Fallout 4 Announced 229
An anonymous reader writes: After teasing gamers with a countdown timer yesterday, Bethesda has now announced Fallout 4 for PCs, the Xbox One, and the PS4. They've also released an official trailer (YouTube video). The game will be set in post-apocalyptic Boston, and the player character will apparently be accompanied on his adventures by a dog. The Guardian has a post cataloging the features they're hoping will be improved from previous games in the series: "The combat system in the last two Fallout games was not universally adored. It often felt you were shooting wildly and blindly, biding time before you could use the the Vault-Tec Assisted Targeting (VAT) system, which allows players to focus in on specific parts of enemies with a percentage chance of hitting them. ... Well-written, hand-crafted quests are going to be vitally important. The Radiant Quest system used in Skyrim sounds brilliant on paper: infinite quests, randomly generated and a little different each time. But the reality was a lot of fetch quests in similar looking caves. Bethesda may be tempted to bring that system across to Fallout 4, but there's an argument for abandoning dynamic quests altogether and opting for a smaller range of authored challenges."
Saw it coming (Score:5, Funny)
To absolutely fucking no ones surprise a sequel was announced to a popular and profitable franchise.
Re:Saw it coming (Score:5, Informative)
Amusing but the truth is there was doubt if this franchise will be killed off due to legal issues.
The truth is loads of geeks want to know this and there was a bit of an interesting intellectual rights battle between Bethesda and Interplay.
So really, this is a little bit of a surprise ifyou think that my most beloved game series of all times was almost axed because of some failed MMO you insesitive clod!
Read more here -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Saw it coming (Score:5, Informative)
That's not quite how it went down. Let's be clear: Interplay is a shadow of its former self, has been that way for a number of years, and any Fallout game they would make would be just as much a "true successor" to the series as one made by anyone else since all of the devs are gone. Just to review...
1) Interplay created Fallout, and their internal Black Isle team created Fallout 2, under the leadership of Brian Fargo and the creative direction of Jason Anderson.
2) Anderson left the company during Fallout 2's development, and Fargo was ousted by shareholders in 2001 in a corporate shakeup.
3) Black Isle Studios was closed in 2003 and the entire staff was laid off. Van Buren (i.e. the original Fallout 3), which they were working on, was cancelled. A lot of them ended up over at inXile Entertainment, which Fargo had founded after he was ousted. Many of the others went on to found Obsidian Entertainment. More on those guys later...
4) Despite cancelling Van Buren, Interplay did, however, manage to push out the rather craptastic Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel in 2004 (not to be confused with the similarly-named Fallout Tactics: Brotherhood of Steel, which is a decent game with which Interplay had no involvement). It's so bad, diverges so far from the rest of the series, and sold so poorly that even Interplay and Bethesda can get on the same page in agreeing that it's not canon.
5) On the verge of bankruptcy in 2004, Interplay sold the rights to make three Fallout games to Bethesda Softworks (not to be confused with Bethesda Game Studios, which is the developer that makes The Elder Scrolls, Fallout 3, and now, Fallout 4, and which I love).
6) Still on the verge of bankruptcy, Interplay sold all of the rights to Bethesda Softworks in 2007, but licensed back the rights to a Fallout MMO, conditioned on their getting $30M in funding and meeting certain development goals by April 2009, as well as launching within four years of starting development.
7) Having failed to reach the necessary funding and with their "Project V13" Fallout Online game in development hell at a newly reopened Black Isle after Jason Anderson left yet again (who they had hired back on to handle creative direction), they tried to pull some eleventh hour crap on the day before their April 2009 deadline by announcing nonsense plans to partner with some Bulgarian company to make the game happen.
8) Bethesda Softworks sued them in April 2009 and then reached an out-of-court settlement in 2012 to get back the rights to the MMO, as well as the rights to the original games in the series. Project V13 continued development at the new Black Isle, with all Fallout references stripped.
9) Interplay pulled a "screw you" by making the original games in the series free on Steam, GOG, etc. for a week or two before the rights were set to transfer to Bethesda in 2013.
10) As for where we're at today...well, remember all of those original Interplay devs who left for Obsidian and inXile? They've gone on to make Fallout: New Vegas (which incorporated a number of ideas from Van Buren) and Wasteland 2 [kickstarter.com] (a sequel to the game that was the spiritual predecessor to the original Fallout), respectively. Meanwhile, Project V13 remains vaporware, even though we're now two years beyond the launch date that their rights were conditioned on reaching.
