Gamebanshee reviews Fallout: New Vegas
- Thread starter Brother None
- Start date
silverburst
First time out of the vault
i just want to say that I really enjoyed this review. I read it the first day it was put on GameBanshee. BN, I think you really address the game thouroughly, pointing out the good and bad with equal precision. Good stuff.
Thanks BN. Sorry about your feelings, i did not check GB because i thought it would be mentioned here the day you put your review up. 
I was too curious and bought it after your first impression piece. But I would have got the game based on your review. Anyway i realise that i use games more and more to rate reviews instead the other way round. In this case: 8.5/10 BN.
I don't have this issue with fetch-quests. Could be that i did not find enough of them to annoy me in my first PT.
I was too curious and bought it after your first impression piece. But I would have got the game based on your review. Anyway i realise that i use games more and more to rate reviews instead the other way round. In this case: 8.5/10 BN.
I don't have this issue with fetch-quests. Could be that i did not find enough of them to annoy me in my first PT.
As strange as this might sound to a few people around here but for some of us for a really good Fallout game not only the content of the writting is important but gameplay as well. Can I blame someone who is a fan of birds view or tourn based combat to not like Fallout Vargas as it is basicaly a shooter with skills thrown in ?NiRv4n4 said:
Again that doesnt mean its a bad game ! (why do people always assume I mean ...), but everyone simply has DIFERENT priorities. Some prefer combat over everything others like the combination of the gameplay and content while others feel fine with just the story. I am not that bothered with Vegas shooter gameplay. Could be better but its a step above Fallout 3 at least. But that still doesnt change the fact that this kind of gameplay is usualy alien to the Fallout franchise afterall. What ever if the shooter combat is good or bad. Hands down it was never meant to be a first person game in the first place just as how Doom never was meant to be a top down tourn based RPG.
TwinkieGorilla
This ghoul has seen it all
I don't necessarily agree with all of the criticisms, but I do however feel that all of the criticisms are well-stated and fair. While FO:NV is miles (milesmilesmilesandspacemiles) beyond FO3 as a traditional Fallout game and as an RPG as well, I still think they could have done better, even considering the lack of time given to them.
One thing you mentioned which bothers me to no end is the lack of depth in dialogue choices. While the NPC's writing is far superior and much more interesting (not to mention relevant to the franchise's tone) there were multiple times where
* I would get the same result no matter what I chose.
* I could backtrack even after I should have been closed off to options.
* I didn't feel like *my* choice was even available.
* I didn't have to work for my results (Renesco, anyone?) because a single skill-check would magically solve my situation.
As somebody who agrees that the dialogue, writing and quests are the most important aspect of Fallout (as has been clearly established by the first two games) I was certainly impressed by FO:NV, but these short-comings are what keep FO:NV from being quite as good as FO2 in my eyes.
Also, really well-done review, BN. GB has always been my favorite RPG site (and has the greatest walk-throughs of all-time).
One thing you mentioned which bothers me to no end is the lack of depth in dialogue choices. While the NPC's writing is far superior and much more interesting (not to mention relevant to the franchise's tone) there were multiple times where
* I would get the same result no matter what I chose.
* I could backtrack even after I should have been closed off to options.
* I didn't feel like *my* choice was even available.
* I didn't have to work for my results (Renesco, anyone?) because a single skill-check would magically solve my situation.
As somebody who agrees that the dialogue, writing and quests are the most important aspect of Fallout (as has been clearly established by the first two games) I was certainly impressed by FO:NV, but these short-comings are what keep FO:NV from being quite as good as FO2 in my eyes.
Also, really well-done review, BN. GB has always been my favorite RPG site (and has the greatest walk-throughs of all-time).
The biggest fail in dialogues are the stat flags, imo. Seeing a [Speech xy] tag in front of a line is a insta-win scream to me. If this shit would have been gone, you still had to read and think about what you want to say next. With these tags... you just click the winning line.
While my three playthroughs, I didn't even bothered clicking such a line, if I didn't hit the requirements.
While my three playthroughs, I didn't even bothered clicking such a line, if I didn't hit the requirements.
