Fallout: New Vegas

Just pre-loading now, I'm slightly worried, it seems awfully small...

Edit: I'm imagining things, it's actually bigger than Fallout 3.


On the topic of achievements, I like them if they actually relate to you achieving something that requires effort and not obtainable by just playing the game. I think I said this in the Metro 2033 thread, I do not need gratification and a little pop up box telling me I just wiped out an underground base full of Nazis, I get all the gratification I need FROM WIPING OUT AN UNDERGROUND BASE FULL OF NAZIS.

I actually quite like some of the Metro achievements though, things like not killing any enemies or killing ALL of them on certain levels, especially seeing as one of these several different possible routes and more enemies than you can shake a stick at.

For me an achievement should be earned by going above and beyond the standard game mechanics, doing something either special or different, this does not include things that are utterly contrived and pointless to the games story, see Alan Wakes bloody Coffee Container thing.
 
Last edited:
Fenris said:
Just pre-loading now, I'm slightly worried, it seems awfully small...

Edit: I'm imagining things, it's actually bigger than Fallout 3.


On the topic of achievements, I like them if they actually relate to you achieving something that requires effort and not obtainable by just playing the game. I think I said this in the Metro 2033 thread, I do not need gratification and a little pop up box telling me I just wiped out an underground base full of Nazis, I get all the gratification I need FROM WIPING OUT AN UNDERGROUND BASE FULL OF NAZIS.

I actually quite like some of the Metro achievements though, things like not killing any enemies or killing ALL of them on certain levels, especially seeing as one of these several different possible routes and more enemies than you can shake a stick at.

For me an achievement should be earned by going above and beyond the standard game mechanics, doing something either special or different, this does not include things that are utterly contrived and pointless to the games story, see Alan Wakes bloody Coffee Container thing.
Click to expand...

Thats exactly what I mean, I do achievements after the game has been completed, and I end up doing more in the game so long as it's a realistic goal and fun, which 100% of the Fallout ones are.

Usually, I complete the game and then sell it on or play something else but if the achievements sound fun then definitely I do them.

meaningless achievements I don't do, so I dont see where all the hate is from.
 
Sinny said:
so I dont see where all the hate is from.
Click to expand...

I think a few people got the wrong idea, I think it's perfectly reasonable to like achievements to work for in a game like Fallout 3 where the main story is relatively short in comparison to the possible hours you can get out of it simply by exploring, however some people don't enjoy that aimless wandering, I do but I can also understand that others like to have some sort of goal, aiming to complete achievements which have you do things beyond the main story must be a godsend.
 
Thinking about aimless wandering brings me to one of the issues I had with fallout 3, and that was there are certain areas of the game (a specific vault if I remember right) that you shouldn't visit until you are at the correct point in the main story or things can get screwed up. I was lucky and was told about that before I explored too much, so knew to stay away if I found it by accident, but I just hope there is nothing like that in new vegas.

I don't mind if they 'lock' certain places until you reach the required points in the story, I don't see that as a negative limitation if it holds you back from potentialy ruining the story or the chain of events, because otherwise I'm afraid of spoiling parts of the game, and to me it is the story and how everything ties together that makes these games so great.
 
I find it quite funny how the menu's and start screen graphics are the EXACT same as F03. Infact the whole interface is identical.

Its like they handed Fallout 3 to obsidian and said "knock your self out"
 
I've read through the thread but haven't seen much mention of specs + performance.

I haven't upgraded my PC in ages, I also have a 360, but I still believe that FPS = PC.

Does anyone know if this will run like the original Fallout 3?

I have a C2D clocked to around 3ghz, 4gb ram and an 8800GT.
 
As much as I loved Fallout 3 (having gone through it about four times, it's my most played game by some margin), I'm going to wait until Christmas before getting New Vegas. I've got more than enough games to probably keep my occupied even far beyond Christmas, but Christmas seems like a good opportunity to get it (not to mention the inevitable price drop after it's been out for a couple of months, or even a Steam sale akin to last year).
 
Andelusion said:
I've read through the thread but haven't seen much mention of specs + performance.

I haven't upgraded my PC in ages, I also have a 360, but I still believe that FPS = PC.

Does anyone know if this will run like the original Fallout 3?

I have a C2D clocked to around 3ghz, 4gb ram and an 8800GT.
Click to expand...

Those PC specs are still better than a 360, so I'd go for PC version.

I've also heard about a few performance issues on the 360 version. People are reporting slow down and freezing after a while of gameplay, and think it could be related to a memory leak or something similar. Apparently clearing the 360's cache fixes the problem but that's going to get annoying after a while.
 
Sounds like its a review for the Xbox version and if that is as unstable as it sounds i only hope the PC version isn't gonna be even worse off.

I like how 'Hardcore mode' basically took some aspects from FWE, that is, sleep/hunger/thirst and made healing harder, though honestly that won't make a blind bit of difference if those are the only changes they made. FWE was harder because stimpacks heal considerably less and did it gradually not instantly, combined with stuff like things generally been more expensive and doing more damage it made a difference...

Story sounds pretty good but the core gameplay is sounding a lot like Fallout 3 with a couple of popular mods tacked on and no major changes.
 
CaptainRAVE said:
You say that as if it is a bad thing? FO3 was a great game!
Click to expand...

Well not bad but something other than location would've been nice to help it stand out from FO3.

The Faction System at least makes it sound like you won't be able to join 4 different factions at once and that joining 1 will make certain ones immediately hostile and others just neutral until you **** them off. Or maybe its just going to be the same as Oblivion where you can practically everyone regardless :p
 
Mixed reviews around, some give it low, some mid/high. 3.5/5 ,4/5, 84/100 etc etc

Still seems worth playing, but as expected I didn't keep my hopes up for anything that counted as `must play`, Obsidian just can't put out anything really good, just more the same of Fallout 3 in new content. Don't get me wrong, I'll get around to playing it after re did the goty Fallout 3. I just have my grievances with Obsidian, Rushed Sith Lords 2, Meh Neverwinter Nights 2 (compared to first), poor Alpha Protocol game play, and now Vegas review saying its a bit stale as it just more of the same Fallout 3 and a bit buggy.. Gives the impression they pick up peoples work, make something subpar and try take credit for it. Oh well, not to be a downer :D
 
LokiS said:
Mixed reviews around, some give it low, some mid/high. 3.5/5 ,4/5, 84/100 etc etc

Still seems worth playing, but as expected I didn't keep my hopes up for anything that counted as `must play`, Obsidian just can't put out anything really good, just more the same of Fallout 3 in new content. Don't get me wrong, I'll get around to playing it after re did the goty Fallout 3. I just have my grievances with Obsidian, Rushed Sith Lords 2, Meh Neverwinter Nights 2 (compared to first), poor Alpha Protocol game play, and now Vegas review saying its a bit stale as it just more of the same Fallout 3 and a bit buggy.. Gives the impression they pick up peoples work, make something subpar and try take credit for it. Oh well, not to be a downer :D
Click to expand...

I think Obsidian's problem is they have gamers\designers\creative people in the lead and not a businessman, so feature creep kicks in. Combine that with short schedules set by publishers and you probably will get an unpolished release...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom