Poll: New Vegas?
Better than Fallout 3
As good as Fallout 3
Not as good as Fallout 3
On Planet X, Fallout XVII is the best
[Show Results]
 
New Vegas
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
06-11-2010, 02:31 PM
RE: New Vegas
(06-11-2010 01:20 PM)Buddy Christ Wrote:  Well I WAS playing as an "evil character" that time around, devoid of morals or compassion. So I'd say you're pretty accurate.

ROFLMAO ... Big Grin

I swear there should be a game where every stupid choice you make gives you Theist points and every logical and reasonable quest gives you Atheist points.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-06-2011, 04:29 PM
RE: New Vegas
A little late onto this thread. Huge Fallout fan here and New Vegas is certainly
my favorite of the series. This game is so replayable it hurts. You never run out
of mods and the areas to explore seem to go on forever.

Hard as nails. lol (my character & Boone)

[Image: newvegasshopping.jpg]

http://www.youtube.com/user/MindprowlerMusic
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-06-2011, 07:39 PM
 
RE: New Vegas
*Cough* Not to ruin anyone's parade here, but New Vegas is smaller than Fallout 3. I have 300 hours invested in Fallout 3, only 70 in New Vegas and have already discovered most of the locations in the second game (with exception to some around New Vegas).

The game was and still is to some extent extremely buggy, while Fallout 3 wasn't perfect in this sense it worked a lot better than the initial version of New Vegas. Blame Obsidian, ALL of their games are extremely buggy and frustrating (Knights of the Old Republic 2, Neverwinter Nights 2, New Vegas, etc). Some perks do not even function, some are broken and only partially function, creatures still routinely fall through the gameworld (especially if using a weapon like the YCS/186). Gambling is so simplistic as to be nearly impossible to win with low luck, but extremely easy to win with high luck, skill plays virtually no role during the minigames.

All of that being said though, the smoother aiming and fps styled combat has gotten me hooked on the game. I no longer use VATS at all, its too slow and inefficient, considering it can no longer effectively keep you from dying while being attacked (the resistance it grants is nowhere near as powerful as it was in Fallout 3) and the bonus to critical hit chance is less as well. I like using a pistol as a sniper rifle, as I know I have a 90% or better chance to hit the enemy while VATS users have only a 1-2% chance.

Not using VATS also let's you use those saved perks for other things, such as Toughness x3 (+9 damage threshold). Now as to the claim Fallout 3 has fewer songs, that's not true. Both games have a similar number of songs if you include instrumentals.
Quote this message in a reply
29-06-2011, 11:19 PM
RE: New Vegas
As buddy said, most of the good stuff in New Vegas is just carried over from Fallout 3.
Personally I want to kick the developers at Obsidian because I have a sense of indignation on behalf of Bethesda. Mind you it is a lot of fun fucking around in New Vegas once you get past the first 10 tedious level ups. So maybe I'd just spit on one of the developers, thank the others and call it a day.

They lose points for taking out the Perforator though.

Hey brother christian, with your high and mighty errand, your actions speak so loud, I can't hear a word you're saying.

"This machine kills fascists..."

"Well this machine kills commies!"
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-06-2011, 11:24 PM
RE: New Vegas
New Vegas had more variety throughout the story line with the introduction
of factions and a choose-your-own plot kind of feel allowing for more variety
and choices to be made by the player. New Vegas has way more quests, as a
matter of fact about five times more than Fallout 3. New Vegas has interactive
factions (much more interactive on PC with mods). New Vegas has more variety
in its landscape such as snowy areas (Jacobstown), developed areas (New Vegas
Strip), and heavily planted areas (Vault 22) etc. New Vegas has customizable
weapons with add-ons (and ironsights finally). New Vegas has a larger variety
of enemies. New Vegas had more interactive companions with more interesting
background stories and quest lines. I certainly like New Vegas more.

As for the bugs, most of them were fixed before it came out on PC so I wouldn't
know. I always hear console gamers talking about buggy New Vegas is and get
rather confused. I've also heard the loading screens are much longer on console.
One thing that did bother me about New Vegas was the amount of invisible walls
bordering mountains, but then again we had that same problem in the downtown
DC area in Fallout 3. I'll certainly submit that Fallout 3 had WAY better DLC's.

http://www.youtube.com/user/MindprowlerMusic
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-06-2011, 06:17 AM
 
RE: New Vegas
(29-06-2011 11:24 PM)Mindprowler Wrote:  As for the bugs, most of them were fixed before it came out on PC so I wouldn't
know. I always hear console gamers talking about buggy New Vegas is and get
rather confused. I've also heard the loading screens are much longer on console.

The game was released on PC the same days it came out on consoles, the only difference in release dates were regional (Asia, North America, UK).

Its still buggy on all systems, the game has a reputation for it and not just on consoles. They've done a lot to fix it, but some bugs are still hard coded into the game and can't be repaired easily with a patch or an unofficial mod. In this regard it is identical to Neverwinter Nights 2, though the community will generally tolerate the bugs (not always related to gameplay but with the tool set as well) if the game has enough substance to earn patience. Which New Vegas clearly has based on this thread and others like it I have participated in since its release.

