Just finished Fallout New Vegas and it's the worst game I've Played this year...

Sucks for you I guess. I enjoyed it a lot even though I loathe Fallout 3.

New Vegas crushes Fallout 3 in so many ways that it isn't even funny talking about it. And that game got a higher score. Goes to show how bad the reviewer bribing has become.

Once I installed FOOK the only bug I ever encountered were a pair of misplaced desks that were stacked one into another. How can people play through a Bethesda game is another thing that completely eludes my understanding.

N30F3N1X

I just finished fallout new vegas yesterday. I actually put about 20 hours into the game & decided the choices id made with the charecter were just not working and I also wanted too play it a bit differently. So I started the game over from the begninning and focused on melee weapons and unarmed. and I got alot futher alot quicker and found it much easyer this way. So I just went around killing absolutely everything in site and eventually reached the part where yes man has taken over mr house in the casino without doing any missons atall. Then the game made me do 5 missons before I could get any futher with the main quest, once that was done I went straight for the last part of the main quest. I managed to finish it pretty easy using the melee weapons instead of any of the guns etc. So Id say if anyone is struggiling give up on the guns, I also found the sneak to be pretty useless too.

In some ways it felt a bit like a gta sort of game, because most of the game seems to be focused upon working between all the different gangs which I dont think suited it too much. Its not that fallout 3 was really any better I think its just they havent made any improvments since fallout 3. The graphics are still the game, still lots of minor glitches etc. After playing a couple of the other games last year it does come across as a bit out of date, it does feel like a 3 year old game in my opinion. Thing is though, nothing since fallout 3 has really come out to replace it so its still worth playing. Also I think if you literally just want to do the main quest the game seems to delibertly make it confusing as to what this might be and you can end up doing tons of stuff for the different gangs thinking your getting much futher but really your notprogressing the main quest atall.

I do think fallout 3 was just layed out alot better and a little more time and thought had gone into it. If I was going too say which one to get Id say fallout 3 if you havent played it already.

DKC4

New Vegas was easily one of my top games of 2010. I put over 60 hours into my first playthrough, and I didn't even reach New Vegas until I was about 25 hours into the game. Replayability, variety, mods, character. It's light years ahead of FO3, and I hope Obsidian makes the next Fallout on the Skyrim engine.

New Vegas was easily one of my top games of 2010. I put over 60 hours into my first playthrough, and I didn't even reach New Vegas until I was about 25 hours into the game. Replayability, variety, mods, character. It's light years ahead of FO3, and I hope Obsidian makes the next Fallout on the Skyrim engine.

PTMags

[QUOTE="PTMags"]

New Vegas was easily one of my top games of 2010. I put over 60 hours into my first playthrough, and I didn't even reach New Vegas until I was about 25 hours into the game. Replayability, variety, mods, character. It's light years ahead of FO3, and I hope Obsidian makes the next Fallout on the Skyrim engine.

FelipeInside

Basically there are two factions battling for control of the New Vegas/Hoover Dam region, and you, a mail courier, get dragged into the conflict whilst tracking down a group of thugs responsible for robbing and attempting to kill you in the opening cinematic. When you reach your initial goal, you learn more about New Vegas itself and the man behind it all.

That's the plot in a nutshell. There's so much to do outside of the main storyline though. Like I said, I ended up playing for a good 20-30 hours before I even reached New Vegas itself.

This is blogworthy. Too bad I had already purchased it and started to enjoy it before I read this.kdawg88

Nope. As an RPG it's superior to just about every other competitor that's been released within the past three years, and it's my favourite for the whole generation. I detested Fallout 3 and I adored New Vegas. It's vastly better written, has much much better gameplay, is more challenging and doesn't have dialogue that pisses me off for every word I hear.

So many mixed opinions here that i dont know who to trust. Truth is, i avoid buying this game mainly because of obsidian and bugs. Pletny of people say that even after al lthe patches, there are important bugs that break quests. Others say they never had a problem. Some say its better than fallout 3 with better writting and dialogues, from what i saw, its pretty much the same. What i do know for a fact is that the story is not as good as fallout 3. The main quest is borring. I cant really make out much of what i am hearing from others however. Especially in this thread, one user says that fallout 3 was better, yet another says that new vegas is better. Proapbly bugs/ nonlinearity wise but then to hear someone saying that they both suck and another saying that they are both better than the old ones....kinda makes me curious of how the game really is. Anyway, too many games in 2011 and i dont feel like playing more fallout right now, so ill skip it for now.dakan45

Yeah, i can never get a consistent answer on which is better.....perhaps a Poll would have been a better way. Haha maybe that will be my next one.

I avoided getting both over Steam's year-end sale, because I just can't figure which to get.

I think this game rocked, and I hope Obsidian will continue contributing to the fallout games

As for me F:NV was weird. I loved Fallout 3 but F:NV just felt like a giant DLC so I couldnt motive myself to play all the way through. Its not so much a problem with the game, its was just TOO similar to F3 to keep me playing for over 10hrs.

Eh, it was alright I suppose. I admit I stopped playing it like halfway through because it just didn't grip me like a good game should.

I find the recent iterations of Fallout games to be lacking in that special something that makes a game something really special as opposed to just an experience you get once and forget.

It's the worst game you've played this year, and yet you finished it.

Would you eat an entire rotting fish and then say that it tasted horrible?

As for me F:NV was weird. I loved Fallout 3 but F:NV just felt like a giant DLC so I couldnt motive myself to play all the way through. Its not so much a problem with the game, its was just TOO similar to F3 to keep me playing for over 10hrs.

