Steam is currently downloading it for me, so I will have to wait and see, but I would like to see some more innovation, which from what I have seen will not be present, but I'm not going to judge it quite yet.
Poll: Is New Vegas a rip off?
- Thread starter darkkan2125
- Start date
Recommended Videos
So I'm about 10 hours in, and I'm thinking I'm getting my money's worth. Okay, okay, the game-crashing bugs are VERY annoying, and if there isn't a patch released within the week I'll be pissed, but seriously, it's a pretty damn good game.
I'll say this much:
To my way of thinking "Fallout 3" is actually a rip off of "New Vegas".
While "Fallout 3" was a decent game, I feel that it was lacking in terms of writing and the way the world was presented compared to the first two Fallout games and Tactics. "Fallout 3" just got a lot of the details and a big part of the vibe plain out wrong. I kind of felt that Behtesda would have actually delivered an even better product had they not been trying to work within the Fallout world which they just were not able to really do justice to.
"New Vegas" is done by a lot of the same writers as the original Fallout games, and while I don't think they quite have the same backbone they once did the style is more along the lines of what "Fallout" should actually be. What's more it seems to be picking up elements from "Van Buren" which was the original "Fallout 3" before the well known series of events that lead to Bethesda eventually winding up with the franchise.
It's also noteworthy that despite the numerical designation of "Fallout 3" it takes place in a radically differant location from the other games in the series, being more akin to a spin off than an actual sequel in terms of actual material and what it covers.
-
As far as the game's actual content goes, I think the problem with people calling it an "expansion pack" is that the kids today have little experience with games. Yes, "New Vegas" uses the same engine as "Fallout 3", however that doesn't make it any more a "glorified expansion pack" than say "Planescape Torment" is an expansion pack to "Baldur's Gate". In the overall scheme of gaming it's not unusual for a number of games to be released using the same basic engine, such as "the infinity engine" or whatever. Heck, when you get down to it, most shooters are the same game almost literally with a few tweaks, as most of them draw upon the same basic engine such as "Unreal" or "GRAW" or other engines. I think a lot of people, including a surprising number of "experts" who do reviews, simply do not get that two games developed using the same toolboxes are going to be extremely identical. Claiming that one game using GRAW for example is *almost* identical in play to another game using GRAW despite some thematic differances should go without saying. I find it especially amusing in cases where one game is accused of ripping off another in cases like that, when in reality they are both ripping off whatever game the engine was pimped with. All those games using the "Unreal" engine are by and large going to be similar to umm, Unreal.
Overall I think there is enough in "New Vegas" for it to easily be considered it's own game akin to a "Baldur's Gate II" or "Icewind Dale" were despite them sharing the same engine with other games.
These are my opinions, and not really in keeping with the intent of the original poster I guess.
I guess for the kids who never played the original "Fallout" games they see things as starting with "Fallout 3" I can understand that perspective. For the real fans of the series who have been following it from before gaming was quite this mainstream, "New Vegas" is more along the lines of the game they were waiting for, at least as far as the material in the game goes. Engine wise, I don't think the current "first person shooter" type Fallout games will ever be able to scratch the itch of a true hardcore RPG player... though admittedly "New Vegas" *DOES* come closer to this than "Fallout 3" did because "New Vegas" does force people to make some harder desicians with character development, as it's far more difficult to develop a perfect character, and due to the usage of things like attribute levels again in addition to just skill percentages, and putting more minimums into dialogue options as opposed t letting people save and reload until they get what they want, it does force people to tend to specialize rather than simply being able to automatically do whatever the best thing is for any given situation.
To my way of thinking "Fallout 3" is actually a rip off of "New Vegas".
While "Fallout 3" was a decent game, I feel that it was lacking in terms of writing and the way the world was presented compared to the first two Fallout games and Tactics. "Fallout 3" just got a lot of the details and a big part of the vibe plain out wrong. I kind of felt that Behtesda would have actually delivered an even better product had they not been trying to work within the Fallout world which they just were not able to really do justice to.
"New Vegas" is done by a lot of the same writers as the original Fallout games, and while I don't think they quite have the same backbone they once did the style is more along the lines of what "Fallout" should actually be. What's more it seems to be picking up elements from "Van Buren" which was the original "Fallout 3" before the well known series of events that lead to Bethesda eventually winding up with the franchise.
