Generally favorable reviews - based on 39 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 36 out of 39
  2. Negative: 0 out of 39
  1. Oct 22, 2010
    Fallout: New Vegas, looks and plays exactly the same as Fallout 3. But the additions that Obsidian have made push the survival angle even further to provide a much more immersive and authentic experience, and just like its predecessor New Vegas proves to be a role-playing masterpiece.
  2. 93
    After Fallout 3, veterans of the series had lost any kind of hope they would ever set foot in a new post-apocalyptic world that they could appreciate without the help of mods. That's why New Vegas is all the more impressive, because despite its problematic foundation, it turned into a game that even the most elitist and conservative of fans will play until exhaustion.
  3. Oct 20, 2010
    Maybe we could have waited for some new features from Obsidian, apart for the scenario change and some new improvements in gameplay. But you could also ask why change something that works so well. The recommendation is clear: If you liked Fallout 3, don't hesitate in getting New Vegas.
  4. Dec 19, 2010
    Plenty of side quests.
  5. Jan 11, 2011
    Fallout: New Vegas marries the best of Bethesda's open world tradition with Obsidian's excellent storytelling, writing and quest design. This is a huge and addictive role-playing game with an enormous amount of content and options for the player.
  6. Dec 25, 2010
    A stupefying number of bugs and an aging engine can do little to hold back this slice of brilliance. [Issue#185, p.60]
  7. Dec 13, 2010
    Fallout: New Vegas is easily one of the top contenders for Game of the Year.
  8. Oct 20, 2010
    Despite the numerous bugs, New Vegas is a magnificent RPG, one that stands head and shoulders above its predecessor. More importantly, it's also the game that Fallout fans have been waiting for.
  9. Oct 20, 2010
    In New Vegas, the fun Fallout 3 formula is intact, with more polished combat, high-quality side missions, and the exciting setting of the Vegas strip. Unfortunately, the bugs also tagged along for the ride.
  10. Oct 20, 2010
    With a hugely expanded perk system, new traits you can use to give your character both an advantage and a disadvantage, warring factions to join or make enemies out of, plenty of new features to dig into, and better dialogue, Fallout: New Vegas is better than Fallout 3 in many ways.
  11. Oct 20, 2010
    It's a game we've been wanting to play for more than a decade, a real modern re-imagining of the Fallout series, complete with that deliciously black humour. But it's also more of the same, aesthetically and technically identical to Fallout 3, wonky facial animation and all.
  12. Oct 20, 2010
    Obsidian had a difficult task with New Vegas, a "sequel" of Fallout 3 where they could not offer anything radically new in terms of engine or game systems. But just as expected, the superlative talent of the studio for narrative and dialogue has been more than enough to keep the interest in this game. More of the same, yes, but better and closer to the spirit of the original series, just don't expect it to be immediately noticeable.
  13. May 27, 2011
    Quotation forthcoming.
User Score

Generally favorable reviews- based on 1822 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 53 out of 443
  1. Oct 23, 2010
    27 hours in, just getting started. Take fallout 3, expand it, add more diversity, add more interesting locations, triple the amount of factions, add a better theme, and add more immersion and you have fallout NV. Obsidian has taken a decent game and made it great. Really a lot more depth in the world and just overall better. Of course your on the same engine, so some of the same problems exist. But literally a new mod is released by the hour since they only have to be ported over. Im already using over 10 mods just as longer days, smaller ui, centered raised camera, perk every level etc. Oh and if you get stuttering get the d3d9 file, and if you have ati get the alternative d3d9 file so you can still use transparency mutisampling. If it wasn't for the mods i would have to take off a point or 2. Really though the best way to describe it is it makes the fallout 3 world seem boring. Full Review »
  2. Oct 21, 2010
    I'm very disappointed with this one, certainly a piss poor PC port. No in-game graphics options, can't even use standard windows shortcuts such as alt-enter, on that basis alone this game wouldn't even pass Games For Windows certification (not that I am a big GFWL fan mind you). Loads of graphical glitches, loads of gameplay glitches, terrible distance LODing. Despite seeing a lot of things that shouldn't be in a shipped game in the first few minutes I gave it more of a chance, after about 40 minutes of gameplay I realized that I had played this game before, except its previous incarnation was a lot less buggy.

    This is the last time i'll buy a game from these clowns (Obsidian/Bethesda) without carefully looking into it first, as a publisher/developer they certainly don't seem to care much for quality (at least for the PC version, I can't comment on PS3/XBox360). Infortunately, this was a day 1 purchase for me. I should have waited and read the reviews.
    Full Review »
  3. Oct 21, 2010
    Bethesda did it again. Even when I thought my expectations could not have possibly been lower since the mediocre FO3 and it's laughable DLC, they managed to amaze me yet another time by taking this game into a new low. Do not believe the reviews of the press.

    Every aspect of this game has been catered to what we call the 'new generation' of gamers. A poorly thought out, yet incredibly simplistic rpg system that effectively kills any sort of difficulty in this game. If you do not roll through the game using the VATS system, or kiting equally fast enemies to death using the laughable shooting mechanics that take any sort of excitement out of this game, then you are sure the game beats itself using the bug fest of a game engine against your enemies.

    How could this engine still be so terrible? Bethesda has been using it since Oblivion. That's at least 5 years of development. Bugs and random crashes break any fun of the game. Enemies getting stuck in objects and bumps of the map.. even scripted events like quest completions tend to break the game. And what is up with the graphics? Did Bethesda stop improving the visuals since Oblivion? It looks like a PS2 game released in 2010. Walking to new locations takes up a considerable time, and adds virtually nothing to the game play, other than a way to sink your time with uninspired environments and enemies.

    The 'plot', is an absolute joke. Whereas Bethesda ruined the concept of the Vault Dweller along FO3's progression, they did not even seem to care to make a game where dialogue and story plays a major role interesting. Conversations are forced and robotic (in both speech and animations, even when it has many voice actors), and embarrassing to any human being that ever wrote anything down. The karma system is, as in FO3, poorly thought out, breaking any game credibility for a decent role playing experience.

    It's a poor port as well. I've seen developers do better in the past when they at least tried to make something out of a muliplat release.
    Full Review »