Fallout: New Vegas

[Malcador]

It'd be nice to have no feedback for attacking targets aside from reactions or them falling over dead. Then again maybe there is, and I'm out of the loop

[funcroc]

1UP preview

Kotaku preview

Eurogamer preview

GamesRadar preview

G4 preview

Edited May 4, 2010 by funcroc

[funcroc]

MCA interview at VG247

Game Informer - What You Should Know About Fallout: New Vegas

Joystiq preview

Edited May 4, 2010 by funcroc

[Niten_Ryu]

Lotsa previews. I'm going to enjoy 'em with my finnish military issue spork

[Enoch]

http://kotaku.com/5530359/fallout-new-vega...mods//gallery/4

 

Awesome.

[TwinkieGorilla]

Sawyer wants skills to feel more meaningful.

 

good.

 

Urquhart points out that, yes, the skills were meaningful in Fallout 3

 

[intelligence] So you say skills were meaningful in Fallout 3?

 

Super Mutants are still present, but they're more like the smart and powerful ones from the first two Fallouts.

 

yet for no reason still look like ****ing orcs.

 

However you made your character, it should be a viable way to finish the game. That's one of my core beliefs.

 

good to see a new Fallout game following Cain's original Fallout ideology. let's just hope this applies to the entire game, not just the ending...as Cain said, all situations should be able to be handled through dialogue, stealth or violence. let's also hope these moments are not as idiotically vapid and arbitrarily written as convincing the computer to commit suicide.

 

The Big Horners are docile, but the geckos aren't. They're also one of Obsidian's favorite beasts from Fallout 2

 

word. i always loved the geckos myself.

 

The promise of proven gameplay with classic Fallout know-how, combined with the allure of a post-nuclear Vegas Strip, might overcome some of that all-too-familiar feeling.

 

yes, but how long must you polish a turd before it's not recognizably a turd anymore?

 

hulking brute in a blonde bob wig and love-heart glasses

 

Pete Hines?

 

New Vegas will give you a chance to unfold your own story somewhere that's at once real and unreal, familiar and utterly fantastical and strange. And that, surely, is what role-playing games are all about.

 

yeah. i'm not sure this is what role-playing games are all about, but it certainly sounds better than being once again...arbitrarily...forced to care about your father.

 

No doubt expecting that most of the audience for Fallout: New Vegas is already a Fallout 3 devotee

 

always know your audience and cater directly to them! let's get some exploding cars, boys!

 

Since New Vegas is running on the same engine as Fallout 3, don’t expect massive graphical or technical changes to the game

 

cool story, bro. but we've already seen the screenshots. *sigh*

 

...

 

these previews are basically the same regurgitated info we've been seeing for the past few months. *yawn*

Edited May 4, 2010 by TwinkieGorilla

[funcroc]

Gamespot preview

[Gromnir]

"good to see a new Fallout game following Cain's original Fallout ideology."

 

you must be speaking of a different Cain than the one who worked on fallout. the original fallout had a number o' relative useless skills and some overwhelming useful skills. balance and usefulness o' skills, perks and traits were Not part o' the original fallout that we played. with meta knowledge you could indeed complete fo with any build, but am doubting that is how you or obsidian intends.

 

nevertheless, if obsidian has finally put the spectre o' timmy's crap fo balancing to rest and actual made all skills, traits and perks relative useful, then we have 0 complaints on this matter... regardless of the fact that they is clearly spitting on the cain legacy by doing so.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Starwars]

You are a special and controversial flower Gromnir.

 

Not much that much actually new stuff in the previews. Not a fan at all of the skill numbers, red text showing if there's a chance of failing (too which there appears to be no consequence judging from what's been said before) and all that... If hardcore mode and the seemingly more political plot are the things which I think are great news, I feel the dialogue stuff (as I understand them) is the worst news thus far.