TL;DR: Interplay failed at making the Fallout MMO even before Bethesda Softworks got involved (in fact, that's why they got involved), and they've continued to fail ever since, even though their former devs have gone on to great acclaim in making new games related in various ways to the franchise. Also worth mentioning: I'm no fan of Bethesda Softworks, since they've demonstrated that they're a legal troll (e.g. all [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:3)
Bethesda do like their GOTY editions.
They have the effect of punishing those that buy the base game and later decide to buy the DLCs: the DLCs never go on on a significant discount, so it's actually cheaper to buy the GOTY over the top of the base game.
(By no means an EA-level act of scummery, of course. Just a little annoying.)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In Bethesda games since nearly the start, you have to use mods to get the UI to be usable. Even when consoles were rare the default UI seemed to be built around having low resolution and lack of a mouse.
Steam got slapped back for trying to add the paid mods to Skyrim. I don't know if Bethesda learned the lesson though. The majority of their fan base wants the open source mods far more than they want DLCs.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't care. HL1 was great, but by the time of HL2 they should have improved so that you weren't continually stuck on the rails with no freedom of action. But then I put up wiht it for the story, only to have it abruptly end and was told "please buy HL2 Part Two to continue". No thanks, they lost a fan with that.
My wish list: (Score:4, Informative)
I saw the article linked with things some folks want, and hated most of it. Vehicles? Really?
Here's what I'd like;
- Companion characters & character development done by the Bioware teams (I'm gonna ignore the low-average quality from the Dragon Age Inquisition game). Bethesda Softworks does an admirable job with environment and atmosphere, but their NPC's are generally flat, with a few exceptions. Companions most of all. Multiple companions might be nice, Companion quests, idle-time squawking/interparty squawking, scenarios providing different options with different companions.
- Combat that always feels like a challenge, and not just in a ninja-monkey way where their stats scale to your level. Perhaps limit the character growth and equipment attributes in a D&D 5'th ed sort of way. Adjustable, though (see 'customization' below)
- They rock at allowing mods, but having a truly made-for-third-parties-without-a-debugger-running sort of script evaluation (profiling), execution, merging and management system would be swell. Knowing a module was going to crash - or even just which mod caused the crash - is a big help.
- Enough customization to allow different play styles, not just different difficulty levels. For example, the New Vegas optional 'hardcore' mode requiring food, drink and sleep, but perhaps with a checklist of 'collectables' and an easy combat or excessive loot for folks who are more interested in achievements than someone who wants to soak up the atmosphere. This includes any time a dev said "But that won't work on console" - make it an option. None of this dumbing things down just because it has to run on a console.
- That mod thing up there? I'm putting it here again because I like mods.
- Oh, and an easy way to add songs to a playlist rotation, not requiring a mod with a new radio station, necessarily.
Re: (Score:3)
I saw the article linked with things some folks want, and hated most of it. Vehicles? Really?
Done the right way, I think they could do vehicles right. Just look at GTA5- if you play in first person all of the time, the game is a believably realistic crime simulator. They sunk a lot of time and effort into making every aspect of the vehicles realistic, including believable damage models (cosmetic AND physical), realistic handling physics, etc. It is quite a departure from the arcade feel of the previous GTA games and IMO a huge improvement.
The last Fallout games, on the other hand, could do wi
Re: (Score:2)
A field of view slider would be nice for that first person mode. Also true for skyrim/fallout (at least I can set it in the console on those two)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Different strokes for different folks. Personally, I don't agree with your list either. I'm not so fixated on vehicles, though I wouldn't mind, especially if they make a massive world to explore, which is one of the things I'd like to see.
But personally, I'm not too interested in teams and companions. I know that's blasphemy to some RPG fans, but I feel like companions typically just end up being something else to worry about. If you let the AI run them, then the AI is always doing something stupid, an
Re: (Score:3)
Having replayed skyrim recently, I think the vehicles could be like the horses. Not amazingly fast, no usable combat while in a vehicle, but if you've made it your personal goal to walk everywhere instead of insta-magic-travel then having a slightly faster mobility is handy while retaining immersion.
For the NPC companions, they're not there to help me fight, but to help me carry the loot! Except for dogmeat, he's there because he's not yet house trained.
