GameCon ’10 Ripport: Fallout New Vegas

By Alec Meer on August 23rd, 2010 at 10:03 pm.

Ashes. All is ashes. All I’ve eaten is ashes. I’ve slept on ashes. I’m covered in ashes, following an unfortunate incident in which 31 Finnish journalists mistook me for an ashtray. I thought of Quintin, and how he had talked of sleeping on a mattress made of phoenix down. Perhaps he could spare a cup of water to throw at me, to wash some of the soot from my face. But then I thought of how he’d sneer and say how that water came from the highest mountain spring in Scotland, and that I owed him £500 for it. No. Better to carry on, to my next appointment, to a real world of ashes. To New Vegas!

I was hands-on with this one – no more watching from afar, judging/wondering/scribbling. Exploring/fighting/irradiating!

From the off, it’s a smarter game: one that senses you’re raring to go off adventuring rather than one that wants to browbeat you with its exposition. Sure, New Vegas enjoys the significant advantage of the Fallout universe having now been established for a new generation, so it doesn’t need to painstakingly describe what a Vault is, what happened when the bombs dropped and where those funky blue jumpsuits came from.

It’s also pretty clearly having a bit more fun, though: not chained to an epic status quo-defining core story, but instead mucking around with the outliers of the nu-Fallout universe. The intro sequence (pre-recorded, but nonetheless a statement of intent) shows the New Vegas strip, wasting no time in ushering robots, mutants, guys in sharp suits, and NCR snipers into the crumbling glitz.

It’s… well, it’s slightly silly. And it suits it. We’ve seen enough sparse wastelands now – far better to toy with the more colourful possibilities of a post-nuclear sci-fi world.

Of course that’s just an intro cutscene, and it’s not long before we’re back to the land of ashes. Before that, we meet a fink. A fink in spats and a pin-stripe suit, and who says things like “I ain’t a fink”, before shooting you, a nameless courier in the face. Which is pretty damned finky, if you ask me. He’s colourful and incongruous against the washed-out night desert, and again a statement that that this is a more wilfully outlandish take on Fallout and before.

Clearly, that may change as the game wears on, but from the half hour or so of random exploration I got under my rad-belt, it seemed to be making a little more effort to catch the eye as well as the mood.

In a sequence that’s already been documented in previews last year, you come to in a doctor’s surgery. The guy’s somehow pieced your shattered skull and splattered brain back together, which also happens to be a pretty smart way of justifying why you then have to define name, face and abilities of an adult character. It’s a lot more straight to the point than Liam Neeson’s endless, awed muttering in Fallout 3′s character creation, and a damn sight more playful too.

The writing and acting seemed a little sharper than F3′s oft-wobbly dialogue, but I’ll admit I may be coloured in my thinking there, already knowing as I do that Planescape god-brain Chris Avellone has had a major hand in New Vegas’ wordsmithery. While my wandering and chatting through the Wild Westy opening town was about as purposeful as a cider-soaked wasp crawling across a lawn, I didn’t run into any jarring “a traveller, eh?” you-are-in-an-rpg clunkers. I felt a little more comfortable, a little more absorbed.

At the same time, clearly it’s very, very familiar. It would be a mistake, from what I played, to go into this expecting a brand new experience. That was never the offer, of course, but I did have to fight off a distracting sense of Done This. That said, I suspect knowing I wasn’t here for long, that this preview session wouldn’t be enough to invest in my character, my purpose and my trinket-hunger, didn’t help. Rather than take on quests with noble intent, my impulse was simply to see how far I could run.

First I thought I’d shoot a cow-thing, though. That didn’t go well. Half the town came after me. Thought I was holding them off pretty well, until I suddenly got gored by a baby cow-thing from behind. Important Lesson: don’t shoot the cow-things.

