To me the legion feels more like evil opposition you are allowed to join rather than a real faction.
But that may be because I expected a great personality from Caesar and was seriously disappointed.
There's plenty of younger gamers and casual gamers to make up for the loss though. Financially, you can't condemn Bioware for courting the kiddies and the soccer moms. That's where the money is.
While that may be the case as Nintendo found out with Wii - it still is beneficial to maintain a group of dedicated fans, if only for their predictability.
Whether Bioware build a new following that will complain in a decade how ME2 was their high point is impossible to tell.
not in my book it wasn't.
That AND
you may be shocked to learn that there are people who really liked BG2 but have no interest in DA2.
At least not as an RPG game.
Whatever good will Bioware had among older gamers may be slowly coming to an end.
I must have that bug then, because I've killed him twice in daylight while he just stands near the rock going 'heh heh' to himself. I shoot him once and he attacks, I kill him, take his note, done.
Having ED-E with you seems to break this quest.
Given game mechanics they could barley scratch them.
It gets even worse with legion supposedly defeating them with machetes.
Yes, and given game mechanics, water heals gunshots.
Game mechanics are not the setting's reality.
Indeed and using common sense that outcome is even more absurd.
Unless you are willing to believe that 2000 years of weapon and armor development can be completely discounted.
It's definitely possible as I managed to defuse the bomb on my run. I used SCIENCE!
Basically what I did:
And you managed to report back a success?
Because as far I could see the
, regardless of whether
.
I was wondering about that as in that part of the game he got seriously bugged.
Is he supposed to arrive in the vertibird or simply appear with you at the entrance to the dam with the armor?
Quite a few things in fact.
It had far less bugs for one.
I don't think I encoutered even half the problems in whole of Fallout 3 that New Vegas has in only one area.
Bugs are always a questionable thing to focus on. FO3 has a reputation for being excessively buggy (I had virtually no issues), and FONV is following up that reputation (again, I have had virtually no issues as well).
I disagree.
Some industry quality standards are in place for open world games and players have every right to judge games accordingly.
I also had few minor issues with Fallout 3 but New Vegas turned out to be quite another story.
Even without having my saves deleted/corrupted the sheer amount of console lock-ups was simply un-excusable. I seriously doubt a casual player could be expected to put up with that problem.
But even worse is that for every severe technical issue the game has a dozen minor ones.
In Fallout 3 I never needed to open up GECK so I could try to distinguish between bugs and terrible quest design.
Fallout 3 also never showed me incorrect ending slide.
Quite a few things in fact.
It had far less bugs for one.
I don't think I encoutered even half the problems in whole of Fallout 3 that New Vegas has in only one area.
"Quite a few things. It had less bugs."
...is that all?
No, but writing a three page long rant would be unfair to Obsidian.
Like I said it's an ok game and many of it's issues are minor or small by themselves but the sheer number of them brings the overall experience down quite a lot.
Quite a few things in fact.
It had far less bugs for one.
I don't think I encoutered even half the problems in whole of Fallout 3 that New Vegas has in only one area.
Just finished it.
It's not a bad game but ultimately fails at too many aspects to call better than Fallout 3.
Quality is all over the place and in the end it feels like quantity completely triumphed consistency.
I'd certainly disagree.
If level scaling of regular guns can cause a serious problem for the player I imagine the same can apply to other weapon types.
Bethesda - the first Obsidian publisher who actually cares?
If that's the way they care about their games I'd rather do without it.
It's hard enough to find reasonable opinions without publishers getting reviews pulled and journalists fired at a drop of a hat.
Why exactly do you believe gamespot? There are multiple other sources that say the complete opposite.
Because I'm familiar with the reviewer and sadly in this case I'll take his word over all other gaming journalists combined.
Was there any DLC considered?
Maybe at least there is hope for small-scale story-driven addon.
....
This is it fellow friends . EPIC, DRAMATIC is the key to great, compelling writing.
They are signs of attempts at writing.
It seems that for new vegas obsidian just didn't bother.
Maybe he had low expectations. Given Oblivion standards it would be hard to blame him.
And I hope he's wrong as to the storyline. That was the biggest failing of Fallout 3 by far.