[WIP] New Vegas Bounties III

[EpicXTitanProductions]

What if someguy was hired by BGS? 10/10 would not be upset. I hope this is the case.

Edited June 18, 2015 by EpicXTitanProductions

[ailestrike2331]

 

 

 

Hopefully one of the first mod created is the Silenced Protagonist, xD.

Here is hoping as well. I don't want to play a Mass Effect clone, I want to play a Fallout game. WTF was Bethsheda thinking?

 

they should've sticked to distribution and left developement to obsidian.

 

That would have not pleased the barking seals who are raving for this game and who Beth is making and marketing this game for. Most of them hate NV, saying it was too boring, hard or that it forced them to think when they just wanted to do was be a badass and shot things in their badass armor, nor did they like that your actions had consequences. They want immersion but no consequences for their Fallout game.

 

 

I'm going to throw my two cents in on this topic of conversation because...why not.

I tend to see quite often that New Vegas is the better game between itself and 3 -- and it is in terms of it adding things that were missing or just made the game better --, but it is the more boring game of the two, mostly because it doesn't feel like a post-apoc game at times.

I'll give an example: When I first left Vault 101 in 3, it was...awe-inspiring to say the very least. I looked and felt like it was truly post-apocalyptic. The people in the multiple settlements were actually trying to survive.

When I left Doc Mitchell's house, I just stared at the town for a moment, shrugged my shoulders, and went to speak with the robot wandering past. It felt more like an old western than post apocalyptic. It didn't so much feel like the people were trying to survive as they were waiting for the NCR to come by and deal with the problem.

 

Obsidian did good in the way of characters and story, especially when it comes to your companions, though I'd argue that the main story of New Vegas is worse than 3. But Bethesda knows how to make a world and that is what I've seen so far from everything I've seen of Fo4.

[anduril100500]

 

 

 

 

Hopefully one of the first mod created is the Silenced Protagonist, xD.

Here is hoping as well. I don't want to play a Mass Effect clone, I want to play a Fallout game. WTF was Bethsheda thinking?

 

they should've sticked to distribution and left developement to obsidian.

 

That would have not pleased the barking seals who are raving for this game and who Beth is making and marketing this game for. Most of them hate NV, saying it was too boring, hard or that it forced them to think when they just wanted to do was be a badass and shot things in their badass armor, nor did they like that your actions had consequences. They want immersion but no consequences for their Fallout game.

 

 

I'm going to throw my two cents in on this topic of conversation because...why not.

I tend to see quite often that New Vegas is the better game between itself and 3 -- and it is in terms of it adding things that were missing or just made the game better --, but it is the more boring game of the two, mostly because it doesn't feel like a post-apoc game at times.

I'll give an example: When I first left Vault 101 in 3, it was...awe-inspiring to say the very least. I looked and felt like it was truly post-apocalyptic. The people in the multiple settlements were actually trying to survive.

When I left Doc Mitchell's house, I just stared at the town for a moment, shrugged my shoulders, and went to speak with the robot wandering past. It felt more like an old western than post apocalyptic. It didn't so much feel like the people were trying to survive as they were waiting for the NCR to come by and deal with the problem.

 

Obsidian did good in the way of characters and story, especially when it comes to your companions, though I'd argue that the main story of New Vegas is worse than 3. But Bethesda knows how to make a world and that is what I've seen so far from everything I've seen of Fo4.

 

well, what do you want? it's been two centuries since the bombs fell, people rebuild and go on. post-apocalyptic world of F3 just never made any sense, it felt like the apocalypse happened 200 monthes ago, not years. like most of enclave's personel and material resources never been destroyed, and people who are too young to even know anything about pre-war world can't get over it's destruction. F3 was not a post-apocalyptic world, it was a picture of it with absolutly boring story with cardboard cutouts of stereotypes instead of characters, retarded black-and-white moral and linear quests that don't affect endig in any way at all. at least vegas has more depth and logic, more variability and replay value

Edited June 18, 2015 by anduril100500

[anduril100500]

It will come when it comes if we can wait for fallout 4 we can wait to play this mod.

you mean NVB III will come out seven f*ckn years later?

[RangerBoo]

 

 

 

 

 

Hopefully one of the first mod created is the Silenced Protagonist, xD.

Here is hoping as well. I don't want to play a Mass Effect clone, I want to play a Fallout game. WTF was Bethsheda thinking?

 

they should've sticked to distribution and left developement to obsidian.

 

That would have not pleased the barking seals who are raving for this game and who Beth is making and marketing this game for. Most of them hate NV, saying it was too boring, hard or that it forced them to think when they just wanted to do was be a badass and shot things in their badass armor, nor did they like that your actions had consequences. They want immersion but no consequences for their Fallout game.

