Fallout Series Thread V6 - FalloutNV.exe has stopped responding - Games

[QUOTE=Android phone;30112531]Why not? I think the overworld for NV sucks hard compared to F3, there are no really interesting and expansive or scattered but similar places like the subways and downtown DC and overpasses. It's just a mostly flat, orange, empty desert. On that same note I think Bethesda is also much better at giving minor characters personalities, you'll notice that most of the named-but-nobody-gives-a-fuck-about-them characters in the casinos in NV have no real personality or voice or role besides "talk to to complete quest 942", the little guys in F3 had a lot more life to them: that asshole doctor in Megaton, all the caravan owners, Mel, even some of the raiders have extensive back-story to them. inb4 I'm a bethesda fanboy for not worshiping obsidian[/QUOTE] I personally thought NV's world was better, not by much though. The problem is that FO3 used way too many of the same tilesets EVERYWHERE. You've seen one subway or one destroyed building, you've seen them all. There's less of that in NV. That's not to say FO3's world sucked, it was mostly decent, just way too repetitive. They did awesome with their DLC, however. Point Lookout and The Pitt were so good. NV is empty in areas, there's no mistake about that, but I personally liked its gameworld better because there are some "diamond in the rough" locations, and it's less claustrophobic all around. Like Fallout 3, they'll probably fill the empty areas when more DLC launches. Also, the vaults in the two gamebyro fallout games are a tie for me, FO3 had the Gary vault and the weird hallucination vault, and NV had the Jumanji vault and the crazy-election suiciding vault. On a final note, I also agree that Bethesda was better at making NPCs livelier. They did a better job than Obsidian with NPCs.

[QUOTE=SoaringScout;30110405]Too bad the speech system, aiming, subway spam, and repairing system all sucked.[/QUOTE] Speech system was roughly 1000% better in Fallout 3. It actually made sense and promoted focusing on the skill. Now it's just "read a magazine and put on the naughty nightwear". what's that? Your one point short? NO SPEECH OPTION FOR YOU!

i cant wait for fallout 4, i pray the story is better than vegas

New vegas's setting and basic aesthetic was no doubt better (post nuclear mojave), but in terms of quality and size I think bethesda can do more just because of their experience with the style of level design and their large team. What bothered me about Fallout was the "overly-destroyed" look of much of the outlying areas. there's no doubt that DC itself would be a massive waste if it were hit by a nuke, but the areas outside.. comon. You've got people living in these areas and yet it still looks like the bombs only hit yesterday? Didnt those lazy assholes think to clean up a bit? Why is there rubble everywhere still? Also why the fuck are there no trees growing? Radiation inhibits vegetation growth [I]marginally[/I], but it's nothing 200 years wouldn't fix. I would have been a lot more impressed overall with Fallout 3's environment if it had more greenery (trees and green grass) and if there were less people shooting at you. I didnt necessarily have a problem with the qauntity of NPCs you could kill, but the ratio of hostile to non-hostile was like 100:1. [editline]29th May 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Cpn Crunch21;30112845]i cant wait for fallout 4, i pray the story is better than vegas[/QUOTE] New Vegas is more of a faction play game. The sidequests are better but the MQ definitely has less of a story. In regards to Fallout 1 & 2 it has quite a bit less story. That said some of the "big personalities' of fallout NV alone were very interesting, but yeah there really is no central story. really the Story of NV is embedded in the factions, and the people that make up the factions.

[QUOTE=hypno-toad;30112881]New vegas's setting and basic aesthetic was no doubt better (post nuclear mojave), but in terms of quality and size I think bethesda can do more just because of their experience with the style of level design and their large team. What bothered me about Fallout was the "overly-destroyed" look of much of the outlying areas. there's no doubt that DC itself would be a massive waste if it were hit by a nuke, but the areas outside.. comon. You've got people living in these areas and yet it still looks like the bombs only hit yesterday? Didnt those lazy assholes think to clean up a bit? Why is there rubble everywhere still? Also why the fuck are there no trees growing? Radiation inhibits vegetation growth [I]marginally[/I], but it's nothing 200 years wouldn't fix. I would have been a lot more impressed overall with Fallout 3's environment if it had more greenery 9trees and green grass) and if there were less people shooting at you. I didnt nessarily have a problem with the qaunity of NPCs you could kill, but the ratio of hostile to non-hostile was like 100:1. [editline]29th May 2011[/editline] New Vegas is more of a faction play game. The sidequests are better but the MQ definitely has less of a story. In regards to Fallout 1 & 2 it has quite a bit less story. That said some of the "big personalities' of fallout NV alone were very interesting, but yeah there really is no central story. really the Story of NV is embedded in the factions, and the people that make up the factions.[/QUOTE] Green World + Fellout + Advanced Weather = A much better experience.

