Why I Abandoned New Vegas For Renaissance Rome

Brother None

Brother None

This ghoul has seen it all
Orderite
Gamasutra offers an editorial on how New Vegas gives little feeling of satisfaction and accomplishment compared to Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood.<blockquote>But even after the above-mentioned event that filled me with a new sense of purpose, there was still something that left me wanting, and I couldn't figure out what it was. That is, until I read an article from G. Christopher Williams on PopMatters.com entitled “Fallout, the 'To Do' List Simulator” that made me realize what was bugging me most: I never got anything done! I was apathetic because I never got a feeling of satisfaction or accomplishment. Even upon completing a mission, my quest queue was usually longer than when I started.

While I wanted to keep moving forward with New Vegas, I simply had to pick up and dive into some Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood as well. My plan was to check out Brotherhood for a couple hours then put it aside until I finished up New Vegas... But I didn't want to go back. When played back to back, these games shine an interesting light on each other, specifically on the biggest problem I have with New Vegas and one of the things I like most about Brotherhood.

I like the feeling of getting things done, and working towards a goal, and these are more satisfying in video games than they are in real life mostly due to their immediacy. As soon as I complete a quest I get money and items and experience, etc. In real life, rewards come at a significantly slower pace, and are rarely as materially satisfying as a shiny new sword.</blockquote>
 
So, basically, NV isn't linear and dumbed down enough?

RPGs are doomed if they get criticized for having too much stuff to do.
 
I'm just about forty hours in my second NV playthrough...and I'm close to putting ACB in also! I really like NV ,but the errand boy quests or killing me...alone with the loading times. :evil:
 
The only quests i had a problem with are those where you can't teleport to the location , that's boring yeah after you visit it for 1000 times . And I'm talking about Strip mostly . Everything else falls into place in the end because every one of those quests are interchangeable and teleportable .

I think his problem is much bigger than he talks . He obviously isn't an RPG player . I loved AC2 , and it gives you a good replay value but if you do everything in it first time then not so much (getting feathers or armor or landmarks is that content) . Consider that Ezio is in god mode , press space while jumping and you can't fall . You can counter kill 40 guards in a row also . So there is no real sense of difficulty here , he's just too damn powerful because the whole game is based on jumping and killing . Landmarks and history is where it shines truly . Story is cool but a little cliche , i mean , man o man fight with Borgia ? Sure it's crazy good but a little too crazy .

And now in Brotherhood he's got 45 + years , can jump like a monkey and kill with ease . Well seriously where the hell sanity went here ?
Because he's Ezio !
Game is good but really , giving it that much credit is stupid . It's not even in the same type of gameplay like NV .

NV is a hard nut , unless you plan you get killed . If you don't dedicate to the story and do quest rightly how you want it , that's planning again and thinking! , the end can become unsatisfying . And you plan characters creation too . Still good old RPG , need more brain than button pressing mashing right on time .

This "criticizing" is console games makers fault imo , most games are made too easy and people get used to that feeling . Get everything done but don't need to do anything in particular . And heroes are basically gods . It's cool for the first playthrough but why would i do it again in the same linear fashion ? Well , not all of them have it but AC does .
It sucks some hard balls when people pay attention to some guys critic of a game because he's in a bad mood for it , it's subjective ffs . Sucks more when smart assess come and copy paste that everywhere in forums and they didn't even play the game . We all remember FO3 "critics" ....
 
This
LinkPain said:
The only quests i had a problem with are those where you can't teleport to the location , that's boring yeah after you visit it for 1000 times . And I'm talking about Strip mostly . Everything else falls into place in the end because every one of those quests are interchangeable and teleportable
Click to expand...
THe strip was a huge let down for me in Vegas. Sadly. Because I hoped they would have made more out of it. But so be it.

Though the game is not completely without criticism. While it is miles better then Fallout 3 of course and a decent RPG I think some of the locations are strange or not well thought out. Mainly the story and characters in the Legion. The structure of the Quests also feelt very similar sometimes to Oblivion/Fallout 3. Not in a good way. But thats my personal oppinion. Of course I doubt a comparsion with Assasins Creed is that easy or good since both games aim for a different target. But for me the world of Vegas even with a very interesting look started to become quite dull fast.
 