Reload, re-arm, run for the hills. Run, specifically, for the town of Primm – a place defined by a giant, decaying rollercoaster in the shape of a dinosaur. Again, this is a game that seems to revel in incongruity. It doesn’t chain itself to ruin, metal walls and real-life landmarks, but works that little bit harder to drop startling sites into the wasteland.

As I was still fairly puny at this stage, and frankly not making a whole lot of effort to be tactical due to keeping one eye on the clock (I needed to head off and interview id’s Tim Willits. I can exclusively reveal that he shaved off his moustache at his wife’s request), Primm’s guards swiftly turned me into a human golf course. Oh well. Should have been a bit more VATy, really.

I’d be lying if I said I’d found vast tracts of New Vegas’ world in my brief time there, but I had at least seen spats, a rollercoaster, giant mutant flies, angry cows and the cutest little murderous baby gecko. That’ll do, frankly. I know there’s a game waiting for me that’s going to cheerfully throw visual ideas at me. That’s forever appealing.

While there was a sense of pace and mechanics having been tweaked and tightened, I suspect it won’t make the impact that Fallout 3 did, sadly. Much of that can be laid at the feet of the engine, which quite frankly looks pretty ugly by this stage. Still rooted in old Oblivion’s, there are fundamentally and obtrusively archaic elements to it – most especially the awkward spindle-blocks of the character models. Fresh from seeing the Witcher 2′s rugged, hyper-detailed solidity, my eye struggled to take the Fallout engine’s Puppets On A Sea Of Gravy aesthetic entirely seriously.

Such a thing doesn’t matter once you’ve subscribed to the fantasy and the world, of course. While I broadly know what I’m in for, it’s the writing and the playful perversion of what the Fallout universe allows that’s attracting me to New Vegas. Arriving as it does in a sea of military-themed rail-shooters, I suspect it’s going to feel incredibly refreshing despite its technical age.

, , , .

81 Comments »

  1. Brumisator says:

    I doubt there are that many journalists in Finland.

  2. Mac says:

    Knowing Obsidian it will be some months after launch until a patch to fix the buggy mess is released (if at all, if Alpha Protocol is anything to go by)

    • Nova says:

      I’m pretty sure Bethesda is doing/supervising the final QA.

    • Alexander Norris says:

      Nova: so it’ll never get a patch to fix all the bugs and we’ll instead have to rely on mods, then?

    • Tetragrammaton says:

      Arf

    • Shockedder says:

      For Alpha Protocol, did they actually release a patch ? If so, it’s about bloody time.
      If not,… grr.

    • Nova says:

      @Alexander

      Well that’s another story but better than the capital bugs that Obsidian often leaves in their games, no?
      Even though I didn’t have problems with Alpha Protocol one I had it started and that could have easily been avoided since the game just didn’t install all the necessary programs it needed to run.

    • Patrick says:

      Bethesda supervised the final QA of Rogue Warrior.

    • sfury says:

      @Shockedder I think idiots SEGA are not paying them to work on a patch, even though they said they wanted to release one short after the game was released.

      セガUSAが最低だね!

  3. Skinlo says:

    I have a feeling this won’t sell well.

    • James G says:

      Really? I would have thought the Fallout name would carry it enough.

    • MrTambourineMan says:

      It will sell very well, believe me

    • Anonymous says:

      I doubt it.

    • Anonymous says:

      (As in I doubt it won’t sell well)

    • Freud says:

      Sequel to a recent game of the year? It will sell a throng. No, make that zounds.

    • torchedEARTH says:

      I will buy a copy the very second Bethesda release the patch to make the PS3 GOTY version work properly.

      THE VERY SECOND.

    • Tei says:

      I have my doubts, because It don’t sell differentiate enough from a “mod” of Fallout 3. Some people will think is somewhat like another DLC.

      In a word: is confusing. Anyway, lets wait for the first reviews, I don’t know at this point what we have here.

  4. Krimson says:

    At least they have an established and working toolset. That should have given them more time to create interesting quests and characters rather than fiddling arout with a wonky engine.

