FO3/NV way too easy?

[brfritos]

I wouldn't call FNV "easy" but the learning curve and therefore how to exploit the game is more easier than F1/F2, no doubt about that.
But there are some valid complains in the thread.

Skills and perk requirements for example are very low, with some exceptions. I mean, if you discovered a shotgun technique that knockback your foe without actually killing him and using only regular ammo, I'm expecting you are a master with a shotgun.
Yet, the requirements are very low.
Medicine is too much streamlined, as well the healing system (food/stims), they could require more investment and specialization if you want to be a PhD in femoral fracture and heal yourself without a doctor after fighting deathclaws.
Julie Farkas even asks what level of healing you want, you can only say her to fix your broken bones and you take care of the rest, so it seems this idea was at least considered.

I could go on and on, but it seems that NV is in a brute state, without some refinements in certain areas.
I'm on a PC, so I can use mods like Project Nevada and Bottle that Water along with many others to "correct" these issues, but what about console players? They are the plataform majority and this is their default game.
Hardcore mode should have a huge impact in the world other than adding thirsty/hunger/sleep (these stats are an annoyance at best), weigh and heal over time.
Two things that will increase the challenge is everything in the game having weigh, including medicine and drugs, and opening your inventory (Pip-Boy) during a fight costs AP points.

The DLCs also worsen the problem, forgiving every challenge you had before the same way FO3 did. HH at least did it right in my opinion, because every recipe you use have a drawback and a boost, but overall they empowered the player excessively.
Some recipes from DLCs are available from level 1, like Weapon Binding Ritual wich adds +10 DAM to unarmed/melee or Snakebite tourniquete wich turn Cazadores into annoyances with +85 poison resistance. To add insult to injury LR added auto heal to the game, again available from level 1 if you start a new character.
I think these recipes should at least require some ingredient only found in their respective DLC, like Battle Brew for example.

Then you people say "use mods to correct what you don't like". A fair point.
But mods should add components to the game, not only increase difficulty. There's a pattern on the NV mods that I've found intriguing: all of the overhauls are for increasing difficulty. All of them.

There's something wrong when most mods that touch the challenge are only concerned in increase him, instead of add something.

PS: Excuse any errors, english is not my primary language.

 

[Cruor34]

To the people who are saying to put self imposed limitations on myself in the game, that is crazy. I want the game to be hard without doing foolish things like not wearing armor, as others have said.

I am complaining because I want it to change... there's no changing Fallout 3/NV but hopefully, Fallout 4 will be different. Stats need to matter again, and we need to go back to a system where you have to choose to be maybe an expert sniper and doctor, OR a great mechanic/negociator, but not everything as you can now.

I like the story, I like the dialog, but I want tough fights too, is that a lot to ask? When everything is so easy to kill it kinda ruins any sense of danger the game could provide, which ruins the atmosphere that should be in a dangerous post apoc word.

Lastly, while Fallout1/2 were not hard, they were harder then 3/NV, and skill/stat distribution mattered a lot more. I also completely agree with the poster who said this is more a shooter then a RPG now... its really just an action shooter with a story.

 

[Crni Vuk]

though what do you mean with "tough" fight ?

See. Both Fallout 3 and Vegas are "shooters" in their core. Thats the issue I have with it. Even if you make the fights more demanding they will not be inherently more challenging or even requiring tactics. Because one of the things you do in shooters to make enemies "stronger" is to give them simply more health and powerful weapons. So all it takes is more bullets and stimpacks to gun then down. I don't need something like that if that is what Bethesda or obsidian believe to be a "challenge". It just makes the game closer to a doom clone in my eyes.

So with saying that I agree when people say stats should matter more. But how to achieve that in a "FPS" ? Both F3 and Vegas are for me some game with mediocre FPS mechanics. Because on the other side if you hit someone and it is in first person you expect it to do some damage not to miss from a distance where the head of your enemy fills your screen.

I never liked the idea of mixing FPS and RPG-stats anyway.

 

[Nalano]

I never liked the idea of mixing FPS and RPG-stats anyway.

If you want a survivalist FPS you need to make the weapons ridiculously deadly and make it appropriately hard to recover from getting shot.

THEN things like scouting, flanking, taking the long way around, avoiding fights, using the freakin' binoculars, understanding how to shoot, learning first aid, actually keeping track of where doctors are, etc, will fall in line easily.

 

[Lexx]

Just be quicker with killing than the ai and you still roll over all.

