Why I believe Fallout:New Vegas is a better RPG than...

[Dark Matter]

How is FO1 a better game than FO:NV anyway? FO:NV has better quest design, more C&C, superior game mechanics (crafting, more balanced skills, survival mode), better companions, ALOT more stuff to see and do. In the areas that FO:NV is lacking, the original FO wasn't any better. Both FO1 and FO:NV suffer from being far too easy. Both games have shallow simplistic combat, but at least FO:NV gives you more interesting options like aiming for an enemies weapon (e.g. aiming for the dynamite while the enemy is holdingit) as opposed to FO1 where you just aim for the head every single time once your weapon skill reaches a certain level.

The quality of writing and voiceacting was better in FO1 but that's because it had very little of it, and FO:NV does a pretty good job despite the much greater quantity. The setting was certainly better realized in FO1 but that's not enough to compensate for the fact that it falls short of FO:NV in almost every other aspect.

 

[forgotmypasswordagain]

... I understand ...
... my opinion ...
... I have always felt ...
... I find myself ...
... I feel detracted from the character and don't in any way feel that I'm a part of the story ...
... it feels very awkward ...
... I don't have this ...
etc., etc., etc.

I love you for being a codexer, I love you for being a dragon (lemme ride yo back dawg) but I must tell you that is not the way that things are judged, much less critiqued. Your subjective valuations cannot be transmitted to others coherently without being defined in a wider aesthetic context, which you could convey through an infinite number of stylistic choices in your writing. But you did not do this.

Judging things entirely on the basis of how they make us personally feel betrays an ideological tendency towards hedonism, and if the agreement of your audience with that ideology cannot be assumed then the stance must be defined at some point in your text, if not throughout it.

I could say, for example, dealing only with your points on graphics, that looking at a lone character upon the brink of an impenetrable pitch-black abysm makes me personally feel something very profound, while, on the other hand, looking at a lot of copy-pasta, out-of-place wild-west buildings in a nonsensical Nevada drowning simultaneously in brown fog and bloom causes me to feel only profound revulsion at a waste of resources, talent and setting. But these statements constitute nothing more than an insight into my psychological peculiarities; they cannot serve as a rational basis for judgement. Because they come from me, if I speak about them in the course of a review or critique, then I am not examining the game but instead myself, and if anybody online wanted to read about me then they would have made a Wiki about me by now.

But you haven't.



Anyway, like I said, I love you, but for the reasons above and a million others you are being very
Still wanna ride yo back tho
chase bullies into dumpsters
etc

 

[DragoFireheart]

I love you for being a codexer, I love you for being a dragon (lemme ride yo back dawg) but I must tell you that is not the way that things are judged, much less critiqued. Your subjective valuations cannot be transmitted to others coherently without being defined in a wider aesthetic context, which you could convey through an infinite number of stylistic choices in your writing. But you did not do this.

Fair enough, though I wasn't aiming for solely objective reasons. The games are relatively close to the point that I used subjective feelings to help make a judgment call.

 

[tennishero]

fallout 1 is shit in retrospect

falllout 2 was kinda awesome superfly cool

new vegas is the best game blah blah blah

3rd best game ever made after morrowind and oblivion

 

[circ]

How is FO1 a better game than FO:NV anyway?

Because it runs on the FO3 engine! Troika games, with the exception of Arcanum, can be excused about bugs and what have you. But you can't make a playable game with the FO3 engine, just as little as you can with what NWN2 engine turned out to be. NV in DA:O engine? Maybe. It will still look like shit, but atleast you can follow the story.

 

[shihonage]

How is FO1 a better game than FO:NV anyway? FO:NV has better quest design, more C&C, superior game mechanics (crafting, more balanced skills, survival mode), better companions, ALOT more stuff to see and do.

Filler (mostly Fedex) quests, lack of compelling goals, vomit-inducing visual style turning your monitor into a monochrome display, vast open spaces filled with nothing, designed to artificially extend playtime, retarded infodump NPCs with creepy faces, monotone voices, and bafflingly idiotic agendas, filling equally out-of-place settlements, every indoor area the same generic trashcan, lulzy cowboy robots, unkillable children, annoying radio stations, lack of written descriptions, atrocious and lazy inventory/objectivemap//skill interface, all coming together to form the sea of brown shit known as Fallout: New Vegas.

No, it isn't better than Fallout 1. It really isn't.

 

[King Crispy]

I'm actually trying to defend FO over NV, but your arguments are shit, shihonage.

- The quests are not mostly of the FedEx variety. They are varied and often interesting enough. I could give many examples.

- There are relatively compelling goals in the game, namely to align with or bring down the various factions, and there are of course side quests which are always less compelling.

- The visual style is intended to be desert-ish. You may not like it but it's not vomit-inducing to everyone. It's also not lush and green, which may induce vomiting in some people.

