Behold: Some Fresh New Vegas Images

By Jim Rossignol on May 4th, 2010 at 4:01 pm.


I think Alec is writing a preview for one of the other denizens of the game-o-sphere about this game right at this moment. I am sure he’ll link to it later. But anyway, the new bit of Fallout 3, which is being developed by the lovely Obsidian for release towards the end of this year, is called New Vegas, and it’s looking like it might please a few apocalypse-lovers. Bethesda sent over their latest images, and I’ve posted ‘em up below. Click for full size!








, .

85 Comments »

  1. diebroken says:

    Damn that engine is getting old…

    • Premium User Badge

      HermitUK says:

      At least they’ve turned off the green filter :p

    • /V/endetta says:

      @HermitUK:

      Yes, but now they put a brown filter on. Hell, even the sky has a touch of brown, it looks all poopy

    • Wulf says:

      Sky looks blue to me, except for where it’s sunny.

      The sun looks poopy, now?

    • Premium User Badge

      phuzz says:

      The brown is ash from Iceland.
      No, really.*

      (* lies)

    • Mil says:

      I was curious, so I had a look at the sky colour using “Print Screen” and MSPaint’s pick colour tool. The sky is almost completely grey; it only looks blue by contrast with the yellow clouds. In the bluest spot I could find the saturation (which loosely means how un-grey a colour is) is only about 7%.

      I have to say, the game does look remarkably yellow to me.

    • Momo the Cow says:

      Maybe it was the basement caliber character animations that made it look worse than it was, but I thought the engine looked dated the day it came out. I couldn’t for the life of me understand the praise for the game’s visuals.

      I took Half-Life 2 (a game 4 years older than Fallour 3) for a spin just last weekend, and while it too had dated, it still has the ability to make me oggle and gasp at the visuals in a way that Fallout 3 wasn’t able to do the day it came out.

    • Rich says:

      I’d put that down to Valve’s clever use of miniatures for background vistas. Fallout 3 just relied on huge draw distances to pull off spectacular views, which if you had a steam powered rig like mine, was rather lost when you had to turn that setting down. It didn’t help that the nature of the wasteland meant that there was generally bugger all to look at anyway.

    • Premium User Badge

      VelvetFistIronGlove says:

      @Rich One of the reasons I think HL2 still looks good is the lighting: apart from artful use of lighting, the use of baked lightmaps (ironically one of the reasons the Source engine is considered old) allow for real radiosity calculations, which makes a huge difference to its subconscious “realness” feel.

    • jalf says:

      Yes, but now they put a brown filter on. Hell, even the sky has a touch of brown, it looks all poopy

      Yeah, well, real is brown

  2. sana says:

    …I thought it’s a new, different approach to Fallout, not another Fallout 3 add-on?

    • Rich says:

      That was my impression also. Though I had already heard it’s going to use F3′s engine.

    • lhzr says:

      if it’s gonna have VATS, it’s gonna be more of F3. and it seems to have VATS, sadly.

    • Wulf says:

      There are patches which remove VATS and make Fallout 3 a perfectly competent FPS game.

      It’s not going to be long before those are converted over to New Vegas. Same engine and all, yeah?

      I wouldn’t worry!

    • Wulf says:

      Er, not patches, mods, sorry.

      There were mods that removed VATS, and did a really great job of it, too.

    • MadMatty says:

      erm mods? why not, just not use the VATS at all and play it like an FPS, like me… remember…no space button lol

    • Wulf says:

      It’s not really well balanced to be played purely as an FPS, and it’s a little easy playing it that way if you’re really good. A lot of people who are pretty good at FPS games complained about that and thus a series of balance mods as borne, which increases the difficulty and generally makes it feel more like a competent FPS.

  3. /V/endetta says:

    lol @ the first pic. !!

    • Wulf says:

      My reaction exactly! \:D/

      FORE!

      …I won’t be able to stop doing that.