It's also noteworthy that despite the numerical designation of "Fallout 3" it takes place in a radically differant location from the other games in the series, being more akin to a spin off than an actual sequel in terms of actual material and what it covers.
-
As far as the game's actual content goes, I think the problem with people calling it an "expansion pack" is that the kids today have little experience with games. Yes, "New Vegas" uses the same engine as "Fallout 3", however that doesn't make it any more a "glorified expansion pack" than say "Planescape Torment" is an expansion pack to "Baldur's Gate". In the overall scheme of gaming it's not unusual for a number of games to be released using the same basic engine, such as "the infinity engine" or whatever. Heck, when you get down to it, most shooters are the same game almost literally with a few tweaks, as most of them draw upon the same basic engine such as "Unreal" or "GRAW" or other engines. I think a lot of people, including a surprising number of "experts" who do reviews, simply do not get that two games developed using the same toolboxes are going to be extremely identical. Claiming that one game using GRAW for example is *almost* identical in play to another game using GRAW despite some thematic differances should go without saying. I find it especially amusing in cases where one game is accused of ripping off another in cases like that, when in reality they are both ripping off whatever game the engine was pimped with. All those games using the "Unreal" engine are by and large going to be similar to umm, Unreal.
Overall I think there is enough in "New Vegas" for it to easily be considered it's own game akin to a "Baldur's Gate II" or "Icewind Dale" were despite them sharing the same engine with other games.
These are my opinions, and not really in keeping with the intent of the original poster I guess.
I guess for the kids who never played the original "Fallout" games they see things as starting with "Fallout 3" I can understand that perspective. For the real fans of the series who have been following it from before gaming was quite this mainstream, "New Vegas" is more along the lines of the game they were waiting for, at least as far as the material in the game goes. Engine wise, I don't think the current "first person shooter" type Fallout games will ever be able to scratch the itch of a true hardcore RPG player... though admittedly "New Vegas" *DOES* come closer to this than "Fallout 3" did because "New Vegas" does force people to make some harder desicians with character development, as it's far more difficult to develop a perfect character, and due to the usage of things like attribute levels again in addition to just skill percentages, and putting more minimums into dialogue options as opposed t letting people save and reload until they get what they want, it does force people to tend to specialize rather than simply being able to automatically do whatever the best thing is for any given situation.
Just released, so definitely no mods or bug fixes yet.
And I would be pleased with a smaller map, knowing that Bethesda went out of their way to give me that desolate feel was nice, but the action was far too spread apart, like the last Rambo movie. I have yet to buy New Vegas, but I will be playing it on a lag like I do everything else, so that when I do play it there are little bugs and mods-a-plenty to keep me happy. Not to mention I'm still working on Gothic 3. >.<
And I would be pleased with a smaller map, knowing that Bethesda went out of their way to give me that desolate feel was nice, but the action was far too spread apart, like the last Rambo movie. I have yet to buy New Vegas, but I will be playing it on a lag like I do everything else, so that when I do play it there are little bugs and mods-a-plenty to keep me happy. Not to mention I'm still working on Gothic 3. >.<
Nah, from what I can tell of playing it's not a rip-off money wise. The gunfights are a lot better in this version, a lot more enjoyable to use nades and dynamite is good fun too. It's story seems a lot more structured in this game at least, I do like the story lines so far. All the commie stuff makes me laugh. All in all, worth the entry fee.
Haven't even noticed that. Got measurements, by any chance?darkkan2125 said:
Wow! A game built on the same engine as its predecessor, fresh onto the market has bugs similar to the previous game? Shocker.darkkan2125 said:
No shit, Sherlock. Do you always count it as a demerit against a game if the players can't bend time and space to release new content before it's actually available?darkkan2125 said:
Now you're just whining. Just play the game. Enjoy it, for Christ's sake. You're trying to find things to complain about.darkkan2125 said:
Actually it's 10% bigger.darkkan2125 said:
What? Liberty Prime is in Washington. Why would he show up in New Vegas? Something tells me you didn't play Broken Steel...darkkan2125 said:
i never said you were ignorant because you have a different opinion i said you were ignorant for saying his opinion didn't matter because of his low post countderelix said:
So wait... Mass Effect is an expansion pack for Gears of War, itself being an expansion pack for Unreal Tournament 3, which naturally was an expansion pack for all the other Unreal franchise games (or expansion packs if you prefer) going all the way back to the original Unreal? It all makes sense to me now.Therumancer said:
Yeah the map is smaller but THAT'S A FUCKING GOOD THING.