- There are literally no vast open spaces filled with nothing. There are creatures or locations within 20 seconds of walking, everywhere.

- The faces can be plain and creepy, yes, but NPC voices and the VO's in NV generally are well-done overall.

- Trashcans and robots can usually be associated with a post-apoc wasteland setting.

- Ignore the unkillable children. Ignore the radio stations. Their presense does not contribute negatively to this game.

- This game is first-person and 3D. There are no visual descriptions needed. Duh.

- Pipboy is what it is. It's Fallout.

- It's Van Buren finally realized. You should appreciate it more, but I agree that it's not better than Fallout 1.

 

[shihonage]

I kinda hope this was a troll, considering that this phrase

- This game is first-person and 3D. There are no visual descriptions needed. Duh.

... seems to be directly borrowed from Bethesda forums.

- There are literally no vast open spaces filled with nothing. There are creatures or locations within 20 seconds of walking, everywhere.

And that is just a lie. Even if there are trashmobs within 20 seconds of walking from some places, they're not making the vast distances between places any less empty.

- Trashcans and robots can usually be associated with a post-apoc wasteland setting.

I compared indoor areas to generic trashcans. They're filled with generic garbage. There's no artistic sense or memorability involved.

Fallout had "helper" robots, some of which still remained, and none of which put on cowboy hats, adopted a cheerful tone, and started roaming the wastelands.

- The visual style is intended to be desert-ish. You may not like it but it's not vomit-inducing to everyone. It's also not lush and green, which may induce vomiting in some people.

- Ignore the unkillable children. Ignore the radio stations. Their presense does not contribute negatively to this game.

Again... Bethesda forum vibe. I'm gonna stop here. Either you're trolling (as I hope you are), or a lot of you are suffering from Stockholm syndrome. Fallout 3 raped you, and now you're content with its kinder, gentler sibling. Nevermind that you're still locked in a smelly cage of feces.

 

[Nael]

- This game is first-person and 3D. There are no visual descriptions needed. Duh.

... seems to be directly borrowed from Bethesda forums.

Do you have some strange form of Aspergers that pops up an info box in your head telling you whatever you are looking at in real life?

 

[King Crispy]

Nope, no trolling. Just correct. You may not like NV, and I don't have a problem with that, but most of what you said is simply not factual.

NV does deserve its due credit, even as a stand-alone game.

 

[Mastermind]

Filler (mostly Fedex) quests,

Like "get the water chip"?

lack of compelling goals,

"Take over the world" is a more compelling goal than "kill yet another hitler clone"

vomit-inducing visual style turning your monitor into a monochrome display,

True to the original.

vast open spaces filled with nothing,

What? Fo1 is one vast open space filled with nothing. It has about a dozen and a half locations (if that) compared to NV's locations which run in the triple digits. There is simply no comparison on this front.

designed to artificially extend playtime,

Like a massive empty world map with random encounters, in true jrpg style?

retarded infodump NPCs with creepy faces, monotone voices, and bafflingly idiotic agendas,

True to the original.

filling equally out-of-place settlements, every indoor area the same generic trashcan, lulzy cowboy robots,

All lies.

unkillable children,

Who gives a shit?

annoying radio stations,

The all music one is fine.

lack of written descriptions,

atrocious and lazy inventory/objectivemap//skill interface

All true to the original. Except the inventory is miles above the tiny, unusable piece of shit that was fallout.

 

[shihonage]

@Nael:

Another Bethesda forum-series comment.

Are you seriously going to debate the value of written descriptions vs. generic gray models? Fallout's text screen was an in-game DM. It was genius, and part of it were the descriptions.

How would you portray a SMELL through a visual? You can write that something smells like cheese, but how can you SEE it?

How can you portray ANYTHING that is not audiovisual, through visuals and sound alone?

What's more interesting, examining a bed and seeing "The bed, stained, barely stands on creaky legs; it has seen some hard times", or just... looking at the bed model?

Do you even understand the concept of imagination? Immersion?

Shit, man. This is if I've ever seen it.

 

[Mastermind]

Do you even understand the concept of larping?

Fixed.

 

[Excidium]

Fallout had "helper" robots, some of which still remained, and none of which put on cowboy hats, adopted a cheerful tone, and started roaming the wastelands.

A robot from a Las Vegas Casino was programmed with a Cowboy AI? It makes no sense!!

By the way, It doesn't roam the wasteland, that securitron was sent to follow you around and make sure you arrive safely in New Vegas.

 

[The Ninth Circle]

Jesus. These aren't even good trolling attempts.

 

[Nael]

@Nael:

Another Bethesda forum-series comment.

Are you seriously going to debate the value of written descriptions vs. generic gray models? Fallout's text screen was an in-game DM. It was genius, and part of it were the descriptions.