Lexx said:
I always thought that a skill check should not be handled like a instant "win" situation, not with quets or dialogues to say that. It always hoped or wished it would be more just like a "aditional" way of playing in the quests to give people a chance of roleplaying, so that it would be just natural that a character with high spech would be a smoothtalker and thus have naturaly in some situation a advantage (but not simply a "win" button !). Hence why I loved the low inteligence dialogue so much. Even when it was more fun then anything.
That doesnt sound like what you said prior though ...TwinkieGorilla said:
TwinkieGorilla
This ghoul has seen it all
Crni Vuk said:
Do you read things the same way you write them? I've said, repeatedly, that this game is nearly equal to FO2 on my Fallout scale. I just now stated why it is not equal.
Its more about that youre attitude regarding criticism which I mean then your statement about Fallout Vegas quality compared to Fallout 2.
~ Though not that a very positive attitude is any kind of problem of course
~ Though not that a very positive attitude is any kind of problem of course
TwinkieGorilla
This ghoul has seen it all
I don't even know what you just said, nor do I care. Please stop trying to provoke me. Anyway, back on topic:
Yeah, y'know...at first I think I bought into the dev's explanation for this, but the more I think of it the less I agree. I'll agree that your average modern gamer probably needs to be told that there is more than meets the eye. But a traditional Fallout fan doesn't. There were many factors which played into having a vast array of choices to respond with (Master, Lynette, Renesco, just off the top of my head) in the original games. Some of them were obviously not the greatest choice, but there were many which seemed like they might be the right thing to say but you only found out if it really was after you chose it. In FO:NV it's not only always obvious, but yes...there is the skillcheck requirement right there to let you know exactly which one gets the job done. I miss the ambiguity very much.
Lexx said:
Yeah, y'know...at first I think I bought into the dev's explanation for this, but the more I think of it the less I agree. I'll agree that your average modern gamer probably needs to be told that there is more than meets the eye. But a traditional Fallout fan doesn't. There were many factors which played into having a vast array of choices to respond with (Master, Lynette, Renesco, just off the top of my head) in the original games. Some of them were obviously not the greatest choice, but there were many which seemed like they might be the right thing to say but you only found out if it really was after you chose it. In FO:NV it's not only always obvious, but yes...there is the skillcheck requirement right there to let you know exactly which one gets the job done. I miss the ambiguity very much.
TwinkieGorilla said:
Exactly. It sucks to know what the "correct" answer is right off the bat because you get a [Speech] tag right in front of the choice. You get experience for that choice and often times could skip over additional steps, plus the general abundance of skill points.. Just "meh" when compared to FO 1/2.
I loved the "Rocketman" line for the Renesco dialogue. Sure, it's a pop culture reference, but it was fucking hilarious the first time I saw it. This is another thing New Vegas lacked - PC dialogue choices with character. J.E. Sawyer's reasoning for not including these kind of choices pisses me off. YOU DON'T HAVE TO PICK THIS DIALOGUE. If you want your character to be a soulless twit, go ahead and choose the boring dialogue options. I like smartass dialogue options and I think "immersion" should be the least of your worries when you have things flying half a kilometer from a Gauss rifle shot or have ghouls spawned from a recent radiation bomb.
TL;DR:
What Twinkie said.
TwinkieGorilla
This ghoul has seen it all
I agree that Sawyer's reasoning is shit and I get the impression that he and I both liked or didn't like Fallout 1 and 2 for different reasons many times. That "rocketman" line you mentioned...that was the moment (I will never forget it) where I said to myself "This is the greatest fucking game I've ever played" (I played 2 before 1). There was so much more humanity and personality in those choices.
He's also kind of full-of-shit in some of his back-peddling responses. Way before the game came out he was talking on Forumspring (I believe) that a game's dialogue should not include multiple choices which all lead to the same response (the Mass "Effect" as I'll call it) but this is exactly what we ended up with in many cases.
It's not as glaringly obvious as in FO3 where you could tell the monkeys were new at using their typewriters and favored "Boomsplode!" elements to dialogue, but if you're going to go on about game-play design and not patronizing your audience with false choices...THEN DON'T FUCKING DO IT, OK?
He's also kind of full-of-shit in some of his back-peddling responses. Way before the game came out he was talking on Forumspring (I believe) that a game's dialogue should not include multiple choices which all lead to the same response (the Mass "Effect" as I'll call it) but this is exactly what we ended up with in many cases.