  4. Vinraith says:

    A new Fallout 3 game is very, very welcome. The inevitable GfWL implementation is less welcome, but for the quasi-sequel to one of my favorite RPG’s of the past decade I’ll find a workaround.

    • Wulf says:

      No need to worry, Vin! Liveless (a patch to remove GFWL) works with Fallout 3. It’ll need only very minor changes to work with this, so I expect within a week of release there’ll be a new Liveless out that removes that evil presence that we both fret over.

      Hooray for people who clean up the nastier elements of gaming!

    • Vinraith says:

      @Wulf

      Yeah, I know it works for FO3, hopefully you’re right that consequently it’ll be easy to make it work for New Vegas. Similarly, hopefully being built on the FO3 engine will mean day 1 GECK for New Vegas. Three cheers for the crap fixers, 3 cheers for the mod makers!

    • Wulf says:

      I wouldn’t be surprised if the GECK works with this out of the box, with only a few minor changes (to accommodate scripts) necessary. If Bethesda and Obsidian don’t do that then I’m sure the fans will, because what the fans were doing even before the GECK was incredibly impressive. Bethesda games seem to have the most innovative and clever modding people working on them, which is always nice.

      I suspect the relation between New Vegas and Fallout 3 is similar to the relation between Oblivion and The Shimmering Isles, and not much had to be done to the toolkit there either to accommodate that.

    • Premium User Badge

      drewski says:

      You don’t need a mod to stop Fallout 3 using GFWL. You can boot it straight from the executable which means it never even does the check.

  5. Clovis says:

    What’s going on in the 4th picture? Does “Fore!” mean “attack with your golf club”? What’s a “Powder Ganger”?

    I like that the robots that have a picture of a cop in the little screen. That’s reassuring when they try to kill you.

    Also, this is super ugly.

    • Wulf says:

      It’s the Fallout 3 engine and some of the assets, and Fallout 3 wasn’t exactly super pretty, was it?

      And yes, I’m guessing that fore implies whacking someone with a golf club. Which I will be doing all the time.

    • Dr Snofeld says:

      According to previews, melee weapons get special VATS attacks to make it worth using them in VATS. Fore! is a golf swing to the nads with a chance to knock down the enemy. It’s not groin targeting but it’s something at least.

    • Shalrath says:

      Was I the only one who read “Power Ranger”?

  6. Wulf says:

    Th-there’s a fore button?

    There are uniwheel robots that wobble at you uncertainly like some old sci-fi movie or questionably low budget episode of Doctor Who?!

    That’s absolutely frivolous, it’s almost as if someone has remembered what Fallout was originally about!

    I love Obsidian.

  7. DeanLearner says:

    Better not be another scenario like…

    “Oh, hey Fawkes, you know you’re immune to radioactivity, as you proved only 1 mission ago, can you go in there and put the code in for me?”

    “Lol, no”

    “god damnit fawkes”

    • Vinraith says:

      @DeanLearner

      At least they fixed that in Broken Steel but, yes, the original ending was pretty stupid.

    • jonfitt says:

      I hated that ending. Goddamn Fawkes. How it ever made it to even a first draft without someone pointing out it was stupid, I’ll never know!

    • suibhne says:

      How? Quite simply, Bethesda has a stable of pretty bad writers. The good news is that Obsidian’s writers are far, far better.

    • wyrmsine says:

      Yep, Bethesda’s writers all have a nasty case of Teenage Dungeon Master syndrome.

    • Ninja says:

      Rofl. I just bought the game of the year version recently, and I was annoyed by the ending, even though it let me put him in it.

      I was using the logic of (Why would I want to risk my life, when I can have a person who will have NO HARM done to him do the same simple job.) But the “ending” credits still made it sound like I was a bad person, despite doing almost no negative karma decisions, because of the whole “The Lone Wanderer decided to not follow in his father’s heroic footsteps”

      And I would say the reason being is that I’m not stupid like my in game father was. And he was hoping to take other people out with him.

