Relay said:
'm not a troll but I enjoy creating a new account every once in a while just to see reactions like janjetina's showing how the codexian fashionista cares more about the who than the what was said. No, I'm not Drog, any moderator can confirm this.
Drog or Chefe (your posts are kind of blackcattish), it's irrelevant. Reading one troll post by you is like reading them all, your posting style is recognizable and labels you a troll. Maybe your arguments would have been addressed if you restrained from lying and exaggerating, and adding the trademark signature "PS:T sucks" and if the elements you attempted to criticize here haven't already been criticized before, without resorting to hyperbole and retardation. The meat of your post is: "Combat system is badly implemented'', to which I reply ''I agree''. But, your brain is too smooth to understand that combat system, while making a large part of gameplay mechanics, is not the only element of gameplay nmechanics and there lies the problem.
Relay said:
I thought in the beginning that they would have made the skills more unique, useful to have but apart from speech you could do the game with a whopping 10 in everything and still be overpowered.
That's a flat out lie. Try overpowering Cazadors, Nightstalkers and Deathclaws with 10 in combat skills. There are many skill checks all over the game and lacking skill requirements will lock you out of a large portion of content.
The truth is, there should have been stricter skill requirements and penalties for failure and the way skills are implemented are a compromise between our needs and necessity to make the game enjoyable for the consoletards. If your statement was along those lines and backed up by examples, I'm sure that content of your post would be worth responding to.
Apart from the odd deathclaw and particularly inane cazador (wtf ? it feels humiliating to get raped by a gang of flies. Nigga' please! deathclaws look impressive, cazadors are just 'tarded.)
Do you honestly think this is worth addressing?
you might say that equipment matters far, far more than your character in New Vegas exactly as it was in Fallout 3.
No contest there. After all, it IS the same combat system as in Failout 3, it suffers from the same shortcomings, and can be summarized as ''bad''. Do you think you're the first one to notice it and write about it?
The thing is, you don't need to be skilled in explosive to fuck people up with dynamites and grenades.
I wouldn't know that, but there were a few explosive checks in a game that my character couldn't pass, as a result I was unable to follow certain quest paths and reach certain quest solutions (the Vault with escaped prisoners come to mind).
You don't need much sneak to be able to snipe people from afar. You don't need much in guns either, sure having more gives you a bit more damage but it's not game-changing.
Why do you lie? Frequency of successful sneak attacks does rise with the increase of the Sneak skill, and this can be a matter of life and death against stronger opponents. ''A bit more damage'' is pretty important when fighting deathclaws.
In Fallout 1 and 2, not having skills points in weapons meant that you COULDN'T use them at all since you would be missing ALL THE FUCKING TIME even if your enemy was right in front of you. Here you only miss in VATS but VATS is fucking useless since you can precisely shoot from a bigger range than VATS allows using scopes.
Lacking strength didn't gimp the big guns as much as I thought it would when people said that "strength mattered". It may either lower the damage or precision but surely not enough to prevent me from using them when I get my hands on the ammunition with a whopping 5 STR.
I haven't invested ANY points in "unarmed" but it doesn't prevent my character from two-hit-killing people with the powerfist. In the original fallout you wouldn't even be able to touch someone if you didn't invest points.
I agree, but this has be mentioned before by others.
All in all, the only thing having a high skill in something does is about making you the avatar of God on earth because without them you can still pwn everything.
Everything, as in Deathclaws, cazadors, Nightstalkers? Really?
Add to that the magazines that boosts +10 your skills (+20 with the must-have perk) and you don't need more than 80 in speech (70 if you don't care for the single 100 speech check of the game), 50 in science and 50 in lockpick anyway.
Magazines and the perk are an overpowered combination, but once again you need to resort to lying and exaggeration. 50 in lockpick won't let you pick hard locks, as lock difficulty is incremented by 25. I think that the game has more than a few Science checks over 70 (e.g. the one for entering the Strip).