Skyrim had a ton of quests, but I'd rather see fewer
Re: (Score:2)
And vice versa, no dumbing things down because PC gamers are a bunch of filthy casual dudebro shooter and MOBA players.
See what I did there?
Right. Can you name the last time a game was dumbed down on a PC because the PC, and it was dumbed down because of shitty input design due to a controller, lack of draw distance because the PC can't draw it at that distance, cut 1k-3k textures down to 256 in size because the PC can't draw textures that large? How about cutting down AI pathing and fighting abilities because there isn't enough processing power in the PC. Load zones between areas including internal to external cells because of PC's? Well I
Deus Ex: Invisible War (Score:2)
Deus Ex: Invisible War [wikipedia.org] comes to mind...
Scaled down levels and simplified ammo systems so the XBOX could run it.
Re: (Score:2)
Well IW was scaled down because of consoles, not PC's so you're helpfully proving my point.
Re: (Score:2)
The "dumbing down" is because the consoles of the era typically couldn't support some basic stuff. Like saving games on demand. Or assuming really tiny television screen resolution. So you'd scale up rez on your PC to 1280x1024 and you'd end up with a really tiny unreadable user interface. Even in a game as new as Skyrim the default UI wouldn't scale up even though consoles are so much better now. Or any game with one of those ridiculous radial selection interfaces (makes sense if you only have a butto
Re: (Score:2)
PC devs are notoriously lazy and incompetent by console-dev standards and prone to underestimate console audiences.
Some of the games are made by the same studios [wikipedia.org]. Some quick googling shows launch day patches for both consoles and titles. Witcher 3 [gamespot.com] day one patch, Halo Collection [kotaku.com] 20gb launch day patch. Evolve, GTAV the same thing... so this reeks of a No True Scotsman falacy with "good developers", as if the developers run the show. It's a business that's all about cranking titles out as fast as possible while papering over with hype. Just for the record what are some developers that you consider good? Constraints: They
Re: (Score:2)
In the old days you could not get patches for consoles at all. But PCs could so they'd get the patches and if there was a console version they'd be stuck. There's a long period of time between when a game goes to be pressed onto CDs or DVDs and by the time it arrives in the stores, so there's inevitably a few bugs or quirks that have been discovered in that period of time, or maybe a last minute rebalancing, etc.
Even today this is still often the case, you can't really get mods for newish games like Skyri
Re: (Score:2)
Then they made a game set in a location where basically everyone carries a giant battleaxe or a huge sword all the time, and the only amputations are relatively rare decapitations that occur if and only if you have the right perk for your weapon type. Why?
Happy Times (Score:2)
I just hope Bethesda takes as much care with the music in Fallout 4.
https://youtu.be/itc8yl9uLD8 [youtu.be]
Re:Happy Times (Score:5, Funny)
I do listen to Ella Fitzgerald and the Ink Spots. However, there is a special charm to listening to them armed with a mini-gun in a poisonous, radioactive wasteland with a dog as my companion while fighting giant spiders.
Though, I suppose I could always just move to West Texas. Same difference.
Re: (Score:2)
However, there is a special charm to listening to them armed with a mini-gun in a poisonous, radioactive wasteland with a dog as my companion while fighting giant spiders.
You mean giant scorpions, F3 and New Vegas don't have Giant spiders They Also have giant flies, roaches, and ants with giant wasps and mantises added in NV.
Re: (Score:2)
Aren't scorpions spiders? What do I know? The big crawly things,
I grew up in Vault 34. I didn't get to see any critters until I was like 17.
Re: (Score:2)
It does add a certain ambiance; and it's not as though Cottonwood Cove isn't full of assholes who have it coming; bu
Re: (Score:2)
Because having their soundtrack is better than having my own soundtrack from itunes. My music list isn't necessarily lore appropriate or in character. Sure some players want to have their deathmetal background music but that just wouldn't be the same thing. It's like wishing you could have your own music playing when you go to the movies. Didn't like the mix tape in Guardians of the Universe and wish you could have put some 90s music on it? I want to hear what they dream up, the good songs and the bad
Modern Fallouts suck ass (Score:2, Insightful)
None of the modern fallouts recreate and capture the spirit of the two first ones.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
None of the modern fallouts recreate and capture the spirit of the two first ones.
That was modded insightful? Why? How?
