the game world.

fallout 3 had such a long dev time because they had to build the game from scratch. where as new vegas already had the fo3 base to use and expand upon.
in my personal opinion Fallout New Vegas is going to be at least three times as good as fo3, with the extensive weapon customization double the amount of weapons as fo3(42~84)
and the hardcoe mode, all goes to make Fallout New Vegas better than fo3.

no , because quite frankly :fallout: 3 is the best game ever ............ behind oblivion B)

As I can transport myself to the future I can honestly say that Fallout New Vegas will be......

*Get's svcked into Oblivion gate bliviongate:

omg ik i cant wait to look down them sights :foodndrink:

In their list of changes from FO3, the NV guy also mentioned that they had re-done the 1st person gun animations, which probably means they saw the demand for proper down the sights aiming and added that in for good measure.

With all of the changes to roleplay, the companions, animations, and weapons, this game looks like it will be way beyond Fallout 3 in every aspect. One change animations-wise I hope they make is the pistol animation. It looked ridiculous running while holding the gun at your hip, and I really don't want to wait for another animation mod before I could get rid of that.

.....yes.....next stupid question please

Eh...the thing is, the top-down view isn't some kind of old-timey style that will die out. It's a design choice that actually makes sense for games with strategic elements to things like combat. For a single-character RPG (which arguably Fallout is) the first-person perspective is a perfectly valid choice, particularly if the combat is going to be action-oriented, but if you're managing more than one character in a game that forces to use multi-unit tactics/strategies a top-down view is necessary. Now, if you don't like games with multi-unit strategy that's perfectly fine, but to say that the entire top-down perspective needs to die out is really short-sighted. More than a few game styles that are alive and well depend on it.

After reading this post and having a little think, I have came to my conclusion.
Fallout 3 was an amazing game, stop splitting hairs. No game can be perfect, never before have I joined a forum before about a game. Or started talking about it 100 or so days pre release. Most people here are just complaining for the sake of complaining.

Therefore New Vegas will be an amazing game, whether it will be better is yet unknown. Judging by interviews,hype,people and just general belief in improvement; I say yes, yes it will.

I hope it's better and it should be better considering it's more recent and so should have more and better features as well as new technologies (though it still runs on gamebryo :shakehead:) but there's really no way pf knowing