-
Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.
"This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.
Fallout Is Fallout: New Vegas a worthy Fallout game?
- Thread starter Sigourn
- Start date
The lore and story are up to snuff, but the game play and mechanics aren't which is just a shame. Lore and story are two important elements of a rpg but the most important element is the game play and the systems that accompany it. the thing is in New Vegas they are both shit, I know you can mod the game to fix a lot of it's problems in the Gameplay department but that doesn't change the fact that Vanilla NV is a piece of female dog turd covered in a bitter-sweet caramel chocolate coating.
It doesn't do it's FPS gameplay right. The guns feel like shit, the controls are sluggish and the AI doesn't seem to react or respond to the players interaction in the game world whatsoever. The rpg elements are butchered and limited because of its "Akshun" gameplay and lack meaningful impact to your character, heck you can roll a character with shit perks and stats but as long as you got a good gun your fine for the most part. It all ends up feeling lackluster, Obsidian tried though you can tell by how much effort they put compared to bethesda regarding the game world.
tl;dr Game is shit, but it tries.
Nekot put it best "I think New Vegas would be better if it wasn't a gamebryo game."
It doesn't do it's FPS gameplay right. The guns feel like shit, the controls are sluggish and the AI doesn't seem to react or respond to the players interaction in the game world whatsoever. The rpg elements are butchered and limited because of its "Akshun" gameplay and lack meaningful impact to your character, heck you can roll a character with shit perks and stats but as long as you got a good gun your fine for the most part. It all ends up feeling lackluster, Obsidian tried though you can tell by how much effort they put compared to bethesda regarding the game world.
tl;dr Game is shit, but it tries.
Nekot put it best "I think New Vegas would be better if it wasn't a gamebryo game."
Last edited:
Play the damn game you retard.
Used this site before you were even born cunt.
an Administrator
Self-Ejected
Not an argument.
If he's asking that question, it's a damn fine one.
Sigourn
uooh afficionado
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2016
- Messages
- 5,659
No it's not, Fallout 1's choice and consequence is vastly overrated.
From a historical perspective, it is a very good one, but from a modern perspective, New Vegas wipes the floor with it. And even from a historical perspective, New Vegas' C&C is very, very good.
Yet only one or two choices in the entire game have an effect on how it plays out, game is a mediocre open world FPS.
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2014
- Messages
- 4,198
But New Vegas had many quests with instant consequences. Goodsprings, Primm, Helios, Brotherhood of Steel questline. I mean immediate consequences in FO1 ammount to: character A is dead, faction A moves in a location where faction B used to be, player gets a different reward. All of these are featured in New Vegas. In fact C&C in new Vegas is much deeper because it features these "far reaching" consequences in addition to immediate ones.
Mediocre role playing game.
I agree with Endemic and also I think FO1 has less C&C in its sidequests than NV, favors the usage of certain skills while others are trap choices, which is less the case in NV. Combat in FO1 isn't particularly tough (from my today's perspective) either, but there is no comparing combat in the two games.
I think there's a pretty clear double standard in this thread when it comes to C&C and reactivity.
FO1 and FO2 have plenty of C&C that could be considered negligible, like seemingly major choices that only really change an ending slide regarding some location that you're probably never going to visit again. Especially FO1 does have a handful of major choices that can potentially affect the outcome of your playthrough, as well as having a systemic C&C element in place resulting from the time limit, but those are generally the exceptions rather than the rule, and a lot of the C&C is actually rather shallow if you take a look below the surface. Not every choice is all that impactful in New Vegas either, of course, as it inherits a lot of the flavor C&C of the originals, but arguably it deals with C&C on a much larger scope than either FO1 or FO2, having a much larger number of decisions to make overall with the faction system providing a systemic element for tracking down the player's choices throughout the game world. The game does have plenty of individual choices that may potentially cut you off from questlines or alter the ending of the game aside from having instantly obvious local effects, but often it's the cumulative effect of multiple smaller decisions that results in the most drastic consequences.
