Gamespot's Fallout New Vegas Review 7.5?!?!

Hey guys I was just wondering if Gamespot's Fallout New Vegas (Homepage Slide)review applies only forthePS3 or for all paltforms? Im still downloading the game from Steam thanks to STEAM and its problems, but wow 7.5! Thats gotta hurt. Hopefully thePC version will have the best review and not 7.5. Theymention that the game has disastrous bugs,is that the case for all 3 paltforms? I thought thePC versionwas a bit cleaner. Kkthanks in advance.

The PC version is also horribly buggygmaster456

Funny, I've experienced 1 bug and no crashes in about 10+ hours of playing. I guess your definition of "horribly buggy" and mine differ greatly.

I hear it's great but buggy. Some users are reporting bugs, others aren't.

At any rate im going to wait for a few patches and hit up the PC version.

Is a 7.5 really that bad? I don't get it...

I say that's fair. This game just feels like a giant expansion.

I agree more with IGN's review for this one.

I played 1-2 hours of hte xbox version and about 8 hours of the pc version.

Just like IGN I would give the PC version a 9/10.

I had one time where the FPS went low and a few NPC's that would get stuck on something, but thats it!
No crashes, no freezes, no auto save issues,etc...

The game is much more enjoyable then Fallout3 imo.

Gamespot's review is consistent with most others. They're all saying the game has bugs. Gamespot just seemed to deduct more for it. But despite the bugs, most reviews including Gamespot's are saying it's very good.

Gamespot's review is consistent with most others. They're all saying the game has bugs. Gamespot just seemed to deduct more for it. But despite the bugs, most reviews including Gamespot's are saying it's very good.

Qixote

[QUOTE="Qixote"]

Gamespot's review is consistent with most others. They're all saying the game has bugs. Gamespot just seemed to deduct more for it. But despite the bugs, most reviews including Gamespot's are saying it's very good.

Im_single

Very true, Red Dead Redemption has the most bugs ive ever seen in a game (way more then I have experienced in Vegas so far) and yet it got very high scores. Still a very fun game, but when you have women turning into horses and peopel flying randomly it makes you wonder. Its ok for Rockstar to make a game that has bugs but its not ok for Obsidian :(

[QUOTE="gmaster456"]The PC version is also horribly buggy-wildflower-

Funny, I've experienced 1 bug and no crashes in about 10+ hours of playing. I guess your definition of "horribly buggy" and mine differ greatly.

turn on full AF and start a new game.. prepare for some lols hahaha

Problem is that Fallout 3 was produced in-house by Bethesda. In-house games from them are usually a 2-3 year production event with a staff of many, lots of money, debugging and testing,and a project manager who helped invent the open endedrpg genre. (Kudos on William and Marycover storyrecently)

New Vegas is outsourced with code, engine, and a minimum of staff to a lesser company . Obsidian Entertainment, the rehasher of novel ideas. Who knows what will happen?

Hope it works out though since I f'ing think that FO 1, 2, and 3 are the best games ever.

I do not have it yet, but a 7.5 for a broken game (from what I have heard, seems like there has been about 20 "Why doesnt Fallout work right" threads today) is incredibly generous.

Either way, a 7.5 is a good score. On the upper end of good, even, approaching great.

And did you read the review? I hope you just didnt look at the score and go "OMG make thread, make thread"

Man, I thought about getting this game. I guess I am going to have to wait until they patch it all. chandu83

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6282464.html?tag=latestheadlines%3Btitle%3B2

I love developers/publishers that look after their gamers and, even better, own up to their shortcomings.

I honestly don't know why Bethesda gets a free pass on buggy games yet other games are penalized for it.

I honestly don't know why Bethesda gets a free pass on buggy games yet other games are penalized for it.

Vesica_Prime

not a fanboy, but I do not think they did...they got a 7.5 when they would have gotten a 9.0 easily

[QUOTE="Vesica_Prime"]

I honestly don't know why Bethesda gets a free pass on buggy games yet other games are penalized for it.

mrbojangles25

not a fanboy, but I do not think they did...they got a 7.5 when they would have gotten a 9.0 easily

[QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

[QUOTE="Vesica_Prime"]

I honestly don't know why Bethesda gets a free pass on buggy games yet other games are penalized for it.

