Hey all! It's interesting to see this discussion evolve. As you all know, what you read is what I came away with after maybe 70 hours spent across three platforms, and of course, after exhaustively playing Fallout 3. Clearly, I love the Fallout universe, but it is very much the sad truth that while New Vegas has a better game hiding behind the technology, as a product, it is broken. It wasn't something I could overlook, particularly when we've all sort of just put up with the same flaws in that engine for years. Sometimes, I do wonder how long it takes before someone says: "This stupid thing has happened in your games since Morrowind. How much longer can we give you a pass?"
Of course, the issues in Vegas exist outside of the engine. I can't tell you how many times I had quests break, or scripting errors grind me to a halt. Crashes, corrupted saves, alarming AI issues and issues with my companion, and so on. Our game guides editor ran into an insane number of issues; the more thorough his playthrough became, the more the game became completely unable to handle it. Of course, I am not here to apologize for taking the bugs into account, but rather, to explain that the game is more than just the underlying complexity, but rather, a sum of parts that make up an entire product. And sadly, one that is broken in ways Fallout 3 never was. You might run into just a few bugs, or be able to forgive them in lieu of the intricate adventure underneath. But in a single-player RPG more broken than any I've played in years, I can't just laud the complexity of the game and dismiss the rest.
Of course, 7.5 by nature means "very good." It's a testament to the underlying game that this is a broken product that can still be called "very good." Check out the PC review, which went up a short while ago. It allows the greatness of the underlying game to shine. But please understand--New Vegas has a better game wallowing underneath the flaws than did Fallout 3. The problem is that the flaws are much, much, much more prevalent than we should expect. I think a developer has a responsibility to work within their means, and there's a definite sense that they found themselves in over their heads. A few more months would have done wonders.
I do think Fallout 3 had the better story. That is to say, if you strip away the side quests and the supplementary stories and look at just the central plot and quest line, New Vegas' is just as simple as Fallout 3's, but Fallout 3 had the more memorable moments. I will try not to spoil anything, but Liberty Prime is a cooler presence than the ones that appear in Vegas' endgame. The midgame reverie in Fallout 3 sticks out in my mind still, as does using a nuke in a fun fight against big mechs. But I don't think either of the games possess a very impressive plot, but rather, the best stuff is in the side stories. In Fallout 3, I thought the Oasis quest told a much more interesting story then the main plot did. Similarly, Come Fly With Me in New Vegas is much more poignant than the central story. That said, I see New Vegas as a 9-range game that deserved better technology and quality assurance to support it, and suffers from sloppiness that wasn't present in its predecessor. (Of course, there's a big review that talks about the awesome, and the awesomely broken aspects of this game.) I am curious to see where the series goes from here, and the engine Bethesda cooks up. I don't know about you, but I'm tired of the the same terrible animations, the awful pathfinding, the awkward combat, the unnatural uncanny valley nature of the character models, the invisible walls, and all the other things inherent to games built on this engine. Aren't you? I know we've come to just kind of say, "Oh, those crazy guys at Bethesda and Obsidian. But whatcha gonna do?" And then we shrug and give a lopsided grin, as if all is forgivable. But I hope the time comes when we can say in unison: "You know? Broken isn't ok with me."
Also, remember that I am usually rather forgiving of technical oddities when the core game shines through. Consider Cryostasis, Age of Conan, and so on. But even I have my limits. I am happy for Obsidian, however, that they continue to prove their mettle when it comes to core RPG mechanics. But the idea of polish continues to elude them. Considering the high degree of polish shown in Dungeon Siege and Dungeon Siege II, I am anxious to see how Dungeon Siege III turns out.
And another thing: I know our site broke this morning, but you can't seriously suggest I give a pass to a buggy game because I work for a site that might break! The very nature of what I do is review games based on their merits, rather than on how stable they are when compared to gamespot.com on the morning of 10/21/2010 :)
:P
Log in to comment