Fallout New Vegas

[MiracleOfSound]

honestly, no I dont think it will be as good. It will possibly be awesome, but not the pure orgasm FO3 was

While I am inclined to think I'll end up feeling the same way, I'm really happy that New Vegas will be more akin to the older games in terms of tone, humour and story.

Couple that with the looks, mechanics and hugeness of F3 and it could even end up being the better of the two.

I dunno if anything will ever recapture the feeling I had exploring the DC Ruins for the first time though. To this day it's my favorite ever gaming experience.

 

[MiracleOfSound]

funny, because fallout 3 was poorly rendered, modeled, animated, voiced, and textured.

I thought it was rather good looking myself. In fact it's my favorite looking game.

F1 and F2 still look good to this day stylistically, but the games are just... different.

 

[Poomanchu745]

as long as it isn't as buggy/glitchy as 3 was i'd be more then happy, everything else would just be icing on the cake.

It's an Obsidian game, running in a Bethesda engine. You wonder if it will be buggy? Every time the game messes up, take a shot. You'll be promptly hammered.

More like properly dead with a BAC of just over .5

 

[Jekken6]

New Vegas seems like it will incorporate what was good about with Fallout 3 and incorporate some of the good things of the original. Pre-ordered it in july i think, collectors edition on PC. I think i'll have a good time with New Vegas

 

[RedDeadFred]

To be honest. If it is the exact same as Fallout 3 just with new scenery and quests I would still buy it day one and love it!

 

[Super Toast]

honestly, no I dont think it will be as good. It will possibly be awesome, but not the pure orgasm FO3 was

Whoa.

You'll have to remind me, when was F3 an orgasm?

The game was good, but... F2 was better :/

Fallout 2 was one of the fabled Super Orgasms.

OT: I think it'll be better. Obsidian seems to have listened to the community.

 

[Misterian]

New Vegas had me sold from the start, it'll be like Fallout 3, just more of it, plus some extra bits and pieces, like gambling, fable 2 style sex (at least I heard there will be some), orbital laser, and Mariposa Super Mutants.

Plus, in that Mojave Wasteland conflict, I'd side with the NCR just to spite the Caesar's Legion, for 2 reasons; 1, I loathe slavery by 100%. 2, How can you take these guys seriously if they wear skirts all the time?

 

[explanoit]

My biggest problem with these kinds of games is since they moved to voice acting for everything.

Morrowind had long, detailed dialog. HUGE trees with massive detail. I want that back.

I mean, they're still a 300 hour orgasm for 60 bucks. But I want the text. This is not someone speaking who grew up with text based games. I merely recognize the benefits.

 

[beema]

Fallout 3 was my favorite new video game I've played in the last three+ years. So even if NV is more of the same, I'll be happy (although, I guess not super ecstatic). Also I'll be getting it for like $15, so can't complain.
As far as how I think it will be? I'm not expecting it to be mindblowing or all that different. Even if that's true, it will be better than 95% of other games releasing within the next year.

 

[Flying-Emu]

honestly, no I dont think it will be as good. It will possibly be awesome, but not the pure orgasm FO3 was

Whoa.

You'll have to remind me, when was F3 an orgasm?

The game was good, but... F2 was better :/

Okay, I'm sick of fanboys crying about how "Bethesda fucked up Fallout". Let's see, combat, F1-2 had turn based combat and had "dice rolls" for hit or miss, sure you could try VATS but it was still the same dice rolling crap, the winner was usually the guy with the better gun. Fallout 3 had real time combat, could pause to let the player pick body parts to cripple enemies to great effect, being less rigid meant more strategies could be incorporated, stealth may not be great but it's there, unlike 1-2 where you generally were not given said option in combat.

Graphics, 3d vs 2d who wins? Gameplay, F3 is much more action packed and can keep your attention longer than F1 or 2, I'd rather have an easier FPS than an unforgiving, isometric, turn based shooter. Story wise is where a tie comes in. You may get more backstory and sub-plots in F1-2, but in the end all the stories are rather simple and straightforward. Not much in the way of plot characters either.

Take off your damn nostalgia glasses, the only reason people who loved F1-2 like F:NV better than F3 is because some Obsidian employees are from Black Isle. God damn does it feel good to get that off my chest.

Are you quite done? No? Yes? Okay, good.

Now then. I never said that Bethesda fucked up Fallout. Ever. Kindly don't put words in my mouth.

VATS was an interesting system, but ultimately I still prefer the turn-based system in Fallouts 1, 2, and especially Tactics.

Graphics have no bearing on a game. At all. Isometric or first person, sprites or bump-mapping, doesn't make a shit of difference to me.

As stated above, I played Fallout 2 after Fallout 3, so obviously nostalgia cannot apply.

I find it amusing that you so vehemently attack me over something so small. Really, my friend, is it worth being so rude? I prefer Fallout 2, obviously have no nostalgia (due to playing Fallout 2 AFTER Fallout 3), and have given my reasons why. The 'tactics' you speak of in Fallout 3 are pointless, since doing anything besides shooting your enemy in the head is generally a waste of precious bullets. And besides that, that level of strategy was in Fallout 1 and 2 as well, but implemented better since it actually made more than a very very very minor difference.

However, you are entitled to your opinion. I only ask you to not state it in such an aggressive manner next time.

Have a nice day.

 

[explanoit]

doing anything besides shooting your enemy in the head is generally a waste of precious bullets.

They said they were fixing that in Las Vegas when they were on Xplay, if that makes any difference.