 

 

I'm going to throw my two cents in on this topic of conversation because...why not.

I tend to see quite often that New Vegas is the better game between itself and 3 -- and it is in terms of it adding things that were missing or just made the game better --, but it is the more boring game of the two, mostly because it doesn't feel like a post-apoc game at times.

I'll give an example: When I first left Vault 101 in 3, it was...awe-inspiring to say the very least. I looked and felt like it was truly post-apocalyptic. The people in the multiple settlements were actually trying to survive.

When I left Doc Mitchell's house, I just stared at the town for a moment, shrugged my shoulders, and went to speak with the robot wandering past. It felt more like an old western than post apocalyptic. It didn't so much feel like the people were trying to survive as they were waiting for the NCR to come by and deal with the problem.

 

Obsidian did good in the way of characters and story, especially when it comes to your companions, though I'd argue that the main story of New Vegas is worse than 3. But Bethesda knows how to make a world and that is what I've seen so far from everything I've seen of Fo4.

 

well, what do you want? it's been two centuries since the bombs fell, people rebuild and go on. post-apocalyptic world of F3 just never made any sense, it felt like the apocalypse happened 200 monthes ago, not years. like most of enclave's personel and material resources never been destroyed, and people who are too young to even know anything about pre-war world can't get over it's destruction. F3 was not a post-apocalyptic world, it was a picture of it with absolutly boring story with cardboard cutouts of stereotypes instead of characters, retarded black-and-white moral and linear quests that don't affect endig in any way at all. at least vegas has more depth and logic, more variability and replay value

 

I agree. While I had fun with 3 it was dumb fun. It was dumb but at lest fun. The problem that I haven seen with 4 is that Beth wants to market to the Minecraft and Mass Effect crowd. Nothing wrong with branching out but during the E3 presentation the lines started to blur with how much 4 was starting to look like and feel like Mass Effect, specifically the dialogue wheel and voiced protagonist. However, since those games were popular with casual gamers and made a lot of money every RPG must be like Mass Effect now. It also doesn't help that Beth has the same writer from 3 writing the story for Fallout 4. Suffice to say, I won't be buying Fallout 4 in the near future.

Edited June 18, 2015 by RangerBoo

[EpicXTitanProductions]

You all whine too much. "Oh someguy is taking too long. Oh bethesda sucks at making games even though they all receive game of the year. Oh whine.. Oh people don't like consequences which is why they liked Fallout 3 better." Can you name one consequence in Fallout New Vegas? One? I've played it extensively, yes. "Oh bethesda is marketing it for Minecraft because they added settlement building, a feature that millions of true fans have requested for years." No matter what someone does, you guys will always find a way to complain about something. Tell me, did the creator of wasteland defense market that mod for Minecraft players, or Fallout fans? Or what about RTS? Was that marketed for Minecraft?

 

All in all, I will enjoy Fallout 4 extensively, and when someguy2000 releases NVB3, I will enjoy that too. I'll be happy to know that you guys wasted so much time waiting for something because it took too long, has settlement building, or has a voiced character. I hear Call of Duty takes a year to make and no settlement building. Maybe you could try that?

 

Honestly I love Fallout New Vegas and Fallout 3. There are things both games do better than the other, but to say that "oh bethesda sucks at making games because the world wasn't as rebuilt" or "oh bethesda games don't have consequences" is ridiculous. You do remember the nuclear bomb in Megaton, right? The one that you could detonate? And the citadel which could be nuked from orbit? Aside from that, I feel the unrebuilt worldspace in Fallout 3 is justified to an extent. It's the former capital of America. The GECK hadn't been released yet. (which remember, THE GECK WAS RELEASED ON THE WEST COAST.) If you think that the world would be on the path towards civilization 200 years after undergoing the most catastrophic event that could possibly happen (and one people could survive), without the help of the GECK, you don't understand radiation and nuclear war at all.

 

Rant over.

[RangerBoo]

You all whine too much. "Oh someguy is taking too long. Oh bethesda sucks at making games even though they all receive game of the year. Oh whine.. Oh people don't like consequences which is why they liked Fallout 3 better." Can you name one consequence in Fallout New Vegas? One? I've played it extensively, yes. "Oh bethesda is marketing it for Minecraft because they added settlement building, a feature that millions of true fans have requested for years." No matter what someone does, you guys will always find a way to complain about something. Tell me, did the creator of wasteland defense market that mod for Minecraft players, or Fallout fans? Or what about RTS? Was that marketed for Minecraft?