Barter is redundant, at least two thirds of the dialogues with barter checks offer equivalent speech checks. (huge WTF)
This is correct, though the remaining one third of Barter checks do matter and this is not a small number.
This game is a fucking disappointment and not an incline from FO3.
Let's see:
- combat system: the same
- UI: the same
- non combat skill utilization: better by an order of magnitude (both in quantity and in quality - leading to different ways to solve quests and/or outcomes)
- story and presentation (writing): better by an order of magnitude
- quest design: better by an order of magnitude, multiple ways to solve them, multiple solutions, skill utilization
- consequently, the setting: better by an order of magnitude
In summary, Fallout: New Vegas is a much better game than Failout 3. Of course, you, being a moron, will argue that combat is the only important part of the gameplay. I'll just say a few things: strip Fallout of everything but combat and you will get a bad game. Each game is a sum of its parts, and the parts don't hold the same weight (weights depend on the game itself). The only RPGish game that survives solely on its combat and needs nothing to be added (although it benefits from the additions) is Jagged Alliance 2.
Yeah, it has "better writing" for some relative value. I couldn't care less.
Assburger's syndrome is a desease. Why don't you get a treatment?
FO1 wasn't known for having spectacular dialogue and writing
No, but writing was good and helped the feel of the setting.Reading the Holodiscs found in the Glow and conversing with Zax significantly contribute to the atmosphere of the Glow. If they were written by Torr Howard, and if you had ''Quests" and ''Rumors'' options instead of well written sentences, suspension of disbelief would disappear.
and I'm sure most of the praise for New Vegas comes from the Planescape Torment aka Christ fagclub
In essence, it is a ''storyfag'' game.
The irony is that the biggest embarassment for New Vegas stems from some of the dialogue, in particular Caesar's. If you call "better writing" having a bigger vocabulary than the 100 words vocab' of Bethesda and having more lines of it, OK. Using a bigger vocabulary doesn't make the lines spoken any less retarded though.
The fact that you are retarded doesn't make your post badly written. The same goes for characters. Cass comes of as a crass woman due to her frustration with what happened to her caravan and her little alcohol problem certainly doesn't help. Veronica is just making juvenile jokes, which is in accordance with her light-hearted character. Their writing manages to depict them as characters, with certain character traits, i.e. personality. No such luck for Bethesda-written characters in Failout 3.
Cass obssession with peckers, Veronica joking about being "exhausted" from all the sex she had to do for the brotherhood, Gannon the homosexual playboy.. see a pattern here ? I bet the Christ is sex starved and has to make up for it using his game writing "talents".
Cass was written by Avellone, Gannon was written by Sawyer, Veronica was also written by somebody else than Avellone (I think it was Sawyer).
Of course, to put the last nail to the coffin New Vegas is as much of a walking simulator as Morrowind was in its time. I will not replay this shitty game again if only because of the long trek from freeside to jacobstown with absolutely nothing to do on the roads, complete absence of content. At least Fallout 3 and Oblivion threw the odd monster to kill from time to time while you were "busy" walking (and Oblivion had fast horses.). New Vegas is synonymous with emptiness, which I can somewhat understand in a post-apo world but Fallout 1 and 2 didn't make you do the walking, the character did and time accelerated on the map so you didn't get bored staring at the emptiness for hours.
1. This is postapocalyptic Wasteland, moron.
2. Yes, Fallout system is much better, so you are once again stating the obvious.
In summary, your post contains:
- stating the obvious, i.e. repeating what others have already said
- exaggerating and lying
- trolling (I am in illiterate assburger and I hate PS:T'').
As far as gameplay mechanics go, F:NV is a compromise between a consoletard game like Failout 3 and how an RPG should be done, but most RPGs belong in that category. Finishing the main quest is quite easy without serious thinking about skill point investment, but huge amount of additional content, which makes F:NV a much better experience, utilizes the skill system in a better way.
In short, it is a very good game, much better than Failout 3 and maybe it's the best RPG since Arcanum. Deal with it.
