It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussion (archive)Fallout: New Vegas(925 posts)(925 posts)
(925 posts)
Pages:
1
10
11
12
13
14
15
30
40
50
62
This is my favourite topic
Posted October 18, 2010
avatar
drmlessgames: Steam only, avoid.
YOU DON'T OWN ME YOU CAN'T STOP ME
Posted October 18, 2010
avatar
drmlessgames: Steam only, avoid.
avatar
michaelleung: YOU DON'T OWN ME YOU CAN'T STOP ME
I CANT ??
Posted October 19, 2010
Here's IGN's review of the Xbox 360 version, pretty glowing apart from a few complaints (mainly about some graphical aspects).

http://uk.xbox360.ign.com/articles/112/1128811p1.html
Posted October 19, 2010
Come ooooooooooooooooooon amazon.
Posted October 19, 2010
Bit-tech review, actually a PC version this time:

www.bit-tech.net/gaming/pc/2010/10/19/fallout-new-vegas-review/
Post edited October 19, 2010 by phanboy4
Posted October 19, 2010
avatar
phanboy4: Bit-tech review, actually a PC version this time:

www.bit-tech.net/gaming/pc/2010/10/19/fallout-new-vegas-review/
Okay, they complained about the aging GUI and graphics, but I'm mystified as to what they thought was wrong with the characters\dialogue. That point isn't really expanded on enough in my honest opinion.
Posted October 19, 2010
I don't blame reviews for bashing the ancient Gamebryo engine implementation for New Vegas... they should have done that for Fallout 3, and arguably should be doing it even more now as I see many reviews not mentioning or it not letting it effect the score.

And this comes from a dedicated Fallout, Bethesda and Obsidian fan who will LOVE this game, so I'm just being honest. It's a negative to the experience that it uses such a shitty engine.
Posted October 19, 2010
So this is just like a big DLC for Fallout 3? With some new perks here and there.
Posted October 19, 2010
By that reasoning, every sequel is nothing but a big DLC.
Posted October 19, 2010
avatar
drmlessgames: So this is just like a big DLC for Fallout 3? With some new perks here and there.
70 hours of gameplay can hardly be called a DLC or even an expansion pack.

I really don't understand why the reviews are choosing now to bash the game for using the Gambryo engine. New Vegas was never meant to be Fallout 4 and Bethesda never promoted it as such. It's a brand new story using the same engine with refinements to to certain areas like weapon mods, iron sights, companion control etc. New Vegas seems to be exactly what they promised with a much better script than Fallout 3 and yet every reviewer seems to be acting shocked by this.
Posted October 19, 2010
avatar
Adokat: By that reasoning, every sequel is nothing but a big DLC.
No, a sequel can be done with newer technology, and is it no way compatible with the older game's data. Did they just employ the GECK from Fallout 3 to make this?
Posted October 19, 2010
avatar
Adokat: By that reasoning, every sequel is nothing but a big DLC.
avatar
drmlessgames: No, a sequel can be done with newer technology, and is it no way compatible with the older game's data. Did they just employ the GECK from Fallout 3 to make this?
An updated GECK yes. They said that.

So what KOTOR2 wasn't a sequel to KOTOR it was DLC?
Posted October 19, 2010
avatar
Delixe: I really don't understand why the reviews are choosing now to bash the game for using the Gambryo engine. New Vegas was never meant to be Fallout 4 and Bethesda never promoted it as such. It's a brand new story using the same engine with refinements to to certain areas like weapon mods, iron sights, companion control etc. New Vegas seems to be exactly what they promised with a much better script than Fallout 3 and yet every reviewer seems to be acting shocked by this.
The Gamebryo engine has sucked for a long time now, of course it makes sense that reviewers point that out. The problem is not pointing it out now, the problem is they didn't point it out before.
Posted October 19, 2010
avatar
StingingVelvet: The Gamebryo engine has sucked for a long time now, of course it makes sense that reviewers point that out. The problem is not pointing it out now, the problem is they didn't point it out before.
That's my point. Why bring it up now just to take a few marks off the score when Bethesda have never tried to hide the fact the graphics have only marginally been improved? Anyone following this knew it already.
Posted October 19, 2010
avatar
Adokat: By that reasoning, every sequel is nothing but a big DLC.
avatar
drmlessgames: No, a sequel can be done with newer technology, and is it no way compatible with the older game's data. Did they just employ the GECK from Fallout 3 to make this?
Well, if a graphics engine is your standard, then tons games never really get sequels, they get 'DLC.'

Here's what I'm seeing: a totally new setting, new characters, new quests (more than the first one) new perks, traits, new method of aiming, customizable weapons, and hardcore mode. That's a sequel man.
Pages:
1
10
11
12
13
14
15
30
40
50
62
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussion (archive)Fallout: New Vegas(925 posts)(925 posts)
(925 posts)