Fallout: New Vegas Review

More Game Info (Print This Article)

Graphics:

6.9

Gameplay:

8.0

Sound:

6.5

Control:

8.0

Replay Value:

8.5

Overall Rating: 7.7

Online Gameplay:

Not Rated

Publisher:

Bethesda

Developer:

Obsidian Entertainment

Number Of Players:

Genre:

RPG

Screenshots

Fallout: New Vegas is hardly an all new game, which explains why it's missing a number in the title. Fallout 4 this is not, but a worthy follow-up, or expansion, to a fantastic game this is. It wouldn't make a whole lot of sense for me to praise New Vegas as much as I did the original Fallout 3. The reasons for that are plentiful. But before I get to that, let's start from the beginning. New Vegas' story takes place three years after Fallout 3, but it isn't a sequel, so it doesn't pick up from where the last game left off. Instead, you are in the shoes of a new character, one who just so happened to get involved with the wrong people and gets a bullet to the head before a burial. Obviously, your character is miraculously still alive and gets dug up by a robot named Victor. A doc is able to extract the bullet from your head and reconstruct your face (this is the part where you choose what you look like). Now, obviously, the quest is for revenge. You set off and the game begins.

Without getting too much into the details, know this, Fallout: New Vegas is essentially Fallout 3 with a new story and setting (for additional details, refer to my Fallout 3 review). If you were a die hard fan of the last game, you will find absolutely nothing remotely resembling a learning curve with New Vegas. Immediately you will feel at home and ready to take charge, I know I did, and it's been years since I've even touched Fallout 3 - probably not since I actually reviewed it. The basic systems present in Fallout 3 have been completely carried over here. But that is not to say anything bad about New Vegas, because the game mechanics in Fallout 3 still deliver a fantastic experience that's worth experiencing even today.

In these types of open-world RPGs, I often find myself in the role of the loner. I'm the guy you shouldn't talk down to, because I'll kill you. And because Fallout New Vegas offers plenty of these smart-mouthed characters, I revel in their arrogance by placing a few bullets in them, and then taking their possessions. In the same way that a Grand Theft Auto game allows you to just run around and cause chaos, Fallout allows me to lay down some of my own personally flavored justice. But the difference between GTA and Fallout is that even when I'm laying the hand of righteousness on these fools, I'm still progressing, in addition to altering, the storyline. Much like Fable, your actions change the way the game revolves around you.

Fallout: New Vegas and its weapon mechanics continue to be a much welcomed feature, but issues of collision detection when not using the VATS system can be annoying, as you'll find bullets missing their target no matter how perfect your aim was. And Fallout: New Vegas is not impervious to further issues, as loading can be excessive and annoying. The game performs an install on your hard drive, but it seems to be completely pointless, as even stepping foot into tiny little shacks will cause the game to load for 5-10 seconds. In other cases, the game will load for as many as two minutes! It is simply unacceptable all these years later. Additionally, bugs and glitches cause the game to hitch and freeze with no warning, often forcing you to restarting your system. Fortunately, the game autosaves frequently, but this is still not something that should be occurring this frequently - we're well beyond the learning phases of developing for these consoles.

If you can get past the issues, the gameplay is still a solid, albeit dated experience for the major Fallout fan. For the newcomers to this franchise, I would recommend perhaps another game, as the technical issues may really turn you off. I'd reckon Oblivion, also a Bethesda title, would be better suited since it is not only cheaper, but has held up better with time, and is a bit more polished despite being years older.

Visually, the technical issues only continue. An abundance of pop-up riddles the screen, as does the sever lack of anti-aliasing. Proving that the graphics have gone largely untouched is the framerate, which still has a tendency to stutter and skip during hectic times. Characters look very rough around the edges, further solidifying that the Fallout 3 engine is aging very poorly. Yes, the environments may be vast, but other open ended games boast a scale that's just as impressive all the while managing to look much better. There have been times where I was walking on a textureless floor for minutes, until the game finally drew it in…the extent of technical problems plaguing the game are vast to say the least.

Audio also needs a lot of work. Yes, there are tons voice overs to be heard, but that doesn't mean they all have to sound dull and lifeless. The characters barely have a personality of their own and the longer you play the game the more it annoys you, and the less you want to interact. I ended up turning the voices down and just reading - it works better that way since it allowed me to just skip ahead as soon as I finished the dialogue. The rest of New Vegas' audio sounds fine, though, as background noise and other effects (especially gun shots) are pulled off convincingly. I understand it's hard to have top-tier voice acting for so many different characters, but can we at least try?

One massive issue Fallout: New Vegas has besides all of its technical problems is that price tag. Let's face it, this is a game built on the original where the mechanics were barely touched. It's an expansion that's being charged full price for. While I'd certainly consider Fallout New Vegas a good game, it loses a lot of points to what I can only attribute to as lazy developing. A dated game engine, coupled with a plethora of gameplay plaguing technical problems, boring voice acting, sub-par visuals, and a bloated price tag compromise an otherwise good game. $60 it's not worth - slash $20, and then we're talkin'.

10/22/2010 Arnold Katayev

Put this on your webpage or blog:
Email this to a friend
Follow PSX Extreme on Twitter

Comments (79 posts)

Toggle Scrolling | Reload Comments

Deleted User []
Friday, October 22, 2010 @ 5:27:35 PM
Reply

*crickets*

7 up, 3 down

Superman915
Friday, October 22, 2010 @ 5:30:37 PM
Reply

i could never get into this game for some reason. maybe it was the buggyness.

