This guy speaks the truth about New vegas!

Courier said:
About his Vault 11 point: there literally is a quest that takes you to Vault 11.

Why do people who haven't completed a game think they should review it?
Click to expand...

It was pretty obvious he wrote out a short list of stuff he didn't like and cranked out a video. Expecting him to actually play through the game would be asking too much.
 
The guy has Dragon ball Z transformations scenes and a shitty song for each point, it's almost like a collection of bad youtube video jokes.... Only thing it lacked was the Hypercam watermark on the bottom.
 
RetroAmerica said:
And that Ladies and Gentlemen is what happens when ADD addled Millennials are made to play anything that doesn't have explosions every ten seconds. Also, what was with all the damn Japanimation, was that supposed to be relevant at all?
Click to expand...
Does this make me a Millenial too? I was born in '98.
 
I can't believe I actually watched this... thing.

So he is bashing New Vegas for having an ending (oh my gaben!) and cause it doesn't let him fuck around (holy guacamole!) as much as he wants? I guess Garry's Mod will be embodiment of a perfect cRPG for him.
 
Big No said:
The ironic thing is a little while back I found a blog similar to the video, but less whiney (to me anyway), but it's obviously from a different person. Some of his complaints I agree with (like the map marker thing) but he does get some things wrong.
http://blog.wilshipley.com/2011/01/why-i-hate-new-vegas.html
Click to expand...

I read that blog too. The guy makes some okay points about some things that aren't perfect about New Vegas (some locations a bit pointless and empty, some potentially cool content was cut), but when you lead with "I loved Fallout 3, but hated New Vegas", then produce a list of things that were far worse in Fallout 3, it makes me facepalm.

He complains about feeling railroaded into the main quest:
"You do quests by the numbers, and gord-help-you if you try to wander off the beaten path".
Click to expand...
In FO3, your options were "help the Boyscouts turn on the doohickey", or "murder everyone for no reason".

He complains that towns feel disconnected from each other, and there is little reason to go back once you have completed all the quests there.
"There's no missions linking towns together, or shared characters except the followers you find on the way".
Click to expand...
Did anybody ever go back to Arefu after they finished the Twilight quest? Did the Republic of Dave link in with the rest of the wasteland in a coherent way? Hands up if you willingly chose to just go back and hang around Little Lamplight.

He then has the gall to complain about New Vegas' companion system: ("Collect 'em all! Because having an abundance of followers makes up for most of them being one-trick ponies!"). Compared to FO3, where pretty much every companion's back story and motivations can be summarised in one sentence. "I'm a dog". "I am a crazy prostitute slave". "I am a ghoul with a bafflingly strict adherence to contract law".

Then there's this quote:
"Yes, in the last game, I was trying to help my father achieve his dream of creating fresh water – in this game I'm trying to kill the guy who shot me and helping people fuck robots."
Click to expand...
. We can easily switch this on its head. In the last game you were collecting 200-year-old soft drinks so a creepy old man could fuck a seemingly brain-damaged woman under a bridge, in this one you hold the balance of power for one of the most important strategic assets in the world.

This whole section:
"Then there are the places that do nothing, or almost-nothing. I wandered into a mining community, they were all sad because their mine had been overrun with giant scorpions. The town pet was a strange but cute mutated animal, and I discovered he had a broken leg. Oh! I can solve this issue, I think. I boost up my Physician skill and fix his leg, and he wuffles happily. Then I try to tell the foreman. He's all, yawn, so what. I can hear the game saying, "Hey! Did I GIVE you a quest to fix that creature's leg? No? Then why the hell did you try it? Now you just burned a buff."

Or I wander south of a town that's been overrun by the slavers, and there's an old beachfront vacation community where the homes are mostly underwater. Someone's gone to a lot of trouble to put all these houses here. And this scenery. And a handful of swamp creatures. But not, like, any point. There's no missions here. No clues. No treasure of any sort. No reason I should have explored it. Why is this town even here?
Click to expand...
You're really taking this path mate? Did the Power Stations in Fallout 3 enrich your life in any way? Were there exciting quests and backstory linked to Deathclaw Promontory? Did the Gary vault have a reason to explore it? Mama Dolce's Chinese Agent hideout? That Tricycle factory?



And this whole paragraph:
"It's also not fun doing quests for people of dubious morality. Sure, this may be more like real life, but it isn't "fun." I did several missions for a fascist government agent before she revealed herself by asking me to do something horrible. I'm like, uh, no thanks, and THANK YOU game designers for making me spend all that time on a person who sucked. Worse, I actually liked the faction she represented, I just didn't like her – but there was no working around her, she was in charge, so I had to abandon a group I'd spent most of the game trying to help. Whoopsie! There goes my emotional connection to the game! If this were an exception it'd be interesting, but it's the rule in New Vegas"
Click to expand...
. I think this is where he shows his true colours. He doesn't really want a game with consequences, linked locations, well-written, with an interesting story, he wants to play as a hero, going "pew pew", killing all the bad guys, without experiencing any feels. Which is fine, Fallout 3 was fun, and not everybody likes or needs to be mentally challenged by every game they play, but writing an entire blog post pretending New Vegas was fundamentally flawed in some way FO3 wasn't, because he didn't personally enjoy it, instead of just saying "New Vegas wasn't really for me", that makes him kind of a douche.
 
