Fallout: New Vegas Honest Hearts Reviews

[Hoxie]

Did not buy, won't ever buy... whatever DLC they can come up with, no matter what it does.
It's such a weasely thing to do.

Neat, have fun missing out on some serious quality characters, locations and stories.

Also no it's not weaselly, $10 actually feels like little for such good DLC. Weaselly is Call of Duty charging $15 for a handful of multiplayer maps, New Vegas DLC's content to price ratio is very fair.

 

[Yamu]

Did not buy, won't ever buy... whatever DLC they can come up with, no matter what it does.
It's such a weasely thing to do.

I'm afraid I'm going to have to seize on this, too, as I'm sure others will. I don't see anything wrong with paying a little extra to get a little extra. It's not like we're talking about armor for your horse, here... these are entire new areas of the game, new storylines that were (more or less, but generally "more" where Obsidian is involved) meticulously crafted after the game's initial release. It's not like they were withholding them from us just to make a quick buck, and it's not like going without them cripples the experience. Conversely, they can enhance the gaming experience quite a bit, exploring thematic elements or takes on the setting that wouldn't quite have made sense for inclusion in the vanilla game, and the content can be well-worth the minor one-time fee.

It's not weasely, it makes perfect sense-- someone put man-hours and resources into this, and they expect a bit back for it. I can understand being cagey going into the purchase of a DLC release. Some companies have put out some real clunkers. Like it or not, though, it's the new distribution model, and I think it's a little ridiculous to distrust the model as a whole. People are quick to forget that back in the days before digital distribution, something like this would've been called an "Expansion Pack" and probably would've gone for at least 40% of what they charged you for the original game. I don't remember anyone complaining about it back then.

Do you have any idea how much time and effort goes into one of these things? And they're selling it for the price of a medium pizza. And, in this case, it's good. Where's the issue?

 

[TwinkieGorilla]

Well said, Yamu. Also, let me try this again:

Are you kidding me?

No, I am not. Can you please tell me why you disagree instead of angrily patronizing me?

Do you work for them or something?

Jeeze man, your perception of these dlcs is SKEWED.

Oh. Is it really now? Am I far too forgiving of Honest Hearts here?

I even went through the trouble to find my stream-of-consciousness sentiments on Dead Money. Both during and after. Mayhaps you'd like to read and tell me why you disagree? I can't promise I'll care, but it'd at least be a step up in our communication thus far.

Only played it for a little bit, recruiting one companion. It is already by and large...better written and executed not only than FO3's DLC, but FO3--PERIOD. I love how nearly every bit of writing and story creation by Bethesda looks like it was written by toddlers in comparison to the job Obsidian have done with NV and so far, with this first DLC. Say what you might about Obsidian (I still haven't encountered any game-breaking bugs since my first few ctd's on day one) but these guys sure can write. Dialogue and stories.

Also, nice touch: I at least feel "under the impression" that looting is actually a little more important, which...for wasteland dorks like me...is p. cool.

Played a lot more tonight. Couple hours I'd say. Really good stuff. Atmosphere is very dark. Not intensely "Fallout-y" necessarily, but wayyyyy Avellone-y for sure...and that's surely not a bad thing in this day in "MassEffectboobsDragonAgeboobsFallout3justplainfuckingretarded" age.

Characters are very well-written, densely-detailed, and voiced appropriately. I know a well-written game when I'm certain I'm missing things while I'm playing, and this has happened a few times already. But rather than go back and beat something to death I'm going through naturally knowing that I can always come back and re-live it again a different way. And shit...that right there? That IS "Fallout-y-ness" at its core, idn't it?

I'm playing in hard-core mode too which, unlike the vanilla game and coupled with scrounging actually being much more important, actually does make things quite challenging for a change.

It's hilarious, really. This little bit of DLC which I'm not even half-way through has offered me more ingenuity and creativity than all of Bethesda's "Fallout" experience combined. Fucking morons.

ALSO: People will pay 10 bucks for a cheap plate of Chinese food or a single viewing of a film in a theater but not for permanent ownership of a great bit of entertainment?

 

[Brother None]

I can understand being cagey going into the purchase of a DLC release. Some companies have put out some real clunkers. Like it or not, though, it's the new distribution model, and I think it's a little ridiculous to distrust the model as a whole.

Really? Why? It's been abused by the industry as a whole. Good DLC worth the price of purchase are the exception, not the rule. And no, these DLC aren't the size of the expansions of yore.