4 up, 0 down

KNG201
Friday, October 22, 2010 @ 5:40:58 PM
Reply

"The characters barely have a personality of their own and the longer you play the game the more it annoys you, and the less you want to interact."

now how do you know what annoys me? you been talking to my girl?...lol
the charecters are the same as fallout 3. I do agree that it is an exspansion but a meaty one so I dont mind the price tag. as for the minor freezing (stops for 2secs then continues)that and the loading is unacceptible. you would think they would learn from the last fallout. but all in all i enjoy the concept of it and like the scope of it im still having fun. i hope they plan to patch it...

1 up, 0 down

Killa Tequilla
Friday, October 22, 2010 @ 5:42:09 PM
Reply

I cant get into this game or Fallout 3 at all. LimitedVertigo have sympathy. It was like playing pokemon like when I was 13 ( ok maybe 17) joking lol ... everyone you talk to you must read text. Cant they just make noises come out of their mouths?

BTW have you guys noticed that IGN took down their Medal Of Honor video review? They probably noticed that they Fuc**d up and the game was higher than the score they gave it. IGN ... you really cant spell ignorant without IGN.

Good for the people that like Fallout NV, but it just isnt for me. My very 1st game on Ps3 I played online is Call of Duty 4. Ever since I have been pretty much buying war games because they are my favorites of all time. Especially FPS.

Last edited by Killa Tequilla on 10/22/2010 5:44:18 PM

2 up, 6 down

dillonthebunny
Friday, October 22, 2010 @ 6:00:06 PM

war... war never changes

3 up, 0 down

SolidFantasy
Friday, October 22, 2010 @ 7:49:22 PM

According to Solid Snake's voice over in MGS4 war has changed. But that's not till 2015 i think.

5 up, 0 down

sirbob6
Friday, October 22, 2010 @ 10:32:23 PM

In this competition I go with Snake, he might snap my neck if I don't

5 up, 0 down

dillonthebunny
Friday, October 22, 2010 @ 5:58:14 PM
Reply

I love this game, but then I loved FO3... in 14.5 hours Ive had no game stopping glitch, nothing terrible at all.. though thats what a lot of the reviews said would happen, maybe ive just been lucky?

whats quite interesting (and I don't usually recommend these sites) but lensoftruth looked at the ps3 vs 360 on fallout, and i was surprised at what i saw. tho, you should take it with a pinch of salt.

anyway, if you are like me and you have completed FO3 and its DLC to anal proportions then FONV is worth your $60 imo.

5 up, 0 down

Gabriel013
Monday, October 25, 2010 @ 2:28:05 AM

See, I'm expecting a glut of dlc for FNV so I'm waiting for the GotY edition.

0 up, 0 down

ValdiPS3
Friday, October 22, 2010 @ 6:14:50 PM
Reply

i like fallout 3, maybe i pick new vegas when they release the goty edition, for now theres a lot of better games to look after, and thanks for the solid a fair review ben.

2 up, 2 down

hellish_devil
Friday, October 22, 2010 @ 7:30:41 PM

It was Arnold, not Ben.

Knowing who did the review is more important than the review itself.

Last edited by hellish_devil on 10/22/2010 7:31:38 PM

4 up, 0 down

Hezzron
Friday, October 22, 2010 @ 6:14:57 PM
Reply

***Spoiler Alert***

This game is a disappointment.

8 up, 6 down

dillonthebunny
Saturday, October 23, 2010 @ 2:14:57 AM

Maybe you should clarify why you think its a disappointment.

that sort of sweeping statement should be left for GFAQs not here.

3 up, 2 down

Alienange
Friday, October 22, 2010 @ 6:23:54 PM
Reply

A really good review Arnold. Thanks. A generous score though. I was honestly expecting lower from you.

Due to the massive amount of media regarding the bugs in New Vegas I did what I never thought I'd do, I've waited. F3 was a day one for me, New Vegas just sounds like a really buggy production. I'd have dismissed those claims if I hadn't played the F3 expansions. That was just horribly unplayable.

One thing though. Why such a low score for sound? You made it look like that was the best part of the game.

1 up, 0 down

FM23
Friday, October 22, 2010 @ 6:25:34 PM
Reply

Wow...very harsh review. Aside from familiar FO3 mechanics and glitches, I personally disagree with alot of what I have read here. The voiceacting, after you mentioned it does come off as bland, but FO3 sounds exactly the same. I am only 10hrs in, but this game is addictive and fun. The story isn't epic like FO3, the world isn't brand new, and the main character is given any development, but I still like the game . It does feel like an expansion, but it's big as hell and I don't regret my prchase...YET. Have to beat the game first to see how I feel. But it's pretty lazy of obsidian not to fix the gunplay (accuracy), physical/facial animations, loading time, and these abnormal amount of glitches. When, I think about it, I agree w/ Arnold on probably everything except the voive acting, but then again...I rarely read pro's in this review and in my opinion...this game offers alot of pros, especially if you loved FO3. I'm getting my money's worth, that's what matters of course.

2 up, 4 down

WorldEndsWithMe
Friday, October 22, 2010 @ 8:15:42 PM

Arnold tend to be more unforgiving then Ben.

2 up, 1 down

CH1N00K
Friday, October 22, 2010 @ 8:52:50 PM

Hey World, log into the forums and check your in box...left a message for you....by the way, how is New Vegas in your opinion so far? I'm still up in the air as to whether or not I want to get yet

1 up, 0 down

WorldEndsWithMe
Friday, October 22, 2010 @ 9:13:04 PM

Replied.