    • Anonymous says:

      To be honest, this looks like the exact same engine. It looks more like a DLC than a sequel.

      That’s why I was sorely disappointed when I first saw New Vegas.

      It doesn’t look like they improved at all!
      I’ll bet its still impossible to make a face that doesn’t look like roadkill.

    • Zenicetus says:

      It’s always nice to get a shiny new game engine *and* great writing and content. But if there is only enough resources to do one really well, or both poorly, then I’ll take an old engine and high-quality new content. If it looks and feels like just a huge expansion for Fallout 3, then I won’t mind too much if the writing and situations are good (more humor, please).

      My favorite time in most RPG’s or RPG/FPS hybrids is always the first half of the game, where I start out weak and can’t just blaze through everything like Death Incarnate. It will be good to have a fresh start with a new character. I just hope they manage to avoid Fallout 3′s difficulty scaling issues. You became Death Incarnate a little too quickly in that game, and it didn’t flow well into the DLC’s. They had to make the country bumpkin bad guys in Point Lookout ridiculously strong (two or three shots to the head, still coming!) to balance the player’s level by that point.

    • Jad says:

      To be honest, this looks like the exact same engine. It looks more like a DLC than a sequel.

      Was there really that much of an engine update between Fallout 1 and Fallout 2? Was Fallout 2 a sequel? Were the various Black Isle games like Planescape and Icewind Dale DLC to Bioware’s Baldur’s Gate? Should this engine shit matter?

    • jeremypeel says:

      Good point there – Fallout 2 was in no way shape or form a technical improvement on the first game (I personally don’t believe it was an improvement on Fallout in any significant way but that’s not the point here, really).

      I can put up with the engine’s ugliness – like I did until I stopped playing Fallout 3, fairly recently – if this is as good as I suspect it could be.

  5. Alexander Norris says:

    The only important question is: is it funny? Fallout 3 was terrible because it lacked all of the whimsy and humour of Fallout and Fallout 2. I’m hoping that with the chappies from Obsidian behind it it’ll actually be a proper sequel, but you never know.

    Also, VATS is still a steaming pile of offal because of its hybrid nature, but I guess that’ll get modded out in six months’ time, just like every other terrible design decision in every other terrible Bethesda game.

    • Joshua says:

      Since Fallout: New Vegas is made by the team (Along with backup) that made Fallout 1 and Fallout 2….

      Have faith :)

    • Alexander Norris says:

      I’ve found that having faith in any kind of business is a fast-track to a major let down. :P

      I know that Avellone and friends are working on this, and I know that Obsidian generally delivers shit games with great writing. I wasn’t born yesterday. Doesn’t mean the writing in NV is automatically going to be any good, though.

    • Adventurous Putty says:

      Man, sometimes I wonder: am I the only human being on the Internet who thought Alpha Protocol’s gameplay was actually pretty good? I mean, shit.

    • jeremypeel says:

      Does anyone else remember that the humour in Fallout (ironic, usually pretty subtle) and it’s sequel (constantly fourth-wall breaking, very silly) were really quite different?

      Or that the Black Isle teams working on both of them were mostly different?

      I don’t know what Big Point I’m trying to prove here – I guess I don’t like the way the first two games are so often coupled in such an offhand way when they’re actually pretty different beasts once you get past the surface.

  6. Premium User Badge

    DarkNoghri says:

    Cute murderous gecko, you say?

    http://finalfantasy.wikia.com/wiki/File:Tonberry-ff8.JPG

    RUN FOR YOUR LIVES

    • FunkyBadger says:

      Nice marmot.

    • Fumarole says:

      And let’s also not forget – let’s not forget, Dude – that keeping wildlife, an amphibious rodent, for uh, domestic, you know, within the city – that isn’t legal either.

    • tomwaitsfornoman says:

      Say what you want about The Brotherhood of Steel — at least that’s AN ETHOS, Dude.

