Fallout: New Vegas - Review Flood #2

Dhruin

SasqWatch
Joined
August 30, 2006
Messages
11,842
Location
Sydney, Australia
Here's Round #2. Again, the content is highly praised and most of the scores are very good but bugs are a consistent theme - albeit not enough to blight most scores.
PC Gamer sent in their review (84%), which mostly praises the game but chides not developing the technology further and says "I had a lot of fun, but I never uncovered anything as wonderful as Fallout 3’s Oasis or Little Lamplight".
FileFront, 91/100, "All in all, Fallout: New Vegas is a triumph for Obsidian. Once again, they’ve taken on a beloved franchise and managed to do it justice in the sequel. From a purely technical standpoint, New Vegas does have some issues, but a game isn’t all about the technical side of things. It’s about the experience of playing the game, and on that front, New Vegas delivers in spades. It’s easily one of my favorite games of the year to date, despite all of the technical glitches. If you liked Fallout 3, you owe it to yourself to play this one all the way through. It’s a most worthy successor."
We The Gamerz, - Buy - The author hated the original and thought this game would be the same old thing as the last one. He found out how wrong he was. He goes into the setting, hardcore mode (he played it this way), improved Vats sytem, graphics, sound, quests and more. It's a positive review from someone who didn't care for the original Fallout 3.
Charleston Gazette, 9.5/10 - "There are other noteworthy additions, like the ability to start campfires and cook your own food, new magazines that grant temporary stat bonuses, a number of different gambling minigames, the Companion Wheel that lets you issue commands to anyone who may join you on your journey, and plenty of new perks and skills (I highly recommend selecting the Wild Wasteland perk.)"
Hooked Gamers, 9.5/10 - "Unfortunately, the PC version of New Vegas I played wasn't as stable as Fallout 3. It inexplicably crashed a few times, which I thought would prove annoying at first, but it never really bothered me. Frequent quick saves and auto saves ensured I always got back in with minimal repetition."
TQCast, 4.5/5 - "Game-play: At it’s core, Fallout: New Vegas is a HIGHLY polished Fallout 3, but there’s so much more surrounding that core. Yes, the Karma system is still in tact, and it has some implications – but more than that is the faction reputation system they now have. Before you even leave your first town you have a choice to make: save one man from a gang, or help the gang kill him. Help him and you get discounts in the town, and everyone there is hunky-dory with you, but the gang and all it’s friends really don’t like you; help the gang, and it’s the opposite."
G4 TV, 4/5 - "As with any Fallout game, the single-player storyline is secondary to the myriad of sub-quests that you’ll discover as you explore the wastelands. The various gangs and groups will open and close possible missions depending upon your standing, but either way, there’s a huge amount to see and do in the Mojave. That said, the quality of the writing in New Vegas – which is to say, the degree to which these stories will compel you as you play through them – is only a scant shadow of what players have come to expect from Fallout 3."
Game Informer, 8.5/10 - "But even with bugs, glitches, and mundane moments, Fallout: New Vegas is great fun. The gunplay (even with a new iron sight targeting system) is as flawed and inaccurate as before, but combat through V.A.T.S. remains one of my favorite things to do in a game. I love the strategy tied to it, and the payoff (usually in the form of a head exploding in slow motion) always feels great. When it comes down to combat encounters, Obsidian delivered in a big way."

Just Push Start, 4.5/5 - "While Fallout: New Vegas may feel like an expansion to Fallout 3, it offers something that fans of Fallout cannot resist. The lengthy adventure, epic story, and the plethora of quests give gamers more reasons to spend time on the game. It may not win a Game of the Year award bu...More information.
 
Joined
Aug 30, 2006
Messages
11,842
Location
Sydney, Australia
And for my part, I would choose to play a game that is an unpolished gem rather than a polished turd any day of the week. There's not a part of Fallout: New Vegas that could be called a turd, and if you're a fan at all of western-styled RPGs, there is no doubt that this game is worth picking up.
I believe all developers should read that.
 