0 up, 1 down

FlyingKickPunch
Friday, October 22, 2010 @ 6:26:27 PM
Reply

Isn't Obsidian made up of ex-Black Isle developers? Didn't Black Isle create the Fallout series? The series creators craft the inferior Fallout game?! Oh, the irony!

8 up, 1 down

Lawless SXE
Friday, October 22, 2010 @ 6:32:02 PM
Reply

Well that's... expected. You'd think that Bethesda would have switched things up from the Gamebryo engine by now, considering they've been using unmodified for the last four years (Since Oblivion), and even then it wasn't the best.

I always knew to treat this more as FO3: Relaunch than a new game, but to hear that it is more or less exactly the same is a huge disappointment. Nevertheless, I maintain some degree of interest and will likely pick it up when Bethesda releases a GotY/Complete Edition.
Peace and Thanks Arnold.

2 up, 0 down

Shams
Friday, October 22, 2010 @ 9:14:35 PM

I suppose enemies still can't climb stairs, either... With Oblivion reskinned for the 2nd time, one would've thought they could've at least tuned things up a bit...but from this and Alpha Protocol, we can gather that the studio can't be bothered with QA. I suppose they're confident their customers will grab it, either way, in much the same way MS wasn't too bothered with RROD. Too bad. Perhaps, i'll just wait on FO3:GOTYE for the bargain bin.

2 up, 1 down

Shams
Friday, October 22, 2010 @ 9:16:06 PM

Thanks, Arnold, for the sufficiently informative review, and for saving me some money.

2 up, 0 down

Shams
Friday, October 22, 2010 @ 9:53:00 PM

Oh, and the line, "I'm the guy you shouldn't [talk] down to, or I'll kill you" is classic, love it. Hope there's no copyright because that's one for the arsenal.

0 up, 0 down

ArnoldK PSXE [Administrator]
Saturday, October 23, 2010 @ 12:37:49 AM

Yeah, just fixed that typo.

1 up, 1 down

Alienange
Friday, October 22, 2010 @ 6:35:58 PM
Reply

I would have liked your impressions of the hard core mode. Does it make the game crazy hard or does it make the game more immersive?

0 up, 0 down

hellish_devil
Friday, October 22, 2010 @ 7:34:35 PM

I heard the difficulty setting and hardcore mode aren't tied. You can choose very easy difficulty and hardcore mode on, as you can do very hard and hardcore mode off.

0 up, 0 down

Alienange
Friday, October 22, 2010 @ 8:10:13 PM

I read that too. But they say there's some nasty side effects from lack of sleep and ammo having weight leads me to believe i'll be a lot more broke than i was in F3. That just makes things harder no?

0 up, 0 down

Geobaldi
Friday, October 22, 2010 @ 10:37:43 PM

It's really not as difficult as it sounds. True ammo has weight so you have to be selective about what weapons you want to specialize in. Food and water is everywhere so that's not a problem at all. Just keep a decent supply of rad remover on hand and you're good to go. Lack of sleep throws your aim all off so that's not a good thing. About two hours of sleep at a time cures that. It's harder in hardcore mode obviously, but still very much playable if you don't try to Rambo your way through it like you would normally.

Last edited by Geobaldi on 10/22/2010 10:38:45 PM

0 up, 0 down

WorldEndsWithMe
Friday, October 22, 2010 @ 6:50:07 PM
Reply

Sounds fantastic, I'm starting my playthrough tonight. So far the gripes seem petty and I'd be rather upset if they changed too much of the gameplay. Some things should stay the same. Fallout is atmosphere, period.

2 up, 2 down

Jawknee
Friday, October 22, 2010 @ 7:21:48 PM

Shouldn't a game that comes out 2 years after it's predecessor have improved though? Especially in the graphics department?

http://www.psxextreme.com/ps3-reviews/179.html

6 up, 2 down

WorldEndsWithMe
Friday, October 22, 2010 @ 9:12:34 PM

yes, but I personally didn't expect it to. I have followed Bethesda for a long time and know to keep certain expectations low.

What bothers me is that other high profile games don't get chastised for not improving.

2 up, 1 down

Aerifale
Friday, October 22, 2010 @ 6:58:55 PM
Reply

Enough of this crap. I want a new Elder Scrolls :)

2 up, 2 down

Heartless Angel
Friday, October 22, 2010 @ 7:09:11 PM
Reply

Good thing for me that the game sold here in the Philippines for about $40, Region 3. I'll wait for the patches before I play this.

0 up, 0 down

hellish_devil
Friday, October 22, 2010 @ 7:21:03 PM
Reply

7.7.....

damn!

Not surprised though. Bethesda isn't the one to blame, it's Obsidian. They made Alpha Protocol after all.

Last edited by hellish_devil on 10/22/2010 7:26:42 PM

2 up, 2 down

Jawknee
Friday, October 22, 2010 @ 7:22:58 PM
Reply

I looked up the Fallout 3 review. 9.6.

No wonder they wanted to silence peoples reviews. Usually new games are supposed to get better. Not worse.

9 up, 3 down

WorldEndsWithMe
Friday, October 22, 2010 @ 8:15:13 PM

Maybe they wanna keep em quiet for an impending patch.

0 up, 0 down

Jawknee
Friday, October 22, 2010 @ 8:45:21 PM

I thought the same thing but if they were that worried, shouldn't they have fixed these issues before release?

9 up, 1 down

maxpontiac
Monday, October 25, 2010 @ 9:10:33 AM

Agreed Jawknee. The technical bugs in Fallout 3 should be gone for New Vegas, and they are not. I understand the complaints in regards to that.

Pushing the glitches aside, Fallout New Vegas is a much deeper game than Fallout 3 ever was.