 

[Walpknut]

Make the enemies have access to weapon mods and special chems, and have a cover system that they can use, but without making it Wack-a-Raider. Change Engien so they can move around acrobaticaly, or at least beign able to jump over things and evade attacks.

 

[Wastelander357]

The game is Fallout: New Vegas, not Call of Duty: New Vegas. The FPS format was obviously a format style choice, not a play style choice. The game is still hailed as an RPG. If you don't like it, go play Call of Duty or Medal of Honor. All you have to do there is point and shoot.

 

[Nalano]

The game is Fallout: New Vegas, not Call of Duty: New Vegas. The FPS format was obviously a format style choice, not a play style choice. The game is still hailed as an RPG. If you don't like it, go play Call of Duty or Medal of Honor. All you have to do there is point and shoot.

Is STALKER a Call of Duty clone?

The idea that FPS and RPG are mutually exclusive needs to die.

 

[Crni Vuk]

The game is Fallout: New Vegas, not Call of Duty: New Vegas. The FPS format was obviously a format style choice, not a play style choice. The game is still hailed as an RPG. If you don't like it, go play Call of Duty or Medal of Honor. All you have to do there is point and shoot.

Just because something has a few "stats" here and there and is called/sold as "RPG" does not mean it is inherently some RPG.

This is my opinion of course. But For me both Fallout 3 and Vegas are rather shooters (and mediocre ones to say that) then true RPGs when it comes to the gameplay.

The writing/dialogues are a whole different story. But even here I think Vegas could have done a bit more to reflect the "roleplay" a bit better. I mean com on. The Legion and House have been a joke. Well the Legion more then House. But still. Most of the side quests have been rather entertaining though.

I mean if you don't "point" and "shoot" at the enemy till he dies what else are you doing in Vegas which is soooo damn tactical and separates it from a mediocre cod clone in the gameplay ?

The gameplay is a shooter trough and trough. I played F3 and Vegas as shooter and it was no trouble for me.

 

[ramessesjones]

The gameplay is a shooter trough and trough. I played F3 and Vegas as shooter and it was no trouble for me.

I've played it as a pretty much a pure RPG with no shooting skill at all and its been no problem for me either. What makes the game an RPG is the way the dialogue, factions and quests are set up in a way that allows you to uniquely define you character and New Vegas does that better than pretty much any game on the market. It probably allows greater flexibility in role playing than any major release game since Arcanum which came out over 10 years ago.

For me the combat is weak in both New Vegas and the older Fallout games, New Vegas isn't exactly Call of Duty in its shooter mechanics, but Fallout isn't Jagged Alliance either. Both styles are easily exploited and have terrible AI (how hard is it hide around a corner or doorway in Fallout, shoot then go back behind the door while the enemies take several turns walking directly at you with no cover). The series is successful despite it's combat, not because of it.

 

[Sub-Human]

I agree, New Vegas and 3 were too easy. All of your enemies are easily defeated, and you've got a mass health bar that will probably will never end. I don't want something as hard as Oblivion (where a single fight would leave you wanting 10 health potions - at least for me, a melee knight), but at least a Crysis type of difficulty (that is, on hardest difficulty possible).

 

[agiel7]

Basically any RPG is really easy when you learn how to game the system, and the original Fallout games were no exception. Case in point, making a bee-line to Navarro and getting not one, but two sets of Power Armor and a weapon that can last you to the end of the game in Fallout 2.

Weirdly enough, I managed to figure this out pretty early on in my first blind playthrough of Fallout 2 without the aid of a FAQ. I couldn't believe my luck when I went from a .223 rifle wielding tribal in metal armor to being clad in Enclave power armor and vaporizing people from eye-criticals with a plasma rifle.

 

[ramessesjones]

I agree, it's not hard to break sequence in Fallout 2, even for a new player without a guide. You can get Redding very early and one of the people there well tell you the general location of San Francisco; as long you aren't wiped out by random encounters on the way, which isn't too tricky with some occasional reloading, you can make it there fine and have access to all sorts of end game equipment.

In Fallout very good gear is available as soon as you get to the Hub, its just a matter of being able to afford it. Power armor is harder to get, but combat armor and high end weapon go a long way.

Fallout and Fallout 2 also have stupid exploitable AI. None of the games are that hard, although in Fallout and Fallout 2, it was more possible to screw yourself with bad stat and skill allocation and the game's poor weapon type distribution.

 

[Sub-Human]

At least you don't end up killing 500 people and 1000 creatures by mid game.

 

[brfritos]

In Fallout very good gear is available as soon as you get to the Hub, its just a matter of being able to afford it. Power armor is harder to get, but combat armor and high end weapon go a long way.