Last edited:
It's weird that they say the game is only about killing Benny, because as far as I remember the game is actually about the threeway war between NCR, Legion and Houseto take control of the Dam.... Also the Sloan quests give you rewards and are just early game non marked quests to teach the player about those.... Fallout 3 fans tend to be kind of.... dumb....
 
Walpknut said:
It's weird that they say the game is only about killing Benny, because as far as I remember the game is actually about the threeway war between NCR, Legion and Houseto take control of the Dam.... Also the Sloan quests give you rewards and are just early game non marked quests to teach the player about those.... Fallout 3 fanboys tend to be kind of.... dumb....
Click to expand...

Fixed. You can be a fan of Fallout 3 and still like good RPG's.
 
peadar87 said:
I think this is where he shows his true colours. He doesn't really want a game with consequences, linked locations, well-written, with an interesting story, he wants to play as a hero, going "pew pew", killing all the bad guys, without experiencing any feels. Which is fine, Fallout 3 was fun, and not everybody likes or needs to be mentally challenged by every game they play, but writing an entire blog post pretending New Vegas was fundamentally flawed in some way FO3 wasn't, because he didn't personally enjoy it, instead of just saying "New Vegas wasn't really for me", that makes him kind of a douche.
Click to expand...

This is what I have been saying for a while. Fallout 4 is going to be made for fans like him. Gamers who want to be Billy Badass and blow shit up while looking cool. Things like storytelling or characterization don't mean jack shit to idiots like him.
 
RangerBoo said:
peadar87 said:
I think this is where he shows his true colours. He doesn't really want a game with consequences, linked locations, well-written, with an interesting story, he wants to play as a hero, going "pew pew", killing all the bad guys, without experiencing any feels. Which is fine, Fallout 3 was fun, and not everybody likes or needs to be mentally challenged by every game they play, but writing an entire blog post pretending New Vegas was fundamentally flawed in some way FO3 wasn't, because he didn't personally enjoy it, instead of just saying "New Vegas wasn't really for me", that makes him kind of a douche.
Click to expand...

This is what I have been saying for a while. Fallout 4 is going to be made for fans like him. Gamers who want to be Billy Badass and blow shit up while looking cool. Things like storytelling or characterization don't mean jack shit to idiots like him.
Click to expand...

And to be honest, I'll almost definitely play it, and I'll probably have a lot of fun doing so, but I'll be sad that it doesn't follow the path New Vegas did. I think the best we can hope for is an entertaining, broad-but-shallow shooter with RPG elements set in the Fallout universe. If that happened, I think I could live with it, and hope that Obsidian could do something deeper with the engine if they were allowed.
 
"Caesar's Legion is overpowered."
Ahahahahaha. Oh, wait, you were serious? Let me laugh even harder. AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

How do Caesar's Legion track you? They have spies EVERYWHERE. That was made clear to the player when Vulpes Inculta talks to you on the Strip. The game pretty much flat-out told him how they could track him and he's confused? Also, does he think that, in history, once somebody walked out of town, they couldn't be tracked down? What a moron.

The thing that really boiled my piss was, "Why does he pronounce it Kai-sawr"? Um... because that's the actual historical pronunciation, you stupid piece of shit.

"Fallout 3, provided you have the Broken Steel expansion pack, ends when you run out of things to do. How a game should be." He does fuckin' realize there's a save made right before he goes to Hoover Dam, right? He could just load it and go fuck off and do everything else. I've never understood why this was made such a big deal about in Fallout 3, and especially New Vegas. And he shows how little of the series he's played, of course, as the originals did have a concrete end.

"Why Bethesda may be the best game developer in the world."
This is not something I say to people, but kill yourself. You're too fucking stupid to live. You have to be a SPECIAL kind of dumbass to think that Bethesda is a good game developer, especially when led by the moron, Todd Howard. "Best game developer..." Just. Wow. Anyone who understands the intricacies of game design to an even rudimentary level would disagree.

Then he priases F3's DO WHATEVER YOU WANT WHENEVER freedom, which isn't bad in itself, but that very design philosophy makes a game that has no focus. And Fallout 3 (and Oblivion, and even Skyrim) lacked any focus, to the detriment of their stories (which weren't very good anyway, but being marred by a false sense of urgency isn't very helpful). He also misses the point of the ending. They can't fucking change the entire wasteland to fit what your ending gave you. When Broken Steel came out, it overrode everything, with nothing in the ending actually happening. The only choice that was saved was whether you used the FEV or not and even that was barely mentioned, save for the fact that it killed the bums and had a negative impact on your own health. So the game's 'ending' had no fucking relevance.

The countless glitches on launch? Um, Fallout 3 seems to have this weird revisionist history going on. It was buggy as shit at launch. People keep forgetting that.

