"Fallout New Vegas is Only Good Because Fallout 3 is Good"

[TheImplodingVoice]

the thumbnail of this video implies that black men are superior to white men by putting the F:NV logo on the negro!
it should be the other way around.

No, it implies that people who like Fallout 3 are white supremacist scum and must be wiped off the face of earth.

does this mean I should like Fallout 3 now ?!

Unlike you, I am willing to play games I politically despise like KC: D

Politically disagree? Because there aren't any negros or other non-whites in the game? Did you cry for Hillary?

 

[naossano]

Most of game was designed years before Beth acquired the IP, but yeah, it wouldn't be half as good without the forced out of scale continuous gameworld, the engine that doesn't allow more than 10 npc in the same area, the running ghouls, the rushed Q & A, and the changed timeline.

 

[typical user]

Fallout: New Vegas is mediocre but it has some excellent moments. Still majority of the game is based around shitty shooting mechanics, the beginning is slow and boring and later on everyone views you like a god when you were invited to one closed-off area. The game is better because it allows you to make different decisions, if you kill Benny or spare him, if you retrieve the chip or not, if you met House or not and if made some trouble with NCR's and Legion's by ruining their plans. But the approach to lore is weird like bringing Khans again back to life, calling different groups "tribes" like trying to throwback to Fallout 2 beginning or going with wild west theme and then sticking Roman Empire in the middle of it and calling them strong when they refuse to use firearms.

 

[RapineDel]

This video explains why people get hyped up and buy the new Assassin's Creed or Far Cry every year.

Apparently if there's new assets and a clear change of setting it's a new, exciting game that needs to be re-bought but if a game comes out with an entirely different design approach, but happens to use similar assets it's an "add-on"

It's the reason the die hard Bethesda fans don't like New Vegas. They see it like the guy in the video, just another Bethesda game by a different developer so they get to work exploring every inch of the world, scavenging, taking things back to their base and attempting to make their own fun. They get frustrated that the game is far more faction/quest based.

You needed to watch a video about it? I have explained it here many times already...

Fallout New Vegas is a great game, for 1 or 2 playthroughs tops. After that it gets boring and lame, because outside of the dialogue,factions, NPCs, there is nothing great about it. It is a chore to play because there aren't enough places to explore or shit to do. The game is extremely quest driven and it is very, very linear.

Obsidian with NV did the same thing they did with NWN2, they took the original concept and twisted it into a storyfag experience. Fallout 3 was a very open, exploration based, make your own fun RPG, and Obsidian turned it into a storyfag quest and C&C heavy game. Neverwinter Nights was essentially a single-character-create-your-own-module-for-multiplayer toolset that Obsidian attempted to make a party based storyfag CRPG out of.

Don't get me wrong, this approach is not "bad", but it does detract in some ways from the original experience. It is very hard to make an openended exploration based storyfag game. Imagine Minecraft, can you even imagine a linear storyfag campaign within Minecraft game? You can't... If you add this type of element in a game, it can't be "make your own fun" anymore. It puts limits.

To better illustrate the problem from a Bethesda-fan perpective, imagine our frustration when every time we want to make a new build in new vegas, we have to make the U turn Primm-Mohave Outpost-Nipton-Novac-Freeside-New Vegas. Every fucking time, doing the same quests every fucking time, because they give a lot of exp and loot and it only makes sense to take them in order. It is frustrating to try to level up without doing the quests because they provide HUGE EXP, and doing the story quests implies watching the same fucking dialogue and clicking the same fucking options every single time... It is boring...

You claim to not like grinding but according to you it's impossible not to go around New Vegas clockwise? Yes, going that route might be the 'best' option if you want your game to be easier but this isn't some competitive MMO/shooter, it's about enjoying your own experience. Sure, speech might be one of the more useful perks but what is the point of replaying if you're just going to max it early every time and experience all the quests the same way. You get the most out of this game by mixing it up on replays by let's say, running to New Vegas first as a level 1 which is a challenge the first time in itself along with trying different skills before you get too OP.