Tried AC1 once. It's just a rather linear third person fighting game of sorts, with minor RPG elements. I really don't see how AC:B could have more depth than NV does. They're quite different games entirely. Might as well have written an article about quitting chess for tic tac toe.
 
"The to od list simulator", yeah, not like Assassins Creed, "Win the race against your brother at the begining of game over, no variation, no options just go and do it, or else agme over", or "Ezio didn't kill 3 civilians in a row, gameover".
 
I tried playing AC and totally hated it. Mostly because of the repetition. I'm a lore buff and love reading the wiki of Fallout NV or any Fallout. Same with WOW or Mass Effect. I think most of the locations in Fallout NV are very interesting. I do wish the caves were more expansive and unique though. Perhaps the BOS bunker could have looked cooler. But aside from that, Hidden Valley is fucking awesome! I still haven't completed the game though and I've put in 100 hours. I started over just because I wanted to try energy weapons. I'd start over again if I wanted to change something. It doesn't bother me. I've spent thousands of hours with Fallout 2 and considering New Vegas is actual cannon (at least to me), I don't mind sitting through it and playing it multiple times in multiple ways. Its a pretty awesome game. I was not going to buy it before because of how alike it is to Fallout 3 or Oblivion, but I got passed the bump; and read many reviews and such as NMA and got the urge to buy it. I love it and I am happy I spent the money on it. I want the DLC though (dead money), it sounds really cool with all its lore and such.
 
See , that's it , either you like it or not .
AC2 is a good game and it is fun , but i'd rather spend time on ME2 when i'm done with my priority which is Fallout . And there simply isn't enough time to play so many games....

I think it's better to play ones that have high replay value and many in game options so you can't finish it the same every time .


@Crni Vuk
I know what you mean . I finished the game 2 times and it feels dull now . But i spent god knows how much time in it and that's my main reason why i quit for now . Need some time to recover my brain xD
 
@Crni: It's not that FONV is faultless, it's the guy's 'criticism' that's stupid. Yes, FONV isn't a "Press A to win" game, but that's one of it's GOOD sides.
 
I dont mind difficult gameplay. As long its consistent and logical. Like different tacics for different enemies. Or if you want differrent amunition and better AI. A death claw with 1500 HP and a punch that always almost kills you ... that feels a bit lazy. But well.
 
I've never played any Assassin's Creed and, maybe, that's why I don't get what the point of that article was. To sum it up, his complaint was that there were a lot of quests in Fallout, which made it poor in comparison to the fact that there are a lot of quests in AC:B? I am confused.
 
sea said:
Idiotfool said:
I've never played any Assassin's Creed and, maybe, that's why I don't get what the point of that article was. To sum it up, his complaint was that there were a lot of quests in Fallout, which made it poor in comparison to the fact that there are a lot of quests in AC:B? I am confused.
Click to expand...
His point is that the lack of interesting characters and events in the story, coupled with feeling like he isn't making any progress in the game (way too many quests, no sense of getting "closer to the end") drove him to put away New Vegas in favour of Brotherhood. I think he has a point, but he didn't do the best job of articulating why he felt that way.
Click to expand...

Ah, thank you. Well, I like the number of quests that may or may not have an impact on the main storyline in New Vegas. I'm 22 hours in and, although I haven't accomplished much storywise, I've been entertained the whole way.
 
some of the quests have really no other purpose then to get a better reputation with one of the groups. But I would agree if you say some characters and quests are outright "flat". But hey which game has ONLY awesome quests. At least Vegas has a good number of entertaining questlines. Even though when some of the factions and locations look outright stupid to me.
 
Crni Vuk said:
some of the quests have really no other purpose then to get a better reputation with one of the groups. But I would agree if you say some characters and quests are outright "flat". But hey which game has ONLY awesome quests. At least Vegas has a good number of entertaining questlines. Even though when some of the factions and locations look outright stupid to me.
Click to expand...
No game has only awesome quests because they don't edit out the crap. I'm with him that too many RPGs have a lot of crappy side quests due to various combinations of bad writing, bad quest design, and bad rewards. Whether or not New Vegas fits that bill, I'm sure that there are some mediocre or worse quests which could have been cut.