To many reviews are failing to recognize the improvements and depth offered in this game.

0 up, 0 down

Jalex
Friday, October 22, 2010 @ 8:28:05 PM
Reply

I haven't even opened this yet, so I have no personally informed opinion on the game yet, but I knew from the get-go that I would basically be paying full price for a game that's really a giant expansion.
But I'm fine with that, because as buggy as 'Fallout 3' was and 'New Vegas' likely is, I've still poured more hours into the former than almost every other video game I've played, so the latter is likely to be at least in the ballpark of the same level of enjoyment.

2 up, 0 down

CH1N00K
Friday, October 22, 2010 @ 8:50:45 PM
Reply

Even though F3 received good scores when it first came out, there will still posts on the net on how it had major glitches to it. As I'd never played a Fallout game before having played F3, I hummed and haughed over buying it for a few months before I finally picked it up. When I did, I was glad that I had, but I had about an hours worth of updates to download before I played. Even though the game wasn't perfect, I was still an amazing game to play. I'm hoping to find the GOTY version super cheap sometime so I can play all the DLC as well without forking out all that extra dough for them. (Not to mention having to re-download them if my PS3 dies..again..)

When I first heard about NV, I was definitely thinking D1P for me...but then as I thought about it, I remember that maybe I should wait again for a few months until it's been updated a few times to work out some of the glitches.

I will be getting NV eventually, but this is a trend in video games that has become more and more prominent with this Gen of systems. I don't know about you guys but less then 10 years ago, when I heard a game was coming out, it was a D1P for me, no questions asked...Now, my D1P games are few and far between because developers seem to be launching a game that isn't ready. Look at a few of the games that have launched since the PS3 came out that weren't complete. Socom comes to mind...GTIV had major issues with freezing up and was pretty much patched the day it released. F3..now F:NV?

Makes me wonder if the internet on consoles is really a good thing...use to be if a game had glitches on release date..you had to deal with it..now? When's the last time you bought a new game and got it home and DIDN'T have to do an update on it right away?

I've said it once before and I'll say it again. The day is coming when we will run out to the store to buy a brand new game. We'll run home unwrap the cellophane from the box, and in anticipated excitement, we'll open the game case.......................................

Only to find a hand written sticky note taped inside saying

"Will update soon."

But then again, who am I kidding? The note won't be Handwritten...that would be a waste of time...

2 up, 0 down

BikerSaint
Friday, October 22, 2010 @ 10:36:31 PM

CH1N00K,
Actually.....
We'll get a promissory voucher now, for a secondary voucher later on, which will entitle us to the primary voucher for 2/3 of the game, in which they'll hold back the other 1/3 so they'll have us shell out an additional $60 for another promissory voucher that will get us the secondary voucher, and will entitle us to what they call *cough* extra DLC *cough*.

We just have make sure to save all our vouchers in case we continue to get a extremely shoody, buggy, glitchy, freeze-up broken downloads, cause we'll then have to request a request for a return voucher, that will give us a second voucher with their P.O. box addy on it, so that we can request the primary return request voucher that will entitle us to request a return voucher envelope to place our 37 vouchers in.
And of course, a small waiting period for the secondary Voucher, and once again, another small waiting period for the primary voucher.

And if our broken D/L should so happen to accidentally on purpose get lost in the mail & we want to track all our vouchers in transit, then no problemo!!!!

We'll just need to fill out a promissory lost D/L voucher request which will then authorize them to send you a secondary voucher that will give us the primary voucher showing us a map of where our broken D/L was last seen.

BTW, since they use two different vouchers with two separate map locale on each, I'm really not sure which map voucher we'll will be recieving.

But I do know this much, it's got to be either the Slauson Cutoff at East JeeBip, or in the general vicinity of Bum F*ck Egypt, give or take a few thousand kilometers.

Last edited by BikerSaint on 10/22/2010 10:40:23 PM

2 up, 0 down

CH1N00K
Saturday, October 23, 2010 @ 12:51:17 AM

two things.....
first...Lol...
second..WTF, Huh?..LOL!!!

0 up, 0 down

FxTales
Friday, October 22, 2010 @ 9:38:10 PM
Reply

I'm really enjoying Fallout 3, so much so that I turned to the clock next to me and it read 3:30am so that's when I decided it was time for bed. Highly addictive. When I finish that then I may try NV.

Last edited by FxTales on 10/22/2010 9:39:03 PM

1 up, 0 down

tlpn99
Friday, October 22, 2010 @ 10:19:39 PM
Reply

Got this today and I have to say I am enjoying it, will just add to the collection nicely with my Fallout3 Game Of the Year Edition.

Fair review Arnold but im happy with my purchase cant say ive seen nothing too glitchy so far.

3 up, 0 down

dillonthebunny
Saturday, October 23, 2010 @ 2:16:20 AM
Reply

..btw chaps the patch is out.

2 up, 0 down

___________
Saturday, October 23, 2010 @ 2:18:33 AM
Reply

really enjoying this, its the perfect example of fun over technological advancements.
yes its EXTREMELY buggy, the graphics are not exactly cutting edge, the lip syncing is way out, its cheesy and cliche but SO WHAT?
all that does not make a good game, it being fun makes it a good game.
im loving it just as much as i was loving fallout 3, no more because of some of the sick twisted missions!
this is what i dont get with the media, MW2 had you shooting innocent people as a terrorist and the sh*t hit the fan!
but one of the missions in this has you dealing with a cannibal!
ok, killing innocent people is not ok but eating them is?????????