Also you're saying Obsidian twisted the series into something it's not. Ever heard of Fallout 1 and 2? Bethesda bought an extremely rich IP and turned it into Oblivion with guns to capatalise on the name. Anyone's disappointment with NV not following the Bethesda model is on them.

 

[Funposter]

New Vegas's growing resurgence is so weird to me. Maybe it's just because YouTubers/Redditors are really malleable and fell for all the overly long video essays by Hbomberguy and his ilk about how Fallout 3 and 4 are bad but obviously those viewers could never handle the mechanics of the first two games. I want to love New Vegas, but the mechanics of the Gamebryo engine really kill it for me. It probably would've been a great isometric Fallout 3.

A lot of it is redditors, but I think a large part of it is also people returning to games that they enjoyed from previous generations, or getting the urge to do so. I never see anybody say "oh man, time to do a yearly playthrough of Fallout 3", but you see it all the time with games like Bloodlines, Deus Ex, Morrowind and New Vegas. Fallout 3 was a lot of fun, for a lot of people, but it's been left in the past. No one talks about it anymore except to shit on it, or to reminisce in vague terms. It didn't actually leave a strong impression on people, because the characters are pointless and forgettable, the story is utterly banal, and the gameplay was not impressive even at the time. A game like Vanquish can have a stupid storyline and pointless characters, but people return to it for the incredible gameplay. New Vegas actually has a good story, it has memorable characters, and it also has a setting which roots itself firmly in your memory.

 

[Deleted Member 16721]

I was one of those crazy people who thought Fallout 3 was much more memorable when it came out than New Vegas. Fallout 3 I wandered and dungeon-dived for hundreds of hours, New Vegas seemed like it lacked content the first time I played and I was finishing the game at Hoover Dam after 60 hours. It wasn't until recently that I replayed New Vegas and saw, wow, what a game it is. Tons of content but you have to actually explore and find it. Lots of little nooks and crannies and very consistent game world and lore. I enjoyed it a hell of a lot more, but I credit that to now being a CRPG gamer mostly, because when New Vegas came out I knew little about real CRPGs and was still a console gamer. I still would probably enjoy a playthrough of Fallout 3 for what it is but New Vegas is really something, and I found the gameplay, exploration and dialogue just fine for my tastes. The gunplay was fun enough, not sure what you guys are expecting from a first-person CRPG with guns...

 

[Okagron]

Also you're saying Obsidian twisted the series into something it's not. Ever heard of Fallout 1 and 2? Bethesda bought an extremely rich IP and turned it into Oblivion with guns to capatalise on the name. Anyone's disappointment with NV not following the Bethesda model is on them.

Fallout 3 is the one that twisted the series into something it's not. The first two Fallout games were about the people, the politics and how you could influence them in a myriad of ways. Fallout 3 is a theme park with no consequences, just focusing on exploration and almost nothing else. The first two games had exploration but it wasn't the main drive force.

Bethesda basically shoved their design philosophies from the Elder Scrolls series into Fallout, basically making Fallout 3 into Oblivion with guns. New Vegas actually made faction politics into the main point of the game, just like the first two games.

To quote something that has been quoted to hell:

My idea is to explore more of the world and more of the ethics of a post-nuclear world, not to make a better plasma gun. - Tim Cain

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Also you're saying Obsidian twisted the series into something it's not. Ever heard of Fallout 1 and 2? Bethesda bought an extremely rich IP and turned it into Oblivion with guns to capatalise on the name. Anyone's disappointment with NV not following the Bethesda model is on them.

conveniently overlooks this hot garbage

 

[Okagron]

That's not a main series game, that's a spinoff. Spinoffs are allowed to to whatever they want, but meanwhile Fallout 3 is a main series game.