 

[Yamu]

Why? Naïveté, mostly. That's the word most people would use, anyway, I'm sure. I realize it's usually not the smartest thing to keep sticking your hand back in the fire, but no matter how abused the system has been in the past, It'll be a long, disappointing while before I can allow myself to default to the cynical assumption that DLC equals crap. As you point out, though, so much IS, and this all comes with the caveat that you should always look before you spend.

As to the expansion packs, I have payed for some serious turds in my day, but I was also a bargain bin kid.

 

[Courier]

So is anyone on NMA going to write a review of Honest Hearts? I liked The Dutch Ghost's Dead Money review a lot.

 

[Brother None]

Yip. Should be up this weekend.

 

[The Dutch Ghost]

So is anyone on NMA going to write a review of Honest Hearts? I liked The Dutch Ghost's Dead Money review a lot.

Thanks for the compliment, but this one will be written by Mikael Grizzly and he will also do Old World Blues. (damn school projects ).

But I will be back for Lonesome Road

 

[Vrede]

Did not buy, won't ever buy... whatever DLC they can come up with, no matter what it does.
It's such a weasely thing to do.

Neat, have fun missing out on some serious quality characters, locations and stories.

Also no it's not weaselly, $10 actually feels like little for such good DLC. Weaselly is Call of Duty charging $15 for a handful of multiplayer maps, New Vegas DLC's content to price ratio is very fair.

Heh, you must really think the world is made in your image. You couldn't be more wrong about those assumptions.

In my view, milking more money out of an already sold product is weaselly. Considering they could have sold you this specific DLC already embedded in the game. It wouldn't have took anything out of the game to begin with, right? It would have only made the game better.
They knew that they will add it at some point from the very beginning. So... it seems to me, and I don't believe I'm wrong at all... that they kept it out of the game on purpose, just so that they would have you pay them more later. Which... is just plain jerkiness, excuse me for pointing out the truth.

So, considering all of the above, right now, I think you're ready to start playing and paying for your games one quest/map/location at a time. So, that's maybe exactly what will happen, and you are probably gonna like it. I certainly won't follow.

 

[Lexx]

Doubtful that they kept Zion and Co. out of the game on purpose, as it would have been impossible to add it into the normal FNV worldspace and adding it as extra worldspace in the way the DLCs are doing it, would really have been unfitting for the main game.

 

[Stanislao Moulinsky]

They knew that they will add it at some point from the very beginning. So... it seems to me, and I don't believe I'm wrong at all... that they kept it out of the game on purpose

You are wrong. That kind of stuff is released shortly (if not immediately) after the release to maximize returns, not released 9 months after the main game. Planning for DLCs (because it's true that they planned for them since the beginning) doesn't automatically mean that.

 

[Vrede]

They knew that they will add it at some point from the very beginning. So... it seems to me, and I don't believe I'm wrong at all... that they kept it out of the game on purpose

You are wrong. That kind of stuff is released shortly (if not immediately) after the release to maximize returns, not released 9 months after the main game. Planning for DLCs (because it's true that they planned for them since the beginning) doesn't automatically mean that.

Yes it does mean exactly that.
This is the entertainment industry right?
What movie producer comes saying "hey, we have a new scene for our movie available now, so come and see it for 5 bucks more" or a book author coming up with a new chapter in his already released book? Or, you could go see your favourite band live and at the end they say "hey that's all folks, but those who want an extra song can stay for 10 bucks extra?
People would be furious if that happened... yet, in the game industry, it's apparently perfectly fine. Because it's not another game they're selling you. It's "content", for the same game. Content!!! Get it??? Well, apparently not.
But don't hold it against me, it's my opinion, on my money. On my money, I choose not to spend them on such games, from such companies.
On yours, well, I don't have anything against you doing whatever with yours, absolutely not.

 

[Per]

So is Sam & Max Save the World also an abomination, or is that something else?

 

[Walpknut]

Man 10 dollars for a live song performed by the band itself is basicaly a gift, bad example.

You are saying this under the assumption that the New Vegas DLCs are just one mission or a single weapon, the two of them are fairly long adventures, they last for about 7 hours, wich is what a lot of 60 dollars games last. DLCs are like if a writer in between books writes small novels, mini stories etc, like Junji Ito or Augusto Monterroso, a band releases singles and demos between albums, so your examples all suck.