    • DeanLearner says:

      @Ninja

      Hahaha, even the ‘fixed’ ending sounds bad. You can just imagine it. Hero walks into room and a couple of people whisper to themselves “oh look, it’s that guy who wouldn’t unnecessarily sacrifice himself” *hero hangs head in shame*

  8. Eggy says:

    I’ll wait untill there is a high res texture pack available. My FO3 looks heaps better than this.

  9. Corporate Dog says:

    If they wanted to impress me, they needed to wheel out the pictures of the Vegas strip in all of its post-apocalyptic glory.

    This doesn’t look incredibly different from the environs of DC.

    • Momo the Cow says:

      Wow, you’re absolutely right. These look, if anything, more featureless and bland than even the monotonous environments of Bethesda’s D.C.

      I wish Obsidian well on this one, I really do, but these stills fill me with disappointment.

  10. the_dancing_spy says:

    Fore! Is a referance to the new melee system, which introduces custom attacks for each melee weapon so they all handle differently. Fore! is the golf club’s special attack.

  11. Mistabashi says:

    If the Wiki article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallout_New_Vegas) on New Vegas is to be belived then it looks like Obsidian are going to address a lot of the issues I had with Fallout 3. Except for the combat of course, which will no doubt retain the same ‘poorly-made fps with terrible AI’ feel, but as long as they improve the RPG elements I’m all for it.

    I just wish they would bring back some of the missing character options from the original game, such as traits, and balance it so you can’t be good at every skill.. And remove the abundance of skill books and bobbleheads.

    And for the love of god, fire that voice actor. You know the one, mister “gimme a second, keep your panties on!” who seemed to voice every other male NPC in the game.

    • Nerd Rage says:

      @Mistabashi

      I read an interview with Feargus were he talks about improving the shooter aspect of the game as well. I doubt it will get to the point of resembling a “real” shooter, but as long as my gun actually shoots when I push the button and not 10 frames later… I’ll be reasonably happy.

  12. Sarlix says:

    Man, it looks like you still grip the rifles in that annoying – I’m trying to smother the barrel sort of way. My biggest disappointment in F3 was when I found that ornate repeater rifle in the museum of history, only to have half of it blocked out of view by my big fat hand.

    • Sarlix says:

      Hey that looks like the rifle from the museum of history!.

      Strange that theres mods for a game that isn’t even out yet… :s

    • Wulf says:

      I think that’s meant as in physical modifications to the gun in-game to make them behave differently.

  13. jonfitt says:

    I would avoid that Ghoul, his head appears to glow with the radiation of a thousand suns!

    • Sarlix says:

      It’s actually his head that’s illuminating the room!

      Also I think that could be Gom’s brother!

      Or sister, it’s hard to tell with Ghouls.

  14. snv says:

    Stupid DLCs

    I can’t bring myself to play Fallout3 ( or Dragon Age or Mass Effect 2 ) because i don’t want to play it again and again. I want to beat the game when it is complete. So i wait until they’re finished – maybe most bugs might be patched out by then too.

    • Vinraith says:

      @snv

      Fallout 3 IS finished. No more DLC’s and probably no more patches, especially with this pseudo-sequel coming out.

  15. EBass says:

    Despite my love for the fallout series, and my like of Fallout 3, I can’t get particularly excited about this. Don’t know why.

    Also, Damn if that engine isn’t getting creaky, although I swear engines don’t get better our eyes just downgrade. I mean when the Unreal 2 engine came out IT LOOKED LIKE REAL LIFE, how come it doesen’t anymore?

    • Spacewalk says:

      I reinstalled UT2004 the other week and I swear it still looks better than Fallout 3.

  16. Tulpa says:

    While the Fallout 3 engine is remarkably hideous, the design sensibilites on display are much less repellant than what I was subjected to in FO3. It’s almost as if having the people that made the previous games work on New Vegas implies New Vegas will have an art direction in line with Fallout 2 (AT the least)

  17. Ninja says:

    I hope the golf picture is a sign that they are adding melee specific vats attacks.