Ragingbear505

not a fanboy, but I do not think they did...they got a 7.5 when they would have gotten a 9.0 easily

Hmmm I have not gotten New Vegas yet so I will say nothing good/bad about it. However, the reason I believe New Vegas is getting lower scores is because it really feels more of an "expansion" so to say, since it is still based on the old Gamebryo engine and has very similar mechanics to Fallout 3. All I hear from people is that New Vegas has deeper story, improved dialogue and ties to the origins, but I seriously think Obsidian just learned from Fallout 3's shortcomings and added many tweaks. They didn't change the formula, or innovate anything. I guess it is an "improved" Fallout 3, or even a true sequel to the original Fallouts, but I still feel like they should've went for something new. People here on Gamespot judge Fallout 3 harshly, but it was more "novel" for it's time, unlike this game, where the formula seems to be tiring itself.

[QUOTE="Ragingbear505"]

[QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

not a fanboy, but I do not think they did...they got a 7.5 when they would have gotten a 9.0 easily

BLUBBBER

Hmmm I have not gotten New Vegas yet so I will say nothing good/bad about it. However, the reason I believe New Vegas is getting lower scores is because it really feels more of an "expansion" so to say, since it is still based on the old Gamebryo engine and has very similar mechanics to Fallout 3. All I hear from people is that New Vegas has deeper story, improved dialogue and ties to the origins, but I seriously think Obsidian just learned from Fallout 3's shortcomings and added many tweaks. They didn't change the formula, or innovate anything. I guess it is an "improved" Fallout 3, or even a true sequel to the original Fallouts, but I still feel like they should've went for something new. People here on Gamespot judge Fallout 3 harshly, but it was more "novel" for it's time, unlike this game, where the formula seems to be tiring itself.

I get where you are coming from, concerning new ideas.

But in these times of casualization and whatnot, all I ask out of developers (specifically those making sequals, mind you), is that they learn from prior mistakes.

I have not played this yet, but aside from the bugs it soudns liek Obsidian did this.

After 15 hours of play i have had 1 crash. No gamebreaking bugs, no graphic glitches. All graphics and settings to ultra high.

All i can say is im having a great time and dont care much for reviews anymore - i use to, but i make my own judgement nowadays.

Is a 7.5 really that bad? I don't get it...

agpickle

with their budget anything less than 8/10 is bad, not that gamespot has the word since their constantly inacurate in reviews, giving incredibly high rating to generic or poor games, etc.. but in this case its pretty acurate and the game is a fail considering the budget and such

I didnt like Fallout3 much but I LOVE this game.

They made everything that sucked in Fallout3 great in New Vegas. Better story, more rpg elements, better voice acting, better atmosphere and better characters.

The only thing that is better in Fallout3 is the Radio stations.

Sure there is bugs but I have had ZERO crashes in 9 hours of gameplay, no freezes and no gamebrekaing bugs.

I had one slowdown in one certain house and a few npc get stuck, other then that my experience has been smooth sailing.

As one review said "I would rather have a gem of a game that is buggy, instead of a well polished turd".

This game is extremely fun to me, somethign Fallout3 wasn't.

This feels like a true fallout game to me to be honest.

So far its been less buggy for me then Fallout3 was on release (I crashed once in the first 10 hours of Fallout3, have not crashed once in 8 hours of New Vegas), but even if it is more buggy I dont mind.. I would take some bugs anyday if I get a better story, atmosphere, characters, gameplay, better roleplaying and voice acting.

Just my two cents, I bought Fallout3 on released day, was dissapointed, bought Fallout New Vegas on release day and am having a heck of a time, bringing back memories frmo when Fallout1 came out.

[QUOTE="agpickle"]

Is a 7.5 really that bad? I don't get it...

chertoo

with their budget anything less than 8/10 is bad, not that gamespot has the word since their constantly inacurate in reviews, giving incredibly high rating to generic or poor games, etc.. but in this case its pretty acurate and the game is a fail considering the budget and such

Try the game first, the game is not a fail at all.

Gamespot gave it a 7.5 (on consoles) and IGN gave it a 9/10 on PC, who says gamespot is more RIGHT then IGN is? I personally think IGN nailed the score and review for this game, I would advice people to try this game first before callING FLOP OR FAIL!

Red Dead Redemption was released with waaaaay more bugs then this game was and yet gamespot gave that score AAA. Its ok for some games to be buggy but not others it seems.

[QUOTE="gmaster456"]The PC version is also horribly buggy-wildflower-

Funny, I've experienced 1 bug and no crashes in about 10+ hours of playing. I guess your definition of "horribly buggy" and mine differ greatly.