 

[Courier]

Yes it does mean exactly that.
This is the entertainment industry right?
What movie producer comes saying "hey, we have a new scene for our movie available now, so come and see it for 5 bucks more" or a book author coming up with a new chapter in his already released book? Or, you could go see your favourite band live and at the end they say "hey that's all folks, but those who want an extra song can stay for 10 bucks extra?
People would be furious if that happened... yet, in the game industry, it's apparently perfectly fine. Because it's not another game they're selling you. It's "content", for the same game. Content!!! Get it??? Well, apparently not.
But don't hold it against me, it's my opinion, on my money. On my money, I choose not to spend them on such games, from such companies.
On yours, well, I don't have anything against you doing whatever with yours, absolutely not.

If you don't want to buy the DLC then no one is forcing you, have fun missing out on a few more hours of gameplay.

 

[Vrede]

So is Sam & Max Save the World also an abomination, or is that something else?

Oh hey Per.
You tell me. Didn't know it even existed. Google is a friend. Not much smarter now that I do, hehe.
To each his own I say. I'm a little old for that.

Man 10 dollars for a live song performed by the band itself is basicaly a gift, bad example.

You are saying this under the assumption that the New Vegas DLCs are just one mission or a single weapon, the two of them are fairly long adventures, they last for about 7 hours, wich is what a lot of 60 dollars games last. DLCs are like if a writer in between books writes small novels, mini stories etc, like Junji Ito or Augusto Monterroso, a band releases singles and demos between albums, so your examples all suck.

I don't assume anything.
You would think. Well not quite...
A single is a song that is released separately from an album, but normally already appears on the album. Not comparable.
A demo is not sold. It's meant to "demo"nstrate the abilities of an unknown band/artist. Never heard of already well established bands that sell "demos". Ridiculous.
A novel/short story does not claim to be a part of another work. Unless they appear alongside several other such works and form a book. Again not really the case.

If you don't want to buy the DLC then no one is forcing you, have fun missing out on a few more hours of gameplay.

Agreed. Already.
Thanks for pointing out nothing.


Thank you fellows, but... no, I'm not leaving with your opinions and sure as hell you ain't gonna leave with mine.

So yeah. I concede the fight.
DLC's are good and they are definitely worth the money. Especially Fallout DLCs, which everybody should buy and be thankful for.

 

[Walpknut]

A short story can easily be a section of another one, There are singles that are never included in any Album until much later in compilations, example 20 th century Boy by T-rex was a single t hat is only included in compilations, it doesn't belong to any album.

whats with people just avoiding dicussions all the time, isn't that what a Forum is for?

 

[Generic Dude 2.0]

I wonder why they didn't include Arroyo theme in "Honest Hearts". It would fit perfectly.
As for DLC itself, I really loved the setting (in contrast to "Dead Money's" one, which I hated with all my heart), but story and characters were kinda meh... No one to care about, no one to be afraid of, no one to feel sorry for...
The Pitt is still my favorite Fallout DLC. Not for too long, I hope.

 

[Ilosar]

They kept an area that looks and feel entirely different from the main game (it has different textures, lighting and even weather ffs) as a pure jerk-ass move (reasonable economic decisions don't exist, of course, don't they), and then sell it... 9 months later? How can you make this work in any way? What next, the Star Wars trilogy was completed all at the same time but George Lucas held it off for teh $?

And hell we're only talking about Zion itself, admitedly the main draw of the DLC. That's not counting all the dialog, quests, NPCs, weapons, ect. that factor in Honest Hearts's worth. I paid about one fifth of the game for the DLC, and got about that; a world with about a fifth of the total content.

To clarify, I don't worship DLC in any way, I think I bought six of them in my life, and two were for New Vegas. But that doesn't mean I have to boycott them on some shaky moral reason or because I arbitrarily decided they are all rip-offs.

Also, Verde, others have said it, but all your examples suck. What about Director's Cuts? Singles? Short stories? Supplementary material (look at Tolkien, not exactly a capitalist pig or greedy corporation, and he has entire libraries to flesh out the Lord of the Rings world besides the already voluminous main books)? The base concept for DLC is hardly new; people love something, and pay money for more of it.

 

[Courier]

They kept an area that looks and feel entirely different from the main game (it has different textures, lighting and even weather ffs) as a pure jerk-ass move (reasonable economic decisions don't exist, of course, don't they), and then sell it... 9 months later? How can you make this work in any way? What next, the Star Wars trilogy was completed all at the same time but George Lucas held it off for teh $?

Maybe it was released nine months later because *gasp* they were still working on it and it hadn't just been kept seperate from the main game. I don't know why you people feel some kind of sense of entitlement, if you worked months to make a cool game would you just give it away for free or would you expect people to pay your hard work? That's like hiring someone to replace your living room floor with hardwood, then getting all upset because you thought they should have done the kitchen for free.

Edit: This wasn't talking to you in particular Ilosar.