  7. Qjuad says:

    @Alexander

    They’ve definetly improved non-VATS combat – plus you can now switch off that stupid “kill cam” that pops up every five seconds.

    I’m excited for this, despite the limitations it will carry – ugly faces etc. (and every “town” being populated by three people vs the 400 raiders that randomly appear all over the wasteland)

  8. benjamin says:

    Let’s see Oblivion needed about 30+ mods to make it reasonably interesting. Fallout 3 needed about five. This might not need any…

  9. Dominic White says:

    Lesson of this thread: Never, ever mention Fallout 3 or Oblivion, or even Bethesda in general around curmudgeonly PC gamers. Any discussion will rapidly be drowned out by this high-pitched, constant whining noise.

    • danarchist says:

      Mentioning any game of any note around game forums is just asking for it really. One of the basic facts of the internet forums is people only post a reply if they are A) really excited or B) still angry about some imaginary wrong committed against them in the past. On the internet everyone is Siskel and Ebert with there thumbs up their…well you get it.

      I’m just glad this happens on British sites too, I sometimes worry that us yanks are the only ones that spend our workdays whining on the internet =P Trolling truly has no borders.

    • The Hammer says:

      Have posts been deleted, or is Dominic just complaining about… non-existent complaining?

  10. V. Tchitcherine. says:

    Who else here, feels the game somehow manages to look worse than Fallout 3, a game based on the same technology, some two years its senior? (A game which despite its notably poor animation, I think looks quite wonderful overall).

    • Dude says:

      Yeah, I thought so too.

      I have no hopes for this one.

    • Premium User Badge

      skalpadda says:

      Well, KotOR 2 was significantly uglier than KotOR 1 and Alpha Protocol isn’t exactly the prettiest Unreal 3 engine game around. Obsidian seems to suffer a bit in the art and animation department, but luckily there are other reasons to play their games than eye candy.

  11. A-Scale says:

    I can’t help but feel that games journalists might be slightly negatlively biased in their reporting on games because they all seem to suck at video games.

  12. SAeN says:

    I just can’t get excited about this. It has the same creaky engine as the last and doesn’t look like it offers anything different to 3 which I never really got on with.

  13. MutantNME says:

    I’m actually looking forward to this. I really enjoyed the first game and think a little more of a comic twist will let me enjoy the experience even more.

    I also really liked VATs (remember you don’t have to use it it you don’t want to), but am a bit disappointed that they’ve not put any work into making the engine look a lot better, as it’s gonna get blown out of the water in the post-apocalypse stakes by Rage when it finally arrives. Most likely Bethesda are saving the new engine for Elder Scrolls V though.

    • Chris says:

      Seriously, if anyone played through FO3 without VATS, I’m not surprised if they think it sucked. As a shooter, FO3 makes a pretty good RPG: you felt floaty and disconnected from the whole shooting-things experience, and don’t get me started on how crap the sniper rifle was. In the same way that the tactical mode transformed Mass Effect combat, VATS makes albino radscorpions almost tolerable. And watching super-mutant heads explode in Matrix-o-vision never gets old.

      - Chris.

    • DigitalSignalX says:

      I loved FO3, but hated VATS – within a couple of days I’d replaced it with a bullet time mod that drains AP. I’ve probably used 300+ mods over the course of 3-4 times through. I’m confident Vegas will be equally enjoyable because of the mod community.

  14. Sam says:

    Only thing I don’t like about this game is that it’s going to look worse than Fallout 3 with mods (i.e. ).

  15. RC-1290'Dreadnought' says:

    I didn’t put much time into playing it, since I’m horrible with controllers when it comes to fps controls. But it was fun to discover that you could pick up corpses and drag them around. I got arrested shortly after that.

  16. Xercies says:

    You people and your complaining about graphics…you are terrible and you make companies focus on graphics over gameplay. To be hoenst gameplay has always trumped graphics if the gameplay is good the graphics go away like a devil on the shoulder. I hate people who are like this…the graphics are alright now fecking live with it.