0 up, 2 down

LimitedVertigo
Saturday, October 23, 2010 @ 4:16:34 AM
Reply

Decent review for a game I'm eventually going to buy. I plan on getting it around Dec. I went ahead and "downloaded" it to check it out before they fix all the bugs and it's still an enjoyable experience but it definitely feels like a Fallout3.5

I really don't get why developers feel it's okay to release a game that CLEARLY isn't past the beta stage (FFXIV) and now this game.

1 up, 1 down

The X Factor 9
Saturday, October 23, 2010 @ 4:50:31 AM
Reply

Why all the hate? If you like Fallout 3, you'll probably like this.

Sure it's overpriced, but it's still fun.

An 8 in my opinion.

1 up, 1 down

The X Factor 9
Saturday, October 23, 2010 @ 4:50:32 AM
Reply

Why all the hate? If you like Fallout 3, you'll probably like this.

Sure it's overpriced, but it's still fun.

An 8 in my opinion.

1 up, 1 down

SSRGohan
Saturday, October 23, 2010 @ 5:06:34 AM
Reply

The game froze on me twice already for no reason, also using VATS mode got me stuck inside of a rock (and the same thing keeps happening to the enemy). Hardcore mode seems like a really cool idea, so far the only problem seems to be lack water, but at least the game does tell you when you need sleep, food, water. If you break a limb in hardcore mode you need to find a medic to fix it for you and also you can only heal over time, not right away. Like Geobaldi said, if you dont try to be like rambo you'll be fine.

0 up, 0 down

Remei Aoki
Saturday, October 23, 2010 @ 6:48:26 AM
Reply

I don't necessarily agree with the total review score, or with a few of the problems your talking about. I've been playing this game since launch, i'm a bit of a fallout fan, but i could swear that I'm not having the problems you people are talking about. missing textures, jumping graffics, freezing, shots not hitting the mark (the bullets DO drop by the way, noticed that with the varmint rifle with a little distance on it. Beef up your gun skills, the algorythm for hit detection isn't just point and shoot. You need to factor in your gun skill, weapon condition and your distance... (notice the sway in your rifle? minute sway kills accuracy man, even while crouching, just like in real life).

I did have it freeze up on me 1 time, but it was my fault for not pausing to jump into the XMB and start writing a note, only to be attacked by a deathclaw and die while trying to get back into the game, freezing it.

Sure a lot of the stuff is reused from Fallout 3, clothes, weapons, character models, however this is surely not an expansion, Hardcore mode is a perfect example of this, along with the factions and affinity for such (both of which were strangely left out of your review). Not to mention the ability to live off the land (goodbye stimpack abuse).

At least the enemies are smarter, (climbing up a rock wont save you this time), not to mention a plethora of new types make traveling the waste MUCH more interesting than in F3. Nightcrawlers, massive stun inducing mosquitoes, big horners are just a few of the new beast types. I've also noticed enemies wont simply 'stick around' like they used to when you popped a round from a hidden spot, they'll run away much faster than before. One particular example I had was trying to get past a deathclaw infested pass, tagging one with an armor piercing round, only to have it alert not only the one i hit, but the hole pack around him, all of which quickly retreated back into the mountains until the shooting stopped. Thinking it was safe, i tried to hoof it past, only to be unpleasantly suprised when they peaked back out and gave chase!

There IS a lot to do in New Vegas, almost too much, i often find myself in the middle of a quest, only to get info on a new quest midway through some character dialogue with someone I may need to kill. Recently I've noticed myself stopping just to maximize my earnings, rather than just do the work and get through the story, and that might be a good thing to some, but might tick off another.

However I do have a few qualms, The voucher problem is one of the big glaring issues... The blackjack tables seem to be a little unfair (but this is Vegas we're talking about). I do recall being up 1000 chips, betting 4 hands at 250 chips a piece and busting out with 12, loosing with 20 and getting out held (house drew 5 cards on my 21). Didn't make me feel like gambling after loosing about 500 caps in a 'game', but it did make me feel just like a few of the vagabonds that were unfortunate enough to make it to New Vegas only to leave with the shirts on their back. You could argue this is immersion, and for sure i felt immersed, (right until i killed the dealer and then reloaded the game prior to cashing in) but those who play for perfection or on hard might want to beef up their luck stat.

A big problem i've noticed however is that my perception is really high, so high that most of the time, i find myself chasing 'shadows' on my compass only to have the golden human icon suddenly shift to aggressive red the closer get to seeing them. Oftentimes I'll see enemies quite literally a mile away on my compass, but when i try to look for them on screen, they don't show up until they are just a little closer than I would have liked. Try sneaking to New Vegas past the Quarry North of Sloan and see what I'm talking about!

Last edited by Remei Aoki on 10/23/2010 7:02:52 AM

3 up, 0 down

Beamboom
Sunday, October 24, 2010 @ 12:57:45 PM

Thanks alot for this comment, finally some views about the content of the game. I am especially pleased to see that there are lots of side quests, that was what made fallout3 to me, those weird little stories to discover everywhere!

2 up, 0 down

Zorigo
Saturday, October 23, 2010 @ 7:45:56 AM
Reply

this is a real shame.
my die hard fallout fan mate will pay, but i'll wait. but i still bloody well want it.

0 up, 0 down

JackC8
Saturday, October 23, 2010 @ 7:55:44 AM
Reply

Sounds like a bargain bin purchase. Fallout 3 was pretty fun, but I can't imagine spending more than $20 on an alpha build of a game. And considering it's really more of a stand-alone expansion...