I used "their world" it actually makes the capital wasteland look like washinton DC. But still, the quality of that content is not super high because, well, it's third party. I think if Bethesda has just done a better aesthetic and color palette from the start there'd be no need to mod the game to hell.

Fallout isn't supposed to be realistic. Its supposed to follow the sterotypical concept of nuclear armageddon, not the real one .

Fallout 3's atmosphere is far superior. Every town felt like a ghost town, once populated with people and whatnot. New Vegas is just like today but with broken buildings.

I just thought of a genius speech system. Take a Medicine 55 check about some dude's broken leg. Medicine >= 55 becomes "<expertly reset and bind up the leg>" Medicine <= 30 becomes "<attempt to bandage leg>", which results in the person with the fubar leg yelling in pain. Medicine between 31-54? Attempt to bandage leg, with a percentage check like Fallout 3's, getting closer to 100% the closer you are to that 55. It's not so much the check I'm trying to show here as the system behind it. [editline]28th May 2011[/editline] And for a touch of humor, Medicine <= 10 becomes "What if I kicked your leg in the opposite direction you broke it in?"

[QUOTE=zombojoe;30113073]Fallout isn't supposed to be realistic. Its supposed to follow the sterotypical concept of nuclear armageddon, not the real one .[/QUOTE] Not really, at least not as much as Fallout 3. Fallout 1 & 2 are a bit cartooney, but Fallout 3 really took the whole "1950's Armageddon" thing way, way over the top. They overdid the 1950's aspect and they overdid the Armageddon aspect. [quote]Fallout 3's atmosphere is far superior. Every town felt like a ghost town, once populated with people and whatnot[/quote]Same deal. I find it really ridiculous. Fallout 1 & 2 had far more rational and believable settings. [I]Most[/I] towns with the exception of large cities have been re-inhabited, and many of them aren't super obliterated. Fallout 3's atmosphere was quite cliched in comparison; monsters everywhere and everything is way overly destroyed and un-lived in. It's been 200 years, people would be re-establishing themselves and be rebuilding, and Fallout 1 & 2 generally represent that with Settlements like Junk Town, Shady Sands, Vault City, San Francisco, etc; Fallout 3 did not.

[QUOTE=hypno-toad;30113745] Same deal. I find it really ridiculous. Fallout 1 & 2 had far more rational and believable settings. [I]Most[/I] towns with the exception of large cities have been re-inhabited, and many of them aren't super obliterated. Fallout 3's atmosphere was quite cliched in comparison; monsters everywhere and everything is way overly destroyed and un-lived in. It's been 200 years, people would be re-establishing themselves and be rebuilding, and Fallout 1 & 2 generally represent that with Settlements like Junk Town, Shady Sands, Vault City, San Francisco, etc; Fallout 3 did not.[/QUOTE] Of course they fucking wrecked the Capital Wasteland. IT'S THE MOTHERFUCKING CAPITAL. You don't just send a couple nuclear bottle rockets out like China did with California. When you're going to annihilate your sworn enemy's home base with explosives, you send out your most and best bombs.

[QUOTE=hypno-toad;30112881]New vegas's setting and basic aesthetic was no doubt better (post nuclear mojave), but in terms of quality and size I think bethesda can do more just because of their experience with the style of level design and their large team. What bothered me about Fallout was the "overly-destroyed" look of much of the outlying areas. there's no doubt that DC itself would be a massive waste if it were hit by a nuke, but the areas outside.. comon. You've got people living in these areas and yet it still looks like the bombs only hit yesterday? Didnt those lazy assholes think to clean up a bit? Why is there rubble everywhere still? Also why the fuck are there no trees growing? Radiation inhibits vegetation growth [I]marginally[/I], but it's nothing 200 years wouldn't fix. [/QUOTE] This is something that bothered me about Fallout 3 a lot. And really it wouldn't have been such a big deal if it was set like... 30 years after the bombs dropped, then it's understandble and all that, but after 200 years? Come now. [editline]29th May 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=eatdembeanz;30114022]Of course they fucking wrecked the Capital Wasteland. IT'S THE MOTHERFUCKING CAPITAL. You don't just send a couple nuclear bottle rockets out like China did with California. When you're going to annihilate your sworn enemy's home base with explosives, you send out your most and best bombs.[/QUOTE] Then it should've been a total wasteland instead of a mostly standing city.