    /rant

    • Anonymous says:

      Graphics can represent how much effort they put into the game.

      And right now it doesn’t look like they put much effort.

    • Pidesco says:

      Is Anonymous just trolling or what?

    • Tetragrammaton says:

      Nathan Barley?

    • Lilliput King says:

      You employ the same kind of fallacy that Obsidian apologists tend to use – “I’d rather take a buggy but ambitious game than a functioning but boring one.” It’s a false dichotomy – the aesthetic is an important part of a game. “gameplay has always trumped the graphics” is a ridiculous statement, because that’s not the choice we’re being offered, here. Gameplay and aesthetic are two parts of the same whole, and if the aesthetic side of the game is bad, we should say it’s bad. It doesn’t necessarily make it a bad game (e.g. Dwarf Fortress), but it certainly contributes.

      The other thing is, a game can look good without having amazing graphics. There’s something to be said for art design, which is a term Bethesda don’t really understand. Look at HL2. Look at Ico, or Baldur’s Gate. All released well before Oblivion, and they all look a hell of a lot better while requiring a fraction of the processing power. It looks like a turd because no-one put the effort in to make it look otherwise, and that’s important. We shouldn’t be afraid to say so.

      NB Bethesda is to blame for the engine, not Obsidian, of course.

    • Quinnbeast says:

      “Graphics can represent how much effort they put into the game.”

      The important word here is “can”.

    • Patrick says:

      Other important words are “the” and “into”. The period, too, is crucial.

    • Jad says:

      @Lilliput King: The other thing is, a game can look good without having amazing graphics. There’s something to be said for art design, which is a term Bethesda don’t really understand. Look at HL2. Look at Ico, or Baldur’s Gate. All released well before Oblivion, and they all look a hell of a lot better while requiring a fraction of the processing power.

      Half-Life 2′s graphics were quite hyped up before its release. I remember lots of talk about whether people’s computers would run it and what the requirements would be. Although, to be fair, the lion’s share of that kind of talk around then circled around Doom 3. Still, HL2 was not some gameplay-first-don’t-care-about-the-graphics game on release.

      Secondly, comparing the games you list to Oblivion is problematic. None of them have the draw distance or open-world scope that Oblivion did, so of course they will require a fraction of the processing power.

      While I personally did not love the art design of Oblivion — I preferred Morrowind’s — I will note that Oblivion was a very colorful game. HL2, while not at Gears of War-level greyness, was still much more dreary. There’s a narrative reason for that, of course, but I can easily see someone who values vibrancy in their art design preferring Oblivion’s art design to HL2′s. Again: I would not say so, but you can’t make that kind of blanket statement that HL2 looks “a hell of a lot better”.

  17. Cvnk says:

    Honestly I haven’t been caring about this game all that much (I had to force myself to finish FO3) but I must say the first screen shot in this article piqued my interest. If that isn’t just a side event (like in FO2) and I can actually go around boxing opponents to death I might just buy the game for that.

  18. c. todd [phylum sinter] says:

    It’s a difficult proposition for me, to play this game with a smile on my face.

    I look at the screenshots, notice all the clunk and creak of the old engine and wonder if it’ll play any more smoothly than Fallout 3.

    Then again, after buying Fallout 3 twice [once at the outset, then again used for the GOTY and DLC edition] and playing through it twice i think none of that may matter if Obsidian put enough time into the questing and world as a whole. Fallout 3′s characters stopped seeming so obscenely stupid looking after about 20 hours, and i imagine it could happen again.

    But why would they bother making another game with such old tech? Money grab? Screw it, i’m renting this one first.

  19. coupsan says:

    I wonder if they’ve improved the animations. I might get it if the writing is interesting.

  20. TheTingler says:

    The only thing I’m curious about is how big the world is, and how much is in it.

    Beyond that I’m really excited about it. The game I’m most looking forward to this year without a doubt.

