User Score
8.6

Generally favorable reviews- based on 3094 Ratings

User score distribution:
Buy On

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Oct 21, 2010
    4
    I've played each Fallout game since the first and I have to say I'm as disappointed with Fallout: New Vegas as I was with Fallout 3. I always thought it would be fun to have a 1st person perspective while playing Fallout 1, 2 and Tactics, but Bethesda simply does a poor job of it. New Vegas was rushed to market before it was ready much like Fallout 3. Wait for the bargain bin on this one.I've played each Fallout game since the first and I have to say I'm as disappointed with Fallout: New Vegas as I was with Fallout 3. I always thought it would be fun to have a 1st person perspective while playing Fallout 1, 2 and Tactics, but Bethesda simply does a poor job of it. New Vegas was rushed to market before it was ready much like Fallout 3. Wait for the bargain bin on this one.

    Positives: Obsidian does a MUCH better job of writing story lines and quests than Bethesda did. Good voice acting. New environment and (slight) movement forward in terms of the Fallout canon. Negatives: Its still Oblivion (LOLblivion) with guns. As others have posted, you think they would've improved the game engine and graphics by now! The VATS system makes the game laughably easy and you can kite any enemy in the game. If you play the game without VATS, the NPCs dodge and weave like a weasel on crack all while maintaining pinpoint accuracy. Although the stories for each quest is better, the execution is still murky at best as one wrong dialogue choice cuts off entire quests. Certain quests are only offered under poorly designed circumstances with NPCs not reacting to successful completions or acting as if you DIDN"T just save their whole city from bad guys. Final analysis: Rushed out to market before true completion in a manner typical of Bethesda. This is essentially DLC for Fallout 3 that they tried (and failed) to pass off as a stand alone game. Although the fan boys, "independent reviewers" and paid Bethesda employees will seek to skew these rating sites, the proof is in the lackluster sales and general negative, poor opinion of Bethesda.
    Expand
  2. Dec 8, 2010
    4
    All I can say is thank God I have this on the PC and can go and get mods from the Nexus!

    I mean really, Fallout 3 was amazing, and compared to that the Mojave Wasteland feels kind of empty. From the rushed Main Quest story lines and the "OMG! You can't be serious" moments, I've really found myself struggling to enjoy this game. The combat IS the one thing that saves the game! The Nexus
    All I can say is thank God I have this on the PC and can go and get mods from the Nexus!

    I mean really, Fallout 3 was amazing, and compared to that the Mojave Wasteland feels kind of empty. From the rushed Main Quest story lines and the "OMG! You can't be serious" moments, I've really found myself struggling to enjoy this game. The combat IS the one thing that saves the game!

    The Nexus is thankfully filled with a LOT of helpful people, who not only improve the visuals (with mods such as Fellout, and one that gives streetlights light!). Another good mod is Real Time Settler, although it is buggy at the moment, this was a great mod for FO3 that let you create your own little village which you had to be with CONSTANTLY otherwise it would fail!.

    Overall, New Vegas is a pretty shoddy sequel for a game that had so much impact on the gaming world.
    Expand
  3. Oct 21, 2010
    2
    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 ofI'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.
    Expand
  4. Oct 31, 2010
    3
    Considering this Game is almost exactly like Fallout 3 , one would think it to be more like an expansion. The Game engine is the same and although they did change a few things such as iron sights on guns it does not really feel any newer. If you charge $60 For a full retail game update graphics and game engine after 2 years! Now onto the ultimate crime... this game is so buggy that itConsidering this Game is almost exactly like Fallout 3 , one would think it to be more like an expansion. The Game engine is the same and although they did change a few things such as iron sights on guns it does not really feel any newer. If you charge $60 For a full retail game update graphics and game engine after 2 years! Now onto the ultimate crime... this game is so buggy that it crashed on me about 5 times in 10 hours... even after I patched it. the quests are broken and unplayable... if this title was $20 and was stable I would recommend it to hardcore Fallout 3 players only because its a new story and you have additions like gambling now. I bet this will hurt Bethesda/obsidian hard... Expand
  5. Oct 19, 2010
    3
    Buggy POS. This game is very much in the habit of reverting quicksaves and autosaves to the first one you ever make. So let's say you get 4 hours into the game and then crash or restart, guess what? Next time you run the game you lose 4 hours of playtime and start at the beginning. Invisible walls are everywhere, can't hike up a hill without running into one. Also enemies have a habit ofBuggy POS. This game is very much in the habit of reverting quicksaves and autosaves to the first one you ever make. So let's say you get 4 hours into the game and then crash or restart, guess what? Next time you run the game you lose 4 hours of playtime and start at the beginning. Invisible walls are everywhere, can't hike up a hill without running into one. Also enemies have a habit of of spawning inside walls and crashing the game. There may be some improvements over Fallout 3 in there, but I wouldn't know as I've been replaying the same 4 hours of game over the past 8 hours. Expand
  6. Jan 6, 2014
    4
    I’ve played and replayed this game many many times. I keep coming back to it purely because people keep raving about it, and I keep thinking, based on that, that there has to be something I’m missing. There has to be some quality in it I’m just not getting. Now I think I can safely judge why people go out of their way to claim that it’s good: They WANT it to be good. They can see that thisI’ve played and replayed this game many many times. I keep coming back to it purely because people keep raving about it, and I keep thinking, based on that, that there has to be something I’m missing. There has to be some quality in it I’m just not getting. Now I think I can safely judge why people go out of their way to claim that it’s good: They WANT it to be good. They can see that this is the shell of a great game. But that is the big problem. It’s just a shell, hollow inside when you look inside.

    New Vegas is a complete developmental screwup. Everything that is important to the primary/important content, the factions and New Vegas and the plot, was stupidly deprioritized in favor of stuffing the game with frivolous irrelevant sidequests. It’s hard to process just how bad the content prioritization and presentation is. The making of easily cut content like the Boomers, Thorn, Jacobstown, rocket ghouls, etc, came at the cost of desperately needed faction quests and fleshing out. The entire main questline is padded with these sidequests to stretch it out, only ending up emphasizing how little you connect or get involved with the character and the factions. The Faction “system” is really just deciding which questgiver you want to receive your nearly identical selection of mandatory sidequests from. The reputation system is basically pointless, rarely amounting to anything other then NPC banter.

    People claim the writing is great, I found it dull and uninspired. The dialogue options are bland and soulless, clearly designed for a blank slate character and not one with actual personality. NPC quality varys greatly but tend to suffer from directionless voice acting. I’ve heard characters talk about their squadmates being raped in the same tone they use to complain about patrolling the Mojave. Not even kidding. The writing in the DLCs is pretty weak to boot, with Old World Blues actually being surprisingly involving and funny to boot while Lonesome Road may have the most incompetent, full of crap, and definitionally pretentious writing I’ve even seen in a RPG, outside of a Mass Effect sequel. Pains me to think one of Planescape:Torment’s writers was involved in that dreck.

    The world map is awfully designed, offering no incentive to explore what is ultimately a linear doughnut dotted with invisible walls, uninteresting and unrewarding locations, NO random encounters, and amateurly placed blatant progression Many things that worked fine in the previous game, like the radio and VATS, were and still are broken and glitchy. While I liked how there were more skill/stat checks, most of the other added features like ammo types (which were bugged at launch. Pretty sure they were bugged in the first two Fallouts too. How do you not learn how to program that in twenty years?) are easily forgotten. And I don’t think I need to bring out how buggy it is. Suffice to say the public had made it clear that it is utter unacceptable to ship a game with this amount of game-breaking and save-wiping glitches.

