Is Fallout: New Vegas a worthy Fallout game?

[Lucas9]

Basically that. A lot of users around the Internet seem to believe that RPG Codex and NMA are a hatejerk about the 3D Fallout games.

So I ask: for No Mutants Allowed, is New Vegas a good Fallout game, or another rooty-tooty-point-n-shooty hiking simulator? Does NMA really hate every 3D Fallout game?

My opinion: it definitely is a worthy Fallout game.

 

[R.Graves]

Its a great game. Its a great RPG. and it is a great fallout game. Bethesda struggled so hard to accomplish these three things. It seems with fallout 4 they just quit trying.

 

[Brivoo]

They can fuck off for all I care.

There's a reason people don't tend to make sequels to ten-year-old games using an entirely different genre of gameplay. Imagine if Crash Bandicoot was given a Grand Strategy sequel; it would be ridiculous.

Anyway, yeah, it's a worthy Fallout game. I find myself on the fence of whether I consider it an epilogue, a spin-off or a genuine sequel, simply because it's so much broader in tones and themes. If I had another Obsidian Fallout to compare it against it may provide me with enough context, but I'm not sure how good of an idea that is.

Also, for the record, I rather enjoyed Fallout 3; I just think it plays out like Fallout fanfiction rather than a sequel.

 

[R.Graves]

Also, for the record, I rather enjoyed Fallout 3; I just think it plays out like Fallout fanfiction rather than a sequel.

Basically this. This is why you get a like. Just wanted you to know.

Spoiler: Random Pic

 

[CerberusGate]

For me at least, New Vegas is a worthy sequel to the classic Fallout games and as far as I'm concerned, it is proof that Fallout games can be made in 3D if done by a competent and ambitious developer. It has great writing, plenty of role-playing potential and is directly linked to prior Fallout games rather than only having mere token elements of the franchise mentioned.

Fallout fanfiction rather than a sequel.

This is probably the best way to sum up Fallout 3.

Basically that. A lot of users around the Internet seem to believe that RPG Codex and NMA are a hatejerk about the 3D Fallout games.

All that does is prove how uneducated they are since a simple check will reveal that NMA (not sure about the Codex) mostly loves New Vegas and are willing to like a 3D Fallout game if it was competently made. Besides, their opinions are inconsequential and not worth caring about in the long run.

 

[DirtyOldShoe]

At the time, isometric was pretty cool, (or whatever Tim called it) Not a huge fan of that game style anymore(I played it when it came out), so I can make an exception for my favorite game Fallout 2. FNV was unexpectedly wonderful and a return to form and tied as my other favorite Fallout game.

 

[vertibirds]

I think it's very worthy, and it showed actually progression and change without breaking a bunch of lore or looking like it skimmed a Fallout 1/2 wikia article for references. New Vegas shows natural/expected progression of various Fallout factions very well. There are some times where I just like to experience/replay for the RPG/story aspects of the classic Fallouts and I'll just use a save edit to give my character 100 AP or something.

I thought the stereotype of this place was more hating anything Bethesda even looked at rather than just 3D alone.

 

[Kohno]

The middle vote. The core gameplay and design is just not doing it for me, it's not hitting any marks. The narrative and quest design parts are ok, but it's hard to appreciate them to their fullest when the thing that a game is all about - gameplay - is putting you off.

 

[Crossfire]

I think it's very worthy, and it showed actually progression and change without breaking a bunch of lore or looking like it skimmed a Fallout 1/2 wikia article for references. New Vegas shows natural/expected progression of various Fallout factions very well. There are some times where I just like to experience/replay for the RPG/story aspects of the classic Fallouts and I'll just use a save edit to give my character 100 AP or something.

I thought the stereotype of this place was more hating anything Bethesda even looked at rather than just 3D alone.

I think NMA's rep has evolved over time. When FO3 came out and everyone here hated it, everyone else was like "oh, you just don't like 3D 1st person games" and then when FNV was released and was reasonably well-received at NMA, it became "oh ok so you just hate everything Bethesda makes".