  21. bill says:

    I’m not on the cutting edge of gaming (my laptop is manfully struggling through STALKER as we speak), but it looks pretty nice to me – in the screenshots at least.

    I’m obviously becoming terribly out of date.

    • Vinraith says:

      I like being terribly out-of-date, myself. There’s no sense getting so spoiled by shiny new graphics that you can’t enjoy older games, after all. I’ve never really understood the visual complaints about FO3, and I don’t particularly want to. I shudder to think how narrow the scope of games I could enjoy would become if that was my definition of ugly.

    • Lilliput King says:

      It’s not ugly because of the technology.

      Most of the aesthetic enhancing mods don’t increase the resolution of the textures or otherwise compromise performance. They just change stuff like the colour palette. It’s amazing how much better the game can look with no performance impact whatsoever.

      What does that tell us?

    • Auspex says:

      That modders are ingenious?

  22. pkt-zer0 says:

    What’s with people focusing on the graphics so much? I’m more interested in the mechanics, writing, and quest design. It’s seemingly going to be closer to FO1/2 on those fronts (many of the removed mechanics are making a return, for instance), which is interesting enough on its own.

  23. Ziv says:

    “It’s a lot more straight to the point than Liam Neeson’s endless, awed muttering in Fallout 3′s character creation” when fallout 3 came out people praised the ingenuity of the character creation system taking you from childhood into adulthood and now you say you hate it? Personally I liked the baby part and the G.O.A.T. test, the birthday was a bit tedious but a good presentation to the karma system. Overall it is a nice segment that is a tad too long.

  24. jon_hill987 says:

    As much as I loved FO3 I will not be getting this until they have released all the inevitable DLC and the game of the year edition with it all in.

    I don’t buy games in instalments. Especially when it makes them cost £60 (yes FO3 at release and the DLC on top cost that). DLC is just a way to put up the price of the game without anyone noticing.

    Down with this sort of thing!

    • Devenger says:

      Agreed. I bought FO3, but never bought any of the DLC, because while I enjoyed FO3 for the most part, the ending to the main quest seemed so grotesquely lazy that I wasn’t going to give them more money for the fix to said ending.

      Where possible, games should be complete on release. If that’s not possible for some reason, DLC should be free. I hate to say this, but… Valve. That is all.

    • Jad says:

      Oh good lord, this argument again. By that standard, Half-Life 1 cost over $100, because Opposing Force and Blue Shift should have been included in the original box. By that standard, Episode 1 & 2 are horrifying price-gouging DLC.

      You can finish the campaign of every single-player game Valve has ever made (HL1, HL2 & Episodes, Portal) in the time it takes to do a solid play-through of Fallout 3 (side-missions and exploring included). Does this mean Valve games are not complete on release? No, of course not. Fallout 3 was a complete game. Whether you liked the game is your problem, but it was a complete game. After the game was released, Bethesda made expansion packs, available for purchase online. Just like Valve made two expansion packs, available for purchase online, for Half-Life 2. Bethesda just made them faster, because, well, Valve is notoriously slow.

      There are lots of examples of abusive DLC out there to rage against. Fallout 3′s downloadable expansion packs are not the correct target.

    • Devenger says:

      Okay, if you prefer; FO3 was a disappointing game because, despite having numerous good qualities, it placed an unsuitable emphasis on the main quest – a main quest that varied enormously in quality (from the dazzling brilliance of the happy-American-town simulation, to the iffy elements that required navigation through D.C.’s disappointingly linear ruins). The final act of the main quest did some great stuff (Liberty Prime!), then threw an exceedingly disappointing ending that was also unavoidably the end of your character’s adventures. I get quite attached to characters and their narrative – having my character led to a dead end really upset me, and I haven’t played the game much since then as a result (if I try to continue with that character, it feels wrong, since they’ve already had the conclusion to their story…)

      So, I was very disgruntled. By the time they released the DLC to fix their shoddy finale, my desire to play the game further was completely gone – and I wasn’t going to give them money for fixing what shouldn’t have been, and in the case of that character on a narrative level, couldn’t be repaired.

      A final note: I felt HL2′s Episodes were a letdown, but I didn’t end up with them through specifically desiring them – the Orange Box was an exceptional deal just for getting TF2 (and its years of updates) and Portal. Additionally, I find the argument that more game time equals more value for money a poor one – longevity is a perk, but it’s not the sole attribute of a good game.

  25. Skusey says:

    Why has somebody scribbled “BAN THE BOMB” on both sides of a door, in exactly the same handwriting?

  26. BubbScience says:

    1. The message was thought important enough to be mentioned twice.

    2. He/she had a certain degree of OCD, necessitating the need for symmetry.

    3. The artist had previosly indulged in some illicit puffing and forgot that they had recently done one on the other side.

    4. It isn’t actually the same, it only appears to be the same.

    5. It was actually the work of two people, who having looked at the similarity between their work concluded that they must be soulmates. These two later got married and had many a tender scrogg, and did bear a child, and yea all seemed good. Alas, the bombs did still fall, and the graffiti was all for nothing (sad face) but not before they managed to successfully apply to a certain Vault 13, and there begin a legacy that many generations later would bear the oh so tasty fruit of destiny in the form of the original wanderer.

    • Devenger says:

      Or perhaps it was just one confused criminal who went on to survive for hundreds of years more, eventually to go around writing ‘PIS OFF’ in various locations in Borderlands’ Pandora (with similarly identical designs)

  27. Frankle says:

    I hope that this game won’t be as buggy as hell like Fallout 3.
    save games would be go bad. But would only crash when i went into a door to a new area.
    In one of the dlc’s where you go into the white house subway where theres loads of Ghouls, did anyone else have Ghouls that would have some kind of seizure? (I’m talking Major seizure where you honestly think they are going to explode) it was so bad that you couldn’t actually hit them as the hitboxes were just…. gone. And the others that weren’t Being S.P.E.C.I.A.L when they got hit they would fly through the roof and into outerspace. It wouldn’t leave kill cam for a while as they were still traveling in the air.
    The Super Deathclaws that would fly above and would only swoop down to attack you at the worse possible time.
    Why did they make Super mutants so weak in fallout 3? in fallout 1&2 they were something to be worried about, and why did Bethesda make all of the Ghouls ex-olympic sprinters? they should be slow as hell but damn hard to take down.
    Oh game companies, Why do you ruin the names of greatest games of old? *sigh*

  28. tomwaitsfornoman says:

    I want Chris Avellone to write all of MY dialogue.

  29. Vodka & Cookies says:

    I’m looking forward to this, it sounds like a solid Fallout game and more “Fallouty” than F3 was.

    I dont get the whining about the graphics its like PC gamers have to find fault somehow after complaining for years about the lack of any true Fallout sequels, do you want thing game to fail ???. Since when are grahics supposed to be the defining factor for an RPG ? Dragon Age wasn’t all that great visually either but was damn good fun to play, even indie RPG’s like Avernum have their fun.

    The developers of Torchlight certainly didn’t care about what Diablo 3 may look like.

  30. sfury says:

    “nu-Fallout” is an oh-so-right term, thank you Alec.

  31. Scott says:

    I would be the first in line if they made another Fallout, with the engine from 1 and 2. I really dont care about the eye candy. PC games didn’t start that way anyway, they started by making you think and handing you a story you could get immersed in. Give me story over candy any day. Save the candy for the console kids that want pretty over thought.

    • Duffin says:

      Exactly, I don’t care what it looks like so long as it is an immersive and well written game. The dialogue in Fallout 3 was some of the worst I’ve ever seen in an RPG.

  32. neofit says:

    One thing only is preventing me from pre-ordering New Vegas, and given these guys track record I think it is justified: does the game have a save anywhere feature, like the original Fallout 3 and any game worth playing, or will we have chapter saves?