New Vegas a 7.5 ... really??

I know this is off topic but thought I'd ask here instead of making a new topic. I'm interested in playing these games and I'm just curious. Is New Vegas number 4, like a direct sequel? or is it an expansion or stand alone game. I heard it was a stand alone.

thanks

It feels like the GTA IV of the fallout series, my brother isn't looking forward to replaying it despite it being pretty cool. In a few months It would be interesting to see how many people in heres opinions change.

I know this is off topic but thought I'd ask here instead of making a new topic. I'm interested in playing these games and I'm just curious. Is New Vegas number 4, like a direct sequel? or is it an expansion or stand alone game. I heard it was a stand alone.

thanks

natenation87

Anyone saying this game doesn't deserve more then a 7.5 hasn't played the game. I have put 16 hours into, everything they added is awesome. Making items, Stimpaks being included? Hardcore mode? AIS? A ton of weapons? A ton of items that only Fallout 3 could get with DLC?

Yes, this game has glitches, but they already said they were going to fix them. Let's face it, more people have the internet to get updates then don't, and if you are here, you have the internet and can get it. I didn't plan on getting this game until GotY, but I am glad I did buy it. Now until you actually put some decent time into it, stop saying it sucks.

However, I am going back to killing things with my Energy Tommy Gun.

I've been playing through new vegas and personally I've encountered next no glitches at all, and the main story is just as good as fallout 3. I honestly don't understand how gamespot could rate this game a 7.5, maybe there are glitches bit they're being patched, i think the game deserves at least a 8.5.

and IMO i just think the glitches are being getting attention from people who don't actually have the game just say " OMG this is the glitchiest game ever because i follow the reviews and don't have an opinion of my own ...baaaaa" :P . Then a few guys who have actually purchased the game come along and re-assure them that its not a glitchy as they think, but dont feed the trolls LOL

Getix-01

here is the true question, if fallout 3 never came out, there was no dc game, what would the score be? seeing as how fo3 was game of the year, and everyone has said this game is "same thing with a new coat of paint" then theoreticly this game is a goty worthy title, well aside from the fact that fable 3 is coming out and will probaly be goty... but seriously this game is better than the last, it might not be the biggest milestone but its great additions to a amazing game so there is no reason for it to be critizied as if it was a horrible game. honestly i would have rather had them work for the entire time on this fallout and never had 3, and i loved 3 dont get me wrong, but it wasnt true to the original two games, it was its own little world far away from the original. kinda sucks that good old bob aint gonna be growing in the desert where he started! i would have loved to had visited the power plant to find harold sitting out front grown into the ground there, but vault city probaly would have killed him anyway. but back on point, to use the last fallout as the starting point of what this game should be and say it should be a glitch free above and beyond game from that point is ludicris and i dont mean the artist. oblivion was not reamed for its glitches and fallout 3 is a redeco of oblivion, for those not familiar, redeco is when they take something and change little things like color and patterns painted on, and call it something new. so if you want to be truly fair, fo3 deserves a 7.5 as much as this game does... so was the goty a 7.5???

I had wished i had an exterminator nearby because my experience had more bugs than the NY subway.

here is the true question, if fallout 3 never came out, there was no dc game, what would the score be? seeing as how fo3 was game of the year, and everyone has said this game is "same thing with a new coat of paint" then theoreticly this game is a goty worthy title, well aside from the fact that fable 3 is coming out and will probaly be goty... but seriously this game is better than the last, it might not be the biggest milestone but its great additions to a amazing game so there is no reason for it to be critizied as if it was a horrible game. honestly i would have rather had them work for the entire time on this fallout and never had 3, and i loved 3 dont get me wrong, but it wasnt true to the original two games, it was its own little world far away from the original. kinda sucks that good old bob aint gonna be growing in the desert where he started! i would have loved to had visited the power plant to find harold sitting out front grown into the ground there, but vault city probaly would have killed him anyway. but back on point, to use the last fallout as the starting point of what this game should be and say it should be a glitch free above and beyond game from that point is ludicris and i dont mean the artist. oblivion was not reamed for its glitches and fallout 3 is a redeco of oblivion, for those not familiar, redeco is when they take something and change little things like color and patterns painted on, and call it something new. so if you want to be truly fair, fo3 deserves a 7.5 as much as this game does... so was the goty a 7.5???