    I liked sneaking up behind people and smashing them with a melee weapon (Or slicing them) and it would have been so much better if when I was behind the person, and used a vats knife attack, if I stuck the knife firmly in thier back, maybe twisting it for good measure. Same thing for other melee weapons.

    I would have KILLED to use the baseball bat to knock people’s heads off (Or better yet from the front knock them in the groin a good one).

  18. Momo the Cow says:

    Maybe it was the basement caliber character animations that made it look worse than it was, but I thought the engine looked dated the day it came out. I couldn’t for the life of me understand the praise for the game’s visuals.

    I took Half-Life 2 (a game 4 years older than Fallour 3) for a spin just last weekend, and while it too had dated, it still has the ability to make me oggle and gasp at the visuals in a way that Fallout 3 wasn’t able to do the day it came out.

    • Lilliput King says:

      “I took Half-Life 2 (a game 4 years older than Fallour 3) for a spin just last weekend, and while it too had dated, it still has the ability to make me oggle and gasp at the visuals in a way that Fallout 3 wasn’t able to do the day it came out.”

      Yeah, definitely. The quality of the animations have a startling effect, and don’t really have anything to do with technological fidelity.

      Bethesda! No excuses.

  19. Vinraith says:

    I’ll never understand the complaints about FO3′s graphics, and can’t help but suspect that it’s just more “it’s not Fallout 2″ bitching thinly disguised. I can only say that, for me, stepping out of the vault and getting that view of a desolated D.C. landscape still makes me stop and stare in wonder for a minute, even on my 3rd play through.

    • Wulf says:

      “I’ll never understand the complaints about FO3’s graphics, and can’t help but suspect that it’s just more “it’s not Fallout 2″ bitching thinly disguised.”

      It’s exactly that, really.

      I didn’t think Fallout 3 was the prettiest thing I’ve ever seen, but it was competent and there were a few really beautiful moments, especially with a texture pack or two. I’ve seen better, but I’ve never had any real complaints about it. I’m not going to go yelling about graphics either because I’m not a graphics whore.

      It seems a lot of people forget these days that not everything is about graphics, anyway.

    • Jesus says:

      game is still crap though

    • Momo the Cow says:

      Honestly, me too. The promise of discovery and exploration, or a whole world to discover, in that first moment out of the vault was extraordinary…. but the world didn’t deliver. There were moments, for sure, but for the most part the game felt like an indoor/outdoor dungeon crawl through utterly repetitive landscapes and corridors. Butter that wasn’t that good to begin with spread too thin over too much dry toast.

      Speaking personally, that precipitous plunge from the expectation and wonderment sparked by that moment (which was probably too high to begin with, to be fair) to the meager reality offered was comparable to what a lot of people must have felt between the opening scrawl and the closing credits of the Phantom Menace back in 1999.

    • Momo the Cow says:

      Out of curiosity, would you consider negative reactions to the Phantom Menace or its sequels just more “it’s not the original trilogy” or “it’s not Empire Strikes Back” bitching?

    • Rich says:

      For me, the bit where you leave the Vault and step into the Wasteland was really impressive in the pre-release gameplay footage. My experience never lived up to it.

    • Premium User Badge

      skalpadda says:

      Vinraith: I think that’s the thing though, the visuals did a fine job of giving you that great sense of a large world and being able to go everywhere, but from a technical perspective it didn’t look great and artistically there was nothing on the “smaller scale” that really filled me with awe.

      Not that I cared while playing the game though, the overall character and massive world to explore was the only thing they really needed to get right for me, and they did.

      I do think it’s a bit strange that so many immediately cry “ugly”, “dated” and “hideous” whenever a game doesn’t look as technically good as the current top graphics powerhouses. I doubt many will care much while actually playing the game.

  20. Serenegoose says:

    Besides the green hue (which bugged me in the matrix, too) Fallout 3 looked really pretty – the abandoned bunkers sufficiently rotten, the city itself was interesting and the scenery was good. Something looks really -wrong- in those screenshots though, and I can’t put my finger on it.

