Game News APRIL FOOL: Bethesda: Obsidian To Develop Fallout Sequel

[Mastermind]

Never experienced that.

They patched it after a day or so. I experienced it and loads of other people did too. That's what I get for buying an obsidian game on release but the fact remains that their reputation in this matter is well deserved.

 

[Xor]

I was playing the not-removed-from-inventory version without any patches. I didn't pay for the game until recent.

 

[Coyote]

There were bugs in NV? Huh. I didn't notice.

Are you being facetious?

I'm with Xor. TBH, I've never found Obsidian games to be all that buggy aside from NWN2 (I haven't played KotOR 2 or SoZ, though, and I always wait a few weeks before picking up a game so that I can get a better impression of it, so there's usually a patch or two out by the time I play it). For instance, I'm a few missions from finishing Alpha Protocol for the first time, and the only bugs I've encountered are two areas where the enemies wouldn't always spawn upon reloading and enemies being able to see through Shadow Operative at the end of the hotel level in Taiwan after erasing Heck's files. A far cry from the buggy, unplayable mess I've seen some people claim it is. Don't remember any problems with NV off the top of my head, either.

Then again, I've never had much of a problem with bugs in Bethesda's games, either, so maybe I'm just lucky. Gothic 3, on the other hand...

I know that threads about this always boil down to a bunch of anecdotal evidence and that any one player's experience isn't representative of the whole, but I can't help but wonder at times if part of Obsidian's reputation for bugginess comes from (a) players who are used to the "streamlining" of Beth/Bio games and thus chalk it up to bugs when they mess up a quest in a way that Obsidian actually intended to happen, can't get 100% of the dossiers in AP, etc., and (b) confirmation bias after a few buggy releases early in their existence as a company. Bethesda and to a lesser extent Bioware always have tons of threads in their forums about bugs whenever they release a new game and several issues that are never addressed by official patches, but somehow they never get a reputation for bugginess the way that Obsidian does. (Well, maybe Bethesda does here, but not in the general gaming community.)

 

[Clockwork Knight]

I over reacted as usual.

Visceris is an idiot and this is what you can expect from him.

Does anyone find it SUPREMELY ironic that that Urban DIctionary entry was written by EXITIUM?

troll

3035 up, 504 down

One who purposely and deliberately (that purpose usually being self-amusement) starts an argument in a manner which attacks others on a forum without in any way listening to the arguments proposed by his or her peers. He will spark of such an argument via the use of ad hominem attacks (i.e. 'you're nothing but a fanboy' is a popular phrase) with no substance or relevence to back them up as well as straw man arguments, which he uses to simply avoid addressing the essence of the issue.

Volourn

by Exitium Oct 10, 2003

 

[Genma:TheDestroyer]

There were bugs in NV? Huh. I didn't notice.

Are you being facetious?

Check out some of the initial release threads, if you can find them. Half the people had game cripplers, whereas the rest (like me) experienced little to none. The biggest glitch I found was occasionally seeing Giant Radscorpions spawned inside the ground. I'd just watch half a barbed tail go floating past.



I had far more bugs with Fallout 3 initially than I ever did with New Vegas. And I only installed a patch if after a couple days no posts sprung all over the internet saying "SHIT RUINED MY GAME" "OMG BROKE PATCH" or something. To this day it's actually been a pretty smooth experience.