New Vegas review from NMA, too good to be true???

[Carlos' Bitch1]

Correction; a lot of the usual types that have said Dragon Age, Mass Effect, Alpha Protocol, Fallout 3 (and I daresay, Oblivion) are good games are claiming this is amazing.

It's interesting that you group all those games together, when I'm pretty sure if you asked 10 different people in this thread who like NV their opinion of each of those games, you'd get 10 different answers.

No, I am certain that virtually every one of them said endearing things about most of these games until the afterglow subsided. Even you were not displeased about Alpha Protocol until you had gotten a certain way into the game.

 

[Mangoose]

The only one I may guilty of is DA, but that's moreso because it started out promising and decent with the origins but then went to stupid in the Derp Roads and the final chapters were just a blur.

 

[Carlos' Bitch1]

The only one I may guilty of is DA, but that's moreso because it started out promising and decent with the origins but then went to stupid in the Derp Roads and the final chapters were just a blur.

Which proves my point. Before that, you enjoyed it to varying degree's.

I waited until after the 'derp roads' episode, and all other information had come in, and so learned the way things went without wasting time and/or money.

Had a good time arguing on the Codex too. Win/Win really.

 

[Drakron]

No, I am certain that virtually every one of them said endearing things about most of these games until the afterglow subsided. Even you were not displeased about Alpha Protocol until you had gotten a certain way into the game.

Because most of those games are not horrible?

Mass Effect is good in the sense its a sci-fic action B movie as a game, I enjoyed playing it on the Xbox 360 and enjoyed replaying it on PC.

Fallout 3 is a very playable game, filled with issues (bad writing, bad plot and other bad and silly things) but its a playable exploration RPG.

Dragon Age ... I *think* that at one point I defended it but after a while its a standard Bioware game with a exception, awful gameplay and its not a pretty game so its not even eyecandy worth.

Alpha Protocol, I also think I defended it ... until I was stonewalled by a certain boss and I rage/quit, still think it had good ideas but mixed with bad ones and poor implementations, I would say its a decent but SERIOUS flawed game.

Now if I think Fallout 3 was playable as far mechanics wise goes and New Vegas does about the same with the exception of having a better plot, better quest structure and overall improves on every single point that Fallout 3 had issues with besides bugs and maybe models (I still dont like the webbed feet of Fallout 3 and hair is still pretty bad, slightly better that Mass Effect Hair however).

 

[Carlos' Bitch1]

No, I am certain that virtually every one of them said endearing things about most of these games until the afterglow subsided. Even you were not displeased about Alpha Protocol until you had gotten a certain way into the game.

Because most of those games are not horrible?

Mass Effect is good in the sense its a sci-fic action B movie as a game, I enjoyed playing it on the Xbox 360 and enjoyed replaying it on PC.

Fallout 3 is a very playable game, filled with issues (bad writing, bad plot and other bad and silly things) but its a playable exploration RPG.

Dragon Age ... I *think* that at one point I defended it but after a while its a standard Bioware game with a exception, awful gameplay and its not a pretty game so its not even eyecandy worth.

Alpha Protocol, I also think I defended it ... until I was stonewalled by a certain boss and I rage/quit, still think it had good ideas but mixed with bad ones and poor implementations, I would say its a decent but SERIOUS flawed game.

Now if I think Fallout 3 was playable as far mechanics wise goes and New Vegas does about the same with the exception of having a better plot, better quest structure and overall improves on every single point that Fallout 3 had issues with besides bugs and maybe models (I still dont like the webbed feet of Fallout 3 and hair is still pretty bad, slightly better that Mass Effect Hair however).

Thank you for being honest. I too will be honest; they are horrible to me. No doubt you think many of the oldschool games I rattle on about are horrible too. Thats ok. Different tastes and all that. But even you admit that you leaped all over these new games initially and the shine rubbed off them well before the end of most of them.