A rather good early example of New Vegas' C&C is the Goodsprings shootout right at the start. If you decide to side with the townspeople and fight the Powder Gangers, you will piss off the entire faction, meaning that they will shoot you on sight when you approach the correctional facility which they use as their base (unless you abuse the broken disguise system, but that's another story). With that one early choice you've basically locked yourself out of a quest chain, as well as closed off one route to solving a big side quest in Primm. However, it is possible to redeem this situation by improving your relationship with the Powder Gangers later on, but there are not many opportunities to do so, and you really have to go out of your way to patch things up with them. Alternatively you might start off as their friend and then piss them off later on, which could happen by accident or by double-crossing them and essentially wiping them out with the NCR. If this quest was done like in FO1, everything would've tied into that first choice: you either side with the Powder Gangers and become their friend, or you side against them and end up being their enemy for all eternity. It probably would've made it feel more impactful, permanently severing your ties to a faction like that with just a single choice, but it also would've been a much more simplistic way of doing C&C. New Vegas is more about combinations of choices, as there are often many different ways of reaching a specific outcome. Because of this the individual choices rarely have the same impact as the most memorable moments in FO1, but the C&C overall is actually more impressive in many ways.
FO1 and FO2 have plenty of C&C that could be considered negligible, like seemingly major choices that only really change an ending slide regarding some location that you're probably never going to visit again. Especially FO1 does have a handful of major choices that can potentially affect the outcome of your playthrough, as well as having a systemic C&C element in place resulting from the time limit, but those are generally the exceptions rather than the rule, and a lot of the C&C is actually rather shallow if you take a look below the surface. Not every choice is all that impactful in New Vegas either, of course, as it inherits a lot of the flavor C&C of the originals, but arguably it deals with C&C on a much larger scope than either FO1 or FO2, having a much larger number of decisions to make overall with the faction system providing a systemic element for tracking down the player's choices throughout the game world. The game does have plenty of individual choices that may potentially cut you off from questlines or alter the ending of the game aside from having instantly obvious local effects, but often it's the cumulative effect of multiple smaller decisions that results in the most drastic consequences.
A rather good early example of New Vegas' C&C is the Goodsprings shootout right at the start. If you decide to side with the townspeople and fight the Powder Gangers, you will piss off the entire faction, meaning that they will shoot you on sight when you approach the correctional facility which they use as their base (unless you abuse the broken disguise system, but that's another story). With that one early choice you've basically locked yourself out of a quest chain, as well as closed off one route to solving a big side quest in Primm. However, it is possible to redeem this situation by improving your relationship with the Powder Gangers later on, but there are not many opportunities to do so, and you really have to go out of your way to patch things up with them. Alternatively you might start off as their friend and then piss them off later on, which could happen by accident or by double-crossing them and essentially wiping them out with the NCR. If this quest was done like in FO1, everything would've tied into that first choice: you either side with the Powder Gangers and become their friend, or you side against them and end up being their enemy for all eternity. It probably would've made it feel more impactful, permanently severing your ties to a faction like that with just a single choice, but it also would've been a much more simplistic way of doing C&C. New Vegas is more about combinations of choices, as there are often many different ways of reaching a specific outcome. Because of this the individual choices rarely have the same impact as the most memorable moments in FO1, but the C&C overall is actually more impressive in many ways.
Lemming42
Arcane
Whoaaaa, steady on.
don't forget that even if you decide to become friendly with the powder gangers (and thus either side against Goodsprings or completely ignore them) the game still gives you opportunities to double-cross the powder gangerrs by saying you'll help them out and then ratting them out to the NCR for their eventual assault on the prison.
or you can double-cross the NCR by stealing the attack plans from them and giving them to the gangers. and all this shit is just from this 1 single quest.
or you can double-cross the NCR by stealing the attack plans from them and giving them to the gangers. and all this shit is just from this 1 single quest.