[QUOTE=Android phone;30110588]the speech system could be remedied with quicksaving, I preferred the working "slightly closer to your head" aiming system over the completely broken "half-assed ironsights" aiming system, the subways were fucking awesome what are you talking about why does NV not have subways or overpasses or anything cool like that, and the repairing system wasn't all that bad, just slightly more annoying than this one[/QUOTE] The speech system being remedied by quicksaving is a sign of poor development. The 'slightly-closer-to-your-head' aiming system was annoying and imprecise. The iron sights are only broken with the Caravan Shotgun. The subways were copy-pasted and cool at first, but soon got incredibly irritating. The repair system was a major 'fuck-you' to the player in Fallout 3.

[QUOTE=lavacano;30113465]I just thought of a genius speech system. Take a Medicine 55 check about some dude's broken leg. Medicine >= 55 becomes "<expertly reset and bind up the leg>" Medicine <= 30 becomes "<attempt to bandage leg>", which results in the person with the fubar leg yelling in pain. [/QUOTE] Doesn't FO already do this?

Has anybody ever tried making a jumpsuit mod where said jumpsuit has an orange color and has the Aperture Science Innovators logo on the back? It could have an effect like +5 Science and +1 Agility.

[QUOTE=Android phone;30111235]I'd rather have one assault rifle than 200 that all have such slight differences to them they're basically all the same and I'd rather not carry around 10 different kinds of ammo for one type of weapon[/QUOTE] I thought this was Fallout not Borderlands, theres like 3 assualt rifles and there all completely different.

[QUOTE=Generic.Monk;30110846][h2]OBSIDIAN DON't GIVE US MORE CONTENT, PLEASE NO[/h2][/QUOTE] but i love the variety of weapons.

What I really want is Van Buren made in the vein of Fallout 3 and New Vegas and more places like Dog City Denver with above-ground settlements. There was so much opportunity to do that in Fallout 3, but they wasted it and gave us one Arefu which was small as fuck.

[QUOTE=zombojoe;30113073]Fallout isn't supposed to be realistic. Its supposed to follow the sterotypical concept of nuclear armageddon, not the real one .[/QUOTE] [img_thumb]http://images.wikia.com/fallout/images/d/d3/Fo2_New_California_Republic_Satellite_View.jpg[/img_thumb] [img_thumb]http://images.wikia.com/fallout/images/0/0f/Fo2_Vault_City_Council.png[/img_thumb] Clean, freshly built adobe buildings. Trees and grass. A lack of rubble and destruction. These were missing in FO3, and NV as well, which was particularly disappointing.

[QUOTE=Capitulazyguy;30117480]-imagesnip- Clean, freshly built adobe buildings. Trees and grass. A lack of rubble and destruction. These were missing in FO3, and NV as well, which was particularly disappointing.[/QUOTE] Oh god. This is why we need Media tags back. Edit: There you go simkas.

[QUOTE=Takuat;30117636]Oh god. This is why we need Media tags back.[/QUOTE] Yeah, good job, the pictures were loading just fine, but when you made them into thumbnails by quoting, my browser runs slow as fuck while scrolling past your post.

So I beat Dead Money and I think my game is now broken. I cannot leave the Sierra Madre without it crashing.

thank you for posting those 50,000,000x30,000,000 resolution screenshots of fallout 1 and 2, that's exactly what I wanted when I came here :colbert:

[QUOTE=redBadger;30120751]So I beat Dead Money and I think my game is now broken. I cannot leave the Sierra Madre without it crashing.[/QUOTE] That happened to me in Oblivion. I got past the crashing by using the console to teleport to another location.

what level should i be to do the hoover dam quest? i'm level 18 and i cant do shit against the centurions

[QUOTE=Assburgers;30107143]He is in the hangars.[/QUOTE] Well it turns out, the wiki says for the Old School Ghoul quest: [quote=Fallout Wiki]Travel to Nellis Air Force Base [b]or Black Mountain[/b] and speak to Loyal.[/quote] God fucking dammit. I bet I did a quest that made him travel to black mountain.

is it wrong to download a free fallout 2 game? [highlight](User was banned for this post ("warez" - GunFox))[/highlight]

[QUOTE=Jimmyjohn;30123425]is it wrong to download a free fallout 2 game?[/QUOTE] yes in fact, it's considered pirating, which just so happens to be bannable here bye-bye :)