Poll: Fallout: New Vegas - No play after end?

[TheIronRuler]

I just completed Fallout: New Vegas a few hours ago. Here were my thoughts:

1. Wow, great game.
2. OK, credits. Skip.
3. Hmm. Reset to the main menu. Weird. I'll try clicking continue.
4. What? I can't continue? Damn it, damn it, DAMN IT!

I researched a little and found that the project director wanted the player to feel that the changes shown in the end slides were major, so decided to give it a definitive end instead of allowing the player to continue afterwards.

So, what are your opinions on this and should Obsidian release DLC to change this?

P.S. I have downloaded a mod that allows you to go on, but it just doesn't feel right. Oh, well.

It;s the same as Broken Steel DLC is Fallout 3.
I'm sure they'll make the last DLC let you continue your tales.

 

[DustyDrB]

Back in November, I was sort of mad about the game ending. But now I see I was stupid. It is unreasonable to expect Obsidian to craft a post-ending game world that accounts for every variable. And if they were to choose one "canon" ending, then we would all be angry about that (and rightfully so).

The way they did it allowed for the best possible narrative. And most every other game has an ending. I think people (myself included) were spoiled by Oblivion's continuing after the main quest. But the thing about Oblivion is that it's story sucked and the world felt too static.

 

[Total LOLige]

It wasn't that bad, you can make a new game or load an earlier save. I recall Obsidian saying they weren't going to release an add on like broken steel for NV.

 

[spencergreenshow]

after the end of fallout 2 it asks you if you want to continue playing, and i accepted the the offer and played for a few more (in game) years, it was fun seeing how all the npc's reacted to your accomplishments and finding the secret after ending items like the 300% skill book in the tiny church in New Reno. I can't recall clearly but I seem to remember a similar offer made after the ending to fallout 1 also, but not in tactics

 

[spencergreenshow]

Whoever said no was stupid.

I mean after the whole epilogue thing I want to see how the world changes with your actions. I mean it will to take time to make a DLC that would make separate worlds for NCR, the Legion, House, or You in control with the other teams pretty much gone, but that would be awesome. Go help NCR wipe out the last of the Legion, help House keep control of New Vegas, or help the Legion just take over rape/pillage/speak in latin or whatever.

Unless they release content that logically must take place after the credits roll, then I have no problem with the game ending. What's more, I find this complaint baffling. When Fallout 1 ended, I was cast into the wastes and the game was over. When Fallout 2 ended, I traveled back to California and the game was over. When Fallout Tactics ended I was merged with the Calculator and the game was over. Continuing the game after the credits roll was something that was never a part of Fallout until Broken Steel was released.

What is so terrible about a game having a concrete ending, a moment where your actions are inventoried and accounted for?

i don't think it effects the endings too greatly to have a play after end experience honestly, because most of the fallout titles have little to do with eachother aside from 1 leading to 2 due to ancestry. playing after the end of fallout 2 had neat perks

 

[DustyDrB]

Necrooooooooooooooo

Though it's depressing to see all the banned users on this page. I remember almost all of them...

 

[evilneko]

It annoys me that there's no play after the main quest. This forces you to basically tell the factions, "hey, hold off on your war for a bit while I go hunt some bounties!" And sadly enough, they shrug and twiddle their thumbs while you do whatever.

With free play, you could at least imagine that they won't do that, and you aren't forced to do an immersion-breaking departure from the questline while everyone's talking about this imminent huge battle...

 

[Jitters Caffeine]

They've already dropped support for the game. There aren't going to be anymore DLC now. But why SHOULD there be play after the finale? That's why it's the FINALE. You reached the exciting conclusion, just reload your last save and keep going. And now you don't have the Skyrim problem of wondering why absolutely nothing has changed since you've essentially saved the world.

 

[fireaura08]

Nah, too many variables in the ending. The DLC would have to be huge (and expensive) to make it worthwhile.

 

[Altorin]

I don't have a problem with the way it is. It sort of lays it out that you're going towards a final end and gives you a lot of warning before you start the final mission. The only real things you miss out on are Lanius' and Oliver's items. There's no real NEED to allow you to keep playing afterwards. If you missed some stuff, you can load your save from before you started the mission (you made a save, right?) and then blam, go complete whatever you want and just consider the game "beat" until you want to end it again for whatever reason.

Or start a new game, follow a different path, try Hardcore mode, buy some new DLC and see how that is... The game has plenty of replay value.

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

Whoever said no was stupid.

I mean after the whole epilogue thing I want to see how the world changes with your actions. I mean it will to take time to make a DLC that would make separate worlds for NCR, the Legion, House, or You in control with the other teams pretty much gone, but that would be awesome. Go help NCR wipe out the last of the Legion, help House keep control of New Vegas, or help the Legion just take over rape/pillage/speak in latin or whatever.

Unless they release content that logically must take place after the credits roll, then I have no problem with the game ending. What's more, I find this complaint baffling. When Fallout 1 ended, I was cast into the wastes and the game was over. When Fallout 2 ended, I traveled back to California and the game was over. When Fallout Tactics ended I was merged with the Calculator and the game was over. Continuing the game after the credits roll was something that was never a part of Fallout until Broken Steel was released.

What is so terrible about a game having a concrete ending, a moment where your actions are inventoried and accounted for?

i don't think it effects the endings too greatly to have a play after end experience honestly, because most of the fallout titles have little to do with eachother aside from 1 leading to 2 due to ancestry. playing after the end of fallout 2 had neat perks

The same could be said about virtually any game. Of course, I don't really agree in the slightest with your assertion that there is little in common between those first two fallout titles.

After all, they share such things as a common narrative thread (The master's Super Mutant army, its remnants and remains all play a part in the next game). They share the same setting (Southwest US including portions of California, Arizona and Nevada). They share the same places and have the same people (Marcus the Super Mutant for example, Harold the Ghoul as another). They share the same items (The Power Armor, the Metal Armor, the Pancor Jackhammer). They share the same mechanics, many of the same graphical assets and the same engine.

Hell, the only thing that is really different about Fallout 2 is the specific narrative you follow.