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
23,459
We The Gamerz, - Buy - The author hated the original and thought this game would be the same old thing as the last one. He found out how wrong he was. He goes into the setting, hardcore mode (he played it this way), improved Vats sytem, graphics, sound, quests and more. It's a positive review from someone who didn't care for the original Fallout 3
I just wanted to highlight that part because I feel that some scores may be high just because this is the next Beth game.It's good to know that the game might appeal to those who hated F3.
G4 TV, 4/5...That said, the quality of the writing in New Vegas is only a scant shadow of what players have come to expect from Fallout 3.
Did I miss something?
 
Joined
Aug 17, 2008
Messages
1,718
Location
Dear Green Place
7.5 on Gamespot

" * Absolutely swarming with disastrous bugs
* Some quests are not enjoyable
* Main story isn't compelling. "

FO3 got a 9.
 
Joined
Jul 15, 2009
Messages
673
Well, I'm all for the rough gems - but when the hell will Obsidian learn???

They had an established engine with a ton of assets, and they STILL can't make a half-way stable game.

Incredible, when you think about it.
 
I'm reading a thread right now with 50 or so people playing it, most people seem to encounter bugs, maybe not completely game stopping ones, but some are quite serious. Not that i care, i'm not gonna buy this for quite some time.

And it's not that "incredible", its just that they have a very limited amount of time to create the game, and they didn't put the focus into fixing bugs or problems, they've focused their efforts on the content itself..
 
Joined
Jul 15, 2009
Messages
673
And it's not that "incredible", its just that they have a very limited amount of time to create the game, and they didn't put the focus into fixing bugs or problems, they've focused their efforts on the content itself..

I think it's about more than just focus, actually.
 
Joined
Oct 13, 2007
Messages
7,313
Bring on the bugs :) It's become 2nd nature for any great rpg to be a mess when it's first released. I don't really fault them too much because how many great rpgs can you guys name that were a polished gem when they were first released?

Fallout ? Nope, buggy as hell. Same with Fallout 2, all of Troika's games, The Witcher and maybe Baldur's Gate and KOTOR. Although I don't really recall if they had many bugs or not.

So bring on the bugs. I never thought I'd actually say that:D
 
Joined
Feb 3, 2007
Messages
5,347
Location
Taiwan
I'm hopeful for the bugs to be ironed out quickly. Obsidian is known for making buggy, but great games yet Bethesda has a very good QA lab that should find and squish the bugs quickly. Bethesda got a horrible rep with Daggerfall and they don't want that to happen again, so I'm hopeful. It's sad that the patch notes don't go into detail. The mod community is firing out mods like crazy already and the GECK just got released. Wild times out west.

The one bug I have run into is that autosave and quicksave are stored in the steam apps area while all other saves are in the My Docs area. It's best not to use quicksave or quickload at all and instead use the console to make saves. Just type ` to open up the console and then savegame Description-of-gamestate, ie "savegame Goodsprings-b4-Tavern." Press ` again to close the console.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
8,836
I like the viewpoint!
Fallout ? Nope, buggy as hell. Same with Fallout 2, all of Troika's games, The Witcher and maybe Baldur's Gate and KOTOR. Although I don't really recall if they had many bugs or not.
The Witcher was okay. Performance was an issue but it wasn't really a bug per se. Baldur's Gate itself wasn't to bad either.. it broke when you installed the expansion pack though :p
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
1,877
I like the viewpoint!

The Witcher was okay. Performance was an issue but it wasn't really a bug per se. Baldur's Gate itself wasn't to bad either.. it broke when you installed the expansion pack though :p

Oh god no, The Witcher was horrible. So horrible I had to stop playing it. I guess it wasn't so much bug related, but the time it took to load was unbearable. I made it out of the Temple District when I finally said, "Enough!." I couldn't do another city area where there were tons of loading screens again.

That was fixed later and it became the gem that I knew it could be :)
 
Joined
Feb 3, 2007
Messages
5,347
Location
Taiwan
Back
Top Bottom