Fallout and Fallout 2 also have stupid exploitable AI. None of the games are that hard, although in Fallout and Fallout 2, it was more possible to screw yourself with bad stat and skill allocation and the game's poor weapon type distribution.

Really? I've found very easy to get my hands on PA in F1, of course the first time I played I was focused on getting the water chip, so the only good armor I was able to put my hands on was Metal Armor.
I already had found the BoS chapter, because I usually explore a lot when the game let me, so I complete some quests for them and became a Iniciate.

True to be told I had to restart my game, because my build was very unbalanced reagrding attributes and it was hurting my progression, making the game very harder as the time passed.
After I corrrected some stats, it was very easy to use the sniper rifle with a high sneak and blow enemies from insane distances.

I was shocked with the end though, because there are some constricts you have to respect regarding time and ALL of my towns except Redding got the bad end simply because I visited them again after completing some quests.
It was much more difficult in the subsequent playthroughs trying to get the good ends.

 

[Crni Vuk]

I never liked the idea of mixing FPS and RPG-stats anyway.

If you want a survivalist FPS you need to make the weapons ridiculously deadly and make it appropriately hard to recover from getting shot.

THEN things like scouting, flanking, taking the long way around, avoiding fights, using the freakin' binoculars, understanding how to shoot, learning first aid, actually keeping track of where doctors are, etc, will fall in line easily.

Just be quicker with killing than the ai and you still roll over all.

This, I played ARMA 2. And if you dont have a good AI that "realism" is useless. It is not even that fun in Coop if you ask me. The AI is so stupid one way or another.

Hence why I prefer in RPGs with guns the tourn based gameplay. Never did I really feelt in a game the sense of "immersion" like Jagged Alliance 2. Not because the AI was super realistic or teh setting. But the fights feelt pretty well done.

 

[agiel7]

I never liked the idea of mixing FPS and RPG-stats anyway.

If you want a survivalist FPS you need to make the weapons ridiculously deadly and make it appropriately hard to recover from getting shot.

THEN things like scouting, flanking, taking the long way around, avoiding fights, using the freakin' binoculars, understanding how to shoot, learning first aid, actually keeping track of where doctors are, etc, will fall in line easily.

Just be quicker with killing than the ai and you still roll over all.

This, I played ARMA 2. And if you dont have a good AI that "realism" is useless. It is not even that fun in Coop if you ask me. The AI is so stupid one way or another.

Hence why I prefer in RPGs with guns the tourn based gameplay. Never did I really feelt in a game the sense of "immersion" like Jagged Alliance 2. Not because the AI was super realistic or teh setting. But the fights feelt pretty well done.

It does make me seriously wish that Bohemia would spend more of their time and money on fixing the AI and horrible optimization issues rather than trying to, say, modeling saluting in the game. It pisses me off to no end that ArmA II is a game that has absolutely no excuse for why it runs the way it does for how it looks, and now ArmA III you need an i5 at the bare minimum to run it.

 

[DForge]

It's like F1 and F2 - easy, but satisfying. They did include a fair share of overpowered perks, weapons and ammo, but the carnage that follows obtaining them is just great. If anything, I'm kinda sad there isn't a place FILLED with legion guys, deathclaws, cazadors... not 10-15, but something like 50, to satisfy my blood thirst.

(played it on very hard and it was extremely easy since I power-gamed the shit out of it by taking Rad Child at 4...)

 

[Quaid]

Weakest link in NV is the combat engine. I miss the turn-based system of Fallout 1 and 2. The only thing that saved the combat for me is VATS. As tacked on and pseudo-turn-based as it was, it allows me to let my character build do 100 percent of the combat. If I don't have enough action points in VATS during combat I don't attack. It makes AGL, Action Boy, Grim Reapers Sprint and Nerves of Steel critical to my build. A nest of Deathclaws on very hard difficulty is a challenge and I have 100 gun and energy weapons, with Brush gun and Gauss rifle, as well as Power Armor.

One thing that makes the combat easier is companions. I only travel with ED-E, but his realtime combat can sometimes make the combat less intense than my pure VATS approach. I wish I could force companions into a pure-VATS type limitation.

 

[zappian]

I think if you play them on very hard with no companions they are pretty darn hard.
Companions ruin the fun of the game , they just tank up the dmg while you shoot everyone in the head.
I thought fallout 1 was a walk in the park , i only died when trying to save tandi by clearing the raiders hideout.
Never died again in the game