And the ending in Dead Money where you get locked in is just great. THE GAME TELLS YOU WHAT WILL HAPPEN IF YOU BOTHERED TO READ, YOU ILLITERATE TWAT.
 
tbh like the ending to DM, what made the start of NV good WAS that they basically went 'well here's a fast route there, best of luck with it fucko', and it's not impossible to go that way, simply damn hard. It's hardly a new or bad tactic for a story-driven game, it's simply open to exploitation. But that's the point. Obsidian basically go 'well, you can ignore the story /if you want/, but fuck you for trying'. You still have the freedom, it's just established that you'll suffer for it. It's got pros and cons to it but it's still freedom, they just punish those who don't pay attention. Like in Freeside when they say, without speaking to you through a dialogue prompt, that if you draw a weapon, they gon fuk u up. Kinda hard to blame the game if you aren't listening. A stronger criticism (and one of the few that really stands up to criticism through it all) is that the strip is hyped as fuck but is a painful and underwhelming area, including Freeside. Simply removing the countless gates works wonders for it, but the game is so unstable and unfinished that it's a risky mod to use.

Thing is, NV is a story-based RPG with an FPS begrudgingly tacked on. It's all about the world, the endless struggle between equally corrupt and ideologically flawed parties, the last gasp of an old and nostalgia-distorted civilisation trying break through the dead, dry wastelands filled with unspeakable horrors and drought. Fallout 3 is an explorey walking simulator/shoot em up with an RPG and story begrudgingly tacked on. Seeing as how artworks generally convey a message, no matter how simple it is, FNV does it better. It's actually got a point to it, and without any real 'right' answer to the struggles. And it forces you to deal with the world before you battle at the dam, where exploring is needed in order to get help at the dam (a little broken, as by the end of the game you're a walking tank, BUT).

If F3 had gotten rid of the main plot, and simply thrown you in there with no plot, no vault intro (despite how much i liked that), no directions, just you, your SPECIAL, improved gameplay a-la NV and a wasteland which you must explore and piece together vague pieces of information to understand what happened a-la Dark Souls, and given a new name, THAT would be amazing.
 
Last edited:
Moosick said:
A stronger criticism (and one of the few that really stands up to criticism through it all) is that the strip is hyped as fuck but is a painful and underwhelming area, including Freeside. Simply removing the countless gates works wonders for it, but the game is so unstable and unfinished that it's a risky mod to use.
Click to expand...

While that's a valid criticism, the countless gates for the strip kinda make sense for the strip. They don't want hobos getting in, or the people from Freeside in general. I'd rather just see a bigger and more prosperous Strip instead.
 
I don't know, I run New Vegas with the Strip and Freeside open mods since they came out for the first time and I really have no problems with them. But I have a pretty good machine.
 
It's also that Freeside is filled with doors. But that aside, why? Those securitrons can kill medium-level PCs with ease, there are cap-searches, bouncers, and spies ALL over the strip. If a hobo snuck in he'd be vaporised before he could set up camp, enslaved by the omertas at best.

Nah, they did it because they A: didn't have time to finish it, B: didn't have reliably stable enough an engine to remove them and C: the huge area size and lack of gates/removal of them was screwing with scripting so much that even if A and B weren't the case, it would still cause major problems, something especially noticeable by how dangerous it is for a save game to install Freeside Open.

but at the end of the day the game is more about the politics surrounding the strip than the strip itself, so I'm not overly fussed and I know they were rushed and they did a bloody good job overall
 
Moosick said:
It's also that Freeside is filled with doors. But that aside, why? Those securitrons can kill medium-level PCs with ease, there are cap-searches, bouncers, and spies ALL over the strip. If a hobo snuck in he'd be vaporised before he could set up camp, enslaved by the omertas at best.

Nah, they did it because they A: didn't have time to finish it, B: didn't have reliably stable enough an engine to remove them and C: the huge area size and lack of gates/removal of them was screwing with scripting so much that even if A and B weren't the case, it would still cause major problems, something especially noticeable by how dangerous it is for a save game to install Freeside Open.

but at the end of the day the game is more about the politics surrounding the strip than the strip itself, so I'm not overly fussed and I know they were rushed and they did a bloody good job overall
Click to expand...

I'm not arguing the motivation to do it, as I agree it was a matter of time and engine and scripting constraints, I'm sorry if I sounded like I was. What I'm saying is that, IMO, the gates make sense for the Strip in particular nonetheless. Everything else, I agree. Why would the people on Freeside want gates everywhere, for example? I understand they delimit the outer part to avoid attacks from vermin, but the inner ones are just nonsense. On the particular case of the Strip, it's a place for gambling. Nobody wants to see how someone gets vaporized. While blood is cheap in Fallout, I think it might kill the gambling mood in quite some customers, so marketing says, please, put gates around The Strip. It should be far bigger and wider, IMO, probably as big and prosperous as The Hub, but not without gates, because you want your customers to feel exclusive and to avoid the view of poor people and bloodshed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top