[J.E. Sawyer]

There is no "chance" of failure; they're all straight threshold checks. Either you have the required skill or you don't. I've never understood the appeal of random chance, no-contest failure in games with instant reload. And I mean inside dialogue and out. If starting up a reactor requires a certain amount of Repair or Science, as a player, I'd rather have that be a threshold check than randomized. If I can't do it, I'd rather the game just tell me I can't do it instead of allowing me to unwittingly end/reload the game.

[Starwars]

There is no "chance" of failure; they're all straight threshold checks. Either you have the required skill or you don't. I've never understood the appeal of random chance, no-contest failure in games with instant reload. And I mean inside dialogue and out. If starting up a reactor requires a certain amount of Repair or Science, as a player, I'd rather have that be a threshold check than randomized. If I can't do it, I'd rather the game just tell me I can't do it instead of allowing me to unwittingly end/reload the game.

 

I think it depends on the situation. It's not totally random after all, if I put a lot of skill points into Speech then I would comfortably choose those options despite there maybe being a small chance of failing. Having just instant death situations, then yeah, I'd agree with you there.

 

But to use an example for New Vegas, there is a chance of using Explosives in the dialogue with Pete to get some dynamite. Now, I love that the dialogue option changes on itself depending on your skill, I think that's great. But if you choose the Explosives line with a low Explosives skill, and maybe come across as a real idiot or amateur, wouldn't it make sense if Pete (if we just assume for discussions sake), being nice old man who feels he has a lot of responsibility in handling dangerous stuff like dynamite, would be doubtful in dealing with you again?

Crude example but you know...

Edited May 4, 2010 by Starwars

[TwinkieGorilla]

you must be speaking of a different Cain than the one who worked on fallout.

 

 

no, i'm referring to a quote. a quote from one of the original developers which i can't locate for the life of me right now. regardless, you missed what i actually said, then...didn't you? the point was about solving situations through diplomacy, stealth or violence. not whether or not every skill was worthwhile or balanced (though compared to FO3 the skills and S.P.E.C.I.A.L. had a much greater impact; i made a post detailing this last year. go dig it up.)

[WorstUsernameEver]

There is no "chance" of failure; they're all straight threshold checks. Either you have the required skill or you don't. I've never understood the appeal of random chance, no-contest failure in games with instant reload. And I mean inside dialogue and out. If starting up a reactor requires a certain amount of Repair or Science, as a player, I'd rather have that be a threshold check than randomized. If I can't do it, I'd rather the game just tell me I can't do it instead of allowing me to unwittingly end/reload the game.

 

Just a question, if you had to throw a bone to us, how many of this speech checks are non repeatable?

I'll try to explain myself better with an example :

let's assume we have two quest.

One quest requires you to find the mystical nightwear.

The other asks you to convince Bob to lend one of his brahmins to Josh.

 

In the first quest, when you get the mystical nightwear you're ambushed by a couple of raiders. There is a speech check to convince them to let you go. Obviously, if you fail it, when the conversation ends they'll attack you. That's what I consider a non repeatable speech check.

In the second, obviously you can convince Bob in various ways, one of them a speech check. Since you can come back to him in different moments, it's my understanding that speech options never disappear, so if you come back when you meet the requirements of the check, you pass and convince him to lend one of his brahmins to Josh.

That's a repeatable speech check (you would never have guessed uh?).

 

Because to be honest, it'd make the second kind of quests a bit too easy, especially since you could just wait and come back with a speech magazine.

[TwinkieGorilla]

Because to be honest, it'd make the second kind of quests a bit too easy, especially since you could just wait and come back with a speech magazine.

 

or even worse, those checks in FO3 where you could pass a speech/skill/SPECIAL check even if you had a very low build in that area. like a percentage check instead of a threshold check. i'm ALL for threshold checks. percentage checks are ****ing retarded though. if implemented poorly, it can render your character build completely worthless.

Edited May 4, 2010 by TwinkieGorilla

[WorstUsernameEver]

If Hardcore proves too much for you you can revert to Normal at any time, but once you do that, you can't go back, and you won't get the special achievement for completing the game on Hardcore.