Well then you're lucky. I've encountered the following in my four hours of play:

- Unacceptably low framerates. With my rig I get 25 FPS average with no AA, no AF, HDR disabled, and vsync disabled at 1920x1080 ultra high quality. If I turn down the quality to "high" I get 35 FPS average which is still unacceptably low when you consider my rig has a 5970 and an i7. To put this in perspective, Metro 2033 runs at about 45 FPS average completely maxed out at the same resolution, and Crysis gets 45 FPS average with AA on, vsync on, and CCC level 6 and the extreme quality mod (if I get rid of the mods I can pull 60+ FPS no sweat with the game maxed out).

- The game cannot quicksave. Hitting the quicksave key elicits the "Quicksaving..." message, but upon checking my saves I can see that the game consistently fails to overwrite the last quicksave. Unfortunately I didn't notice this until I lost a total of about an hour and a half of game progress.

- Texture and mesh glitches everywhere. This is especially prevalent when looking at far off landscapes like mountains where I can see textures and mountains clipping through each other. I'd also mention the fact that at certain distances far off textures begin flashing between a high quality rendering and a distance texture rendering, but this is a flaw in the Gamebryo engine so I'll let that slide (for the record the HDR bug is also in this game).

These are all pretty serious, gamebreaking bugs that were all unaddressed by the patch released yesterday.

I hear it's great but buggy. Some users are reporting bugs, others aren't.

At any rate im going to wait for a few patches and hit up the PC version.

Wasdie

Well then you're lucky. I've encountered the following in my four hours of play:

- Unacceptably low framerates. With my rig I get 25 FPS average with no AA, no AF, HDR disabled, and vsync disabled at 1920x1080 ultra high quality. If I turn down the quality to "high" I get 35 FPS average which is still unacceptably low when you consider my rig has a 5970 and an i7.gameguy6700

[QUOTE="Vesica_Prime"]

I honestly don't know why Bethesda gets a free pass on buggy games yet other games are penalized for it.

mrbojangles25

not a fanboy, but I do not think they did...they got a 7.5 when they would have gotten a 9.0 easily

7.5 is for the console version, PC version has a NA. But as others have stated 7.5 is not a bad score and looks like a patch has already been released for the PC version and one is coming for consoles.

[QUOTE="chandu83"]Man, I thought about getting this game. I guess I am going to have to wait until they patch it all. mrbojangles25

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6282464.html?tag=latestheadlines%3Btitle%3B2

I love developers/publishers that look after their gamers and, even better, own up to their shortcomings.

Its good to know that they are taking care of the problem, but from my experience, its always better to wait for a while before buying games these days. There are exceptions of course, but in general, good things come to those to wait.

Don't look at the critics average score, look at the user review avg.LTZH

I honestly don't know why Bethesda gets a free pass on buggy games yet other games are penalized for it.

Vesica_Prime

[QUOTE="LTZH"]Don't look at the critics average score, look at the user review avg.Renevent42

It is very sad the game was released in a broken and bugged state, and I can understand why the game was given this score. If they release patches which correct much of the bugginess, then perhaps GS would add notes to that effect in the future. Still, it's inexcusible that QA hasn't done a very thorough job.

who cares? I dont agree with the review at all, but I couldnt care less about waht kevin v or any one random person thinks of the game.

Interesting that Fallout 3 managed to get 9 them... I mean i know how this world works and that obsidian dont have a chance to get more than 8 for any of theyr game ... but still , sometimes even i have a hope .

Another thing is i dont like how much reviews base theyr score on bugs . Bugs can be fixed and if they do lower score they must rereview it latter . Also fun to see how some game bugs are ignored too , from big devs i mights add ... anyways

If the main problem the reviewer had with new vegas was bugs, then the review is not fair at all. I've had fallout 3 freeze on me like 5 times, when I've played for 4-6 hours, and from what I'm seeing on the forums, new vegas freezes are far less common.

[QUOTE="badtaker"]Every developers should be ashamed of releasing game in buggy state expect newbies. Obsidian inspite an old game developer doesn't understand the importance of game testing GSC & Bohemia did an excellent job inspite their previous games were buggydakan45

so does bethesda, and so does the community who play their games.

Can anybody confirm that the review is down off GameStop?

try clicking on it it gives you 404 page error...

Can anybody confirm that the review is down off GameStop?

try clicking on it it gives you 404 page error...