I have played every single Fallout game. I love the first two games, they were great, but that takes nothing away from the newer ones. Fallout 3 was epic. I believe it might be the only game where I experienced my own birth. True, you couldn't kill children or be a fluffer (you could in earlier games), but what you could do was truly experience the world. Vault 108 is still one of my favorite things in the series (GARY!).
New Vegas brought back some of that post-apocalypt
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Oh get off it (Score:2)
They are different for sure, but that doesn't make them bad. I enjoyed Fallout 3 and I loved New Vegas. Are they the same kind of game as 1 and 2? No, not at all, but they are enjoyable all the same. Not everything needs to be the same all the time, you can have different things in the same universe and it can be fun.
By the same "things can never change" logic, Fallout 1 and 2 were no good because they were different from Wasteland, which was their predecessor (the universe was made because Interplay couldn
Re: (Score:2)
There is no place for FUN in video games, they must be ever faithful and must not progress past 1997 tech.
Re: (Score:2)
Bethesda didn't make New Vegas.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
However, I'd agree that, while Bethesda didn't really understand the Fallout spirit(FO3 was a compet
Re: (Score:2)
But Obsidian screwed up a bunch of it too. They worked too hard to make sure you had to make hard moral choices which FO1&2 never did. Every single main quest ending felt like a wrong ending. Every faction to ally with were bastards. Sometimes on replays I avoid seeing some people because I know I'll get a quest that can not be resolved happily. Too many shades of gray in spots that should be black and white in a classical fallout world.
Re: (Score:2)
Fallout 4!? (Score:5, Funny)
Don't give up on replayability (Score:2, Insightful)
The Radiant Quest system used in Skyrim sounds brilliant on paper: infinite quests, randomly generated and a little different each time. But the reality was a lot of fetch quests in similar looking caves. Bethesda may be tempted to bring that system across to Fallout 4, but there's an argument for abandoning dynamic quests altogether and opting for a smaller range of authored challenges.
The Radiant system still shows a lot of promise, they just need to keep what they've got and add even more randomness. If you've played enough Skyrim it should be clear that they copy-pasted a lot of the cave models, and much of the dungeons could be tiled and randomized; not just the loot. The assassin quest line is tons of fun but then the Radiant quests afterwards are all some guy standing around defenseless - it reeks from lack of effort. The war questline has some great battles that could return as ski
Re: (Score:3)
They've been experimenting with this idea from the start. Daggerfall was one big gigantic pile of randomness. So it ended up as my least favorite game I've ever finished. In Morrowind they removed much of the randomness and started crafting things by hand, shrinking the game world down tremendously, and it's one of my favorite games.
Actually many of the "radiant" quests in Skyrim are interesting and hand crafted, it's just that often they're not recognized as being radiant quests. Some radiant quests yo
randomized vs authored content (Score:2)
Go play Quake 2, SiN, or pretty much any notable classic game. The problem isn't that it's too hard to make a satisfyingly meaty game by hand, the problem is that companies have gotten used to fucking people over by shipping barely functional boxes full of shit and bloom that have less meaningful content than expansion packs used to come with.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm still playing Fallout 1 today (or tonight when I get home).
If its as good as FO3/FNV I am so there (Score:3)
Fallout 3 and Fallout New Vegas are the best Sci-Fi RPGs I have ever played (and I am still playing through the various pieces of DLC for Fallout New Vegas having recently finished Old World Blues and started on Lonesome Road)
There aren't too many things that will make me not buy this. If Fallout 4 on PC doesn't have the awesome mod support Fallout 3 and Fallout New Vegas have I wont be buying it. If they add any extra crap DRM on top of the Steam DRM I wont be buying it. If they make the system requirements too great that my fairly beefy system can't play it I wont be buying it. And if they do anything to intentionally make it harder to reverse engineer the games data formats and stuff I wont be buying it.
Oh and they should put some effort into making the engine more stable and less prone to crashing (Fallout 3 and New Vegas aren't exactly the most stable games I have ever played)
Not too sure I like the idea of randomly generated dungeons or quests either, I much prefer the hand-built dungeons/quests of Oblivion, Fallout 3 and Fallout New Vegas to the randomly generated areas of games like Diablo 2.
Re: (Score:2)
Super Monkey Ball (Score:2)
Isn't Fallout that game that the announcer in Super Monkey Ball name-drops all the time?
Re: (Score:2)
I've been into computer games since the late 70s. Something was bound to slip through the cracks.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure. Such as a series of the most legendary games in history.