I want Bethesda to do a complete 180 and make a good Fallout game just so when NMA loves it, everyone accusing us of just hating Bethesda for the sheer shits sake of it can eat their own dicks.

 

[eissa]

Codex dislike mostly because of the limitation that gamebyro have. you could know it from the very first sentence in their review of new vegas.

if obsidian get a chance to do another fallout in id tech 6/7 then i have high expectation more than even a CDPR cyberpunk 2077.

 

[Crossfire]

Honestly, I would love to see Obsidian make an isometric squad-based Fallout RPG in the same vein of gameplay as Pillars of Eternity or the upcoming Tyranny. Modding it would be a nightmare but the RPG factor would be insane.

 

[valcik]

Lore, quest structure, factions, and NPCs are great in FNV.
Mechanics-wise the game sucks Harold's ass.

 

[CaptJ]

Despite not liking the combat system, I enjoyed Fallout: New Vegas. I just don't like how people act like video game mechanics become outdated.

I think NMA's rep has evolved over time. When FO3 came out and everyone here hated it, everyone else was like "oh, you just don't like 3D 1st person games" and then when FNV was released and was reasonably well-received at NMA, it became "oh ok so you just hate everything Bethesda makes".

I want Bethesda to do a complete 180 and make a good Fallout game just so when NMA loves it, everyone accusing us of just hating Bethesda for the sheer shits sake of it can eat their own dicks.

Someone in Youtube accused people criticizing Fallout 4 to be trolls from NMA. I told him if he had any proof. He said something about him calling a racist a racist.

 

[Gizmojunk]

My opinion: it definitely is a worthy Fallout game.

What IS a worthy Fallout game in your opinion?

*And better yet... If Fallout is ~THE Fallout game [obviously], then how can the franken-shooters also be worthy... when they offer almost (but not quite) none of what Fallout offered; (and the Bethesda ones seem to be made with an intentional relish to spit in the face of the series (and series fans); done in favor of giving TES fans another TES game, but draped with the Fallout IP).
??

I think New Vegas is a good half-step back in the right direction, but it is still Obsidian under the leash; where they had to keep within the bounds set by FO3.

I have no qualms with 3D engines; they're great, and wonderfully suited to almost any kind of game imaginable, (I had high hopes for FO3 ~made with Gamebryo!~ before the first screenshots appeared, and dashed all hopes for it); but I would say that the FPP run-n-gun gameplay is entirely unsuited to Fallout series gameplay,[as a whole], or in any [any] title bearing the Fallout name with a sequel number.

FO3 and FO4 do not offer strategic turn based combat; and probably not even strategic just by itself... That's a deal killer in any alleged Fallout title.

*And that's besides the fact that FPP gameplay in general seeks [by design] to substitute the player in situ for the character [a BIG no-no for an RPG, if not handled expertly; and they just don't know how]. They are terrified of spooking the masses with in-servility... and yet an RPG is more about restriction than any other genre. The player character is the deciding limitation of an RPG ~not the player; twitch gaming and servile backpeddling of any consequences incurred by character actions, are unconscionable to have shoehorned into an esteemed RPG series that built its stand on "Live with your choices"... And I've not even mentioned the virtual vivisection they did on IP setting itself.

 

[Kohno]

If Fallout is ~THE Fallout game [obviously], then how can the franken-shooters also be worthy... when they offer almost (but not quite) none of what Fallout offered

...

Indeed.

 

[Lucas9]

What IS a worthy Fallout game in your opinion?

This is the problem:

FO3 and FO4 do not offer strategic turn based combat; and probably not even strategic just by itself... That's a deal killer in any alleged Fallout title.

You think a core Fallout element is strategic combat. I don't see any strategy in Fallout 1. I just don't. It was a matter of having better equipment than the other enemy, and drawing them one by one towards me as possible as I could*. That's what my strategy boils down in Fallout. And that's exactly the same "strategy" I use in New Vegas, albeit with mods, but then again, if mods can make a 3D game challenging, then 3D isn't the problem, excecution is. The difference is that enemies move all the time, and you have to readjust your cover accordingly to stop dying to incoming fire.