    The sad thing is that it’s clear that this game could have been good, even great, if it had been developed properly. And it’s even sadder that people feel the need to overrate it based on the standard of games this developer made twenty years ago, or worse based on what the game COULD have been like rather then what it IS. It doesn’t hold up to other RPGs. It doesn’t even hold up to other Obsidian games. New Vegas is, sadly, a weak unfulfilling game and a weak unfulfilling RPG.
    Expand
  7. Jul 28, 2013
    2
    So many bugs! It's kind of fun but apparently it is common to get MORE BUGS as you get further in the game, as in STOP, CRASH! I like several dialogue heavy games but I can only bother to listen to a handful of these people. They have two actors I recognize from Star Trek which was fun but I realized then that the good actors refer to the leader of the legion as "K-EYE-ZAR" and V.O. theySo many bugs! It's kind of fun but apparently it is common to get MORE BUGS as you get further in the game, as in STOP, CRASH! I like several dialogue heavy games but I can only bother to listen to a handful of these people. They have two actors I recognize from Star Trek which was fun but I realized then that the good actors refer to the leader of the legion as "K-EYE-ZAR" and V.O. they don't care about refer to the legion leader as "CEE-SER".
    Gameplay is fun but the controls could have been MUCH better. Managing stats, inventory, and quests is harder than it needs to be. Tutorial is terrible with little explanation.
    Did I mention buggy?
    Expand
  8. Aug 9, 2013
    4
    Fallout 3 did a much better job on this althought it's worth some free time if you are bored and want to waste your life.
    I give this game a bad rating. waste of time
  9. Jan 12, 2014
    3
    Oh pib-boy. What a mess in gameplay and story-telling.

    Invisible walls everywhere, artificial placed rocks and unclimbable "mountains" followed by places that are bigger than an airport but filled with pure nothing. I loved Fallout 3! Although it had its flaws (dated graphics, bugs and way too easy), it was a milestone in gaming (and for all the Fallout-Fans) and the instinct to
    Oh pib-boy. What a mess in gameplay and story-telling.

    Invisible walls everywhere, artificial placed rocks and unclimbable "mountains" followed by places that are bigger than an airport but filled with pure nothing.

    I loved Fallout 3! Although it had its flaws (dated graphics, bugs and way too easy), it was a milestone in gaming (and for all the Fallout-Fans) and the instinct to discover and scavenge a large world!

    But somehow Fallout new Vegas managed to feel so dry and empty like beeing stranded in a desert. You will encounter so few gunfights, that you'll wish you could just raid camps and all the enemy stations.
    But you can't.
    I was asking myself all the time:
    "Why the hell am I scavenging all that ammunition and bottlecaps when there are so few enemies you can pump full of led?"

    After 10 hours of time-consuming navigation I caught myself trying to rush through the story, only for the hope of some big scale battles. But after at least 25 Hours arriving and leaving Vegas I gave up.

    Prepare to spent more time walking, and walking and walking instead of meeting interesting places or people.

    Don't get me wrong: You CAN find at least 3 interesting places. They will suck you in with a dark and spooky atmosphere. I won't spoil it, but New Vegas isn't one of them.
    Neither is it a surprise you'll arrive there nor is it a really spectacular place.
    Most People there will tell you some generic gibberish and the quests in there are so ... meaningless.

    Most of the Quests are annoying chores that let you scout empty places for hours only to find out that at least one skill is insufficient to complete it (mostly your speech-skill!).

    Then there are so many illogical design-flaws that pop up randomly and destroy all imersion.
    -Many doors that are just painted textures and can't be opened.
    -The flaw in stealing from bad guys (why does the game randomly punish my karma when I rob the psycho bad guys?!).
    - you meet some high-ranked guys for the faction you work, but they don't have any quest to give you!
    - You don't have any impact on the lazy written "War" of the different factions!
    Noone will say any word to you beside their random gibberish!
    - doors and gates that are closed until you progress the main"story", or more: Keep yourself squeezing the path the game has chosen for you.

    This game only left wasted 40 hours and a sore forehead from all the facepalming.

    This may be an overused sentence in rating games, but this feels really like an overpriced DLC or even mod for Fallout 3.
    Don't buy it and wait for Fallout 4!
    Expand
  10. Feb 25, 2014
    4
    Despite my bad score I had fun playing it! See, on the one side there are the brilliant story, the atmospheric setting and good dialogues. And then there are the completely bad engine, the not smooth gameplay and the same bugs from it's predecessor Fallout 3.

    It just annoys me that the developers obviously haven't spent a single thought on how to correct the faults of Fallout 3! They
    Despite my bad score I had fun playing it! See, on the one side there are the brilliant story, the atmospheric setting and good dialogues. And then there are the completely bad engine, the not smooth gameplay and the same bugs from it's predecessor Fallout 3.