One of my favorite things about Fallout 3 was the voice acting, but it's dull and flat here? Jeez. I dunno, these people have good ideas but lack the ambition to realize them in anything but the most rinky dink manner.

1 up, 1 down

Proxy
Saturday, October 23, 2010 @ 11:10:46 AM
Reply

An expansion? An expansion with more quests (quests that are actually fleshed out). An expansion with writing that isn't absolutely horrendous and nonsensical. An expansion with more than five voice actors Bethesda found outside, after having spent millions of dollars to get Liam Nelson for five seconds of dialogue. An expansion with a well thought out and coherent world. An expansion whose storyline isn't fraught with plot holes left and right. An expansion with refined gameplay (hard not to improve on the crap that is Bethesda's implementation of Gamebryo). If that's what defines an expansion, well I say, we need more of them.

Quite honestly Arnold, you think Fallout 3 is a good game and for that I feel your opinions are invalid when it comes to Fallout.

P.S. I don't know what the hell your going on about with the voice actors sounding "dull and flat", you couldn't be more off base.

P.P.S.
" I'd reckon Oblivion, also a Bethesda title, would be better suited since it is not only cheaper, but has held up better with time, and is a bit more polished despite being years older. " Do you mean to imply that it was Bethesda who made this game and not Obsidian? How clueless are you?

Last edited by Proxy on 10/23/2010 11:13:35 AM

2 up, 4 down

ArnoldK PSXE [Administrator]
Saturday, October 23, 2010 @ 2:24:31 PM

New Vegas was designed and produced by Bethesda, and developed by Obsidian. But on top of that, Obsidian was handed a game engine that was already completed by Bethesda years ago with Fallout 3, and what they had to do was reskin it to fit the mold of a new game, all the while keeping nearly everything from the last game intact. Obsidian didn't exactly have their work cut out for them. So how clueless are you to imply that this is an Obsidian directed product, rather than Bethesda's?

So yes, Bethesda made New Vegas. Because they own the Fallout franchise. And they laid down all of the groundwork for Obsidian to wrap up. It's that simple. If you want a pure-bred Obsidian product, you look at Alpha Protocol, which despite being published by Sega, was the brain child of the developer, unlike New Vegas.

0 up, 1 down

Caanimal
Saturday, October 23, 2010 @ 1:49:39 PM
Reply

Reviewers love to call this game a "follow up" or "expansion" to this game, this guy even does it in his second sentence, but his game ISN'T a Fing follow up or a Fing expansion, THIS is what Fallout 3 should have been. Bethesda bought the name and figured they could cash in by using the name of some great older games that already have an established fan base. THIS game is more of a spiritual successor to Fallout 2 than Fallout 3 will ever be and people need to acknowledge that, but rarely do.

Hundreds of games use the same engine their predicessor uses, but that doesn't mean they are expansions of any sort. Fallout New Vegas uses the Gamebryo engine, that same engine has been used in over 200 games starting w/ Dark Age of Camelot, buy using the whole "hur dur that uses the same engine as that other game" argument that means DAoC has hundreds of expansions/sequals, which is just a stupid claim...

Fallout New Vegas is an awesome game all on it's own, baring the few hick-ups that I have experienced in the game (which seems VERY common now a days thanks to consoles having internet connection, but that's a whole nother gripe of mine) I have been having loads of fun w/ the game and am looking forward to Obsidian fixing the few problems I have encountered.

Oh, as for the whole "it should be cheaper because it uses the same engine", well a lot of games reuse older engines, just look at all those games that use Gamebryo or Unreal engines... Just because a game reuses an older engine (if every game created a new engine games would take years and years to come out and we wouldn't see a new Mario, or new Halo, or new CoD every year)doesn't mean the games should be any cheaper.

3 up, 1 down

ArnoldK PSXE [Administrator]
Saturday, October 23, 2010 @ 2:32:31 PM

You completely disregarded every point that was made. Nowhere did I say it should be cheaper because it uses the game engine. Did you miss the fact that this game suffers from the same technical problems that Fallout 3 suffered from? All these years later and they couldn't polish the game up? Two minute loading times? Freezing? Framerate drops? They couldn't add or expand the gameplay mechanics? Look, it's a solid game. But it's stuck in 2008, and we've already managed to come a long way since then.

And what are you talking about it being normal for games to have hiccups because they have internet connections? What does the internet have anything to do with...anything? This isn't an MMORPG.

2 up, 3 down

Beamboom
Saturday, October 23, 2010 @ 5:51:37 PM

He probably meant that because of net access it's so much easier to release fixes than back in the old days without the net.

0 up, 0 down

Caanimal
Sunday, October 24, 2010 @ 1:16:52 AM

Exactly what Beam said Arnold, game companies get away w/ making half assed console versions of games because they know that they can just go back at a later date and clean up their messes once they have US, the consumers, do THEIR QA work... PC games have been doing this for years, and it's now become common place in console games. And I for one am sick of it, I want to buy a damn game that is COMPLETE, that means full games that are relatively free of bugs and glitches, and yes, I know there will never be completely free of them but they can be cut way down from how they are now.

This answer pretty much goes for both parts of post. And once again, this is NOT an extensive expansion or follow-up (just saw that dumb ass commercial once again) to Fallout 3, the only relation it has to Fallout 3 (which I love as well and put in over 500 hours on just 1 of my characters) is the engine used and the copied/pasted items.