    • Momo the Cow says:

      Their focus is overwhelmingly about ugly models shooting other ugly models in barren, featureless landscapes. For me, that actually sums up Fallout 3 concisely, but these pictures are even more barren.

      God, I’m a bitter sonufabitch.

  21. Serenegoose says:

    Hmmm, I’ve always been suspect at the declaration of ‘graphics whore’ and so on. Not all of us have great visual imaginations, and a lack of graphical finesse can really impede immersion for some of us. For example, I’ve never been able to manage text adventures, simply because I cannot adequately comprehend the world I’m in. I totally understand the rebuttal of ‘wow, this game is great because the graphics are amazing!’ I mean, that’s nonsense. However, good graphics (or much more specifically, effective presentation) are not something gamers should have to live without, or be condemned as somehow shallow for wanting. To paraphrase the great English philosopher Stephen Fry, can’t we have style -and- substance?

    • Jesus says:

      we cannot

      also, death to the graphic whores!

      I didn’t die for this bullshit!

  22. Soobe says:

    Pics make me excited- Woo ho!

    They’ve clearly gone for the “reuse as many assets as possible” approach, which means they’ve hopefully spend the bulk of their development time creating a compelling story, interesting characters, and all that other good bid’ness.

  23. sebmojo says:

    Wanderers Edition and Fellout make FO3 sing. WE in particular is amazing, makes it much harder (with plenty of adjustability to match your particular brand of fuckery) but in a really good way.

  24. Seth says:

    shot through the head!
    and who’s to blame?
    you can find out
    in this game
    (this game!)

  25. Magic H8 Ball says:

    Wulf said:

    Th-there’s a <i>fore</i> button?

    There are uniwheel robots that wobble at you uncertainly like some old sci-fi movie or questionably low budget episode of Doctor Who?!

    That’s absolutely frivolous, it’s almost as if someone has remembered what Fallout was originally about!

    Incidentally, it was about neither.

  26. terry says:

    Fallout : Fore!

  27. Momo the Cow says:

    Honestly, me too. The promise of discovery and exploration, or a whole world to discover, in that first moment out of the vault was extraordinary…. but the world didn’t deliver. There were moments, for sure, but for the most part the game felt like an indoor/outdoor dungeon crawl through utterly repetitive landscapes and corridors. Butter that wasn’t that good to begin with spread too thin over too much dry toast.

    Speaking personally, that precipitous plunge from the expectation and wonderment sparked by that moment (which was probably too high to begin with, to be fair) to the meager reality offered was comparable to what a lot of people must have felt between the opening scrawl and the closing credits of the Phantom Menace back in 1999.

    • Momo the Cow says:

      Hmm… Whenever I try to post a reply to a previous poster, my first attempt ends up as a new post and my second ends up in its proper, intended thread.

      Anyone know what I’m doing wrong? Or whether I can delete these double posts?

  28. Alfonso says:

    I don’t want to be graphic whore but Obsidian should get more from the Gamebryo engine. Especially that first Ghoul screenshot; why that skin is glowing and just because nukes destroyed the whole world doesn’t mean enviroment can only be minimalist and of dull grayish dust.

  29. Saiko Kila says:

    Seriously people, I cannot understand why are you bashing this engine so much. Please show me an example of engine of the same age which hasn’t dated. And HL2? Come on, you looking through your nostalgia filter. Only thing better are destructible beverage bottles. In Fallout 3 I loved these dilapidated surroundings, and a view of a lost city near sunset was just romantic. And what’s wrong with washed out colors? Said that, there were and are numerous problems, some of which are getting worse:
    - original textures are simply crappy, despite being slightly better than their console counterparts
    - there are shimmering issues which intensified after some driver release (nvidia) – no AA can’t help
    - there is a performance problem, since nvidia drivers 190.xxx – despite nvidia claims it remains unfixed (just look into the sky with all reflexions on high)
    - there are general performance problems – and lowering settings just makes things disappear, which instant hit to visual aspect
    - animations of people are just a tad better than in Oblivion. And since Oblivion animation is of unspeakable quality…

    • Alastayr says:

      You can’t understand why we’re complaining about the engine and then you list your complaints with the engine… make up your mind.

