Am I playing Obsidian worst games or...?

Why are you expecting grim mad max rules on a setting that takes place 200 years after the war?

NCR and Mr House has tamed a large part of California. They have farms now, see the one just outside the Strip, resources are no longer scarce cause, guess what, people aren't going to be scavengers forever.

Fallout New Vegas, unlike Bethesda who just kept the Capital Wasteland in retarded stasis, acknowledges that after 200 years things can't stay post apocalyptic forever and instead go for a wild western setting instead where resources are relatively abundant but now things are in a state of lawlessness since there's a giant turf war going on.

Primm will take a robot as their sheriff cause at this rate they'll take anything as their sheriff- they have no other option what with crazy gangs trying taking over their city.

Why not, these people can afford to run the big lights. The squatters can suffer. Mr House isn't interested in giving electricity to everyone who needs it. He has plenty available thanks to Hoover Dam and he's only interested in using it to make as much money as he can- and plenty of people are interested in coming to the Strip for Tourism- California is now a technologically advanced state akin to prewar america, they can afford it. That's a major element of his character and the world he intends to create.

Because he doesn't repair your brain with said test. The character creator is a physical exam that he's doing to see how you've managed after the surgery. And what kind of retarded fantasy world are you living in where a doctor in a sparsely populated town which has had very little trouble with gangs is going to be run over by so many patients with ridiculous over the top violence. Besides, in every other area you see a doctor there are plenty of patients lying in stretchers with all kinds of violence inflicted on them. Goodsprings is just a fairly peaceful town.

Gamebryo. You might as well hate all modern games for pretty much abusing this.

I enjoy the writing in Fallout New Vegas, it also means I take the time to understand the setting and try to figure out any doubts I have. And they're all clarified within the game itself by asking around about lore. In FNV the writing's great, but the actual depth of options and C&C are what really set it apart for me- plenty of games have good writing, not many have the kind of design that FNV has. That's why I originally loved Fallout, because frankly, Fallout 1's writing is pretty dry.

I don't, it's...there. And Sawyer's mod tries to make it interesting but it's still just...there. But there's plenty of other elements of the game that I enjoy and the combat isn't as prevalent as it is in Fallout 3. I'm not a combatfag if that's what you're assuming.

Look as far as I can tell, you're stuck in this notion that the world should continue to be postapocalyptic and mad maxian 200 years after the initial war which is bullshit. You do that and you'll just end up with the capital wasteland all over again. Besides Fallout 2 had already started to move away from post apocalyptia, New Vegas doesn't really have a choice.

You also complain about inconsistencies that the game clearly explains within the lore but yet you've never taken the time to actually read all of this. The game explains pretty much all of this within the setting if you actually took the time to ask some NPCs about this. Go read Vault Wiki before you start making complaints here.

 

How is it deeper? "Put points into weapon skill, get better weapons, aim for eyes/head" describes all of them. At least AP ammo actually works in New Vegas unlike in Fallout where it's indistinguishable from regular ammo or Fallout 2 where it's fucking useless because of their shitty formulas that don't take DT into consideration. I also like the ones where you don't get randomly insta-killed by criticals.

 

I appreciate your attempts to explain the plausibility of the world, however I believe you nailed my problem with all post-Fallout1 games by this statement:

I am. "This notion" is what made Fallout what it is - a post-apocalyptic game. It gave it atmosphere and an interesting setting full of possibilities. Fallout 2 was very mondblutian in that respect - deeper mechanics, but derpier, wackier and at the same time less engaging world - because the mondblutian mindset cares more about mechanics than anything else, and that is given in spades.

This is also true for FO:NV, which has a much less engaging main quest and world than anything in FO1, yet greater branching.

I don't think the engine can be blamed for devs making all people look unrealistically healthy. It's a modeling issue.

I find FO:NV writing borderline competent, in terms of "all people not sounding like Todd Howard", the problem is that very little of it amounts to something interesting. I put a number of hours into the game and didn't find myself engaged in the slightest. They do not make you care for anyone. "Sunny Smiles" was a promising start, but her functionality in the plot exhausted quickly.

Why not? If quality and adherence to keeping Fallout "Fallout" is a priority, then just go back to Fallout 1 timeline and place the game in another part of the world, like Russia.

Note the name: "Fallout". In the context, it is ominous. This is not a name that implies a serene world rebuilding itself.

As it stands, this is akin to making a Diablo game where Tristram is a thriving town, and your threat is no longer demonic monsters from hell, but a local businessman who is trying to buy Tristram town property and kick everyone out. The urgency is not there anymore, it's just, for the lack of better word... lame.

If this happened to Diablo, there would've been an outrage, but shifting Fallout from a post-apocalyptic into post-post-apocalyptic has resulted in an odd kind of acceptance.

Which, as I said earlier, I blame "slim pickings" season for. It's been 10 years between Fallout2 and 3, and Fallout 3 has lowered people's expectations into the gutter. Compared to that, FO:NV was vastly superior, and a breath of fresh air.

Fallout 3 explained vampires as well. That didn't make them any less retarded.