    It just annoys me that the developers obviously haven't spent a single thought on how to correct the faults of Fallout 3! They wrote a new story and built a new world(which I liked!) but the fact that the bad gameplay and bad controls in my opinion took a lot of atmosphere from both games. There are just a lot of things about the game that completely don't make sense and which Bethesda could easily have solved!
    Expand
  11. May 25, 2014
    4
    Don't get me wrong Fallout New Vegas had lots of potential and was a good play when I didn't have to worry about the mountains that seemed almost impossible to climb thanks again bethseda thought you learned your lesson about that one with Skyrim. Creatures that back to the same place after you wiped all of them out. And the waste of perfectly good data for thing like unessecary perks likeDon't get me wrong Fallout New Vegas had lots of potential and was a good play when I didn't have to worry about the mountains that seemed almost impossible to climb thanks again bethseda thought you learned your lesson about that one with Skyrim. Creatures that back to the same place after you wiped all of them out. And the waste of perfectly good data for thing like unessecary perks like Confident Bachelor. Why must you wait til level 20 to get the perk to fill your map? I hated the repair idea serously my repair was 100 and still needed to sacrifice one item to repair another of the same type of item. Expand
  12. Jun 5, 2014
    3
    OK so i played this pretty far in, was in process of trying to take over New Vegas. I Played fallout 3 and loved it i think i beat it 2 times if i remember right. I tried to play New Vegas and didn't feel the same. Just felt that the world was to big and empty. 75 percent of the game is spent running from one place to another with very little to do or fight in between. It was just plainOK so i played this pretty far in, was in process of trying to take over New Vegas. I Played fallout 3 and loved it i think i beat it 2 times if i remember right. I tried to play New Vegas and didn't feel the same. Just felt that the world was to big and empty. 75 percent of the game is spent running from one place to another with very little to do or fight in between. It was just plain boring felt rushed. Combat was improved but seems there is less in New Vegas and doesn't have that mysterious feel when i got to a new area. I felt forced to keep playing just to see if it got better but finally gave up. Expand
  13. Jun 24, 2013
    4
    This game has a horrible tutorial. It does not teach you anything you need to know other than "left click to kill this guy". Its map interface is horrible, the entire early game you do not know where to go. It also doesn't teach you thew "lingo" of the game. I guess if you have played the other Fallout games you might have an idea of what is going on but, if you are a new player to thisThis game has a horrible tutorial. It does not teach you anything you need to know other than "left click to kill this guy". Its map interface is horrible, the entire early game you do not know where to go. It also doesn't teach you thew "lingo" of the game. I guess if you have played the other Fallout games you might have an idea of what is going on but, if you are a new player to this game then you are SOL. You cannot track non quest point which is ridiculous, you are basically forced to play the story mode unless you stumble upon the place. There is also no explanation on what items do or what their acronyms mean. If you are a Fallout fan than this game is probably good for you. As a newcomer, seeing this game makes me not want to play the game from this version. Expand
  14. Jul 10, 2014
    0
    A broken and crappy console port. The game's UI is especially designed for console, with no shortcut key to quickly access various info. panel and weapon switching. Player have to do a lot of navigation before they can either use item, repair equipment, check map and the quest logs.

    Also, the game is extremely buggy. Calling out the map too frequently may result in a black screen of
    A broken and crappy console port. The game's UI is especially designed for console, with no shortcut key to quickly access various info. panel and weapon switching. Player have to do a lot of navigation before they can either use item, repair equipment, check map and the quest logs.

    Also, the game is extremely buggy. Calling out the map too frequently may result in a black screen of crash. Loading to a new map can also cause random crash. The scripted events are the worse I have seen in the life, a crash can even occur when a NPC is supposed to leave the building by script.

    This game is indeed an elder scroll with fallout theme, with an extremely large map including lots of waste land, which serves no value to either plot or adventure. The game is made just like a survival game rather than the good old epic classic RPG game, completely deviating from the ideas of Fallout.

    Simply copying the VATS from a tactical game to a FPS game won't work. It is just plain boring when using that ability in FPS, slowing down the pace too much.

