While it fits the basic description to a letter, it doesn't actually use the mechanics for what simultaneous turns are supposed to represent. Simultaneous turns, and that's why I said they won't work when real-time then allows you to take the same actions, work as they do to force players to commit to certain actions, and that commitment being an inherent risk for the player. You neither really commit, nor do you take any risks in Fallout 3 and New Vegas - actions taken in VATS are strictly beneficial. Even if you miss every single shot taken, you actually risk very little by taking actions in VATS, to a point where, unless you're starved for ammo, there's no reason NOT to use VATS even with low hit chances. At this point is really not an issue of balance - it's an issue of core design philosophy being completely different for simultaneous turn-based combat and VATS.

Additionally, simultaneous turn-based mechanics are called simultaneous because they presume more than a single actor entering the planning phase. When there are no actual simultaneous turns taking place in the combat, but instead player gets a chance of pausing the real-time combat and issue orders, well... We've been there already ;-)

It was catered to oldies who complained about writing and storytelling presented in Fallout 3, and rightfully so. New Vegas has beat Fallout 3 in that department by miles. I would agree that it's a case of nostalgia if their arguments were wrong, but they were not - Fallout world as presented in Fallout 3 was unfaithful to actual established canon in many ways, and it has failed to present the world in shades of grey most fans of postapoaclyptic fiction adore.

Actually, I agree with you on level-design perspective. Level design in New Vegas was a mess, especially when compared to the masterfully crafter world Fallout 3 presented. I was talking about level design of early stages of the original Deus Ex, which is to this day used as an example of fantastic level design - we've had an argument about that some time ago that for some reason got stuck in my head, and ever since I've observed a tendency on your part to present your subjective criticism in some discussions as "I'm right and you're wrong because you're being nostalgic", regardless of arguments presented.

Bah. A tremendous amount of New Vegas came from the original Fallout 3, that was called Van Buren. The story and lore were much better, and the mechanics changed to be closer to an RPG than Bethesda had managed.

It was done by Obsidian and rushed, so of course there were bugs. It was so damned brown that it could be downright depressing. But just the Big MT alone was better story, writing, and roleplay than the entirety of Fallout3 with all DLCs included.

Round 1! FIGHT!
Alright, I see that I'm going to just have to retreat into an ideological shell about this, but let me offer a parting thought: if you're standing still in VATS and a super mutant hits you in the face with a club, DR be damned, you've just had an outcome less beneficial than if you had been running away dropping mines for him to step on XD

Really? Because Deus Ex HR is highly regarded even amongst the so called oldies. Even in Rpgcodex.

Did you just run through the landscape in NV without doing anything? One of the game's best sidequests in the NV was Beyond the Beef, and that was in Vegas. How about the Kings questlines? Etc

How about Vault 11? It's still one of the best written explorable places I've ever been in RPGs. It greets you with a air of mystery and feeds you the desire to explore it further and further until it smacks you with the final twist at the end. There are threads in forums on Vault 11 alone:

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1046677
http://www.reddit.com/r/Fallout/comments/2f02rx/vault_11_holy_shit/
http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/959557-fallout-new-vegas/56944292

But if the super mutant can hit you in the face with his club in VATS, he's close enough already that even if you run away from him, the explosions from the mines he steps on might turn out not that beneficial to yourself either? ;)

it looks great,reminds me of fallout 2 in some aspects.best thing is that its not as grey as f3

Yay, Beyond the Beef.... buggiest quest ever in any game published by Bethesda - but then you see the same Obsidian fanboys being mad at Bethesda because of the Metacritic rating / no bonus thing.... blaming the shitty engine, the shitty QA of the publisher (not the dev - no, no), the casuals failing to understand the quest or whatever.
Let's face it once and for all: Obsidian did their share to botch NV Metacritic rating.

You talk about quests, not level or world design. Yes quests are in general better in NV. But Level design? I'd say about on par. World design? Hell no. A desert is inherently emptier and more difficult to fill meaningfully, then a ruined city. And DC alone was more interesting to explore than the complete Mojave.

