Fallout: New Vegas Bugs Spur Negative Reviews

EverythingPR writes: After being hammered by the mainstream gaming media for having one of the glitchiest games of the decade, Fallout:New Vegas takes a new blow from PCWorld, which twists the knife in the wound listing links and texts that describe the game in very discouraging terms. It all may seam as a universal coalition against a game that promised a lot.

[DelbertGrady]

Sounds like PCWorld didn't get their paycheck in time.

[xxchicago33xx]

Do you say that about every negative review? Not trying to be an a##hole but it sure seems like it

[toaster]

Or maybe he's on to something... I swear every game in recent memory with game-breaking glitches and shoddy programming have gotten low review scores. New Vegas has yet to receive anything lower than a 70%.. what good is a game if you can't actually play the damn thing without it getting a fucking conniption?

Something isn't right with the reviews if you ask me. Any other game with these type of glitches the reviewers would bash it and rant about how unplayable the game is, and then give it 50-60 score. New Vegas has all of these, and even gamers are reporting that the game has sequences that are unplayable because of the bugs (see: Bethesda forums).

[rroded]

These sites make money off ads these guys buy so ya no surprise. Look at any of the big sites n u tell me how many talked about the bugs in the last one tho no one can play a whole fallout 3 game on a console without hitting a few...
yep must b the cool-aid

[ico92]

especially when you look at MW2's online that was rampant with glitches and bugs, and even when they sent patches a new glitch or bug appeared, its funny because i didn't really see a mention of these glitches in the reviews

[CrawFail]

@dilhole

well fallout 3 sure was buggy and i didn't not receive a cheque.

dickhead

[Christopher]

I've encountered one freezing issue so far after about 4 hours of gameplay. Also an annoying camera angle issue when the guy who tells you about the special bottle caps pops into your life. There's also been some stuttering in the game, but nothing game crashing or gameplay affecting.

So, it's not as bad as it could be, but I'm hoping it doesn't freeze up on me anymore.

[Chuk5]

I'm only seeing 8s and 9s, so I don't get the negative part.

[-Alpha]

Maybe those 8s could have been 9s and those 9s could have been 10s if not for the bugs.

[VileAndVicious]

Ive been playing it for a while and it IS buggy but to me more importantly its the exact same game from 2 years. That to me means it deserves a much lower score.

Dont get me wrong Fallout 3 was a blast and I enjoyed it. But so far New Vegas just seems like a reskinned version. Im sooooo dissapointed by the lack of innovation.

[General Shrooms]

I don't know where the good reviews are coming from, Fallout 3 was not a good game, it was buggy, ugly, lame combat, horrible animation, bad story, and so on. New Vegas looks like same old same old. Fallout 2 is better than Fallout 3 in every way and it is 10 years older and in 2d.

[S4NDM4N]

New Vegas looks like the closest thing we'll get to a modern Fallout.

Fallout's main focus wasn't the combat. It was the open structure to the quests, the moral ambiquity, the dark humor, the RPG mechanics, the choices, the dialogue and writing etc..

How can you find all of that from a video or a screen?

I hope to God Bethesda gives Fallout 4 to Obsidian and gives them a big budget and lots of time.

[Der_Kommandant]

If i say something bad about Fallout New Vegas, my bubbles magically disappear...

[djfullshred]

Too much BS going in the game scene. It's about time some reviewers step out of the butt kissing shadows, and tell it like it is when game software is all jacked up.

[TOSgamer]

Yeah but that would mean they would actually have to play the game. Instead of cobbling a bunch of facts found on the web, pasting it together and calling it a review.

[tweet75]

if thats the case than the games good

[downwardspiral]

i honestly think its good that reviewers are pointing this out. Fallout 3 was a fantastic game and got good scores, but it was very glitchy.Reviewers seemed to overlooked that because it was a great game. I guess Bethesda thought they could get away with it again.... They could have at least delayed the game till the fix up the majority of those glitches.

[PirateThom]

Treyarch Syndrome.

Fallout 3 was riddled with bugs and glitches and still got insanely high scores, New Vegas is probably no worse and is getting worse reviews.

[yog-sothot]

Okay, I don't know, I haven't played the game yet, but on CPC, the leading french PC magazine, they just love the game, and they are usually VERY harsh. For instance, they did not really like Fallout 3...

If you can read french, I suggest you to read this post from the editor in chief on the magazine's forum (I know forum posts are not the best contributions on N4G, but there is not yet an official review)

http://forum.canardpc.com/s...

so obviously, this is just the opinion of one guy versus another one, no big deal, but at the very end he says "no crash for me after 45 hours and only a few bugs, with only one that screwed a minor quest". Therefore the game is not necessarily that glitchy !

Besides, do not forget the (sad) truth about PC gaming : wait for the first patches.

PS : one should note that this particular magazine sometimes has a very personnal opinion (nothing wrong with that as they always explain their point of view). For instance, they also loved Alpha Protocol. I loved it too, but I know many people found it too glitchy.