Steam telepítése
belépés
|
nyelv
简体中文 (egyszerűsített kínai)
繁體中文 (hagyományos kínai)
日本語 (japán)
한국어 (koreai)
ไทย (thai)
Български (bolgár)
Čeština (cseh)
Dansk (dán)
Deutsch (német)
English (angol)
Español - España (spanyolországi spanyol)
Español - Latinoamérica (latin-amerikai spanyol)
Ελληνικά (görög)
Français (francia)
Italiano (olasz)
Bahasa Indonesia (indonéz)
Nederlands (holland)
Norsk (norvég)
Polski (lengyel)
Português (portugáliai portugál)
Português - Brasil (brazíliai portugál)
Română (román)
Русский (orosz)
Suomi (finn)
Svenska (svéd)
Türkçe (török)
Tiếng Việt (vietnámi)
Українська (ukrán)
Fordítási probléma jelentése
Hozzászólási szabályok és irányelvek
Hozzászólás jelentése
You're being vague-- and that doesn't help you. Do you have any comparisons if you're going to use Fallout 3 as a precedent? I'm not going to baby you to fix your own composition, so. . .
edit: for those curious, it spontaneously freezes and refuses to minimize. So all i can do is restart. My rig runs fallout 4 without problems... (wish the load screens weren't 20+ seconds)
The fame or infamy you get for quests has nothing to do with morality, it does with what a faction thinks of you, and people choose what they want based on what they believe in or if they want to roleplay, so if you or your character hates the khans, you'd just kill them all.
The side quests are still worth it for the xp other stuff you might need for a specific build, and there is no reason to not do them anyways, because its basically free rewards for doing something you want to do, for yourself or your character.
The other fallout games get criticized for not having a grey moral area because let me list the games' antagonists in a nutshell: The evil super mutants and their master, which have their reasons but are ultimately another "oh look im the bad guy with no reasons why you'd want to side with me besides its fun", we have the enclave in both fallout 2 and 3 which are again, one sides bad guys with no reason you'd think helping them is a good idea, and of course you have the Institute in fallout 4, which TRIES to have justification but fails horribly at it. All 4 of the factions in new vegas have reasons you'd want and wouldn't want to help them. The Legion, may be ruthless slavers, but they may actually have a way to save the mojave and make it safe with their known fear and lack of self preservation. The NCR is a democratic republic that lets people live free, but can't for the life of them keep their own citizens safe in their own territory from fiends, raiders, the Legion, etc. Mr. House has the intellect to revive Vegas as it once was and keep it's people safe with securitrons, but he's a dictorship, or "autocrat" in his words, while regulated by programs, still unpredictable. And their is Yes man, where God knows what you will do to the mojave.
The start of the game is made as a literal tutorial so people don't get overwhelmed when they start up the game, and you can still use whatever you can to make your way through the "blocked off paths" if you so choose.
The reputation system gets a person to strive for the most fame they can get with a faction, yes, but for their own benefit. You wouldn't do anything for the Great Khans if you could buy their guns without any rep, you wouldn't do ♥♥♥♥ for the NCR if they didn't open up THEIR armories and quest options for you later on. Or you just strive to get fame because you wanna be that "Elite Legion Idol that is feared by all". It comes to the roleplay most times.
There is a wide assortment of locations you while have to find yourself on the map, while some are in fact boring shacks just sitting in the waste, there are other places packed with challenge, story, or just dumb eastereggs. The arguement that you find everything with guidance worth finding comes from a person who has never heard of "The Survivor" in Honest Hearts, or literally any of the side story in Dead Money.
To number 8, there are plenty of places of interesting worldbuilding in the New Vegas map, like Camp Searchlight, Nipton, Camp Forlorn Hope, Bitter Springs, etc. Take the time to look around and you'll find some pretty interesting things hidden in the cracks. And if you still don't think there is enough of these sorts of places in the map, blame Bethesda for giving Obsidian only a year to make the game.
The Brotherhood in NV is a different blend from Fallout 3's group, and is stuck in isolation because their leader is traumatized after Helios, the rest of the bunker really wants to just get out of the bunker. There is an ending still to get them out of the bunker and active, btw. To say they are flat about why the brotherhood ends off most playthroughs isolated is to admit you didn't look around and explore the lot of what you could do with the Hidden Valley BOS.
For number 3, all of the Bethesda era Fallout games have had a difficulty problem, so no use in pointing fingers at only NV. If Very Hard is a bullet sponge heaven to you, maybe you just didn't make your build right ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
The point i can agree with is 9, as New Vegas does feel a little less like "everything is ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ dead" than the game before. This was, I feel, in a way intentional, to remind you that you don't live in a dead world, but a world trying to put itself back together, and those people fighting like animals for who gets to "make the lego set".
I think the reason you had a problem with some of these is because you weren't thinking in a roleplay stance, just a "finish the main quest once and leave it forever". You don't seem to have done everything you could to research or experiment with some of these problems, as if you just jumped to conclusions on your first playthrough. The Bethesda era games were meant to be modded at some point btw, and helped to make the games popular, so if you still feel the game could use improvement people, just install nvse and get started. It's as easy as dropping a file into a folder.
Just look up a thing on youtube and get started.
oof
I really enjoy all the fallout games, each game has a point where we can gripe over this and that, fallout 4 with it's lack of diversity and role-playing elements, fallout New Vegas being unstable and being linear, and yet giving you the ability to go non-linear (but it is very hard), fallout 3's loooooooooong intro that we would like to skip the second or third time playing it, and not being a ble to run on current PC's without a lot of help. The point is we love these games enough to criticize them. Fallout New Vegas may be my favorite personally (and yes that is with mods) but that should'nt divide our community just because we like a certain game over another. We should be talking about the parts of the games we like.
♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ legendary.
Well, a couple of things here.
1) Making an impact on a game's ending is kind of the point. It's the entire reason you interact with a story in different ways in the first place. It doesn't matter if there's a postgame or not; you're rewarded for your actions by getting to see how everything you did affected the various communities across the wasteland, and overall what kind of impact your character had.
2) Developing a postgame with so many different permutations would've been a difficult and possibly even futile task. Think about it. New Vegas has a ton of endings that would need to be more or less individually parsed out. They'd have to take the time to do that, which would probably take more dev time than the game itself, and even then, they still not may capture the complete scope and end up making things seem artificial.
Overall, I don't think there's a right or wrong way of doing this; I've seen people argue that having an ending to the game allowed them to feel closure, like their time in NV with that particular character had come to a definitive close. Some people genuinely like that. Others, like you appear to, prefer there to be a postgame where you can explore ad infinitum until you get bored. As long as either ending parses out the consequences of the player's choices, I don't think there's an issue.
This is a fair point, but the in-game karma system is so thoroughly broken that it really doesn't matter. Let's take for instance killing fiends. They're automatically hostile towards you, but killing them nets you a ton of karma, even if you're only doing it for money or out of self-defense. I think a flaw of the game was actually that they left the karma system in, but the game's own mechanics render it arbitrary anyway in the end. As for not knowing about the Khans, New Vegas does not run into the same problem as Fallout 3 in giving your character a relatively rigid backstory. There's nothing inherently strange about assuming your character has encountered them before.
Well, I ask this: don't you think that your character's moral compass will have a direct impact on the faction he or she decides to support? For example, if your character's moral compass says that authority is corruptible and generally immoral, your character would likely find helping the Followers and Yes Man more morally acceptable than the Legion, NCR, or House.
Oh, don't mistake me. Fallout 3, as I said, does have some good quests, and that in particular was a good alternate for that one. It was creative. But my point was that the game's main story—the one in which everyone will participate in some way—is plagued by moral binaries, as well as a few of the serious quests, like deciding the fate of Megaton.
Roy Phillips does not give the impression of being a diplomatic individual, or at least I never perceived him that way. I could see the whole "kill all the human residents of Tenpenny Tower" thing coming a mile away, honestly. But let's explore the quest a little more, because I did like this one quite a bit. The premise obviously begins with the residents of Tenpenny Tower being emphatically wrong. Only a rock-banging moron would listen to a ghoul speak and genuinely think that they weren't sentient and humans—mutated, but still "human" in the sense that they're capable of advanced reason, dialect, understanding, emotion, etc. It's a very obvious play towards racism. So the Tenpenny residents are in the moral wrong. Roy Phillips, insofar as he wants to "coexist peacefully" with the Tenpenny residents, is not in the wrong. So, you do the quest, but as it turns out, Phillips actually is just as bigoted as the Tenpenny residents. But it's not clear 1) if you can convince the other ghouls to stop him from murdering the Tenpenny residents, or 2) if you can convince Phillips himself not to do it. So, what seems like it could very well be a moral choice goes awry because options that should be there just aren't for some reason, and you're a monster either way, if we use an outcomes-based morality system. But if we use an intentions-based one in which the player desires the clearly morally good choice of ghouls and humans coexisting, there's an obvious moral binary here. So we either have two morally bad choices or one good choice and one bad one. I guess if you argued in favor of the outcomes-based one, there's moral ambiguity there.
Slavery is a morally ambiguous question? We aren't talking about people like the Legion who may have some very obvious downsides but could be good for long-term stability. The slavers just buy and sell people for personal gain. That's pretty black-and-white imo.
The metros are one of the most universally hated thing about Fallout 3, though. They're less dungeons and more underground areas leading from one interesting location to another. They're dark and, for the most part, not really fun for people to explore. They exist almost solely because of engine limitations. But my point here was that you said there wasn't enough content in the space of New Vegas's map as a whole, whereas large portions of Fallout 3's map are totally barren. Yeah, it may be to give the feeling of vastness, but it doesn't change the fact that F3 also has a ton of empty/unused space and is guilty in this regard as well, provided you consider that a bad thing.
As for the atmosphere, I think the tense atmosphere of impending war of NV is good, but I think Fallout 3 does atmosphere very well.
Eleven is a pretty decent number.
Well, if, for example, you kill the NCR troops stationed at Helios One, the Legion comes in and takes over after a while. But a lot of the "movement" is political and discerned through dialogue.
It's rough around the edges for sure, and the world map itself is bland as ♥♥♥♥. But in terms of just the quality of the writing, it's exceptional where Fallout 3 and Fallout 4 are pedestrian. That, to me, is what makes it the best of the series.
To each his own, though.
No can do.
Haven't ever played it Vanilla simply as I started modding with Fallout 3 and wasn't even interested in New Vegas until some proper mods arrived.
Possibly because the first few tries of playing it (pre-Ultimate edition), made me run into various issues and bugs.
So yeah, upon release it was horrible, but I am not living in the past.
After starting to play and mod it properly it's the best in the whole franchise for me.
Even if it still has similar clunky animations as F3, the modability is thanks to NVSE and JIP LN NVSE plugin way better than F3.
F4 brings new technologies, but as the Creation Engine sucks, when it comes to modding (mod content is saved into the savegame) I rather stick with gamebryo.
Simply as that engine is very forgiving (even though not that stable with too much plugins).
Yet, New Vegas is so easy and joyful to mod, that it will always be funny to come back to it.
I wouldn't have been able to write my Dynamic Pipboy Light mod, if that statement won't come from the bottom of my heart.