I remember my first time playing Fallout. I remember getting owned by the Khans because my character just stood there as everyone kept getting closer and closer to me. This is something that doesn't happen in the 3D games, because my character behaves realistically and can actually move while everyone else is getting closer to me.

If you ask me, I will tell you that 3D games require actual strategy, as long as they are challenging. This is because it isn't a chess match. Real-time is the universe of strategy, of unpredictability. Not to mention if the AI isn't braindead, which again, isn't a problem if you have good AI. In Fallout 1, as I mentioned, I can move the enemies myself through observation as I would in a chess match. In real-time, you have to think on the run. You don't have time to think "well, I shoot, then I move backwards and drain the enemy's AP". No, you must decide quickly, and as you gain experience, you make better decisions. This is where I get huge satisfaction: when I manage to beat the odds and make it out of a place with most of my ammo still on me.**

To a lot of people, isometric makes them feel good for overcoming a fight. Personally, it makes no difference to me. I don't play Fallout 1 for the "strategic turn based combat". I play it because I'm interested in the lore and the quest diversity that also involves multiple ways to solve a quest. New Vegas happens to get both of those things incredibly right, so naturally I think it is a worthy Fallout title.

*this is what I actually did in my second run of Fallout 1, and I beat the Khans effortlessly. I know this may count as "strategy" in some people's books, but it's like me saying that "shoot enemies until they die" is a strategy. I'm just abusing the game in a legal way and I'm not forced to think twice about what I'm doing because I know I will win unless for some reason I'm critically one shotted.
**for the record, I enjoy the switch to 3D because it also makes me appreciate these moments of danger better. I just don't feel as threatened when I see a few sprites come my way and start shooting at me in turns.

tl;dr I believe turn based isometric strategy is an illusion (as opposed to the IE games, for example), and a 3D first person game, as long as properly executed, can make for a great Fallout game, like New Vegas is despite Gamebryo.

 

[0wing]

New Vegas is as worthy and good follow up to original Fallout as SPECIAL was to GURPS. It's a phony rendition but the core game is still here.

 

[Einhanderc7]

NV is basically the best your going to get that is close to the originals. Fallout is now nothing more than a fleeting fantasy slowly evaporating from the now drying sands of time.

 

[lolpop109]

I don't thin the game play in both orginal fallouts and FNV are that special in terms of combat system. I think the really variety of comabt come from the kind of character you build via you're skills and specials. It also just adds to the role paying witch is what makes the combat good. an example would be.

I killed a raider for XP and lot - Generic shooter ect
My characters an evil character whos really good with a blade so I got in close and sliced them up really good. Dam I'm evil who should I kill next ?

Thats the difference for me if the game gives you a good role play ect it can really make the combat purposeful and good rather just boring and mindless

 

[CaptJ]

You think a core Fallout element is strategic combat. I don't see any strategy in Fallout 1. I just don't. It was a matter of having better equipment than the other enemy, and drawing them one by one towards me as possible as I could*. That's what my strategy boils down in Fallout. And that's exactly the same "strategy" I use in New Vegas, albeit with mods, but then again, if mods can make a 3D game challenging, then 3D isn't the problem, excecution is. The difference is that enemies move all the time, and you have to readjust your cover accordingly to stop dying to incoming fire.

I don't like the combat of FO1, FO2, FO3, and FO:NV for different reasons. While I don't think FO1's combat system is strategic, it makes so that you don't feel like a superhuman that can take on everything. Throw is such a bad skill especially considering that you can only throw at a target. Melee was more useful in FO:NV. Stealth is also more fun in FO:NV. However if I am going to boil down what I hate about the combat in all Fallout titles, it is being able to stop and spam Stimpaks whenever I'm about to die.