 

All in all, I will enjoy Fallout 4 extensively, and when someguy2000 releases NVB3, I will enjoy that too. I'll be happy to know that you guys wasted so much time waiting for something because it took too long, has settlement building, or has a voiced character. I hear Call of Duty takes a year to make and no settlement building. Maybe you could try that?

 

Honestly I love Fallout New Vegas and Fallout 3. There are things both games do better than the other, but to say that "oh bethesda sucks at making games because the world wasn't as rebuilt" or "oh bethesda games don't have consequences" is ridiculous. You do remember the nuclear bomb in Megaton, right? The one that you could detonate? And the citadel which could be nuked from orbit? Aside from that, I feel the unrebuilt worldspace in Fallout 3 is justified to an extent. It's the former capital of America. The GECK hadn't been released yet. (which remember, THE GECK WAS RELEASED ON THE WEST COAST.) If you think that the world would be on the path towards civilization 200 years after undergoing the most catastrophic event that could possibly happen (and one people could survive), without the help of the GECK, you don't understand radiation and nuclear war at all.

 

Rant over.

Mass Effect 3 received game of the year. Your argument is invalid. Also your choices in NV impacted the ending you get which is more then you can say for 3. In Fallout 3 it was nailed down too, Good Karma Ending, Bad Karma Ending and Neutral Ending.

Edited June 18, 2015 by RangerBoo

[peadar1987]

Well I'm a mechanical engineer who has worked in a nuclear power plant, and a qualified radiation protection supervisor, do I know enough about radiation? ;)

 

The radiation after a nuclear war wouldn't actually be a problem for more than a short period after the initial strikes, a couple of years at most. Here's a picture of Hiroshima in 1960, just 15 years after it was nuked:

 

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-pBzV03C-AXE/UOQbQjpN-zI/AAAAAAACMUw/dMbKWDtW1Nw/s640/Color+Photos+of+Japan+in+1960+(10).JPG

 

Airbursts, which are mainly used to demolish buildings and cause widespread destruction, cause relatively little fallout. The initial radiation from the bomb dissipates pretty cleanly, and you only really have to worry if you're caught in the blast.

 

Underground explosions, like "bunker busters" used for taking out hardened targets, such as missile silos, tend to activate the soil around them through neutron flux and throw it up into the air, which creates a lot more fallout. However, this is still relatively short-lived. Most radiation comes from isotopes such as Iodine-137, with a half-life of 8 days, or Strontium-89, with a half-life of 52 days. The longest-lived isotopes of any note are Caesium-137 and Strontium-90, with half-lives of the order of 30 years. They are only responsible for about 1% of the radioactivity of the initial fallout between them. After a couple of months, the radioactivity will have decreased to just a few percent of its original value, and it will continue to fall off after that. Bikini atoll, one of the most heavily-nuked places on the planet (28 detonations in a 25kmx25km area) was habitable just 10 years after nuclear testing finished, although bioaccumulation of radioisotopes in the food chain remained a problem.

 

 

 

Anyway, enough radiation nerdiness...

 

I think Fallout NV has more meaningful and nuanced choices than FO3. Sure, in FO3 you can blow up megaton for money, but all that really gets you is a ticking-off from your dad and Three Dog. I don't really count that as a real consequence. You can also open up with an SMG in Rivet City market and it doesn't affect the main questline at all. In New Vegas if you went all trigger-happy in the Mojave Outpost, or decided to attack Vulpes in Nipton, it had far-reaching consequences affecting the entire game (just try a House or independent playthrough after pissing off both the Legion and NCR. If you're very lucky, the Legion and NCR hit squads will reach you at the same time and fight each other instead of you!)

 

That's not to say I didn't really enjoy Fallout 3, I just found NV to be a far deeper and more engaging experience.

[RangerBoo]

I think Fallout NV has more meaningful and nuanced choices than FO3. Sure, in FO3 you can blow up megaton for money, but all that really gets you is a ticking-off from your dad and Three Dog. I don't really count that as a real consequence. You can also open up with an SMG in Rivet City market and it doesn't affect the main questline at all. In New Vegas if you went all trigger-happy in the Mojave Outpost, or decided to attack Vulpes in Nipton, it had far-reaching consequences affecting the entire game (just try a House or independent playthrough after pissing off both the Legion and NCR. If you're very lucky, the Legion and NCR hit squads will reach you at the same time and fight each other instead of you!)

 

That's not to say I didn't really enjoy Fallout 3, I just found NV to be a far deeper and more engaging experience.

