Fallout: New Vegas - Fall 2010

Isn't it mostly the Bloody Mess perk? I didn't pick it and the gore wasn't too bad.

farley3k wrote:

Isn't it mostly the Bloody Mess perk? I didn't pick it and the gore wasn't too bad.

The gory exploding corpse animations were generally your "reward" for a critical hit killshot in VATS. The Bloody Mess perk just made it so that every kill gave you the animations. I avoided taking the perk, and still had hundreds of decaptiations and corpse disintegration. I can't really count the number of times that the only thing I could find to loot on a "corpse" was a random eyeball lying on the ground.

Yeah, I got fed up with the constant gore too. If you have a high enough skill/critical chance you get situations where you line up three headshots on three different enemies in VATS, and three heads fly off like champagne corks with alarming regularity.

I like gore in my games. I want it more realistic (well...in GoW L4D sort of way). Plus, I think making killing a more difficult choice is good thing, right?

I actually installed a gore reducing mod in Fallout 3. Even without the Bloody Mess perk (which, btw, didn't make me feel like I was losing out on anything by choosing it in F3, whereas in the other games you were clearly giving up needed skills in order to maximize "fun") once your character got high enough in any weapon skill, things were almost always getting messy ... as others have pointed out.

Yeah, I always play Fallout with high crit, high accuracy, head shot focused builds. The slow-motion crit deaths in Fallout 3 were excessive because of that. And I seem to recall even a head-shot death could result in severed limbs somehow.

Quintin_Stone wrote:

Yeah, I always play Fallout with high crit, high accuracy, head shot focused builds. The slow-motion crit deaths in Fallout 3 were excessive because of that. And I seem to recall even a head-shot death could result in severed limbs somehow.

As discussed, you'd probably taken the Bloody Mess perk.

AnimeJ wrote:
Quintin_Stone wrote:

Yeah, I always play Fallout with high crit, high accuracy, head shot focused builds. The slow-motion crit deaths in Fallout 3 were excessive because of that. And I seem to recall even a head-shot death could result in severed limbs somehow.

As discussed, you'd probably taken the Bloody Mess perk.

No, it results without bloody mess. Bloody mess just makes non crit kills into gibs.

Yeah, I can confirm that the "crit sniper" builds in Fallout 3 definitely result in many random gore explosions. I never took Bloody Mess, even though it had a nice constant +Damage bonus simply because I found the gore to be undesirable. Despite that, I decapitated hundreds of raiders with small bore pistols and saw super mutant torso explosions with rifle hits etc.

I think that killshots executed in VATS mode are significantly more likely to result in dismemberment than just real-time point and shoot, so maybe the folks who weren't seeing any of this are the same ones that didn't really use VATS much.

AnimeJ wrote:
Quintin_Stone wrote:

Yeah, I always play Fallout with high crit, high accuracy, head shot focused builds. The slow-motion crit deaths in Fallout 3 were excessive because of that. And I seem to recall even a head-shot death could result in severed limbs somehow.

As discussed, you'd probably taken the Bloody Mess perk.

Nope, I never ever take Bloody Mess. What a waste of a perk that could go towards more crits.

I am weird I guess. I find Fallout New Vegas refreshing and from the Youtube and comments surround the trailer in various spots I gather that after the bombs fell New Vegas was rebuilt quickly. Why? It's freakin Vegas we're talking about. Nothing can kill it.

Also I am appalled by the amount of info on this thread. I have actually mainly skipped two whole pages because the information that was available. I don't know how you people can read that and want more. What do you want? Every trailer to tell you the whole game story and every single detail so you don't have any surprises? Geez I seen posts say " I still need more info before I decide" and I nearly had a heart attack. You need more info? So mainly you don't want any surprises, anything that makes you go " Now that was awesome" will be spoiled. Hell I'd love to see if there will finally be other transportation than walking and fast travel but I will look when I buy the game in a few months.

I've heard people complain about too much info about Mass Effect 2. Well you want to know why there was so many spoilers in the trailer? Because the fans ask for more info. Because people can't seem to make a decision on little information anymore.

Sorry for my rant but I felt it needed to be said. I hate spoilers and anymore I need a media blackout to avoid them. I miss the days when games were a surprise. Where all you have to go on are some screenshots and the description on the back of the box.

That's going to be down to personal tolerance, unless we spoiler tag pretty much everything or have varying levels of tagging, there's not much to discuss about a game other than it's coming. At what point do you declare a 'universal spoiler' that needs tagging? The plot (I'd agree there within a certain time-scale around release), the weapons, the locations, game mechanics? I have to ask "what did you expect?" reading a thread discussing an upcoming game, people are going to be speculating given the facts and rumours available and previous games.

I feel that video gamers in general are over-sensitive to spoilers (see also). I doubt there's anything here that you wouldn't stumble upon on any other video games forum, especially given that FO:NV isn't out yet (and they're keeping the plot under wraps), FO3 is over 2 years old, and FO/FO2 are a decade older again.

Scratched wrote:

I feel that video gamers in general are over-sensitive to spoilers (see also).

I'm not a huge spoiler freak (either pro or con), but I think that article you linked to essentially boiled down to "hiding spoilers is infantile, except when it isn't."