Twisted-Ice-God

[QUOTE="Twisted-Ice-God"]

here is the true question, if fallout 3 never came out, there was no dc game, what would the score be? seeing as how fo3 was game of the year, and everyone has said this game is "same thing with a new coat of paint" then theoreticly this game is a goty worthy title, well aside from the fact that fable 3 is coming out and will probaly be goty... but seriously this game is better than the last, it might not be the biggest milestone but its great additions to a amazing game so there is no reason for it to be critizied as if it was a horrible game. honestly i would have rather had them work for the entire time on this fallout and never had 3, and i loved 3 dont get me wrong, but it wasnt true to the original two games, it was its own little world far away from the original. kinda sucks that good old bob aint gonna be growing in the desert where he started! i would have loved to had visited the power plant to find harold sitting out front grown into the ground there, but vault city probaly would have killed him anyway. but back on point, to use the last fallout as the starting point of what this game should be and say it should be a glitch free above and beyond game from that point is ludicris and i dont mean the artist. oblivion was not reamed for its glitches and fallout 3 is a redeco of oblivion, for those not familiar, redeco is when they take something and change little things like color and patterns painted on, and call it something new. so if you want to be truly fair, fo3 deserves a 7.5 as much as this game does... so was the goty a 7.5???

Senor_Kami

I agree that 7.5 is harsh, but I don't think ignoring FO3 is the way to do it. That game came out in 2008. A lot of things have changed in the open world genre and games like Just Cause 2 show that you can have a huge open world and not look super meh to bad. The acting is still non-existent as well. The voice acting is good and the writing is well but it's always off putting to see a character whose voice is yelling and super excited and happy but the body is just them with their arms crossed swaying side to side looking upset. Post games like Mass Effect, Uncharted 2 and many others, that doesn't really cut it anymore. I think you have to take that into consideration. They improved the core gameplay mechanics but other aspects of the game are incredibly dated... and some of them felt dated back in 2008 when the first game came out.Senor_Kami

so why did fo3 rate so high if it was so dated, man the game looks great in hd, to be honest i dont think games are going to truly get much better looking its gonna start mattering more and more about the content not how it looks, we need substance in games not flash, if you want flash go play games like halo that is just a update with no substance. fallout stands out in a mass of games for its story, backdrop, humor, and in the last two games inovation. if all the game was rated on was graphics 7.5 makes sense, but the content of the game is more than how it looks, its a frikken great game, i firmly stand on the grounds that reviews are nothing but ads for games, its not truly rating the game its showing how well they think it will sell, and since this game is not cod halo or gears, and its not ground breaking so they think its crap. its a quality product well worth 60 bucks, if you played fo3 and liked it, this is just like buying another cod or halo just for fallout, and if you didnt then you know you wont like this, and if you aint played fo3, but did play fallout and fallout 2... what vault did you just crawl out of lol, but yeah for newcomers it is good idea to rent this or wait for used at some place like gamestop where you can return in 7 days if its not your cup of tea.

The review is a total botch job. If they at least up it once the major bugs are all patched it's not too big a deal, though,

[QUOTE="Senor_Kami"] I agree that 7.5 is harsh, but I don't think ignoring FO3 is the way to do it. That game came out in 2008. A lot of things have changed in the open world genre and games like Just Cause 2 show that you can have a huge open world and not look super meh to bad. The acting is still non-existent as well. The voice acting is good and the writing is well but it's always off putting to see a character whose voice is yelling and super excited and happy but the body is just them with their arms crossed swaying side to side looking upset. Post games like Mass Effect, Uncharted 2 and many others, that doesn't really cut it anymore. I think you have to take that into consideration. They improved the core gameplay mechanics but other aspects of the game are incredibly dated... and some of them felt dated back in 2008 when the first game came out.Twisted-Ice-God

so why did fo3 rate so high if it was so dated, man the game looks great in hd, to be honest i dont think games are going to truly get much better looking its gonna start mattering more and more about the content not how it looks, we need substance in games not flash, if you want flash go play games like halo that is just a update with no substance. fallout stands out in a mass of games for its story, backdrop, humor, and in the last two games inovation. if all the game was rated on was graphics 7.5 makes sense, but the content of the game is more than how it looks, its a frikken great game, i firmly stand on the grounds that reviews are nothing but ads for games, its not truly rating the game its showing how well they think it will sell, and since this game is not cod halo or gears, and its not ground breaking so they think its crap. its a quality product well worth 60 bucks, if you played fo3 and liked it, this is just like buying another cod or halo just for fallout, and if you didnt then you know you wont like this, and if you aint played fo3, but did play fallout and fallout 2... what vault did you just crawl out of lol, but yeah for newcomers it is good idea to rent this or wait for used at some place like gamestop where you can return in 7 days if its not your cup of tea.