    At last, some more polishing should be done to the UI. No one wants to watch an inventory item menu flooded with words only, even Fallout 1 and 2 have icons associated with the items. What a great mess and disaster to look at the menu when you have lots of items.
    Expand
  15. Mar 10, 2011
    4
    Not worth a complete playthrough, too much brown, exactly the same as FO:3 only a rehash

    I never finished this game because I didnt feel like it was worth it, and for the couple of hours I did play, it wasn't really fun

    FO:3 had an amazing beginning, and being unleashed into the world like that really made that game stand out

    FO:NV attempts to copy that with failed results
  16. Sep 4, 2013
    4
    Boring, boring, boring. Thats the only thing i can think about this game when i play it. Its combat is slow and clunky, its missions are uninspired, and youll find yourself spending 80% of your time wandering the wasteland doing nothing. I guess im just not a fan of the Fallout series.
  17. Jul 5, 2011
    4
    Im over all disappointed about this game. it is nothing more than a new map and quest-line. an expansion to fallout 3. yet without the same fantastic glow of innovation and freshness. Caesar's Legion the enemies in this game is completely disappointing to me. they seems to be badly created. and never could take them serious through out the main quest. that's why i never replayed the game.Im over all disappointed about this game. it is nothing more than a new map and quest-line. an expansion to fallout 3. yet without the same fantastic glow of innovation and freshness. Caesar's Legion the enemies in this game is completely disappointing to me. they seems to be badly created. and never could take them serious through out the main quest. that's why i never replayed the game. which i did 3 times in fallout 3. nothing has changed from the last game except obsidian entertainment made a lot worse. Expand
  18. Dec 21, 2014
    4
    I wanted to like this game (with its supposed focus on freedom and interesting characters), but could not.
    It felt very dated, and there were too many immersion breaking flaws and bugs. In terms of graphics, level design, and animations, this feels like a game from 2005 (to a lesser extent also true for TES:Oblivion, but it certainly bothered me less there).
    The main quest offers good
    I wanted to like this game (with its supposed focus on freedom and interesting characters), but could not.
    It felt very dated, and there were too many immersion breaking flaws and bugs. In terms of graphics, level design, and animations, this feels like a game from 2005 (to a lesser extent also true for TES:Oblivion, but it certainly bothered me less there).
    The main quest offers good freedom of choice, but otherwise quests are mostly quantity over quality – a hallmark of Bethesda. Some of the characters were entertaining though, and voice acting is fairly good. Character leveling and perks are also quite well done.
    The interface looks cool but is a total pain to use. There are no keyboard hotkeys, which means switching weapons or healing requires browsing through the full menu each time!
    Combat feels unbalanced (Oblivion and Skyrim were slightly better here) ranging from ok to frustratingly tedious or difficult. The difficulty of various foes often does not match with the expectations the game lore may give you. Enemies run around without any movement inertia making them frustratingly difficult to aim at. Hitbox detection is not great, and your bullets are often blocked by invisible walls if they pass near geometry. I also had lots of enemies get stuck behind geometry, with only legs clipping through the wall. Worst of all, at one point, my gun would not fire bullets – I would hear and see the gun fire, and the ammo counter would work, but no bullets – I got eaten alive, both ingame and in terms of frustration.
    The mod experience was bad: I could not get most mods to work despite following all instructions etc. The mod scene may be vibrant, but it is still a total mess. It lacks curatorial refinement and there are no “1-click install” total-overhaul supermods (like the “complete” mod series for the Stalker games).