My problem is that he acts like Fallout 3 didn't have the exact same problems he's complaining about.
 
Well if RPG is about checking quest list entries, then we have nothing in common, you journalist. I did some great things in Mojave even before finishing the game. I even didnt acomplish some quest quest because i didnt care about the story or anything behind them (for example I havent been to Ultra-luxe yet).

RPG is about "live", not about doing everything. It is as if you wanted to go through every single street in the city. It is dumb, and boring. Instead choose your way, any way, and enjoy the freedom and responsibility for all your actions. Otherwise play CoD.
 
smejki said:
RPG is about "live", not about doing everything. It is as if you wanted to go through every single street in the city. It is dumb, and boring. Instead choose your way, any way, and enjoy the freedom and responsibility for all your actions. Otherwise play CoD.
Click to expand...
How do you know how they intended their game to be played? Where have they explicitly stated any such thing? They have quests which cut off access to others so presumably they plan on having players do most/all of the other quests. They game doesn't prevent such actions and the manual doesn't suggest otherwise, correct?

A good number of gamers are completionists and they should be taken into account when you make a game. Assuming that having bad quests here and there will be fine because most people will only play through a few of them is garbage. If that's how you want the player to play it then program it that way or tell the player as much.
 
sea said:
Note that I don't want to suggest New Vegas is a poor game or handles its open world badly. It's one of the better Western RPGs in years and the best Fallout in even longer, but the age of Bethesda's original design is starting to show when put next to games that are simply more focused, faster-paced, and provide more compelling reasons for the player to care.
Click to expand...

But you can make FNV fast-paced if you want, just do the main quest without completing the rest. I tried this once, follow They Went That-a-Way, Ring-a-Ding-Ding and the House Always Win only, I ended the game at the beginning of level 18 (I only did Cass, Veronica and Lily personal quests, I think they are great characters. Lily always makes me laugh.)
This doesn't change if you choose other factions, BTW.

So the problem is getting focused or the multi-task? FNV has a shit-load of quests, many of them interlaced with others, that requires constant thinking and planning, not only going from point A to B and "you win". Even in combat NV differs, there's times that guns don't simply work, you will have a much easier life going with your fists or melee.
Take Dead Money for example, one thing I've found great in the DLC regarding how combat happens is that Obsidian did exactly the opposite that people was expecting.

Every courier build you see are highly evolved killers, armed with a multitude of guns or energy weapons, with PhD in Theoretical physics.
What are the good weapons and the best way to kill in Dead Money? Using you fists or melee.
The vast majority of players overlook this skills and are very weak on them when starting the DLC, that's why they complain a lot.

Sometimes I look around and think that gamers are becoming too much lazy, they always want something that guide them or something easy to do or something that makes them feeling like a god.
NV is even more greater because it break all these rules.
 
Sometimes I look around and think that gamers are becoming too much lazy, they always want something that guide them or something easy to do or something that makes them feeling like a god.
NV is even more greater because it break all these rules.
Click to expand...
a valid point but one that underlines the point of the article that the Gamasutra one was based on.

The big thing is that games are supposed to be about enjoyment and immersion into something that is different from your current existence. If this means your character is god like then have at it. The laziness of the present game audience is seen because they know it is just a game, nothing more. It is meant for entertainment its not suppose to represent a new skill or long term commitment its there for shits and giggles.

So when a game makes the genre defining move of becoming more like real life that is when our dear friend over at PopMatters begin to chafe at what we all enjoyed. Its not complexity level or story telling instead its the fact that his method of escape began to too closely mirror his real life and as such made him see the game less as an escape and more like another life he was living with its own problems.

In short the game no longer felt game like and crossed a line. In a silly example it would be like survivors of a horrific alien invasion trying to play halo it would be to close to home. The PopMatters article was fairly good the Gamasutra one kinda convoluted the point but was still interesting especially coming from a game site.Nice find.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top