I put the original Choplifter at the top.
I have a grandchild that plays it on my 35 year old Apple 2. Awesome game.
Re: (Score:2)
It was an RPG game, it really slipped through the cracks for a lot of people who thought gaming was about first person shooters. It was also on PC only at the start, so kids sitting in front of the TV to play games would never have heard of it either. It's a fair comment, I've probably never heard of even a tenth of all the JRPG titles out there.
Re: (Score:2)
I didn't have a PC when Fallout 1 and 2 were released, I just had a PS1. I know it's nice to be able to afford everything, but most of us couldn't, and made choices.
JRPGs are awesome, too.
Re: (Score:2)
PS1 was far too expensive for me :-)
Re: (Score:2)
Sure. Such as a series of the most legendary games in history.
My wife is having kittens (metaphorically, getting in before you Mr AC) at the moment - having just watched the trailer.
We came to the series somewhat late, after buying Fallout 3 in a sale and then leaving it forgotten, unwrapped, for months. But since starting on it, it's been the biggest detriment to household productivity since Skyrim. We've been looking forward to New Vegas (also currently unwrapped), but this... this gives us something to aim for. MUST finish all the series before Fallout 4 comes o
Re:4? (Score:4, Informative)
After you play it through (assuming you are playing on a PC), check out nexusmods. I went out and bought the PC version just for the mods. They add an incredible amount of story an detail to an already rich universe.
http://www.nexusmods.com/fallo... [nexusmods.com]?
Re: (Score:2)
After you play it through (assuming you are playing on a PC), check out nexusmods. I went out and bought the PC version just for the mods. They add an incredible amount of story an detail to an already rich universe.
http://www.nexusmods.com/fallo... [nexusmods.com]?
Thank you Jackie. We've been playing on console, but plan is to build a rig to complete our gaming experience for the family. Funnily enough, I'm the least active gamer in the family (as in I play the least, again to you AC). When I go to spec the gaming box, if I happen to mention that it's for my wife I fully expect the "sure it is" retort I got when bought the original XBox.
Ha, my good lady has just started watching the trailer again. I can hear it playing in the background. The woman is obsessed - he
Re: (Score:2)
So...you were into computer games at the time when the original Fallout was released?
Not really; I don't recall having heard about it at that time because I didn't have a PC then (*). IIRC, it's one of those games whose name popped up often enough over the years that I recognise its name as a famous computer game- if little else- and am surprised that the OP isn't.
(*) Owned and gamed on an Amiga until circa 1996, by which point that machine was no longer mainstream and I was out of touch. (Hadn't played Doom then, have still never played Quake). Bought a Playstation in late 1997 and sold
Re: (Score:2)
How have you not heard of it before now?
Anyway, looks very cool... too cool, I worry - I just hope they didn't sacrifice the amazing gameplay of its predecessors in favor of eye-candy.
Not so sure about the dog, though - All the FO games have allowed you to have dogs as party members, but having one required? That better not make the whole game one giant escort mission...
Re: (Score:2)
Well there was a game called Fallout on the apple ][. I have that.
Re: (Score:2)
Congrats, so you have heard of Fallout.
(Yes the original is that old).
Oh. OK. I assumed it was a different Fallout.
Re: (Score:2)
No. Fallout.
Little pixelated man with crap falling from the sky in 8 bit glory.
I'll dig it out when I get home from work. I strongly suspect that they (apple 2 Fallout and PC Fallout) are not connected. I think I got it from a BASUG distribution in the 1981-1982 timeframe. It wasn't a big name title like Wasteland.
I do have Wasteland, but is isn't called Fallout, so I didn't mention it.
Re: (Score:2)
Well I'm done with FarCry 4. So maybe that's next.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I believe it's actually the fourth one in the Four series series, following Saints Row IV, GTA 4, and FarCry 4, so if you liked the other fours you should love Fallout 4.
I haven't done Saint's Row IV yet. I see toil ahead.
Re: (Score:2)
launches December 31st. I think you have time to finish a couple of other games first.
My habit is to wait a few months for the weekend special at 50%.
There are plenty of other games to choose from. Fallout 3 springs to mind.
Re: (Score:2)
Why do you think this game requires you to have a dog? It's in the video, but no hints at all that it was required. After all FO3 had a dog in its ending video sequence but you weren't required to keep it alive. The dog even ends up in the official lore (as having died at Mariposa even though I kept mine alive).