    Buried underneath all the flaws is a good game, and you might find it, but I gave up after days of digging.
    Expand
  19. Aug 3, 2013
    4
    Fallout 3 is clearly a superior game to this sh*t. Can't believe Bethesda would make this kind of game.
    I was really disappointed, a complete waste of money.
  20. Nov 29, 2010
    4
    You really know a game is weak when it's worse in most ways than the one that came before it. In Fallout 3 was a variety of fascinating architecture; here, it's prefab virtual representations of real prefab architecture. What more exciting place for adventure than a open desert? Bethesda must be insane. In Fallout 3, you never quite knew what plot challenge faced you: It was important toYou really know a game is weak when it's worse in most ways than the one that came before it. In Fallout 3 was a variety of fascinating architecture; here, it's prefab virtual representations of real prefab architecture. What more exciting place for adventure than a open desert? Bethesda must be insane. In Fallout 3, you never quite knew what plot challenge faced you: It was important to think carefully and frequently, or else. Here, I'm on automatic. I don't even bother to think up a tactic, don't even bother to avoid bullets: Just charge in and whack 'em. I've been playing for 5 hours. I doubt I can stand 5 more. But I am thinking of reinstalling Fallout 3, just one more time. For the FUN of it. Expand
  21. Feb 28, 2014
    0
    Buggy piece of crapp, for example shots through walls, round a corners, pity damage system, controls, accidental crashes etc. It shouldn't be even called PC version, to be honest, because this isn't PC version. Poor console ports are not automatically PC versions. Lack of PC optimisation is the problem, but some idiots still don't get it. Graphics is a **** joke, looks even worse than theBuggy piece of crapp, for example shots through walls, round a corners, pity damage system, controls, accidental crashes etc. It shouldn't be even called PC version, to be honest, because this isn't PC version. Poor console ports are not automatically PC versions. Lack of PC optimisation is the problem, but some idiots still don't get it. Graphics is a **** joke, looks even worse than the one in Fallout 3. Absolutely horrible, abomination to the first two Fallout games. Expand
  22. Nov 12, 2010
    4
    I loved fallout 3, but new vegas just seems old, dated, slow and boring. It is pretty much the same game just worse, or maybes fallout 3 wasn't really that good after all and when i was playing it i had nothing better to do. I don't know, all I know is this game is boring, I played it for a week then had no desire to play again. Such a shame.
  23. Nov 28, 2010
    2
    A shame. New Vegas would have been great, but it's ridiculously buggy. Clearly a game rushed out way too soon. I've no idea how it got an average of 86 with such glaring lack of polish and a battery of game breaking bugs. Only worth buying on a discount AND once the game has been sufficiently patched.
  24. Oct 28, 2010
    1
    This game started well...but since I'm unable to play further I can not rate it higher than 1. Did they even have a QA department? I refuse to believe that this game is "so big that it's impossible to properly test it" excuse given by them. I accepted that it was almost like playing a mod in Fallout 3 (really the graphics are almost identical) but the fact that it stopped working after 14This game started well...but since I'm unable to play further I can not rate it higher than 1. Did they even have a QA department? I refuse to believe that this game is "so big that it's impossible to properly test it" excuse given by them. I accepted that it was almost like playing a mod in Fallout 3 (really the graphics are almost identical) but the fact that it stopped working after 14 hours of gameplay (my last four save games refuse to load)...now the only option I have is to lose several hours (4+) of gameplay (which means redo the last four hours of scavening, killing, etc.).

    I've patched, tweaked, etc. and I just can't get those save games to load again (the backups also don't work)...if I'd know this before I could probably have just replayed the same bits over again instead of trying to fix it but now I'm afraid to commit any more time to this with the same problem repeating itself later on. Quite frankly I'm going to try and get my money back for this bug infested excuse of a release.
    Expand
  25. Oct 28, 2010
    3
    Bugs galore. Very last gen graphics. Animated characters walking in thin air. How about a decent auto save system? Nope. Random game crashes on high end PC 's that run any game easily? Yep. How does this thing score more highly than Kane and Lynch, which was slammed by many critics. If I had to choose between the 2 games, K&L would win hands down. Do not believe all the hype. This game isBugs galore. Very last gen graphics. Animated characters walking in thin air. How about a decent auto save system? Nope. Random game crashes on high end PC 's that run any game easily? Yep. How does this thing score more highly than Kane and Lynch, which was slammed by many critics. If I had to choose between the 2 games, K&L would win hands down. Do not believe all the hype. This game is mediocre, and that is being generous. Expand
  26. Aug 16, 2012
    4
    It had great potential, it really did. But, if you don't like grey, cold vaults and an endless dusty Nevada - this game is not for you. The quests get boring after a while, it mainly seems like the same thing. Had nothing that The Elder Scrolls series had. I'll be honest, The Elder Scrolls: Arena (1994) was a better game than this.
  27. Nov 30, 2014
    4
    Apart from a slight graphical update, and the person writing the code for this port wasn't sniffing from a bucket of cocaine, there isn't really anything that was really improved from the console versions. The loading time is still ridiculous, and the game still has that "lifeless" feel to it. The only thing that was improved here was the bugs. don't get me wrong, there is still way toApart from a slight graphical update, and the person writing the code for this port wasn't sniffing from a bucket of cocaine, there isn't really anything that was really improved from the console versions. The loading time is still ridiculous, and the game still has that "lifeless" feel to it. The only thing that was improved here was the bugs. don't get me wrong, there is still way to many for this to be considered a "finished game" but the crashes and most of the quest bugs are gone. The only reason i gave this a 4 instead of a 2 is because of the amazing modding community. They make Bethesda games what they are. Unless you can get this for under 10 dollars (which is possible on steam) I would not recommend it. Play Fallout 3 instead. Expand
  28. Oct 27, 2010
    2
    I'm giving this a 2. FO:NV feels like Elder Scrolls ported into Fallout 3 and given a slap of user forum content feedback veneer and released while in beta.