Tigranes
Arcane
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2009
- Messages
- 10,350
You can also side with Goodsprings and then sit out the actual pied-a-pied, letting you still stay on reasonable terms with the folk at the prison - and then you see how the single faction is tracked differently across its splinter groups, reflecting the lack of cohesion in what is a bunch of prisoner escapees gone bandit.
You can also warn the powder gangers of the assault, and then when the NCR smash the fence and break in, put on some NCR armour and walk out, though I think this is / used to be slightly bugged.
You can also warn the powder gangers of the assault, and then when the NCR smash the fence and break in, put on some NCR armour and walk out, though I think this is / used to be slightly bugged.
sullynathan
Arcane
New Vegas has very good quests and C&C but the overall gameplay is pretty bad. A remake or proper successor is overdue.
DragoFireheart
all caps, rainbow colors, SOMETHING.
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2007
- Messages
- 23,731
sullynathan
Arcane
isn't that the same thing?
it's a good rpg, but by codex definitions, good rpgs don't really need good gameplay. Who can blame Obsidian? They were stuck with Gamebryo, but then again, I don't really know an obsidian game with good gameplay.
Joined: Dec 22, 2015
edit: actually nvm ur rite because most people on the codex are cretins
If we take RPG to be a quality of the game and not the game itself, I'd say the more C&C it has, the more RPG it is.
Note that I'm not saying by any means FO1 is bad, or that it lacks C&C. Also, I think adding the time pressure is a genius feature, and it alone offers more immersion and incentive to roleplay than any hiking sim could ever give you.
I think the biggest strength of FO1 is in its tight size, replayability and the coherence that goes with those two, also due to the fact that the team was very small and clearly didn't see working on the game as a job. There are enough historical accounts on its dev process.
However, if we forget about the 3D shooter combat in NV, I think improves on the FO formula which I would define as - distinct atmosphere, C&C, a post-apoc world and characters the player can believe in.
Those that are against the goofy humor and the cheerful music - I'd say the former is more toned down in NV compared to FO2. But I also think the more serious tone would be more appropriate for the isometric games than for the Gamebryo game. The engine is so old and shitty that it just prevents a game from taking itself completely seriously, so better try to make it all look at least part intentional.
Note that I'm not saying by any means FO1 is bad, or that it lacks C&C. Also, I think adding the time pressure is a genius feature, and it alone offers more immersion and incentive to roleplay than any hiking sim could ever give you.
I think the biggest strength of FO1 is in its tight size, replayability and the coherence that goes with those two, also due to the fact that the team was very small and clearly didn't see working on the game as a job. There are enough historical accounts on its dev process.
However, if we forget about the 3D shooter combat in NV, I think improves on the FO formula which I would define as - distinct atmosphere, C&C, a post-apoc world and characters the player can believe in.
Those that are against the goofy humor and the cheerful music - I'd say the former is more toned down in NV compared to FO2. But I also think the more serious tone would be more appropriate for the isometric games than for the Gamebryo game. The engine is so old and shitty that it just prevents a game from taking itself completely seriously, so better try to make it all look at least part intentional.
Sigourn
uooh afficionado
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2016
- Messages
- 5,659
How can you be so baka, senpai?
The way your nostalgia goggles work, it would seem that saving or killing Killian has a profound effect in Fallout. I tell you what effect it has: if you kill Killian, you lose a vendor in Junktown. That's literally it. That's as much of a consequence as you see in-game, slideshows aside.
I'm not saying that liking Fallout makes you a nostalgia fag, but shitting on New Vegas the way you do makes it seem like Fallout is the Holy Timeless Grail of Choice and Consequence. As another user has said, Fallout's choice and consequence generally boils down to "character A is dead or character B is dead".
As stupid as it sounds, at least a character in Camp McCarran acknowledges someone (read: me) wiped out the entirety of the NCR forces stationed at Forlorn Hope, meaning that getting rid of the Fiend leaders is a good thing, but now he has a surplus of forces that has no real use anymore (because the Legion has occupied the camp).
As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.