So if a ghoul was your companion in the teaser video would you think you were required to have a ghoul friend?
Re: (Score:2)
Aren't party members invincible?
Not commonly so in any of the Fallout games I have played. Keeping party members alive has always been a challenge.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Keeping the dog alive in some places was a challenge, but doable. Set yourself a goal to do it even if the game never penalizes you for it, and you just added some fun. I think a lot of newer game players don't understand this part about adding your own objectives or goals in many games being half of the fun.
Re: (Score:2)
Aren't party members invincible?
Depends: in NV, 'normal' mode made party members vulnerable to damage; but on 'death' they'd just fall unconscious for a short time(typically until the fight was over, so you couldn't just cynically meat-shield your way through a tough fight, because the enemy would turn and finish you before they woke up again); but they could not be permanently slain. In 'Hardcore', they would die, permanently, if their HP was depleted.
While the latter is more realistic, my experience was that the companion AI and path
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not quite getting the logic of the troll rating.
Re: (Score:2)
Not as new as you.
175943 460094
Re: (Score:2)
Arse. It cut out my less_than sign
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I never got why people ran down New Vegas. I really liked it.
Re: (Score:2)
New Vegas definitely had a different feel from Fallout 3, although if you only played NV briefly, then yes, it would have been harder to differentiate. They did look similar.
Re:4? (Score:5, Interesting)
Like the intro to Fallout 3, it's intended to show somebody who knows nothing at all about the game enough that they can at least get themselves killed competently, rather than because they can't find the stimpack in their inventory and don't know what VATS is. If memory serves, it's also a fair bit shorter than the Fallout 3 intro(which was well done, and so fine the first time; but having to spend ten minutes being a baby and another 15 dealing with adolescent vault-bullying every time you want to try a new character build gets kind of dull). The character creation stuff in Doc Mitchell's house is obligatory; but you can skip Sunny Smiles' quest entirely(though it's a generous early-game source of caps and 5.56 rounds, so you might not want to).
Once you get past the intro, the game mechanics are largely the same(SPECIAL and VATS); but there is some additional polish to the skills and perks; the gameworld is really markedly different from the Capitol Wasteland; the local factions and characters are mostly well done and don't overlap at all with FO3(the Brotherhood of Steel is technically present in both games; but in very different capacities).
NV isn't a wildly radical re-imagining of what Fallout should look like in 3D or anything; but it's modestly more technically competent and polished than FO3 is(hence the existence of the Tale of Two Wastelands [taleoftwowastelands.com] project; and it is very much it's own RPG. FO3 is a much more 'apocalyptic' take, since Washington was an obvious candidate for getting nuked to hell, and there's a lot more crumbling-cityscape and deaths by radiation and supermutant attack; along with the fact that the East Coast Enclave are still a reasonably viable force. NV is very much post apocalyptic; but there's a lot less tightly packed death zone and a lot more wilderness(some of it largely benign, some brutally lethal; seriously, don't fuck with Cazarores, or try to stop a deathclaw with anything less than
You obviously don't have to trust my advice or anything; but especially if you already own the game(or find it when it goes on sale, which it frequently does), you are really missing out by not giving it a few more minutes to make its case. Let the doc patch you up, don't even talk to Sunny if you don't feel like it. If you really hate the intended early game, you can even go 'in reverse' by heading directly from Goodsprings to Camp McCarran: it takes a touch of practice; but there's a fairly safe path from Yangtze Memorial(veer to your right a bit if you see radscorpions on your left, early game weapons don't do much against their armor) and between Sloan and Black Mountain more or less straight to Repconn HQ. There are deathclaws on your left and supermutants on your right; but even feeble sneak skill should allow you to avoid the attention of the deathclaws without getting too close to the supermutants(always err on the side of too close to the supermutants: a deathclaw can run faster than you can, and is functionally unstoppable at low levels. A supermutant is something you probably can't defeat at low level; but it will usually stand and shoot at you and not pursue particularly aggressively. Unless you get particularly unlucky, or your character build has nearly no HP, you can survive being fired on, for a short time and at a distance, by a supermutant, which gives you time to get away).