    A piss poor PC port using a dated engine, bringing nothing new to the table; FTW example of how to milk a franchise without improving the game. If you MUST buy it, expect bugs, crashes, graphic instabilities galore.
  29. Oct 29, 2010
    0
    I had heard that there was some alleged improvement in the writing department. This is occasionally evident, but the plot-lines are banal and the NPC's are still robotic and stilted, demonstrated by their oft inconsistent and unlikely behaviour that makes it difficult to become immersed. The best bits still comprise wasteland-wandering, and the hardcore mode is a curious addition. However,I had heard that there was some alleged improvement in the writing department. This is occasionally evident, but the plot-lines are banal and the NPC's are still robotic and stilted, demonstrated by their oft inconsistent and unlikely behaviour that makes it difficult to become immersed. The best bits still comprise wasteland-wandering, and the hardcore mode is a curious addition. However, the Gamebryo engine is beginning to feel dated; It usually looks fine, but loading screens between doorways, the limited NPC population and the lack of views to underpin context add to a collective impression of unreality. Since NV uses the same graphics as FO3, it surprised me that NV shuns years of modding and DLC content by making this a 'new game', when it should have been implemented as a full expansion; Our FO3 character could easily have been asked to courier the Chip from, say, Rivet City to New Vegas and found ourselves confronted with Benny, allowing for a seamless merge. For those of us who have tweaked FO3 to our liking since '08, being dragged back to a 'Vanilla' world is a stark reminder of the flaws that mods have fixed (unless you are a console-gamer). I could have excused the game for occasional crashes and glitches, and I understand that the emphasis is now on the console-market, but the trigger that turned my mind from "give it a chance" to "this is dull" was the awful immersion. This was achieved by the inane AI, the primitive patchwork world, the poorly/lazily constructed story & narration, and the implausible architecture. My zero score is for balance. My true score would be 3, for its efforts to add 'Hardcore', improve the implementation of skills when dealing with NPC's, and some other beneficial but superficial improvments. NV's increased linearity irks me slightly as well. I hope ID Software graces Bethesda with a better 3D engine for TES V:Skyrim. Expand
  30. Nov 14, 2011
    3
    Its fallout 3 2: Electric Boogaloo. With an even less deep storyline (Holy **** that's possible), and the setting is worse. It's a wasteland of a wasteland. Yo dawg..
Metascore
84

Generally favorable reviews - based on 39 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 36 out of 39
  2. Negative: 0 out of 39
  1. May 27, 2011
    88
    Quotation forthcoming.
  2. Apr 21, 2011
    65
    Despite Obsidian's fan-service, Fallout: New Vegas is a heaping pile of bugs.
  3. Mar 18, 2011
    82
    Fallout: New Vegas looks like an Add On to Fallout 3, but that should not mean, that it's a copy of its forerunner. It scores with an great atmosphere, nice story and all the typical and awesome Fallout features.