      On top of that, you may add:
      - laughable art direction in the way that everything is made out of the same recycled assets
      - ridiculous world shadows (hint: there are none)
      - indoor/outdoor separation
      - buggy scripts

      and there’s simply no excuse for Bethesda to have modders eclipse their efforts in about every way.

    • Saiko Kila says:

      Mine complains are minor, nothing you can’t find in other productions. And only one of them is a problem of engine per se, that one about performance. Which cannot be judged by the screens.

      About your complaints: this indoor/outdoor separation is a nonissue to me, because enemies are not repelled by that. And change of mood (outside world is always grim and gray, inside depends) is made purposely. Art direction is a matter of personal taste, I liked it. Bugs in scripts is simply a lousy job of developers – personally I never play without unofficial bug-fixing mods, just like in Oblivion. But it’s not a restriction of engine.

      I don’t get the shadows.

    • Lilliput King says:

      “- animations”
      “- buggy scripts”
      “- ridiculous world shadows”
      ” art direction”
      ” textures”

      Possibly telling that HL2 did every one of these better despite being released 4 years beforehand? Come on, it’s an absolutely shitty engine, and it looks awful. If you still like the game, fine.

  30. Magic H8 Ball says:

    I would like to point out that houses in Half Life 2 have completely flat fronts. The windows are nothing but a texture.

    That is all and I hope no one will ever say Half Life 2 had good graphics again.

    • Lilliput King says:

      You take missing the point to the level of an art form.

    • Rich says:

      At least they didn’t slowly fade in as I approached them.
      Or sit there, resolutely refusing to switch to their close-up texture set, despite me being three feet away.

    • Momo the Cow says:

      My girlfriend has a pretty flat front too, but I think she’s gorgeous where it counts.
      Awful pathfinding, however.

      Anyways, replaying Half-Life 2 made me realise how impressive blocky polygons with blotchy-textures looked only a few years ago, but as some others have mentioned, it’s the art direction and presentation of what they had to work with that makes it still impressive to behold. The way the people walk and gesticulate, the way they look at you with doubt and fear, the way an abandoned swing in a playground sways with your touch.

      I would say this is doubly true of STALKER, whose attention to detail and handmade (rather than prefab) quality made me want to search for more, because I never expected (and never found) a corner or corridor that felt like it came from the ctrl-V from the programmers.

      Opposite to my experience with Fallout 3, STALKER didn’t make me gasp at the outset, but slowly and profoundly pulled me in as I played further. I wanted to explore the nooks and crannies of the Exclusion Zone, and it was a constant feeling of discovery. In Fallout 3, the best thing I discovered was the fast-travel option.

  31. Manley Pointer says:

    I refuse to be excited unless they release a screenshot of VATS allowing you to target the eyes.

  32. WildeAnarchist says:

    I want Wanamingos.

    Also, some people seem to be countering criticism of Fallout 3 and its engine/gameplay -which are mutually dependent- by throwing around the ‘graphics whore’ accusation in conjunction with the ‘Fallout 2′ fanboy-ism argument.

    Wouldn’t they be mutually exclusive?

    The original Fallout games were never considered to be graphical marvels, to my meagre recollection, what mattered -and is revered most- was their unique and masterful combination of atmosphere, art direction and narrative. Three elements that Fallout 3 only partially succeeded in weaving together convincingly (IMO obviously).

    I am a fan of it, no doubt, but while the originals also had crappy graphics and sometimes annoying game-play mechanics for their time, they also left an indelible mark on gaming (13 years later). Which is something I doubt Fallout 3 will be commended for as it ages similarly.

    Nevertheless, I’m hoping that Obsidian will once again overcome the limitations of the engine with which they are working to deliver something uniquely enjoyable -and likely uniquely broken- as is their wont.