Now tell me..what mechanics and gameplay of Fallout 3 do you rate highly? What have they done especially well that really shines? Forget the plot, etc etc, just tell me strictly about what is so good about the Engine and game mechanics.

 

[Silellak]

Correction; a lot of the usual types that have said Dragon Age, Mass Effect, Alpha Protocol, Fallout 3 (and I daresay, Oblivion) are good games are claiming this is amazing.

It's interesting that you group all those games together, when I'm pretty sure if you asked 10 different people in this thread who like NV their opinion of each of those games, you'd get 10 different answers.

No, I am certain that virtually every one of them said endearing things about most of these games until the afterglow subsided. Even you were not displeased about Alpha Protocol until you had gotten a certain way into the game.

I wasn't?

This is pretty much the nicest thing I said about the game (over on ITS):

Still not sure where the game sits with me, since I'm only in Saudi. Playing a pistol/stealth build. Stealth is definitely "clunky", but I'm gradually getting a feel for it. The timed dialog doesn't really bother me as much as I thought it would, but I can definitely see how it'd get annoying in certain situations. The graphics are laughably bad, especially for something that uses the Unreal 3 engine. It feels like something I'd have played 5 or 6 years ago. There's really no excuse for that, either.

All of that said, however, it draws me in, and I was up until 1:30 in the morning playing, which hasn't happened with any game in a long time. So...I guess something is "clicking". Perhaps the game is more than the sum of its parts - it's just too early to tell.

The next day I posted the following:

Just more random thoughts I had while playing yesterday:

- How did they design a cover system this awful?
- On a related note, why can't I vault over cover? This cuts off so many obvious stealth routes.
- Oh good, another scripted sequence where I'm spotted. Hey Obsidian - if I've snuck through an entire level without a single alarm, you shouldn't "reward" me by having alarms go off and trapping my character into a room.
- Really? I just killed the first boss of the level with stealth and now you want me to run around grabbing rocket launchers (that just happened to show up when they weren't there before) and blow up a tank? I fucking hate you, level designer.
- Seriously, why can't I vault over cover?
- I am really tired of every enemy who is "alerted to my presence" somehow knowing exactly where I am
- Oh, speaking of that, thanks for having some enemies randomly fire off a single shot from their gun after I stealthily shoot them in the head, thus putting the remaining guards on alert. I love having all my stealth work ruined by chance.
- WHY THE FUCKING FUCK CAN'T I VAULT OVER COVER JESUS OBSIDIAN IS THIS 2005?!

All of that said, I'm still playing, but it's just frustrating how many small, simple things they could've changed to create a substantially better game. I think it's a hybrid game that suffers even more than ME1 in the fact that it really wants to be an RPG but simply doesn't give you enough feedback about the mechanics. You have to do too much guessing vs. knowing. Imagine playing a PnP RPG without a rulebook and a DM who won't tell you shit about how anything works.

"Will that guard see me?"
"Dunno, maybe. Try and sneak by and see what happens."
"I fucking hate you."
"I know."

Trust me - it never got any better. By the end of the week my comments had devolved to basically:

Fuck you, Obsidian. Fuck you so much.

That said, I think it certainly makes sense to wait until the "afterglow" passes. In fact, from what it sounds like you look for in an RPG, I'm not sure you'd like New Vegas anyway.

 

[chzr]

Question: Is luck important for stealthy characters (ie scoring sneak attack criticals) or is it just for criticals outside of sneaking?

not counting the other luck bonuses, afaik it isn't since it affects crit chance and crit chance while sneaking = 100%

 

[Carlos' Bitch1]

Still not sure where the game sits with me, since I'm only in Saudi. Playing a pistol/stealth build. Stealth is definitely "clunky", but I'm gradually getting a feel for it. The timed dialog doesn't really bother me as much as I thought it would, but I can definitely see how it'd get annoying in certain situations. The graphics are laughably bad, especially for something that uses the Unreal 3 engine. It feels like something I'd have played 5 or 6 years ago. There's really no excuse for that, either.