Oh, I'm not saying this game is perfect, it's far far from that and that is very disappointing, it's pretty much on par w/ my experience in Fallout 3 (which I picked up @ the midnight launch and played about 6 hours that first night, had to wait until Tuesday afternoon to pick up New Vegas) and close to my experinces w/ older Fallout games. I guess what I'm saying is either Fallout 3 scores needed to be a bit lower or the scores for New Vegas should be a bit higher. Oh and yes, I do feel New Vegas was a bit more polished than Fallout 3, maybe not 2 years worth of polish but still.

4 up, 0 down

maxpontiac
Monday, October 25, 2010 @ 9:05:08 AM

Arnold -

Fallout Vegas does something different that Fallout 3 never offered, and that's Hardcore mode. That changes the game quite a bit, and adds a severe danger to every step you take.

The simple fact that you have maintain water, food, and sleep levels is a detail that I honestly believe you would have appreciated, yet there is not one mention of it in your review.

The companion system is highly refined when compared to Fallout 3 with a wheel system. I actually don't mind using a companion at all. What were your thoughts on this as well? For it wasn't covered in this review.

1 up, 0 down

Geobaldi
Tuesday, October 26, 2010 @ 4:58:28 AM

The PC version of Fallout 3 had a mod that added hardcore mode to it so this is nothing new for the PC gaming crowd, and it's just as fun now as it was then. It's nice that the console gamers have the opportunity to try it. Adds a whole new level to the game in my opinion.

0 up, 0 down

WorldEndsWithMe
Saturday, October 23, 2010 @ 6:16:16 PM
Reply

I'm playing now, besides the slow start its all looking good. The aliasing and very tiny skips now and then are still there, but they were in in F3 anyway so whatever. The engine is a bit better in some places. I've never had more than a very brief loading time. Maybe the review copy was junk.

2 up, 0 down

Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Saturday, October 23, 2010 @ 9:34:51 PM
Reply

Again, for people complaining about the review score, go yell at GameSpot first. They scored it even lower (7.5), and it's only averaging a 8.1 or 8.2 depending on the source you use.

Obviously, something is amiss in comparison to Fallout 3, where the scores are substantially higher.

2 up, 4 down

maxpontiac
Monday, October 25, 2010 @ 8:55:37 AM

Disagree with the score, and this comment. Fallout New Vegas is almost identical to Fallout 3. The graphics, gameplay, and gliches are all all comparable.

Now while I can see the justification for giving the game a lower score due to the technical bugs, New Vegas still retains the amazing atmosphere and player choice mechanic.

To many reviews, including this one are to focused on the expansion feel of this game and it's a shame really. It's really an amazing experience that mirror's Fallout 3 in several regards, and even surpasses in other areas.

3 up, 1 down

Chelsea United
Sunday, October 24, 2010 @ 3:34:56 AM
Reply

I bought this and Borderlands GotY at the same time yesterday, and played Fallout first. After about 1 hour i came to the conclusion that I payed an extra $89 AUD for the same game I bought 3 years ago. I cracked open Borderlands ($64 AUD) and haven't stopped playing it since. Well done to whomever made that game, and shame on the lazy game developers at Bethesda.

0 up, 2 down

Beamboom
Sunday, October 24, 2010 @ 12:30:58 PM

Borderlands is awsome but my advice it to save it 'till you can play it coop with a friend, that multiplies the fun factor many times.

0 up, 2 down

Beamboom
Sunday, October 24, 2010 @ 12:45:57 PM
Reply

The problem with this review is that it is way too technically focused. If this was a site for games programmers then it would make sense. But to the general public we simply do not count frames when playing, neither do we count load seconds. On the other hand, we are interested in the atmosphere, the journey the game offer to us, we enjoy the games as gamers and not technicians.
This is a problem with a lot of reviews, especially from semi-pro and hobby sites. The reviews tend to have a very unbalanced content.

This would be as if a review of a Hollywood movie got totally lost in discussing some frames being out of focus, the audio balance of the ambience sounds or the cut techniques in a certain scene, and what camera model were used to shoot the outdoor scenes. Do you read movie reviews like that? Nope. Why not? Cause it has no place in a movie review.

Do I say that technical issues is irrelevant for a game? No, of course not. But in the total picture technical issues count maybe as 1/5th of the totality, and a good review should not spend more than 1/5th on technical issues, and that's only when there are issues worth mentioning at all.

And this goes the other way too, this is why certain other games gets an irrational *high* score, cause it impress from a pure technical point of view, even though the game itself may be boring as hell or at least not such an unforgettable experience a character of 90%+ would suggest.

Last edited by Beamboom on 10/24/2010 12:48:35 PM

5 up, 0 down

Gabriel013
Monday, October 25, 2010 @ 2:31:27 AM

I can see where you're coming from but to the average gamer load times and frame rates do matter.

If every time anything happens on screen, the camera stutters and stops, that's a major issue and we need to know.

If every time you go in or out of a room you can make a cup of tea while the next area loads... we want to know.

These things CAN take away the enjoyment and influence a purchase decision.

1 up, 3 down

Beamboom
Monday, October 25, 2010 @ 1:21:28 PM

Yes of course but that's taking it to the extreme. I refuse to believe that this game is *that* bad.

1 up, 0 down

The CEO
Monday, October 25, 2010 @ 2:30:18 AM
Reply

I played both Fallout 3 and New Vegas liked them both. It was almost comical in New Vegas to see the exact same city that Fallout 2 had overrun by Deathclaws. This game needs vehicles or a run button. All that walking is boring. I played New Vegas on PC and used the unlock all maps cheat it made the pacing consistent compared to walking 15 minutes get in fight then walk another 15 minutes.

1 up, 4 down

Gabriel013
Monday, October 25, 2010 @ 2:32:25 AM

Have they kept the all important quick travel option for unlocked areas?