 

[Chamale]

Fallout New Vaegas: The Expansion pack that walks like a sequel. Fuck new Vegas.

Yeah, and what about that Left 4 Dead 2, eh? Oh, and Terminator 2 is nothing but an expansion. It only added 1 enemy and 2 hours of content!

Seriously, New Vegas will rock. I'm planning to play through slowly, though, because I expect it to be very buggy.

 

[Raptorace18]

ADS FTW! Also you can't go wrong with an automatic grenade launcher and weapon customization.

 

[octafish]

I'll be holding out for the inevitable GOTY edition.

 

[TomLikesGuitar]

Im gonna
LOSE myself
in the vegas strip
the moment
i own it
and dont let the controller go (woah)
ill only take one shot
and let the VATS take care of yo
waiting for my preorder call
once in a life time (yo)

...

...

[small]
once in a lifetime
purify the water now

same as it ever was
same as it ever was
you may ask yourself, how do I kill this mutant?
and you may ask yourself, will this game have automobiles?
and you may say to yourself, my god this game is so awesome.

letting the fallout by
let the water kill your dad
letting the fallout by
wa-ter is what killed your dad
into the dry wasteland
after your dad is gone
once in a life time
purify the water now
[/small]

yeah im drunk but this game is gonna be sweet lol

 

[jboking]

The 'tactics' you speak of in Fallout 3 are pointless, since doing anything besides shooting your enemy in the head is generally a waste of precious bullets. And besides that, that level of strategy was in Fallout 1 and 2 as well, but implemented better since it actually made more than a very very very minor difference.

Hold up, while I'm fine with you preferring F1-2, I don't really care what you prefer as it doesn't effect me, however, that statement about F3's battle system is far from correct. On any difficulty level but easy, if you go up against a deathclaw and went straight for it's head instead of it's legs to slow it down, you are going to get torn apart. Furthermore, if you are fighting a super mutant hord and need to slow down the overlords, shoot out their hands to prevent them from shooting you for a while so you can take out the small fries, then come back to the overlords. Or just use the stealth(which wasn't THAT bad) to try and sneak up on enemies to get the bonus to take out the overlords quickly so you don't have to deal with them. There was a lot of strategy for F3, you just had to look for it in the moment. It was active strategy.

Fuck new vegas, you guys have fun.

Why fuck new vegas? Have you looked at any of the new vegas dev diaries. Have you seen the stuff their adding? The story that isn't full of bullshit like the F3?

What is wrong with it? I'm not asking you to change your opinion, just to justify it.

 

[Starke]

Are you quite done? No? Yes? Okay, good.

No?

Now then. I never said that Bethesda fucked up Fallout. Ever. Kindly don't put words in my mouth.

And, indeed, they have not. Fallout 3 is a very different direction for the franchise, but if anything fucked the franchise up permanently, it would be the PS2/Xbox BOS release.

I actually enjoy Fallout 3, but, that said, Emu, you're probably right. The first two are RPGs, Fo3 is an FPS with RPG mechanics.

VATS was an interesting system, but ultimately I still prefer the turn-based system in Fallouts 1, 2, and especially Tactics.

My only gripe with Tactics was that the turn based mode was horribly broken in places.

Graphics have no bearing on a game. At all. Isometric or first person, sprites or bump-mapping, doesn't make a shit of difference to me.

Okay, so here we'll have to disagree a little. Graphics can be a nice little perk. Crysis is a very beautiful game, for instance. But, I really don't know where this idea that you can build a game on nothing but graphics, or that graphics are an integral part of the gaming experience, and without it a game the game is terrible, comes from.

As stated above, I played Fallout 2 after Fallout 3, so obviously nostalgia cannot apply.

The bit here that I really latched onto was the accusation that I (or you or someone), played Fallout as a child. Now, as I recall, Fallout was actually quite controversial when it was released because of the graphic nature of the violence, and it did (and I think still does) carry an M rating.

To be fair I did play it when I was 19 or 20... so... maybe that counts as a "child" given the offending poster's (I think it was Lucky Charms) obvious maturity, perhaps that is a "child" in his terms. But, meh.

I find it amusing that you so vehemently attack me over something so small. Really, my friend, is it worth being so rude?

But, if I can't be rude... what will I do with myself?

Seriously though, Lucky and Scythe are in need of some rabies vaccines.

I prefer Fallout 2, obviously have no nostalgia (due to playing Fallout 2 AFTER Fallout 3), and have given my reasons why. The 'tactics' you speak of in Fallout 3 are pointless, since doing anything besides shooting your enemy in the head is generally a waste of precious bullets.

And it still bugs me that there's no fire control in Fallout 3. None, whatsoever. Your first shot from an Assault Rifle will be just as random as your eighth in a burst.

And besides that, that level of strategy was in Fallout 1 and 2 as well, but implemented better since it actually made more than a very very very minor difference.

It occurs to me that the multi weapon tactics from the original games are basically gone as well now. There's no off hand equipping, so no shotgun assault rifle combos, no dual pistols, nothing. (Sorry, random tangent.)

However, you are entitled to your opinion. I only ask you to not state it in such an aggressive manner next time.

But, if they don't how will we know it's really them?

Have a nice day.

You too. I'll try, but I've got the most godawful headache.

 

[Vault101]

I dont like to specualte thers not much point, and we all know how friggin unpleaseable the fans of the originals are

Even its its just more of the same I couldnt be happyer

Can't wait!!!