You really liked that huge map in Fallout 3? How much of the map did you see anyway? Bet you spent most of your time fast travelling places huh *****?
What was in that huge map anyway? Barren wasteland boring dungeons bland characters.Woop-di-fuckin-do. New Vegas has interesting characters and a smaller map with the same amount of content in it. The dungeons are still boring but I'm not picky.
You really liked that huge map in Fallout 3? How much of the map did you see anyway? Bet you spent most of your time fast travelling places huh *****?
What was in that huge map anyway? Barren wasteland boring dungeons bland characters.Woop-di-fuckin-do. New Vegas has interesting characters and a smaller map with the same amount of content in it. The dungeons are still boring but I'm not picky.
RhombusHatesYou said:So wait... Mass Effect is an expansion pack for Gears of War, itself being an expansion pack for Unreal Tournament 3, which naturally was an expansion pack for all the other Unreal franchise games (or expansion packs if you prefer) going all the way back to the original Unreal? It all makes sense to me now.Therumancer said:
No, I was a bit unclear apparently.
I am saying that using the same engine does not make the game a glorified expansion pack.
On a fundemental level the core engine being used by all of those games you mentioned using the "Unreal" engine is the same. Albiet it does change with the iteration... Unreal2, Unreal3, or whatever they go up to.
As far as the technology itself goes, games like Mass Effect and Gears Of War are both very similar in of the way they operate the whole third person perspective thing. Both use differant tweaks but are running the same engine. The similarities are going to be more pronounced however when you look at someone using the engine to try and achieve the same results. Such as comparing "Gears Of War" to another twitch-fest using the same engine, probably one of the games people have called a "Gears Of War Clone".
My point is that these things are distinct games, despite the same engine. Just as say "Planescape Torment" is a distinct game from "Baldur's Gate" but both use the same exact engine and a lot of the same code, albiet it's been tweaked in each case and with differant art added in.
Fallout 3, and New Vegas both use this "Gamebryo" engine and what's more are set in the same world, with "New VegaS" being a spin off (despite the fact that I feel Fallout 3 is more correctly the spin off) and thus there are more similarities than usual. They are however distinctly differant games the same as say "Icewind Dale" and "Baldur's Gate".
It's just that a lot of younger gamers are not used to the idea of more than one game of the same sort being developed with the same engine. Or they aren't used to very similar games being developed that way. The point about the shooters is that very few people bother to think about the fact that a lot of differant titles are sharing the same exact skeleton which is why a lot of them "clone" each other (as is frequently criticized), largely because there are typically enough changes in artwork and such that it seems a lot more differant.
For people who have come up with the "Infinity Engine" or seen things like "Ultima 6" and it's engine being used for two "Worlds Of Ultima" games, what your seeing with "New Vegas" isn't all that unusual in the overall scheme of gaming. If you trace it back you'll find it's been going back before things like expansion packs were common. Arguably the whole "expansion pack" concept as it stands now started with disc based expansions for Origin's games like "Wind Commander" and "Utlima 7", before DLC was even practical... although arguably the idea wasn't theirs, I first ran into the concept as a very young kid with things like the "Alternate Reality" games which were designed to be expanded piecemeal, but the series didn't catch on as the creator intended and the idea was never explored at that point.
Ah well, like usual I am rambling. Hopefully I've made things a little more clear.
You sir win this fight.Assassin Xaero said:
No one cried foul when Halo:CE -> 2 -> 3 -> Reach all looked the same..
I mean if Im correct all these have a sniper level...warthog/tank/banshee level...all had the same 5-10 dudes of different color...
BUT I suppose you cant kneecap Halo when its sold for multiplayer and not as a Story game...as no one has to review that part...
OT: Only thing that makes me punch my TV and throw my controller is how useless my companions are....also the guide is about 30% useless about 50% of the time...