NV improved at lot over F3. No doubt about it. Choices and consequences, companion questlines, factions, better writing...
Actually, I'd start disputing at the better writing part, at least partially. Yes, the writing for quests was better. But the overarching storyline? Baby-eating roman baddies? .... sry, you have me speechless.
Now play as a female and join Caesar's legion.... who see woman as slaves and fuckdolls. Gain an audience to Caesar, work as his second hand, become his champion in the field, even perform brain surgery on Caesar himself... after the game told you time after time, how woman get treated in Caesar's legion.... ... ... sry, what was that about story writing?

You remember how Skyrim got beaten down as a "dumbed-down casual game"? Of course you do, sry about asking....
Well, where's the criticism about Obsidian merging big guns and small guns together? Missile Launcher and Fat Man go in explosives, Flamer in... what? Energy Weapons?
.... I give you the answer: it's not there. Criticising Bethesda? "Hell yeah, I'm on board!!". Asking the same person doing so with Obsidian where it applies? "What? Shut up n00b, you know nuthin' about RPG".

HYPE!!!

To be fair, I have always criticized Bethesda for:
a) basing those bonuses on something as fickle as Metacritic rating
and
b) not giving them those bonuses when they missed the rating by 1%. At that point, the 1% is completely negligible.

You could argue that Obsidian was stupid to agree to such a deal, and I would be inclined to agree - still, doesn't show Bethesda in a good light.

*shrugs*
Skyrim finally came up with a system which actively prevented you from becoming a jack of all trades which is something TES series got widely criticized for, and then gets criticized for coming up with such system.

graphics looks like shit and thats good cause i can probably run it unlike witcher 3

Absolutely. They not only could but should have been more reasonable and still give them the bonus. But if they would have done so and even dared to say that they did, the same guys would have bashed Bethesda as PR whores.

Yeap. With all 4 addons it's possible to get a 100-in-all character in NV. I've never seen any Bethesda or Skyrim basher criticising Obsidian for this roleplaying atrocity.... which is exactly my point.

That's what Logan's Loophole was for. Besides, Fallout 3 wasn't any better in that regard, either, as my recent playthrough showed.

That's an odd way to spell Blood On The Ice.

I'll dispute The Capitol Wasteland being more interesting than the Mojave as well. I can remember a ton of locations from New Vegas (which I haven't played in months) but can't remember any place in Fallout 3 (which I just played some of last night) beyond a couple of vaults and the two major cities.

Writing? Bethesda has the worst dialogue writers in the business (AAA or otherwise) and the main story of Fallout 3 was a poor mishmash of the first two games with added stupidity. The silliest example being: "You blew up an entire city, daddy is disappointed in you! Wait...you donated a bottle of dirty water to a beggar? Nevermind I'm so proud of you!", then you have the later parts of the main quest with the Enclave and President Eden that is facepalm worthy at best.


Sure, the Legion was poorly implemented in places (due to time constraints) but at least you had a choice and you could actively cut yourself off from a faction, heck, at least there were actual factions PERIOD. In Fallout 3 you are the good little boy/girl Brotherhood of Steel Knight whether you want to be or not, if you want to play the main quest.

New Vegas has its faults, it was crash-tastic for me, at one point it was crashing every fifteen minutes, which is an issue I never had with Fallout 3, Dead Money was awful, and Lonesome Road was fairly mediocre. Beyond that, I found New Vegas to be infinitely better in nearly every way (besides that awful Johnny Guitar radio bug) over Fallout 3.

And no, I'm not a fanboy of Fallout 1/2 who must defend them for the honor of nostalgia, Fallout 3 was my introduction to the Fallout series. You can dislike Fallout 3 without being the dreaded fan of the first two Fallouts or Obsidian.

I'm not claiming F3 being better at all. I'm claiming the same guys bashing F3 and Skyrim over this, failing to see it in Obsidian's NV.

If you see Blood on the Ice as buggier than Beyond the Beef, compare the bugs section on uesp vs NVwiki.

Absolutely. And I have no problem with it. NV was for a large part better than F3. Not on the world design, at least for me, but this is personal preference and I have no problem accepting other opinions.
But take all the criticism against F3 in this thread alone and compare it with NV - how many fail on facts or, at the very least, disregard any viable criticism against NV / Obsidian? Objectivity, what's that again?

Well, if NV offers an alternative that you can use or disregard, in accordance with your playstyle, I call that an improvement.