Once you make it to Repcon HQ, you can either swing right and head to freeside, or head to Camp McCarran(if you go this way, try to stick reasonably close to the wall, where NCR troopers will provide a mixture of fire support and meat shield against any fiends. You can usually score some energy weapons from the fiends and and some 5.56, a
Re: (Score:2)
I never liked the intro to FO:NV that much myself. It goes on too long. It's like there are two separate intros back to back really; one that shows the background world, and one that shows your confusing backstory. It could have used a bit of editing, or maybe put in a tiny bit of gameplay between the two.
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, but the intro to Fallout NV is much improved over FO:3.
Its shorter, less annoying, easier to get through and large parts of it can be skipped entirely. Beyond that it feels more like part of the game and gives you a reward f
Re: (Score:3)
Stagger out of the doctor's house, looking like you could really use the help, and Sunny will show you some stuff about guns, wilderness medicine, and Ringo will be deeply pessimistic about you
Re: (Score:3)
If there was FO3, with another area of content right next door, I'd have explored that area too even if it was the same green sky, same game play, same enemies, etc. Why not? I mean 100 hours in FO3 and you can't be bothered with 1 hour in FO:NV?
You bought the game. Sure it was only $4, but if $4 fell out of my pocket I'd still spend the effort to bend down and pick it back up.
Re: (Score:2)
If there was FO3, with another area of content right next door, I'd have explored that area too even if it was the same green sky, same game play, same enemies, etc.
Exactly! Of course, after playing FO:NV, it's hard to go back to FO3
Re: (Score:2)
Yes and no. There were things I liked better with FO:NV, and things I liked better with FO3. FO:NV had better characters, but it forced a lot of false moral dilemmas on you too much. FO3 felt more open, world wise, no big mountains or deathclaw hordes forcing you to go through Nipton. FO3 also had many more of the small details to bring some life to it, like the chess set at the top of the raider infested satellite dish. FO:NV had better crafting, a reasonable hardcore mode that wasn't onerous like man
Re: (Score:2)
Ya, I laughed at those who whined about how guns didn't fire exactly in the direction they were pointed. RPG is not about you leet the player is, but how good the skills of the character are. Thus the need to actually put points into stats and skills.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, Bethesda should review what the popular mods are this time around. But I suspect that yet again, continuing the trend from Morrowind, that we'll need a UI overhaul mod just to make things friendly for the PC.
For the hardcore mode, I liked the FO:NV version of it much better than any mod I ever saw. The mod makers all ways to be really hardcore, but FO:NV made it so that you still had to eat and drink but forcing you to stop every hour to do so (or with some you'd die after fast travel because you "fo
Re: 4? (Score:2)
There was no 3, there was only 1, 2, and New Vegas.
Re: (Score:2)
This is not your vault, dweller.
Re: (Score:3)
"That dog"?!? His NAME is Dogmeat! :D
Actually, that's probably the grandson of the original Dogmeat.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
The perk is only with a DLC.
Re: (Score:2)
I kept dogmeat alive all the way through and it was not very difficult except for the military base, and only because of those electric barriers. When your dog is better at killing super mutants than your followers who have guns, then why worry? FO3 was harder of course.
Re: (Score:2)
Online... Pffft, Even Bethesda wouldn't do something that jaw-droppingly stupid.
Re: (Score:2)
i second the "shut your damn dirty, filthy whore mouth."
screw you, and the lies you spew forth.
Re: (Score:2)
Post apocalyptic big dig could have been cool. If it had been built before the bombs fell in the FO timeline.
In the Fallout timeline, the bombs fell in 2077. The Big Dig or something like it would very likely be around.
Re: (Score:2)
Chicago area was already covered in Fallout: Tactics. I know some fans claim it's not canon, but I suspect the devs would have tried to keep from bulldozing it over.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
http://xkcd.com/1053
Yay. Today I'm one of the 10,000.
Re: (Score:2)
No, he sounds like one of the optional crazy ghoul companions you can have in FO4.
Re: (Score:2)
I think FO2 wasn't as good as FO1. But FO3 reinvigorated it.
Re: (Score:2)
Kind of sad, given that FO3 didn't have DRM, and the copy protection only existed during installation. You could bypass the launcher and run the game directly after install meaning you did not need the DVD in the drive in an era where getting no-dvd hacks was common. Then FO:NV screwed the pooch there by getting into bed with Valve/Steam, but it was from a different company. So when Bethesda got into bed with them too with Skyrim then I knew there was no more hope.
Re: (Score:2)
Except that you can arm yourself with lasers for a change.
Re: (Score:2)
But if you don't have enough caps to get off that train you may be riding it forever.