 

Fair enough.

Obsidian originally intended for a kind of prequel but Bethesda said they don't want to go backwards. Bearing in mind that by prequel they just meant it was set before Fallout 3. Either way, you aren't going to see anything set before Fallout 1 or between 1 and 2 because of this.

It can because assets are limited and Bethesda built models that were all buff or supermodels. Obsidian isn't going to waste resources on making different NPC body types when it's so meaningless and their efforts are better spent on a more interesting gameworld and quests.

I get where you're coming from though. For me, I was more interested in seeing how the setting would grow and how the different colonies and factions would change. Fallout 2 was a pretty bad setting in folllowing Fallout 1 but I thought New Vegas managed to get the right tone in keeping a consistent gameworld and bringing it's own tone and setting by maintaining a sense of lawless conflict with the whole wild west frontier/turf war aspect.

For the record, Chris Avellone is also keen to bring back the apocalypse and he intends to make the canon ending the ending to Lonesome Road where Ulysses drops the bomb and nukes the West Coast again and effectively destroys NCR and the Legion.

Maybe that'll bring back what you're after.

And hey, if you're after post apocalyptic there's always Wasteland 2.

As it stands, New Vegas is a great RPG with a well thought out setting and interesting factions and conflicts combined with well thought out quest design and a shitload of C&C.

 

Obsidian's strengths are writing and reactivity - at least ambitions toward reactivity. Alpha Protocol is their grand reactivity experiment, but I can't blame people who throw their controller/mouse/whatever, because it's kind of a butt to play. NWN2 has good bits, but is too long and grindy and narratively pretty straightforward. And Dungeon Siege 3 is an attractive little hack and slash, but kind of an outlier. New Vegas + DLC and Mask of the Betrayer are probably their most solid, polished studio efforts. (Haven't played SoZ yet.) If you don't like those, you probably just ain't into Obsidian.

 

DS3 is 1 of the shittest games I ever played,no gamepad will fix it bro

 

Most of Obsidian's work the last decade or so has been mediocre to horrible. Fan boys deny it, though. I have no idea why people praise New Vegas so much. It's not bad but it's not good... and certainly not great. The C&C/RPG elements are very shallow/obvious.

That's beyond moronic. Hurrr, let's just push a reset button whenever we paint ourselves into a narrative corner. Why not just make a new IP?

 

That's my opinion as well frankly.

I personally think Fallout is over and New Vegas was a pretty good ending for the series.

 

How did you tolerate the awful combat, the boring encounters, and the endless pathing problems?

 

Wow, thanks! I finally fought my way out of the terrible Saudi missions. I hope the real game starts now. I hope.

I'll give a try to their other games, too. New Vegas Ultimate Ed. is 39,99€ on Steam right now. That one will have to wait...

 

For the record, yes it gets better after Saudi. The best hub is Moscow so at least play that one before you consider giving up again.

 

Bethesda didn't pay millions for it just so they could use it for one game and a spin-off. That'd be an extraordinary waste of money/potential-to-make-even-more-money.

 

I'm done. There is not a single interesting thing. It's just a bad game.
I'll try the others.

 

I didn't like the character from the Moscow hub, tbh. Never got involved with her. The levels were also less stealthy. I think Singapore(?) hub had the best stealth missions, so I'd go with that hub.

In any case, I'd love for them to make a visual novel with their timed response system. I think it can work wonders as an interactive film.

 

Yeah. It's all a bit foggy in my head though.

 

I mainly love Moscow cause of Brayko. That boss battle was just really fun.

 

All equal to the previous iteration.

 

That does not invalidate that KotOR II had awful combat, boring encounters, and annoying AI/pathing issues.

 

You should have read my Let's Play of this trainwreck first. It was very clarifying and dramatic:

http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/index.php?threads/lets-play-alpha-brotocol-and-rage-together.45693/

It's popamole with fake C&C that have no relevant impact over gameplay and near every shitty gameplay element taken from Bioware crap and Gears of War, plus new ones like timed dialogues.

It would only not be a total turd by cutting off all of the finished game besides the dialogue choices and convert the rest of it into an Interactive Fiction, and even then it would be at best an average IF. Because other than that it is totally shit. Besides the near total lack of impact of dialogue choices over gameplay, stealth is a joke of popamole special abilities like enemy radar and invisibility without any influence of lighting over it, combat is ripped off straight from great "masterpieces" like Gears of War and Mass Effect and the level design is on par with Modern Warfare: Black Ops, if not worse.

tl;dr Don't try any Obsidian game released after MOTB.

 

It explains it. Perhaps even justifies it. Why would you go into a rapidly released sequel, by a third party developer, using the same engine expecting improvement?

Perhaps I'm missing your point.

 

But you are only conceding there was no improvement.

 

Yes. How often do we judge entire games on their combat, encounters, and AI, though? It hasn't changed in a decade, if not more.

[Sudden Realization] My expectations are that low.

 

I agree wholeheartedly (yeah I had to google that phrase).
Is there any way to see the pics in your Let's Play?

What is C&C? Last time I checked it was Command & Conquer.