All of that said, however, it draws me in, and I was up until 1:30 in the morning playing, which hasn't happened with any game in a long time. So...I guess something is "clicking". Perhaps the game is more than the sum of its parts - it's just too early to tell.

Well...something was clicking, wasn't it?



Anyway, I think we agree with my central premise; if unsure, wait around until you know more. Preferably from trusted sources that enjoy similar games.

 

[Jaesun]

The man residing within Cuntington Manor speaks the truth, and understands the truth.

 

[MasterSmithFandango]

Agree with Blackadder. Will pirate in a week or two when the non-fags report in with impressions.

 

[chzr]

Anyway, I think we agree with my central premise; if unsure, wait around until you know more. Preferably from trusted sources that enjoy similar games.

it's quite simple - the core is still a fallout 3. the ui (which will fix mods probably), the graphics/animations (doubt you're a graphix whore but just saying) and mainly, the combat - which is still bad even with some minor improvements here and there.

so you either
a) enjoyed/can live with these mechanics and play a very good game in terms of writing, settings and area to explore
b) can't stand them (no matter other factors) and the game is simply not for you.

in other words, the game still *is* F3 in core (which many positive comments here don't mention, i assume they belong to the "a)" group). If you think f3 can be 'fixed', FNV fixed it. If you think it's not possible, FNV tried.

 

[1eyedking]

Short impressions its truly an amazing game, probably as good as fallout 1-2 . Now of course you have to stomach the vat combat system, it has been tweaked but its still there and off course the clunky UI .

The majority of quests dont even requires much fighting 3/4 of the quests dont requires it,and can be solved by talking, bribing, or using some skills, you are even allowed to be a complete bastard this time, finally real evil.
Theres many interwined plots, the quest design is superb , the area design, well what to say.. everything bare the core 3D engine is way way ahead of fallout 3. One simple example , in fallout 3 you find an annoying kid village, in new vegas they hunt rats in ruins with a knife and are exploited by some street trader.

Theres really no reasons to wait before getting it unless you are a masochist, it runs o ultra setting on my 4 year old pc.
Off course theres a few bugs, one prevented me to start plots(activating hellios 1 before restoring the hope quest), but i prefer way more that game to any recent polished turd like arcania.You will say its obsidian its bound to be bugged, but its also have a damn better story and more complex quests.

Really it has been so far a very addictive experience ,as entertaining as the fallouts were in their days.
Undoubtly the rpg of the year , best rpg since 5 years at least.

IVE ONLY PLAYED IT FOR LIEK 6 HOURS BUT OMG ITS THE BEST RPG SINCE ARCANUM

Welcome to CodexSpot.

 

[Multi-headed Cow]

Would you have been happier if he said he'd played through it twice already? I wouldn't.

 

[1eyedking]

The guy's worse than VD, that's what I'm saying.

You know, the guy who said AP fucking rocked and was so fucking awesome and full of totally deep C&C and fucking ruled as an action game.

Only to say he dislikes it now :/

 

[commie]

Anyway, I think we agree with my central premise; if unsure, wait around until you know more. Preferably from trusted sources that enjoy similar games.

it's quite simple - the core is still a fallout 3. the ui (which will fix mods probably), the graphics/animations (doubt you're a graphix whore but just saying) and mainly, the combat - which is still bad even with some minor improvements here and there.

so you either
a) enjoyed/can live with these mechanics and play a very good game in terms of writing, settings and area to explore
b) can't stand them (no matter other factors) and the game is simply not for you.

in other words, the game still *is* F3 in core (which many positive comments here don't mention, i assume they belong to the "a)" group). If you think f3 can be 'fixed', FNV fixed it. If you think it's not possible, FNV tried.

The difference is that FO3 had no redeeming story or writing to make up for the game play deficiencies. Mods tried manfully to make it a good game, but could never fix the shitty world.

 

[Mangoose]

Which proves my point. Before that, you enjoyed it to varying degree's.