Same here. I enjoyed 3. It was my first Fallout game. After I beat 3 I went and bought 1 & 2 and I found myself having a more of an engaging experience despite the outdated graphics and enjoyed them more. Same with NV, I had a much more fun experience with NV then I did with 3. If I was to rate them NV would be my favorite but 3 my lest but that doesn't mean it wasn't an enjoyable game to play. Its just the experience was more rewarding with 1, 2 and NV. I have a strong feeling that 4 will be more like 3. After all the same writer from 3 is writing the story and dialogue for 4. Who knows, maybe Beth will prove me wrong and pleasantly surprise me. However, judging from their current track record with big AAA titles, I am not very optimistic to put it mildly.

Edited June 18, 2015 by RangerBoo

[EpicXTitanProductions]

 

You all whine too much. "Oh someguy is taking too long. Oh bethesda sucks at making games even though they all receive game of the year. Oh whine.. Oh people don't like consequences which is why they liked Fallout 3 better." Can you name one consequence in Fallout New Vegas? One? I've played it extensively, yes. "Oh bethesda is marketing it for Minecraft because they added settlement building, a feature that millions of true fans have requested for years." No matter what someone does, you guys will always find a way to complain about something. Tell me, did the creator of wasteland defense market that mod for Minecraft players, or Fallout fans? Or what about RTS? Was that marketed for Minecraft?

 

All in all, I will enjoy Fallout 4 extensively, and when someguy2000 releases NVB3, I will enjoy that too. I'll be happy to know that you guys wasted so much time waiting for something because it took too long, has settlement building, or has a voiced character. I hear Call of Duty takes a year to make and no settlement building. Maybe you could try that?

 

Honestly I love Fallout New Vegas and Fallout 3. There are things both games do better than the other, but to say that "oh bethesda sucks at making games because the world wasn't as rebuilt" or "oh bethesda games don't have consequences" is ridiculous. You do remember the nuclear bomb in Megaton, right? The one that you could detonate? And the citadel which could be nuked from orbit? Aside from that, I feel the unrebuilt worldspace in Fallout 3 is justified to an extent. It's the former capital of America. The GECK hadn't been released yet. (which remember, THE GECK WAS RELEASED ON THE WEST COAST.) If you think that the world would be on the path towards civilization 200 years after undergoing the most catastrophic event that could possibly happen (and one people could survive), without the help of the GECK, you don't understand radiation and nuclear war at all.

 

Rant over.

Mass Effect 3 received game of the year. Your argument is invalid. Also your choices in NV impacted the ending you get which is more then you can say for 3. In Fallout 3 it was nailed down too, Good Karma Ending, Bad Karma Ending and Neutral Ending.

 

Mass Effect 3 was a good game, like Fallout 3, which also recieved game of the year. My argument is still valid.

 

Like I said, Fallout 3 and New Vegas both did things better that the other didn't. Yes, you can argue that New Vegas had better factions, I'm not denying that, in fact I think you are mistaking me for someone who dislikes New Vegas. I love both games, Fallout 3 had a beautiful, destroyed landscape, while New Vegas had a dull landscape with abysmal level design in many areas. Though Fallout 3 did have what you said, flat factions. I'm not going to lie and say I love Fallout 3's combat over New Vegas, because it did lack. I think what did it for me though, was the level design. In Fallout 3, almost everywhere had a story and pretty everything had a purpose, with good level design. In New Vegas, a lot of places were just there with little to no backstory. Basically they were just fillers to make the world feel more cluttered. That, in my opinion, can really define whether or not you are immersed.

 

(Edit, and in response to peadar)

God, don't you hate when you are typing a response but you somehow go back a page and it deletes itself?

 

Anyway, before my computer inconveniently goofed up, I was basically saying this.

 

For me, I only was able to complete New Vegas once, in an NCR playthrough with my first character. And that was way back when I still played on the 360. Since then, I've tried and tried but I've never been able to complete it because it just gets boring and I usually stop caring just before Hoover Dam. Mainly because the other endings never really got stuck with me. Even with independent, I never liked the securitrons. In a game about player choice, I never felt like I had the option to do what I wanted to. I wish I was able to nuke all of the NCR, given the option, or the Legion.

 

New Vegas had tons of options, but none you really cared about because they couldn't really expanded on. I wish if I went with the NCR, I could have played a bigger role or joined them. I almost always felt like a mercenary to them, and the Legion.

 

They were options, yes, but I felt that they were shallow.

 

Basically, in Fallout 3 you could be the savior or destroyer. Not many options. But you could do so many things as that person, even if they were nailed down as good/evil/neutral. It was satisfying being able to basically destroy the Brotherhood, or the wasteland itself.

Edited June 18, 2015 by EpicXTitanProductions