 

This should dispell some worries people had about Hardcore Mode.

[Gromnir]

I've never understood the appeal of random chance, no-contest failure in games with instant reload.

 

oh, am thinking that the appeal is easy enough to understand. the random chance aspect is if not integral, then at least common in most old skool pnp rpgs. possibility o' failure genuine adds to tension... success is made all the more sweet by having the chance o' failure present. 'course having such randomness in a crpg with insta-reload pretty much negates all the positive aspects o' pnp chance. nevertheless, for those purists who insist on a Proper rpg analogue, a fraudulent element o' chance is necessary to complete the rpg experience.

 

*shrug*

 

am personally unmoved by those who would grovel before the altar o' tradition, but there is no denying that a sense o' propriety and the fulfillment o' expectations does enhance the gaming enjoyment of some players.

 

"no, i'm referring to a quote. a quote from one of the original developers which i can't locate for the life of me right now."

 

figures. referring to a quote... but not the material you actual quoted.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited May 4, 2010 by Gromnir

[WorstUsernameEver]

Clarification on my part, since I inserted myself in the discussion between J.E. Sawyer and Starwars : I don't care much about the dice-roll/threshold mechanic, but about the fact that you can try again repeatedly.

[TwinkieGorilla]

figures. referring to a quote... but not the material you actual quoted.

 

 

um, yeah. but you're still not addressing the actual issue.

Edited May 4, 2010 by TwinkieGorilla

[Killian Kalthorne]

There is no "chance" of failure; they're all straight threshold checks. Either you have the required skill or you don't. I've never understood the appeal of random chance, no-contest failure in games with instant reload. And I mean inside dialogue and out. If starting up a reactor requires a certain amount of Repair or Science, as a player, I'd rather have that be a threshold check than randomized. If I can't do it, I'd rather the game just tell me I can't do it instead of allowing me to unwittingly end/reload the game.

 

In Console and Computer RPGs I agree, in PnP I do not.

[TwinkieGorilla]

In Console and Computer RPGs I agree, in PnP I do not.

 

yeah. this was something i always hated about the original Fallouts. being able to load/reload until you get something right. obviously sometimes you have an impossible "dice-roll" if you've not built up the skill enough, but still. FO3 seemed even worse with this in the speech checks, as if the dice-rolls weren't thought out or implemented correctly or something...conversely i did like that you couldn't even attempt to lock-pick certain things unless you built that skill up enough. too many skills though just seemed to sit there, useless.

[Oner]

So, is there anything in these last 6 previews that isn't an endless repetition of "Fore!-GunMods-Boomheadshot"?

[WorstUsernameEver]

Not much, but there's still something. You could just look into this thread to see the new info though.

[J.E. Sawyer]

Just a question, if you had to throw a bone to us, how many of this speech checks are non repeatable?

It depends on the context, but whether or not we allow you to repeat has less to do with realism/plausibility and more to do with not penalizing the player for encountering a challenge at the "wrong" time in his/her build. If most of the safes you encountered in the wasteland wouldn't allow you to pick them after the first time they were examined, that would be kind of irritating. The "you're going to fail" options aren't present in dialogue so the player can select them and see the wacky response to their incompetence (although that does have some appeal), but to let the player know that there's a challenge there that they can't currently meet. Unless you're being directly confronted (e.g. the ambush scenario you described), allowing the player to return and attempt the challenge with a higher skill is less punitive and does reward players who choose to go and advance their skills -- whether that's through leveling up, using chems, or reading skill magazines. Magazines and chems only provide a small boost though, so if the threshold is 80 and you have 33 in the skill, you're not going to be able to bridge that gap without some serious time and effort (i.e., leveling up).

[funcroc]

Chris Avellone interview at Videogamer.com

Videogamer preview

Shacknew preview

Edited May 4, 2010 by funcroc

[J.E. Sawyer]

In Console and Computer RPGs I agree, in PnP I do not.

A DM who allows reloads = a bad DM.