No, not really. Your point was that the enjoyment ended after the afterglow. Me, I still enjoy the Origins section of DA. I still hate the end. My opinion has been the same before and after the afterglow.

 

[chzr]

The difference is that FO3 had no redeeming story or writing to make up for the game play deficiencies. Mods tried manfully to make it a good game, but could never fix the shitty world.

sure which was my point in that post. if i generalize very roughly - it depends how much storyfag are you to enjoy (or not) FNV. and if you answer that i could say the same about PST, you'll be right.

 

[1eyedking]

F3:NV didn't fix F3. It's still got shit art direction (shit visual design, shit voice acting, shit music, etc.), shit sounds, shit graphics (and shit shadows and animations), shit interface, shit inventory, shit combat.

So far from what I've played they only managed to make the game world at least somewhat interesting, and some mechanics and skills more balanced, but that stuff is buried so fucking deep beneath the extremely vomitive F3 shell that it may not be worth the pain.

But keep on hyping Codex, I forgot we no longer evaluate games as a whole now, because so far from what I've read in this thread it's the same as if I were to say "Hey Halo is a great FPS once you get over the nonexistent art direction, stupid gameplay, fucked up controls and take a look at how pretty the guns shoot!"...

 

[Silellak]

The guy's worse than VD, that's what I'm saying.

You know, the guy who said AP fucking rocked and was so fucking awesome and full of totally deep C&C and fucking ruled as an action game.

Only to say he dislikes it now :/

When did VD say that AP "fucking rocked" and "fucking ruled as an action game"?

 

[1eyedking]

At a thread he linked here to his impressions at the ITS forums.

 

[commie]

The difference is that FO3 had no redeeming story or writing to make up for the game play deficiencies. Mods tried manfully to make it a good game, but could never fix the shitty world.

sure which was my point in that post. if i generalize very roughly - it depends how much storyfag are you to enjoy (or not) FNV. and if you answer that i could say the same about PST, you'll be right.

I'm a storyfag true, I can overlook shitty game play up to a point (of course totally shit is still totally shit regardless of story) so long as the world is believable and consistent with a solid and compelling reason for doing what you are doing in it.

For me NV get's extra KKK because it actually feels like a Fallout game, has that same spirit and this shines through in spite of the engine. I ground my way through FO3 with all the game play mods known to man yet NEVER was I allowed to enjoy the game(except in very limited doses) because of the basically horrific, inconsistent and banal world and quests. If I can't find any emotional attachment or enthusiasm for even exploring around(and I'm a fan of hiking simulators) then that really tells you something about the quality of FO3.

 

[latexmonkeys]

Did the patch fix the save game issue?

Apparently the 2nd patch has been released and it's supposed to fix Preferences, quicksaves, and autosaves.

 

[chzr]

F3:NV didn't fix F3. It's still got shit art direction (shit visual design, shit voice acting, shit music, etc.), shit sounds, shit graphics (and shit shadows and animations), shit interface, shit inventory, shit combat.

So far from what I've played they only managed to make the game world at least somewhat interesting, and some mechanics and skills more balanced, but that stuff is buried so fucking deep beneath the extremely vomitive F3 shell that it isn't worth the pain.

it's quite simple - the core is still a fallout 3. the ui (which will fix mods probably), the graphics/animations (doubt you're a graphix whore but just saying) and mainly, the combat - which is still bad even with some minor improvements here and there.

so you either
a) enjoyed/can live with these mechanics and play a very good game in terms of writing, settings and area to explore
b) can't stand them (no matter other factors) and the game is shit.

fix'd for 1ek

 

[1eyedking]

Enjoyed =/= Good

Codex 2010 cannot into proper argumentation.

 

[Clockwork Knight]

F3:NV didn't fix F3. It's still got shit art direction (shit visual design, shit voice acting, shit music, etc.), shit sounds, shit graphics (and shit shadows and animations), shit interface, shit inventory, shit combat.