Is anyone talking about graphics? The fact of the matter, is that New Vegas, like Fallout 3 and Oblivion, is pretty lifeless. Characters are golems, not people. They don't show any sort of emotion. I think that's what Senor Kami is trying to say.

There was a game in 2004 called Vampire The Masquerade - Bloodlines. It was similar to Fallout in that it was a first person RPG. When you talked to characters, they would move, wave, cry, sob, pout, smile, clap, bounce, etc. They were full of life, interesting, and memorable. In fact, that game was doing what Oblivion did two years before Oblivion. The game was almost revolutionary.

You know what it got on Gamespot? A 7.7. Why? Because it was littered with bugs.

A 7.5 isn't a bad score. People need to stop saying the game got shafted or something. Who honestly cares? One of my favorite games of the year so far is the new Castlevania and that got the same score.

Funny how the three complaints could easily be said about both Oblivion and Fallout 3 but since Bethesda didn't develop it bugs just aren't allowed. That is rather funny since I encountered two game breaking glitches in Fallout 3 but it got a 9. Gamespot should never be trusted when it comes to reviews.craigalan23

[QUOTE="ZzZEVOLUTIONZzZ"]

[QUOTE="Overlord93"] good job detective. it is an opinion based soley off second hand information I have recieved from othersOverlord93

This is what everyone is complaining about is people like you that have never touched the game at all complaining about it. If you have not played it then you can't speak about it no one takes you seriously and all you are doing is flaming.

"IMO"

^you see these letters, yes? I did not buy the game because of my own opinion I based off what others had told me, that and I didn't like F3 that much. its not flaming :roll:

You can't have an opinon if you havn't played it like i said you have NO idea. The whole he said she said BS is lame bro, it makes you sounds like a sheep. It is flaming if you are making comments just to start arguements. It is like going on bungie.net and saying halo reach sucks even though you never played it at all. Do you get what i am saying or do i have to spell it out further?

In all honesty, I am around 17 hours in and not really touching to much of the main questline... so far, not a glitch in sight. This is not to say that I never will, but I consider myself lucky I suppose.This is all without a patch as well.dukerav

You are not alone i beat it and the game froze two times other than that not a single bug or glitch. I can handle my system being shut off 2 times in 1 playthrough. They already patched it two times so I am sure my second playthrough which i am starting right away will most likely not have 1 issue at all. Bad review is a bad review he should really play it again and adjust his score. 8.5 for PC means 8.5 for console IMO.

[QUOTE="ZzZEVOLUTIONZzZ"]

[QUOTE="Overlord93"]

Its just an ad-on pack, didn't deserve the hype. its brutal rating was deserved IMO

Overlord93

Spoken like someone who hasn't played the game.

[QUOTE="craigalan23"]Funny how the three complaints could easily be said about both Oblivion and Fallout 3 but since Bethesda didn't develop it bugs just aren't allowed. That is rather funny since I encountered two game breaking glitches in Fallout 3 but it got a 9. Gamespot should never be trusted when it comes to reviews.ZzZEVOLUTIONZzZ

It deserved a 9 and it deserved game of the year it was and is a great game probably one of the best on the xbox 360. I never had ONE issue with fallout 3 and so far new vegas has only froze 1 time since i have been playing it and 2 patches have been released since then so i dont see me having any more issues with it. 1 freeze in 100 hours is nothing to cry about...

I think its awesome, the only twoglitches I've run into were funny so I don't care. One of themwas when I died my guy's neck kept getting longer I couldn't stop laughing at that one. Also the story isgreat in my opinion.

fallout3 had more issues than fo nv for me. FO3 also had worse voice actors and a more boring and predictable plot. Only thing it did better was radio.