Daytona_178

I disagree, it was my favorite RPG from 2010 and this is coming from someone who did not like FO3. Dante2710

i hate fallout in general

the only drawback of F:NV, the leveling system, or to be more precise, it gives out exp points too easily. It would've been a PERFECT game had Obisdian made the leveling-up as laborious as the original Fallouts do.

the only good thing I can say about Fallout 3 is the Tenpenny Tower quest.

when playing F3, once I hit the level cap, I rushed to finish the game and one playthrough is more than enough. With F:NV, after reching the cap, I went on exploring anything and everything; after the first complete runthrough I finished another in hardcore mode.

[QUOTE="Dante2710"]I disagree, it was my favorite RPG from 2010 and this is coming from someone who did not like FO3. dakan45

I think it is one of the best and it puts FO3 to shame.

spookykid143

ok that still doesn't mean that the vast majority of people feel ripped off.

[QUOTE="spookykid143"]

I think it is one of the best and it puts FO3 to shame.

cboyuno

ok that still doesn't mean that the vast majority of people feel ripped off.

Yeah, I'm with you. I completely felt ripped off by FO:3 too. I felt like I spent $50 on what was essentially a Gun mod for Oblivion.

NV, while neither perfect or the Fallout game I really want, at least (somewhat) returned the series to its RPG roots and that alone made it a HUGE improvement in my eyes.

If it's anything like Fallout 3 I'm inclined to agree with you.

Here's what I find strangest: Fallout 3 and NV take place like 200 years after the nuclear war. That said, people still don't clean their homes or repair broken furniture? I just find it completely unbelievable as a world. The fiction makes no sense whatsoever.

Here's what I find strangest: Fallout 3 and NV take place like 200 years after the nuclear war. That said, people still don't clean their homes or repair broken furniture? I just find it completely unbelievable as a world. The fiction makes no sense whatsoever.

KleptoZ

[QUOTE="cboyuno"]

[QUOTE="spookykid143"]

I think it is one of the best and it puts FO3 to shame.

-wildflower-

ok that still doesn't mean that the vast majority of people feel ripped off.

Yeah, I'm with you. I completely felt ripped off by FO:3 too. I felt like I spent $50 on what was essentially a Gun mod for Oblivion.

NV, while neither perfect or the Fallout game I really want, at least (somewhat) returned the series to its RPG roots and that alone made it a HUGE improvement in my eyes.

[QUOTE="N30F3N1X"]

Sucks for you I guess. I enjoyed it a lot even though I loathe Fallout 3.

New Vegas crushes Fallout 3 in so many ways that it isn't even funny talking about it. And that game got a higher score. Goes to show how bad the reviewer bribing has become.

Once I installed FOOK the only bug I ever encountered were a pair of misplaced desks that were stacked one into another. How can people play through a Bethesda game is another thing that completely eludes my understanding.

FelipeInside

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=fook

Here's what I find strangest: Fallout 3 and NV take place like 200 years after the nuclear war. That said, people still don't clean their homes or repair broken furniture? I just find it completely unbelievable as a world. The fiction makes no sense whatsoever.

KleptoZ

I didn't notice that much in Fallout New Veags, especially not in any of the build-up areas, but it was definitely very silly in Fallout 3. In that game, nobody had even attempted to rebuild cities or start up their own farmlands - they just lived in the rubble and scavenged from vending machines.

Fallout 1 and 2 were fine there, though. If we'd gone further west in New Vegas, there would have been several cities that don't even look post-apocalyptic.

[QUOTE="KleptoZ"]

Here's what I find strangest: Fallout 3 and NV take place like 200 years after the nuclear war. That said, people still don't clean their homes or repair broken furniture? I just find it completely unbelievable as a world. The fiction makes no sense whatsoever.

Planeforger

I didn't notice that much in Fallout New Veags, especially not in any of the build-up areas, but it was definitely very silly in Fallout 3. In that game, nobody had even attempted to rebuild cities or start up their own farmlands - they just lived in the rubble and scavenged from vending machines.

Fallout 1 and 2 were fine there, though. If we'd gone further west in New Vegas, there would have been several cities that don't even look post-apocalyptic.

Fallout 1 and 2 were like 80 years after the war, which is still quite a long time to adapt and rebuild, but in those games it wasn't quite as noticeable as in Fallout 3 and to a lesser extent NV. I don't know, I guess back when I played Fallout 2 for the first time my 14 year old mind wasn't very critical with these kinds of things. It's just harder for me to really get immersed in a game like Fallout 3 nowadays.

Has anyone played hardcore yet. It seems impossible I have to play on easy, normal, or sometimes if I there are heaps of enemies VERY EASY!!!Hilarious22

yes, finished the game at hard with hardcore mode enabled.

actually, you can play hardcore mode at any difficulty level. hardcore mode doesn't make enemy tougher; it simply sets more limitations: stimpack heals less, water, food, radiation effects, NPC permanent death and so on.

[QUOTE="FelipeInside"][QUOTE="N30F3N1X"]

Sucks for you I guess. I enjoyed it a lot even though I loathe Fallout 3.

New Vegas crushes Fallout 3 in so many ways that it isn't even funny talking about it. And that game got a higher score. Goes to show how bad the reviewer bribing has become.

Once I installed FOOK the only bug I ever encountered were a pair of misplaced desks that were stacked one into another. How can people play through a Bethesda game is another thing that completely eludes my understanding.

N30F3N1X

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=fook

That came up as:

another way of saying **** favoured by us in the midlands/north england.

hahahahahhaa....

After playing Fallout 3 i was really sceptical about New Vegas, but i quickly changed my mind after i played it. The athmosphere, characters, references to the previous Fallouts it all felt great. The only thing to be desired IMO is the bigger game world. Anyway, maybe after playing Fallout 1,2 You will understand why NV is what it is ;)