How would you portray a SMELL through a visual? You can write that something smells like cheese, but how can you SEE it?

How can you portray ANYTHING that is not audiovisual, through visuals and sound alone?

What's more interesting, examining a bed and seeing "The bed, stained, barely stands on creaky legs; it has seen some hard times", or just... looking at the bed model?

Do you even understand the concept of imagination? Immersion?

Shit, man. This is if I've ever seen it.

My advice: READ A BOOK.

 

[shihonage]

My advice: READ A BOOK.

 

[Multidirectional]

Another Bethesda forum-series comment.

What the fuck does it matter if someone on Beth forum said it anyway? Validity of the point is what's important.
I agree that descriptions in a first person game aren't really fitting. The problem is that models mostly aren't expressive enough and that's what should be improved.

 

[Nael]

My advice: READ A BOOK.

 

[King Crispy]

The problem is that models mostly aren't expressive enough

This is a valid complaint. I actually hope that not only is Skyrim's "new" engine (Gamebryo 2.0, I guess) significantly better in this area (initial examinations of screenshots are inconclusive, IMO) but if it is I hope a new Obsidian-designed Fallout spinoff is done using it. Problem potentially and partially solved.

 

[shihonage]

Another Bethesda forum-series comment.

What the fuck does it matter if someone on Beth forum said it anyway? Validity of the point is what's important.

Bethesda forums are a sea of stupidity. I recall the same very arguments being used by Fallout 3 fans vs. the "oldfags" in 2008, and yes, my "Bethesda forums" qualifier is a measure of the point's value - in case that wasn't startlingly obvious.

I bring it up because I didn't expect to see such things said by people who spent a significant amount of time posting on RPG Codex.

I agree that descriptions in a first person game aren't really fitting. The problem is that models mostly aren't expressive enough an that's what should be improved.

So the superiority of the first-person view has become accepted now, too. (First person view+"expressive models") > (isometric+textual descriptions). I still have a feeling that I'm being trolled. If I am, then you've succeeded. Achievement gained.

 

[King Crispy]

Just curious, shihonage: how far into New Vegas did you actually play? Please be honest.

 

[janjetina]

models mostly aren't expressive enough an that's what should be improved.

No models are expressive enough, and never will be, with reasonable budget constraints. Required level of ''expressiveness'' is achieved in good movies, so it takes a competent director, a quality crew of competent and a huge pile of money. Games are not movies, and never will be.

Written descriptions are a necessity in computer games where setting and atmosphere are important (like RPGs).

 

[Multidirectional]

So the superiority of the first-person view has become accepted now, too.

I never said I thought Fallout is better in FP. I'll always love Falllout 1 and 2 more than NV. Not because I can prove that they are better games, merely because I find them to be way more charming. And I only first played them months before release of F3 so it's not like I'm nostalgic about this.
You are being way too presumptuous. It also applies to your "it's sounds like Beth forum durr hurr" nonsense. I don't know the context you've seen these claims being made in back when you saw them at Beth forums so I can't really comment about that. But pretending to disprove an argument by saying "it's a lot like something I read on Beth forum" is still fucking retarded. Either produce a counter argument or shut up.

No models are expressive enough, and never will be, with reasonable budget constraints. Required level of ''expressiveness'' is achieved in good movies, so it takes a competent director, a quality crew of competent and a huge pile of money. Games are not movies, and never will be.

Well I didn't mean they should look photorealistic. I was talking about lack of proper art direction in this area. Putting some small unique details on a model here and there is enough to provide some hints, my imagination will take care of the rest. I don't need it to be like in a fucking movie. In game descriptions won't match good books either, no?
Not sure if I even needed to get into this argument though, cause if NV did have an "Investigate" option that resulted in some cool descriptions I certainly wouldn't be bitching.

 

[shihonage]

I never said I thought Fallout is better in FP.

Why did you cut out the formula, which was the crux of my argument? Do you agree with that formula or not?

(First person view+"expressive models") > (isometric+textual descriptions)

EDIT: you know what, I think you just butted into the middle of an argument you don't really have an opinion on, and I might've taken it the wrong way.

I'll always love Falllout 1 and 2 more than NV. Not because I can prove that they are better games, merely because I find them to be way more charming.

So "charm" does not account into overall quality of the game... ok.

And I only first played them months before release of F3 so it's not like I'm nostalgic about this.
You are being way too presumptuous. It also applies to your "it's sounds like Beth forum durr hurr" nonsense. I don't know the context you've seen these claims being made in back when you saw them at Beth forums so I can't really comment about that. But pretending to disprove an argument by saying "it's a lot like something I read on Beth forum" is still fucking retarded. Either produce a counter argument or shut up.

The inherent idiocy of "now that you can see it in 3D, screw textual descriptions" used to be axiomic around here and NMA, and such statements did first originate from Bethesda fans.