0 up, 0 down

maxpontiac
Monday, October 25, 2010 @ 8:58:57 AM

Yes, the quick travel is still there.

1 up, 0 down

Beamboom
Monday, October 25, 2010 @ 9:13:28 PM
Reply

There's a patch released in europe now that supposedly fixes more than 200 issues.

1 up, 0 down

Remei Aoki
Tuesday, October 26, 2010 @ 9:15:13 PM
Reply

I think everyone needs more time with New Vegas before a proper score can be determined. For a single mission, i found 6 different ways out of it. Some involved gunplay, other involved speechcraft, another had me chase an NPC across the mohave when i missed my opportunity to take them down.

It's my belief that your going to need multiple playthroughs to see HALF of what this game has to offer in terms of progression and development. Hardcore is more than tacking on a few meters, fight a giant radscorpion or 2 and try to heal midway through the fight. I'm willing to bet fallout 3 players wont make it
out of that, even on normal difficulty.

It may have taken 2 years, might use the same engine, may have some of the same problems that the game prior had, but the fact is this is what Fallout 3 should have been. From the gunplay, to the ambitious story, to the voice acting, and no it isn't what they say it is, it's perfectly appropriate. (Didn't even mention the plethora of new tunes on the radio!). Seems like someone was expecting something groundbreaking when Obsidian announced that this would be more Fallout 3 when it first showed off NV.

On a final note, it's a little disheartening to see that some have chosen to defend a score by pointing to other sources scores and comparing the minute .2 point difference in an attempt to try and deflect some of the negative reaction towards other reviews and reviewers. The fact is that THIS review didn't take into account a lot of the new core elements, (factions, gunplay, hardcore mode, pure amount of content) and instead chose to pick at a few of the problems that this game does undoubtedly have. Yes, the game has hickups, but these aren't game killers. (not even freesides 30 second loadtime stopped me from going back and forth to finish quests) The game is fun, more fun and challenging than Fallout 3, and is by far much better than it's predecessor in every way.

P.S. - Fast travel works differently in hardcore as well, cant just pick up and go if you run the chance of dehydrating, starving, or blacking out on the way. Makes it harder to get back if your in the middle of nowhere and you've used up all your gear, your low on health and you don't have a single drop of water on you.

Last edited by Remei Aoki on 10/26/2010 9:17:58 PM

2 up, 0 down

Skatejimmy5
Wednesday, October 27, 2010 @ 12:19:23 PM
Reply

Played Fallout 3 for about 100 hours when it was new, again for about 60 hours when the trophy patch came out (plat'd it too), and I'm about 30 hours into Fallout: New Vegas so far, can't stop playing it. I really love this game!

:D

1 up, 0 down

FM23
Sunday, October 31, 2010 @ 5:35:47 AM
Reply

THey shoud do this review over because New Vegas is the GOTY. Forget RDR, GOWII, etc, Fallout delivered another great single player adventure. This game has crashed on me about 9 times already, been stuck in infinite loading times, etc and I still find the overall experience better than what is expecteed to be GOTY...RDR and others. And why are reviewers talking about the graphics looking dated, has anyone played RDR...it looks just like RDR and that isn't an insult because Fallout New Vegas looks great. Both New Vegas and Fallout 3 look beautiful on my tv screen. Anyway, this review seems to go out of it way to belitte the game instead of praising it for what it does right.

0 up, 0 down

Leirza
Monday, November 01, 2010 @ 4:13:27 PM
Reply

I don't get why people complain when a sequel to a best-seller is completely different than the original, and then still complain when it's exactly like the original, just no pleasing some people.

Yes it's like fallout 3, I like fallout 3, ergo I like NV.

Last edited by Leirza on 11/1/2010 4:14:51 PM

1 up, 0 down

lvphknuup
Thursday, November 04, 2010 @ 12:07:55 PM
Reply

Too Much Loading, Drove ME Crazy! I Returned It Fast.

0 up, 0 down

Please login or register to leave a comment.

Grand Theft Auto: Liberty City Stories cheats	PSP
Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas cheats	PS2
Gran Turismo 4 cheats	PS2
Need For Speed: Hot Pursuit 2 cheats	PS2
Soul Calibur IV cheats	PS3
Def Jam Fight for NY: The Takeover cheats	PSP
Corvette cheats	PS2
Kingdom of Paradise cheats	PSP
Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 2 cheats	PS1
God Hand cheats	PS2

Playstation 3

Playstation 4

PSP

Playstation Vita

Playstation 2

Playstation

Other

PSX Extreme

Site Stats

Fallout: New Vegas Review

Comments (79 posts)

Leave a Comment

Latest Updates

Popular Cheats

Recent Reviews

Recent Previews

Popular Sections

Extras

Grid 2 review	PS3
The Last Of Us review	PS3
Remember Me review	PS3
Call of Juarez: Gunslinger review	PS3
Fuse review	PS3
Resident Evil: Revelations review	PS3
Metro: Last Light review	PS3
Zombie Tycoon II: Brainhov's Revenge review	PS3
Far Cry 3: Blood Dragon review	PS3
Star Trek: The Video Game review	PS3

South Park: The Stick of Truth preview	PS3
Murdered: Soul Suspect preview	PS3
The Bureau: XCOM Declassified preview	PS3
Time and Eternity preview	PS3
Ride to Hell: Retribution preview	PS3
Call of Juarez: Gunslinger preview	PS3
Far Cry 3: Blood Dragon preview	PS3
Spartacus Legends preview	PS3
Payday 2 preview	PS3
DUST 514 preview	PS3