It's not as glaringly obvious as in FO3 where you could tell the monkeys were new at using their typewriters and favored "Boomsplode!" elements to dialogue, but if you're going to go on about game-play design and not patronizing your audience with false choices...THEN DON'T FUCKING DO IT, OK?
While I agree with your opinion, showing the player what skill the dialogue option will use and if he will win the situation is bad in my opinion. There could be a better way to pull this thing off. Like, I don't know... mark the lines in a different color, depending on how the NPC would react on them. This doesn't make every (as example) green line a sign for insta-win and still shows you, how the NPC would kind of react on it.
Fallout got a perk already, which does exactly that. Sadly, nearly nobody ever uses it, because it is available pretty late and only if you have x perception, if I remember correct.
Fallout got a perk already, which does exactly that. Sadly, nearly nobody ever uses it, because it is available pretty late and only if you have x perception, if I remember correct.
TwinkieGorilla
This ghoul has seen it all
Lexx said:
Why are you agreeing with me, then thinking you're disagreeing with me while actually still agreeing with me? Language/interpretation barrier? I was saying that this was bad.
Indeed, I was writing bullshit.
Anyway, if it would be possible, I would have made a modification already, which gets rid of all the tags. Sadly, it's not possible just like that, because one would need to touche every single dialogue with a stat condition...
Anyway, if it would be possible, I would have made a modification already, which gets rid of all the tags. Sadly, it's not possible just like that, because one would need to touche every single dialogue with a stat condition...
TwinkieGorilla
This ghoul has seen it all
Lexx said:
No, kind sir...touché to you!
Seriously though, removing the tags wouldn't really fix it since the greater issue is that there usually aren't other viable choices for dialogue which appear even slightly ambiguous or plausible. While I appreciate that the Mass "Effect" of dialogue isn't nearly as pathetic:
* What do you mean?
* You mean what?
* Can you explain yourself?
* Hi, I like you, sex?
There still seems to be an obvious "this is the choice which will give me the results I'm looking for", "This choice probably will lead me to a dead end" and "This choice is for starting a fight." Removing the tags isn't going to magically add more dynamic choices to the dialogues in the game - that's up to the developers, and is one of the many balls which Obsidian dropped and should pay more attention to next time, since they've obviously proved themselves better than that in the past (or, at least MCA has and this Fenstermonster kid seems to be an MCA in the making).
Anarchosyn
Still Mildly Glowing
TwinkieGorilla said:
I doubt it. You're just reasoning from the heart and he's reasoning from a position of profit motivation (market penetration, etc).
Keep the big picture in mind: Alpha Protocol was a flop and they probably saw that coming a mile away. They're an independent studio in a market dominated by conglomerates. They're attempting to weather these stormy seas in one of the worst recessions in history (etc).
Market pressures are pushing AAA games towards the lowest common denominator. Don't blame Sawyer -- he's just following the push of the invisible hand.
MurkyShadow
Still Mildly Glowing
As for the tedious “courier” quests.
I finally guess one's just getting too old for that stuff.
Nah, no whining about, they don't do em like the
good old Bard's Tale times of yore anymore.
Guess, after a certain couple of years running around
mindlessly in games, you're just been there, done that.
These courier quests are a good example, where I suddenly
stop, thinking to myself, what the hell are you doing here?
I finally guess one's just getting too old for that stuff.
Nah, no whining about, they don't do em like the
good old Bard's Tale times of yore anymore.
Guess, after a certain couple of years running around
mindlessly in games, you're just been there, done that.
These courier quests are a good example, where I suddenly
stop, thinking to myself, what the hell are you doing here?
Dr. Combat Shotgun
First time out of the vault
They should at least wipe out skillcheck tags from dialogue on "hardcore", one of the most overhyped and lame aspects of the game btw. But I guess in the future dialogue is gonna be all Mass Effect, SPECIAL dropped in order to "streamline the experience" and all enemies are gonna be supermutant behemoths killable by one headshot, just AWESOME! fuck it... by the way, thanks for the review, BN, it and Vinces are best ive seen this far. Btw, article Vince mentions in his NMA review about "6 reasons why FO3 was better than NV" is hilarious, makes me wonder if the writer is serious.