The game is entertaining, though you HAVE to patch it otherwise you will never finish it due to glitches in quest lines, corrupted save files, etc. Obsidian always claims it was rushed by publishers, I might be inclined to believe them if they didn't use that excuse each and every game they release.
Quote this message in a reply
30-06-2011, 08:40 AM
RE: New Vegas
I am a huge fan of old, original Fallouts (1, 2 and Tactics), But the way they did Fallout 3 and New Vegas, I was pretty surprised. And in a good way. I still like the originals way more than these new series, but they are great. Now that you ask, I can not figure out what is better, 3 or Vegas, they are pretty similar in a way, yet so different. I can't wait to see new expansions or even a whole new game.

I give 10/10 for Fallout 3 and New Vegas. Fallout 1 and 2 get 20/10. Smile Tactics are 15/10. Smile

My only wish is to see VanBurrens original Fallout 3... It was 90% finished when they decided to give up... Then came Bethesda and made something completely different.

[Image: a6505fe8.jpg]
I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours.
-Hunter S. Thompson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Filox's post
30-06-2011, 10:58 AM (This post was last modified: 30-06-2011 11:01 AM by Mindprowler.)
RE: New Vegas
(30-06-2011 06:17 AM)Maskelyne Wrote:  The game was released on PC the same days it came out on consoles, the only difference in release dates were regional (Asia, North America, UK).

Its still buggy on all systems, the game has a reputation for it and not just on consoles. They've done a lot to fix it, but some bugs are still hard coded into the game and can't be repaired easily with a patch or an unofficial mod. In this regard it is identical to Neverwinter Nights 2, though the community will generally tolerate the bugs (not always related to gameplay but with the tool set as well) if the game has enough substance to earn patience. Which New Vegas clearly has based on this thread and others like it I have participated in since its release.

The game is entertaining, though you HAVE to patch it otherwise you will never finish it due to glitches in quest lines, corrupted save files, etc. Obsidian always claims it was rushed by publishers, I might be inclined to believe them if they didn't use that excuse each and every game they release.

http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Fallout:_New_Vegas_bugs
Well looking at the bugs pages on Fallout Wiki it seems the vast majority of the bugs
are console only bugs, mainly Xbox, by far. Perhaps I downloaded a pre-patched
version because I haven't experienced many bugs myself at all and I've probably got
60+ hours of gameplay logged.

http://www.youtube.com/user/MindprowlerMusic
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-06-2011, 05:20 PM
 
RE: New Vegas
(30-06-2011 08:40 AM)Filox Wrote:  I am a huge fan of old, original Fallouts (1, 2 and Tactics), But the way they did Fallout 3 and New Vegas, I was pretty surprised. And in a good way. I still like the originals way more than these new series, but they are great. Now that you ask, I can not figure out what is better, 3 or Vegas, they are pretty similar in a way, yet so different. I can't wait to see new expansions or even a whole new game.

I give 10/10 for Fallout 3 and New Vegas. Fallout 1 and 2 get 20/10. Smile Tactics are 15/10. Smile

My only wish is to see VanBurrens original Fallout 3... It was 90% finished when they decided to give up... Then came Bethesda and made something completely different.

I never played the originals, but from what I have seen they were similar to the Dark Sun: Shattered Lands and Dark Sun: Wake of the Ravager games from the early 90's that I played and loved, except in a sci-fi setting.

(30-06-2011 10:58 AM)Mindprowler Wrote:  http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Fallout:_New_Vegas_bugs
Well looking at the bugs pages on Fallout Wiki it seems the vast majority of the bugs
are console only bugs, mainly Xbox, by far. Perhaps I downloaded a pre-patched
version because I haven't experienced many bugs myself at all and I've probably got
60+ hours of gameplay logged.

Looking at the reported bugs. It could just as easily mean that Xbox users are more likely to post bugs on the site rather than ignore them and press on.

You'd have to survey people who edit Wikipedia articles to find out their preferred systems, as editing a Wikipedia is not something everyone does. Its a rather acquired taste, a hobby almost (like stamp collecting).
Quote this message in a reply
01-07-2011, 05:29 AM
RE: New Vegas
Whoever didn't play original Fallouts have no idea how great the Fallout series actually is. It has awful graphics from the early 90-is but the graphics is not why you played those games, it was the story, the jokes, the references to all sorts of movies and books, the characters, the abilities you can make and have, the wide selection of choices you could have and the reactions your actions would produce. New Fallouts are mostly 1st person shooters with some elements of RPG, but old Fallouts were 100% pure RPG, the best that was ever made. And everything was turn-based if you set it like that, not like now when you must run around and pray not to get killed by a bunch of Super Mutants. Original Fallouts don't have any category to put them into, or any other game to compare them with, they are unique.

[Image: a6505fe8.jpg]
I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours.
-Hunter S. Thompson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: