Wot I Think – Fallout: New Vegas

By Quintin Smith on October 21st, 2010 at 4:36 pm.

Why won't VATS let us shoot guys in the nipples? I don't understand.

Obsidian’s pseudo-sequel to Bethesda’s Fallout 3 hits the UK tomorrow, arriving amid a raft of positive reviews. But I see you there, perched atop that blasted rock, canteen in hand, waiting for the official RPS review. That wait is over. Here’s Wot I Think of New Vegas.

There’s a distant sound that can be heard throughout your time with New Vegas. Quieter than the cheery 1930s pop hits that warble from your radio, quieter even than the chirps of night-time insects, or the long gasps of wind blowing across the wasteland. It is the sound of Obsidian phoning this game in. I’m talking long distance, reversed charges, not-giving-a-fuck.

Now, if it’s purely size you care about, New Vegas has you covered. From the moment your character (a professional courier who gets attacked and left for dead in the intro movie) wakes up in a backwater town, you’re introduced to a sprawling wasteland even bigger than that of Fallout 3. There are dozens of settlements to find. There are (shh!) secrets to stumble across. There are four and a half shitloads of different weapons. There is a heaving mass of character perks, just waiting to be unlocked as you progress through the game’s wide array of quests.

But something Bethesda were very aware of when they turned Fallout into a first-person game is that the wasteland is potentially quite a boring setting for the player to be set free in. I mean, you think wasteland, you think deserts, charred ruins and grumpy survivors wearing faded, drab clothes.

So, Bethesda went to great lengths to infuse their D.C. wasteland with colour. It was populated by kooky, occasionally even cartoonish characters- it’s no accident that super mutants and the Brotherhood of Steel featured so prominently. Then you had the independant towns, which were all built in or around visually striking setpieces, and Bethesda even built a labyrinth out of the subway system. Whatever direction you walked in Fallout 3, you felt confident you’d find something interesting.

Whatever direction you walk in New Vegas, you might find something interesting, but it’s much more likely you’ll find something pretty uninteresting, like an empty shack or an NCR army outpost where you’ll hear two different potato-faced soldiers voiced by two different actors say the same line of dialogue about the Mojave being hot. There’s also a slim chance you’ll find nothing at all but a few irradiated creatures, since the game has entire acres of barren scrub and desert that you absolutely would not see in Fallout 3. In my whole time with New Vegas, I found nothing as architecturally entertaining as Megaton, and nothing as eerie or inventive as Little Lamplight. Hiking long distances felt like a chore.

Maybe you’re reading this and thinking that a more bleak and empty and therefore a more “realistic” vision of the wasteland would suit you just fine. Trouble is, it’s more than that. It can be hard to tell the difference between a lack of content and an authentically barren wasteland, but sometimes New Vegas is so impressively bold in its laziness that the distinction is clear.

Look, here’s a shot of the incredible NCR sharecropper farms, the “pride” of the state! One of the guards working here told me that they have to keep the place well-defended, just so every wastelander walking past doesn’t come in and stuff themselves. This isn’t actually a joke. It’s just a disconnect between the scriptwriter and the whoever designs the actual areas.

And here’s a bustling casino floor in crazy New Vegas!

I took those screenshots from quite far back to get a sense of space, but they’re not staged. Almost all of New Vegas simply has a quiet minimalism to it, which is probably for the best since there’s a pretty awful bug with Windows 64 bit that dropkicks your framerate if you’re standing close to several people at the same time.

More frustrating are the absences where you know there’s meant to be an actual feature, but it was evidently forgotten or abandoned somewhere along the brief road to getting this game on the shelves. I had a long conversation with a bartender about the etiquette for hiring one of her prostitutes, before discovering after three increasingly confused laps of the bar that there were no prostitutes in the building. Later, I encountered a man tied to a pole, begging to be cut down, but there was no way to do so. And in one awesomely surreal instance, I had a chat with a character about their impressive snowglobe collection when there wasn’t a snowglobe in sight.

This isn’t another Vampire: Bloodlines, where an ambitious game’s been left unfinished, because there is no ambition here. Imagine for a second that the above problems didn’t come about because of a lack of time, but because of carelessness, and apply that carelessness to the entire game- most importantly, to the quest design and the dialogue. Now you’re getting close to imagining New Vegas.

God, the dialogue in this game. I think there were several points where I was so bored my brain began rotating in my head like food in a microwave. Whatever voice acting agency or methadone rehabilitation clinic Bethesda used to voice the populace of Oblivion and Fallout 3 is back, and while I didn’t particularly like the writing in Fallout 3 either, the characters in that game were often interesting or disturbed enough that you were curious about what they had to say.

With an unforgivably small number of exceptions (and one character who does actually approach the cast of Bloodlines in his likeability), the characters in New Vegas are all tedious constructs, voiced by people who sound like they’re boring in real life, wandering around in the Oblivion engine, which as we all know is about as charismatic as a slow-motion seizure. The low point for me was probably these guys:

Caesar’s Legion are New Vegas’ big addition to the Fallout lore. They’re a huge, warlike tribe that attempt to embody the characteristics of a Roman legion, meaning leather tunics, little skirts and ferocious disciple- drugs, and as far as I can tell, jokes, are banned. There is just nothing interesting about them, except for the fact that they all pronounce Caesar “Kai-zar”, a mystery I never got to the bottom of.

New Vegas’ saving grace is really just the framework it fails to employ particularly well. While I won’t be returning to New Vegas after this review, I did have a fair amount of fun doing all the old Fallouty things- exploring the wasteland, looting bodies, solving problems with my skills instead of violence and, when I didn’t have the skills, blowing apart head after tender head with my favourite shotgun.

It’s just that this is absolutely not the classic that Fallout 1 and 2 unquestionably were, and it’s also not the bold, bright reinvention that Fallout 3 was. It’s just… here, offering more Fallout. Do you want some more Fallout? If so, New Vegas can provide, so long as you don’t mind your every hour with it being laced with some small amount of disappointment. That is, unless you haven’t played a Fallout game before, but in that case you’re better off with the Game of the Year edition of Fallout 3.

I want to finish by talking about the new Hardcore mode, because that’s what lured me into doing this Wot I Think in the first place. Hardcore mode means playing a version of New Vegas where you have to eat, drink and sleep, where ammo takes up weight allowance in your inventory, and where crippled limbs can only be healed by a doctor or with a one-shot Doctor’s Bag item.

In execution, Hardcore mode isn’t hardcore. At all. Playing as a big ol’ science nerd with no survival skill, no barter skill, average endurance and meagre strength, I breezed through all of the obstacles of Hardcore mode without having to think about them.

Just about every building in the game has a working sink somewhere, so water isn’t an issue, and the piñata-like presence of food in the bins and cupboards of New Vegas’ “wasteland” is bolstered by the fruit you find growing naturally everywhere you go. The most you ever end up thinking about Hardcore mode is when some landmine or mutant with a club breaks your leg out in the middle of nowhere, and there’s nothing for it but to fast travel back to a town and go limping the rest of the way to a doctor.

The way it sounded in previews, Hardcore mode was going to provide New Vegas with an additional, survivalist dimension. Instead, it’s just a handful of weak extra rules that have little impact on the rest of the game. Hardcore mode is, at least, ripe for a modder to come along and fix up, which I suppose describes a lot of New Vegas.

What a bummer I am. Look, let me make it all better- here’s a post onSavyGamer about how you can buy Fallout: New Vegas and Fallout 3: Game Of The Year Edition for £30. At that price, I’d say this game is probably worth it.

, , , .

800 Comments »

  1. Huggster says:

    I am about 18 hrs in (steam tells me) and having a blast.
    Yes, it is more sparse than Fo3. Does it feel like obsidian left things unfinished in these sparse areas? First I thought yes, now I think not. You only really get items *in places they should be*, and settlements *in places they should be*.
    Fo3 was literally swarming with bad guys, locations, items – you could not move without finding a new location. Therefore it devalued the experience of finding them.
    I dunno. This game feels a lot more grown up. The world makes more sense. There are actual reasons for characters and where they are going / what they are doing.
    The guns are more staggered (at least for me as I am taking my time) so I am making more use of pistols etc.
    It makes you question most of the stuff you kill, as in many cases you can choose not too if you are careful. I wont spoil anything.
    Although distances are compressed in open world games, it has done its best to put some decent walking time between the settlements – and the townsfolk comment on the other places. (I spotted a fire …. etc.)
    no crashes, though some bad guys in walls a few times (geckos and whatnot).
    so, pretty damn fun, solid RPG.

  2. Wulf says:

    Also, another note for the mod fans out there… it looks like Obsidian hired Oscuro (yes, he of overhaul fame) to actually work on New Vegas with them, this is why a lot of his efforts can be seen in the game, and a lot of the things you’d normally have to mod Oblivion or Fallout 3 for are actually already catered for in New Vegas. A lot of people have been seeing this, that there’s no need to create mod X, Y, or Z because it’s actually in the game. So if you were a fan of Gamebryo mods, especially Oscuro’s stuff, then you’ll be happy to know this, I suspect.

    Source: http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Jorge_Salgado

  3. jennix says:

    Completely disagree this sounds forced just to cause controversy. I almost always agree with the rps reviews but this time it just seems so forced and labored and you compare NV to fo3 and say it doesn’t come out favorably? So many people disagree and hopefully by the volume of comments you will learn to do a proper review instead of just trying to get hits for your website.

    Never visting rps again, have fun cashing your check from whoever gave it to you for slandering the game.

    • Dance on Numbers says:

      As much as I agree with is assessment of the review, don’t leave RPS just because of one asshat review. Really where else are you gong to go for a fair review, IGN Gamespot? The only site that compares favorably is Giantbomb, and they are a bit too console oriented for my tastes. Yeah, it sucks that one of the reviewers showed themselves to be incompetent, but the site itself is still pretty good.

    • panther says:

      We allow different opinions here at RPS. Don’t let the door hit your ass.

  4. Out Reach says:

    I’ve Rushed through the 3 main storyline paths, and I’m currently on a 4th play-through, taking my time to explore the wider wasteland. I’ve so far experienced the sum total of 1 bug in some 40 hours of play, which was mostly caused by me messing around with the console.

    When I read this review just before release I felt New Vegas might be a let down. However everything Quinns said has proved to be wrong.

    The idea that there are no places like little lamplight or Oasis from Fallout 3 in New Vegas is truly laughable. 1 word – Jacobstown. The trip there has the same magical properties of discovering Oasis, and its population is just as interesting as that of little lamplight.

    Next take the farm for example. I went there and found there are at least 5 times the visible crops just out of shot. Meanwhile the red huts with white tarpaulin roofs in the background? They’re about 20 of them and each is being used as a hot house to grow more food.

    The stretch of empty desert? If you turn around Helios 1 a huge and magnificent set piece with a wonderful quest, can’t be more then 1ft away from where the screen-shot was taken.

    Finally the empty casino? that area of the casino is being occupied by the casino boss and a collection of heavy goons with guns at the far end. It’s a staged scene that can end in a shootout. Clearing the area of civilians seems like a good idea if theres a shootout coming.

    The only thing in this review is a collection of carefully staged screenshots, and a quick line to make them all seem terrible. New Vegas is a great game.

  5. Irondog says:

    Well… I’d be a lot farther in the game if I didn’t get pissed and walk away every time the thing freezes on me. Seems to happen every time I need another beer so its not all bad. Still, come on guys. Your testers have the two dozens consoles that it DIDN’T crash on??? Aside from that I want to see another difficulty mode, “The Road”. Where there is almost nothing to be found in structures, the water is filled with crap and most everyone wants to eat you. Oh, and your companion is some little kid with no perks or combat abilities. If you can make him sound like the feral brat from Six String Samurai all the better. The game really isn’t hardcore enough, why stop at eating and drinking? Why not go whole hog and have clips to reload and unsafe ammo? I don’t know, I didn’t give a crap about this game until I heard about the hardcore mode and so far its no challenge at all. Its not like I care if my avatar gets his nosh on from dog meat and truly disgusting toilet bowls rather than a medium rare steak and a bottle of Fiji water. Lets see it get REALLY hardcore, I want to really think about eating people as a last resort. Now where did that soccer team crash?

    • Wulf says:

      Yep, the console versions of New Vegas do freeze a lot, but I suspect that’ll be patched eventually. The thing is though is that it’s a Gamebryo thing, not a New Vegas thing. Oblivion and Fallout 3 on the consoles were also notorious for freezing. In fact, Fallout 3 had one bug where it became impossible to complete the main campaign, I remember this because my roomie was playing it on the 360 at the time, and no matter how he tried to approach the memorial, the game would lock up. A patch came out for that about a week or two later, but it was one of the worst freezing bugs in any game, ever. And he had plenty of random freeze-ups too, he couldn’t play more than a few hours without FO3 freezing, which I chuckled and felt amused by because at the very least my PC version of Fallout 3 wasn’t so freeze-happy.

      That New Vegas, built on the same engine, is a bit freeze-happy in its initial release does not surprise me in the least. I would’ve been more surprised if they’d somehow jury-rigged the Gamebryo engine to not freeze under mysterious circumstances. But that’s just it, the Gamebryo engine itself is a bit of a hackjob, very jury-rigged, and any modder worth their salt will tell you this, just ask any of those who’ve worked on bigger mods, it’s very, VERY hackish. The problem with hackish engines like Gamebryo is that you’re going to have random, bizarre hiccups, like freezing. These will be discovered and patched out eventually, but it’s pretty much par the course for anything that uses Gamebryo.

  6. mrmud says:

    The more I play this game the more Quinns seem either insane or a flat out liar. Pretty much everything every negative thing he brings up have turned out to not only be not negative, but a great feature (bugs, of which i have seen few, obviously not included).

    If it was all down to subjective issues that would be problematic (in that I know I cant trust Quinns oppinions) but still understandable. The really worrysome parts is where he is objectively wrong, such as the staged screenshots and the comments about how hardcore mode has no inpact at all.

    • Wulf says:

      I think I can explain the hardcore mode thing at least. Going by the tone of the review, he was undoubtedly playing it on easy, probably to plow through the game at such a speed that he’d be able to consider that he’d seen enough to be qualified to review it, I’ve heard that reviewers do do this, some have openly admitted as such, but you can’t base the difficulty of the game on that, you have to crank it back up occasionally to find out what things are really like.

      Playing the game on a harder difficulty, the hardcore mode has more teeth, and I’ve had to carry around a supply of food and drink to deal with it, I’ve been madly scavenging Wasteland Survival Guides just to get my skill up so I can cook all the bloody meat I’ve been finding, because that means that I don’t have to keep buying food.

      But yeah, the staged screenshots really bugged me, that’s one thing that people keep dodging when it’s been said that I’m apparently being a poisonous liar myself. The thing is though is that there’s much in the review that’s highly wrong, objectively wrong even, and that’s what grates. There’s just no way he could’ve been so unobservant. Complaining about a lack of hookers in a bar, when talking to the NPC who gives the quest to find them, for example? That either shows that Quinns has a really short attention span, or that he was purposefully trying to pan this game. The screenshots also give this impression too.

      What I don’t get is why.

      :/

    • Huggster says:

      I think the lack of NPC in some locations is a limitation of the engine – even Oblivion had that issue in the large battles and town. If its an engine limitation you cannot really blame the developers.

      Anyway I hardly noticed, just got to the strip and it seems fine to me. I really do not see it as an issue. I have just found there are about 7 ways of approaching a problem I just got to. That is pretty goddam impressive. Plus the plot just spider-webbed on me in a big way.

      Perhaps Quinns and Jim do not like RPGs. Who knows. Its a very, very good RPG so far. On the strength of this I will install my copy of Alpha Protocol once I have done a play-through..

  7. TheTourist314 says:

    Man, everyone’s going up in arms about this something pretty serious! At only having played for 2 hours or so, I’m inclined to agree with the reviewer so far in that it feels like a lot of detail was neglected. Thus far, it’s been boring to walk around rather than “What weird thing will I find next?”. In Fallout 3, my favorite thing was to explore every single nook and cranny, as it better enveloped a sense of survival to me rather than this weird hodgepodge of an environment. But I shall have to play more and see, it might get better. Hell, it may even suck more, but I still payed for it and there’s nothing left I can do but play it and see.

    • Wulf says:

      Every time I see this complaint, I’m baffled by it. Do gamers never go outdoors? There’s usually open space between any town or settlement, and often even that land can be interesting to look at in its own right, it’s nice to have space in between things, interesting looking space, but space nonetheless. That’s what New Vegas has. It’s actually got more content than Fallout 3 overall (and it certainly excels in the compelling sidequest department), but it’s on a far, far bigger map, more spaced out, and thus more real. You actually have to wander more than two pixels to ‘find’ something.

      The thing is, there was no exploration in Fallout 3, the ‘exploration’ was really non-existent. The reason for this is because Fallout 3 was a broom closet, ‘exploring’ in Fallout 3 is the same as looking around in a broom closet, and ‘finding’ something is the same as spotting and picking up a broom. There were hardly any revelations, and you could see pretty much all the content in the game from any averagely high look-out point, which detailed just how tiny and cramped the world was. Yes, you actually have to walk a little bit to discover things in New Vegas, but I don’t see how that’s a bad thing at all. Not in the least.

    • Huggster says:

      I prefer a realistic world to a cartoon world in my RPGs.
      Suspension of disbelief and all that. You know, small things like that.
      I would rather have a town PROSPERING ON NON RADIOACTIVE WATER than a TOWN BUILT ON A NUKE.

      My first walk to Vegas yesterday was great – getting more and more built up. After the wasteland it was quite the contrast.

      I take that over the DC ruins any day.

  8. Marat Sar says:

    Whoah! This is exactly the kind of review I was waiting for when F3 rolled out – but not New Vegas! I am in complete disagreement with this. And I’ve even heard from a friend who gave up playing it because of this review!

    One really, really should pay no heed to this review. Chris Avellone has done an amazing job, it’s almost a dialogue with the fans for christ’ sake! The real long time hardcore Fallout fans.

  9. Truth Stater says:

    being playing this a lot lately, was impressed. And I hated fallout 3.

    it’s just an interesting, believable world with lots of interesting stuff to do. Some boring sidequests are present though.

    Much much better than fallout 2 and 3 in my opinion.

  10. Me says:

    Wow, the reviewer is a completely ignorant excuse of a human being. The original pronunciation of Caesar is actually (Kai-sar.) Do some research b4 you take the time to belch out a review of a highly applauded game and just show your ignorance.

  11. Mahogany Benz says:

    Reviewer is a troll. Troll’s are allowed to have blogs, it seems.

  12. cauldron says:

    French CanardPC gave a 10/10 to New Vegas. The only other game I think of to have a 10 was Half Life 2 in 2004.

    Fallout 3 had only a 5.

    • panther says:

      What’s your point? Another reviewer liked the game more then Quinns? Cool, relevant story.

    • Wulf says:

      His point was that sources that are usually critical about games have praised New Vegas, whereas sources that are usually “YES! 8D AAA, WHEEEEE! AAA IS ALL A GAME NEEDS TO BE GOOD!” have been more harsh on New Vegas than is necessary. It’s a pretty typical trend. Populism ftw, I suppose.

  13. Wulf says:

    I’m still loving this game, and anyone who doesn’t is objectively a fool, a bloody fool, I say.

    The characters are probably the most affecting I’ve encountered in a game in a long time. Raul has probably become my favourite character, I understood and related to him to a degree, he’s old, really old, and he’s had all of his confidence beaten out of him by the world, with one bad thing happening after another. With someone that completely defeated, it was incredible to restore them to pride, and more, to make a hero out of him. One that would be remembered as a legend for generations to come.

    Just take a look at this.

    It was also nice to discover that Rex isn’t as much of a tragic character as I thought he was. In fact, if you pick the right brain to transplant into him, you save two lives. And saving the lives of dogs is something that makes me eminently happy. See, Rex is a cybernetic dog, and when you find him, his brain has pretty much rotted away, almost. His personality and memories are being held in hardware backups, and he needs a new brain in order to function. Without that, he will die eventually (there’s even an ending for that).

    So with Rex, it’s just a matter of finding the right brain, a brain which he can integrate into, it’s a matter of finding a nice dog, not the dog that’ll give Rex the best stats, you have to be selfless with this. The best future for him can be had by picking the kindest, most faithful dog. In the ending then, he integrates with that personality, the two becoming one. The interesting thing is that the aforementioned kind, faithful dog is about to die anyway when you find them, so… you get to save two lives, and Rex gets a happily ever after. For me, that was some brilliant writing. It can go wrong though if you pick the wrong brain, very wrong.

    This is something that’s interesting for me about New Vegas, what will benefit you the most in the story and what will give you the best ending are often mutually exclusive, for example, the brains with the best stats for Rex actually give you worse endings, in the case of Lily Bowen, the Nightkin, depending on how much of her medicene she takes (full doses, half doses, or not at all), she can go completely psychotic in the end or finally find happiness, but it can also positively/negatively affect her stats. It’s interesting the way they handled this.

    What this means is that if you’re a selfless person who thinks of the character more than their stats (like me), then you’ll naturally get the best ending. But if you think of only the stats, and you’re a selfish git, then the ending will punish you, over and over, with bad things happening. (Is this what happened to Quinns, and why he’s so sour?) Basically, the ending is intriguing, it’s home truths about you as a person. The less greedy you are, the better things turn out for everyone in New Vegas. And the more greedy you are? Well… things can go very bad.

    You can literally make the Mojave go to hell, either wittingly or unwittingly.

    And what you do matters so bloody much, it’s amazing. And when you do everything right (like I did, bar one instance, which I had to go back and fix), then the ending is such a crescendo in general that you can’t help but feel bloody grand about the game you played. At the end, it makes you feel like every second you put into this game was worthwhile. The only way you could dislike this game is if you were a bit of a soulless monster, if you were greedy and only thought of yourself, and then you were represented with home truths about this fact in the ending.

    In an era where games tend to pull so many punched to make negative impacts as light as possible, New Vegas does not, and I respect it for that. It means that when you get things right, it all matters so, so much more.

    If you care about intelligent games, then you owe it to yourself to play this one.

    I simply cannot stress how much.

    I suppose it depends on whom you’d rather believe, but from where I sit, I’ve never seen anyone so objectively wrong (not just subjectively, but objectively), so purposefully, intentionally wrong about a game as Quinns is here. It’s almost a crime.

    • Premium User Badge

      jaheira says:

      Wulf:
      “Intentionally wrong”
      So …. what are you suggesting exactly? That Mr. Quinns played this game, decided it was great, then slammed it in his review … why? Your passion does you credit, but where’s the logic?

    • Wulf says:

      Should I be saying something now?

      Nope, didn’t think so. I mean, it’s just too obvious. Try harder.

  14. noodlecake says:

    I’m currently loving this game. I totally disagree with the article. I’m actually enjoying it more than Fallout 3, I think. Everyone’s entitled to their own opinions though. I think some of the responses to this article have been a bit extreme. I can’t stand that really generic FPS for the xbox with all the huge gravel voiced american characters completely devoid of personality. Can’t remember what it’s called but it’s heralded as one of the best console fps games ever. Set on an old mining planet i think.

    *looks it up*

    GEARS OF WAR!!! Jesus Christ if there was ever a competition for unimaginative art and character direction… I was playing it for the awesome mechanics but the lame atmosphere damn near melted my face off it was so dull…

  15. TCM says:

    Let me be honest: I have been more scared off New Vegas by the crazy fans than Quinn’s rather harmless WiT.

    Any fanbase that fanatical and ignorant is compensating for something, and it’s usually their vague feeling of disappointment. They are forcing themselves to enjoy the game, and attack any who are threats to that fantasy. I have yet to find any exceptions.

    (Prediction: First response attacks me and tells me to play the game before passing judgment, when I have not passed any judgment at all.)

    • The Innocent says:

      You tool! Play the game before passing judgment!

    • TCM says:

      I wanted to be psychic, not garner a jocular response! Curses!

    • Duffin says:

      I’m not so sure that your theory holds for that many people. Alot of people here hated Fallout 3 but liked NV, if they were just nutjob fanboys wouldn’t they love Fallout 3?

    • Nick says:

      or maybe it’s good.

    • TCM says:

      I never said it wasn’t good, I said the fanboys scared me off based on past experience.

    • Premium User Badge

      jaheira says:

      @TCM
      “I have been more scared off New Vegas by the crazy fans than Quinn’s rather harmless WiT.”
      Yeah, me too. Methinks the fanboy doth protest too much. I’m leaving this till it’s way cheaper.

    • Wulf says:

      Heh, Duffin makes a good point. I was largely meh about Fallout 3, it wasn’t as bad as I thought it would be, but it did shit all to inspire me in the way that New Vegas has (see below).

      As for this though… trololololololololololol~ ad nauseum, seriously. You don’t seriously post that you’ve been scared off from a game by fanboys unless you’re trying to rile fanboys for drama or unless you’re touched in the head, to be frank. I don’t think that TCM is touched in the head, so I’m just going to outright call it trolling to create drama, but I’m not biting this time. :p

      If you were actually interested in games at all, you really wouldn’t give a damn what anyone had to say to that level, you’d simply take all the opinions, weigh up the average medium opnion, watch some videos to see whether it interests you, and then decide to buy it or not. You certainly wouldn’t run over to a comments thread to say that oh, you were thinking of buying it but the passionate words of some fanboys left you clinging to your bedtime buddy.

      Honestly.

  16. panther says:

    foaming fan boys are my favourite.

    +1 for not holding back

  17. NotSoSavvy says:

    Since pretty much every other issue I have with the review was covered more or less in the first comment I figured I’d just add this in right now: The reason that the Legion pronounce ‘Caesar’ as ‘Kaisar’ is because that’s how the Romans would have pronounced it. One of the defining characteristics of pronunciation in proper Latin are the hard ‘c’. That’s why the German and Russian words for Emperor (Kaiser and Czar, both derived from Caesar) both have similar pronunciation.

    And there’s your knowledge is power

  18. ed says:

    Having now completed the game (well, one approach to completing it anyway, I still have more companions to recruit and foes to take down in my next play-through) I can say without hesitation that I loved it. The writing is so vastly superior to that in Fallout 3 that I almost can’t believe Quintin and I played the same game. The game still has plenty of issues and rough edges, but pretty much everything that is any different from Fallout 3 is a significant improvement. It’s been a long time since I played a game that made me think so seriously about the choices I had to make, or made those choices have such impact on the game world. I had a great time and am already keen for another play-through to see how differently I can relate to the world, and how much I missed the first time.

    • Wulf says:

      Yep, and it was such a wonderful setting too.

      They really didn’t pull any punches, where else will you find an old veteran sharing his tales about the horrors of his fights with a group of psychopaths who’re disturbed enough to… well, there’s this one cook, he’s an apparently brilliant cook, but he rapes whatever he cooks just before he cooks it, every time. He’s not particular about what he rapes-then-cooks, either. And then there’s the Nelphi, who likes to give golfing tips whilst beating a person around the head with a 9 iron, criticising a person’s ‘swing’ whilst beating their brains out.

      I mean, it’s wonderful material and it adds so much to the world. It’s fucked up, yes, it’s oh so fucked up, but can you remember the last time a game was actually fucked up, rather than just gorey? And there’s a hell of a lot of really disturbing things in New Vegas, it’s one of the reasons I love it. It’s a very good analogy of human psychology, through and through, and it’s more real because of that.

      That it’s fucked up is what pleases me about it, it’s intelligent, and true to its roots in that respect. It would probably leave most gamers scratching their head and wondering what on earth is going on, since there are so many layers to that world, to the factions, to the people, and all of your consequences and how it can make you think and feel. Even things like telling Lily how much medicine to take have such brilliant results, even the happiest ending for Lily is tinged with a strange sadness, and I was left wishing I could’ve helped her more, WANTING to help her more.

      How often does that happen? It’s fucked up, but at the same time, it makes you care, it makes you want to help, it draws you in, and it’s so incredibly compelling… and for a person like me, it makes me want to try very, very hard to fix that world. And you can get close, you can get really close, but still, there are some elements that still have a certain sadness to them, no matter how hard you try. It’s tragic, but there’s a lot of hope in those wastes.

      And how you could slam a game that could make someone write what I just wrote is beyond me.

  19. thermo says:

    This reminds me why sites like IGN and GameSpot are so successful. Agree with the mainstream, everytime, or else. Sad, really.

    • Wulf says:

      Saying anything New Vegas is mainstream is like saying that Amon Tobin is mainstream, really. The ‘mainstream’ reviews were actually quite conservative, picking up on a lot of bugs and being negative about them, which still amazes me considering that despite a number of playthroughs of New Vegas, I’ve had less bugs every time than I did in one playthrough of Fallout 3 (which probably got awarded 100% and its equivalent in numerous mainstream outlets).

      The problem with this review though mainly is that it’s objectively wrong, there are lies there, and staged screenshots. The farms? Staged (there’s so much more just outside of the frame of the screenshot). The complaints about the empty bar? Staged (there’s a bloody quest to find employees for it). And a number of other complaints are misinformation/being uninformed, outright idiocy, or more staging. It’s that this review wants to paint it as a bad game, and isn’t afraid to be sensationalist to do it. I’m all for picking up on a game’s real flaws. But if a reviewer needs to invent flaws in order to make a game look bad, then you need to start asking questions.

      If you think that ISN’T a good time to start asking questions, then I’m going to throw your sheep insult right back at you.

  20. Dramatika says:

    Well. This is completely opposite of every impression I’ve gotten upon putting 50 hours into this game. You really think Fallout 3 had a more interesting world? Ugh. Each is entitled to their own opinion, but at least I now know that I should never trust a review from this site to reflect anything I believe about what constitutes a good game.

  21. EBass says:

    Arriving late on this one, but Quin is totally wrong. So badly so. I wasn’t really looking forward to this because frankly, I was sick and tired of Obsidian ballsing things up but NV has totally redeemed them. I liked Fallout 3, it could have been a total disaster but it was alright despite some questionable elements, NV however is the game FO3 should have been. All the reasons have been pretty much covered by everyone already.

  22. Trajectory says:

    What’s baffling me isn’t the review. It’s the hordes of drones disagreeing with it, and proceeding to pat themselves on the back afterward at having such impeccable bravado at mobbing together to protest.

    Quinn, on every point he makes, is utterly spot on. Drab landscapes, insipid dialogue, atrocious bugs, and uninspired art direction come together to make a game so massively inferior to the original, it made me wince. And I loved the original Fallout series.

    Then again, millions of people seem to enjoy American Idol and Jersey Shore. I suppose this lapse in taste shouldn’t come as a surprise. Carry on.

    • Crazy Horse says:

      This sort of review is why I used to enjoy this site. The article might be a tad dismissive and rushed but it is no less so than many recent RPS articles on other games — the difference being that these scathing and one-sided articles are only written on games that 90% of RPS readers will dislike anyway.

      Much of this review is exactly what I felt after recently playing New Vegas. The utterly incompetent voice acting is what ultimately killed this game for me. I made it as far as getting to New Vegas proper where I was underwhelmed by the empty silliness that was what could so easily have been a grand and interesting setting.

      It seems most players succeeded where I failed in finding something likable and immersive about this gameworld. Good for them.

  23. bhlaab says:

    It’s two years later and this review still stinks