Most people seem to be able to distinguish between different levels of spoilers-- in this case, is information about the game "in general" a spoiler? I don't think most people would see it as spoilers, yet there are those who go into "media blackout" if they want to avoid anything about the game. Seems like a fair compromise. As for the rest, I don't know. People who spoil things generally see them as being "no big deal," while people who have something spoiled for them are justifiably upset to a degree. I guess it comes down to using some sort of common sense about not revealing things that are "core" plot twists. Other, less important things are open for debate.

I'm still kind of pissed that Roger Ebert willfully spoiled the "cameo" from ZOMBIELAND in his review. Why he would do such a thing, I don't know, but it definitely lessened my enjoyment of the film.

If general information on a game is spoiler territory, then you need to selfimpose a media blackout and just avoid anything related. Personally, spoilers should, as their name implies, spoil something you wouldn't ordinarily know. In this case, going on about New Reno is pretty much a spoiler for the older FO games. That said, they're old enough that you shouldn't have to be all sensitive about spoiling them. Personally, I'd say once a game passes it's primetime in the spotlight, it's free and clear for open discussion.

Granted, that in and of itself presents numerous issues. How long do you exclude? What do you really consider in the 'prime spotlight'? It's very subjective. Personally, I'd say stuff like DA:O should get some protetction at least until the expansion comes out. Games like AC2, maybe less so, as it's a shorter game and more easily beaten.

Oh, and since this is about New Vegas, I don't care about any of the details, but I'll probably pick it up Day 1 or fairly close to it. And I'll almost certainly buy it on Steam.

I'm not sure if I'm being too sensitive the other way, but between the two spoiler extremes of putting up in 72 point caps "Darth Vader is Luke's dad" on the day of release (it was 30 years ago...) and "you can kill people with guns", it seems people treat the latter like the former when it comes to games discussion. Knowing that you visit the local landmarks around Las Vegas doesn't seem surprising to me, but I can understand people being annoyed by having a major plot point spoiled close to release, but not trivia about gameplay

adam.greenbrier wrote:

I'd like just one feature added to the gory dismemberment model: the ability to turn it off.

I agree. I'm not into the whole head and limbs exploding when you shoot the guy in the chest. A grenade sure, but a bullet, no no no no no.

Scratched wrote:

I'm not sure if I'm being too sensitive the other way, but between the two spoiler extremes of putting up in 72 point caps "Darth Vader is Luke's dad" on the day of release (it was 30 years ago...) and "you can kill people with guns", it seems people treat the latter like the former when it comes to games discussion. Knowing that you visit the local landmarks around Las Vegas doesn't seem surprising to me, but I can understand people being annoyed by having a major plot point spoiled close to release, but not trivia about gameplay

Woah wait hold on, Fallout: New Vegas takes place in Las Vegas?? AAARGH, SPOILERSZSZZ.

Scratched wrote:

Darth Vader is Luke's dad

WHAT THE HELL?!?! I HAVEN'T SEEN IT YET!

I've got a spoiler for you. You will die alone.

BlackSabre wrote:
adam.greenbrier wrote:

I'd like just one feature added to the gory dismemberment model: the ability to turn it off.

I agree. I'm not into the whole head and limbs exploding when you shoot the guy in the chest. A grenade sure, but a bullet, no no no no no.

Are you the Govenor general of Australia? STOP SPOILING MY GAMES!

Rat Boy wrote:

I've got a spoiler for you. You will die alone.

That's no spoiler.

Prozac wrote:
BlackSabre wrote:
adam.greenbrier wrote:

I'd like just one feature added to the gory dismemberment model: the ability to turn it off.

I agree. I'm not into the whole head and limbs exploding when you shoot the guy in the chest. A grenade sure, but a bullet, no no no no no.

Are you the Govenor general of Australia? STOP SPOILING MY GAMES!

Oh, don't get me wrong. If you want that in your game, I'm not opposed to it. I just want an option to turn it off.

Oh, don't get me wrong. If you want that in your game, I'm not opposed to it. I just want an option to turn it off.

Agreed with that. As I've often said,

The most important aspect of a 'new feature' in a game is the ability to turn it off.

EEEEEEEEEEEEEE NIGHTKIN!!!

Fallout is my favorite game world of all time. Super stoked for this.

suko_k wrote:

EEEEEEEEEEEEEE NIGHTKIN!!!

Fallout is my favorite game world of all time. Super stoked for this.

That's pretty much the same noise I made when I first heard Obsidian was making a Fallout game.

I want to rob the vault in the Bellagio.

Quintin_Stone wrote:

I want to rob the vault in the Bellagio.

I'm willing to bet there's going to be more Ocean's 11 and CSI jokes than we can handle.

What's the name of this degoring mod in Fallout 3?

I took the bloody mess perk in Fallout 3, thinking it'll just be an amusing side effect like in FO2. I don't mind the gore so much as the super slow kills for even the scrubbiest of enemies

BlackSabre wrote:

New Screenshots :)

Looks exactly like Fallout 3 to me. Well, excluding UI stuff. I'm actually a little saddened by that.