 

[Sigourn]

New Vegas would have been a better game had it been turn-based. GameBryo really brings New Vegas down, but nihil nov sub sole. The Elder Scrolls was an action RPG franchise (and a terrible one at that) and Bethesda saw fit to turn Fallout into that as well. The only moments I'm glad the game is not isometric is when I look at the horizon or the sky, and even then this could be easily recreated in something like ATOM, provided the developers added some distance blur and allowed you to tilt the camera up to see the sky.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

That's not a main series game, that's a spinoff. Spinoffs are allowed to to whatever they want, but meanwhile Fallout 3 is a main series game.

That "spinoff" had a sequel planned and was the direction of Fallout until Bethesda bought the IP.

 

[Sigourn]

conveniently overlooks this hot garbage

What is your argument, exactly?

 

[Okagron]

That "spinoff" had a sequel planned and was the direction of Fallout until Bethesda bought the IP.

Says who? Where did it say it was going to be the direction of the series? The sequel was cancelled because of the poor sales of that game, so if that was intended direction, it died right after the game came out. And Bethesda's direction is hardly better.

 

[naossano]

FO3 did not have rape.

FO3 IS rape.

 

[2house2fly]

Fallout: New Vegas is mediocre but it has some excellent moments. Still majority of the game is based around shitty shooting mechanics, the beginning is slow and boring and later on everyone views you like a god when you were invited to one closed-off area. The game is better because it allows you to make different decisions, if you kill Benny or spare him, if you retrieve the chip or not, if you met House or not and if made some trouble with NCR's and Legion's by ruining their plans. But the approach to lore is weird like bringing Khans again back to life, calling different groups "tribes" like trying to throwback to Fallout 2 beginning or going with wild west theme and then sticking Roman Empire in the middle of it and calling them strong when they refuse to use firearms.

The Legion doesn't "refuse to use firearms"

 

[KeighnMcDeath]

So this is vanilla FO3 & NV with or without the the extra content? What about Mods to fix the game?

And not to delve too far off but does FO4 veer further in the gutter? Quest driven? Open world? Fortnight like?

 

[Funposter]

And not to delve too far off but does FO4 veer further in the gutter? Quest driven? Open world? Fortnight like?

i played it for a few hours at a friend's house and you just kinda wander around and kill stuff and then build minecraft castles

 

[Sykar]

So this is vanilla FO3 & NV with or without the the extra content? What about Mods to fix the game?

And not to delve too far off but does FO4 veer further in the gutter? Quest driven? Open world? Fortnight like?

No mod can fix the utterly retarded main story of FO 3 or the retconning or the moronic characters which make no sense whatsoever.

 

[ColonelTeacup]

Is this true?

Please also leave a comment on this videos youtube page.

No, if anything the shoddily done creation engine held new vegas back. Between the video josh made talking about the difficulties they had with FNV, and then bethesdas ridiculously short time limit for Obsidian to create the game, the only reason why FNV was so good was because Obsidian not only had the talent required to make the game, but a lot of the left over ideas from Van Buren. The one saving grace of the creation engine is that it allows FNV to be modded, which has allowed it to have a thriving mod community to this day.

 

[Dustin542]

That's not a main series game, that's a spinoff. Spinoffs are allowed to to whatever they want, but meanwhile Fallout 3 is a main series game.

That "spinoff" had a sequel planned and was the direction of Fallout until Bethesda bought the IP.

Other games in the series were planned around the same time but didn't see the light of day, Van Buren and Tactics 2

 

[otsego]

Fallout 2 is only good because Fallout 1 is.

... except not. FO1 is better than 2, and the fact that FO2 shared an engine and style and had things like UI improvements doesn't make up for its shortcomings. (FO2 was still great, let's not confuse that).

It's hard not to make a better game than FO3 using the same engine and assets. FNV succeeded where FO2 did not (in a SENSE). Well... then there was FO4.....