Did anybody bother to read the article? He said exactly what I would say, "It delivers from an RPG perspective." He even admitted that it looked like shit.

@ joydestroy
You haven't played their games, have you?

@ kaveti6616
Did you even RENT Alpha Protocol? No, you didn't, but you'd realize that the game's pretty good if you did. Once again, that just wasn't a pretty game to look at. They have plenty of talent from the gameplay perspective, it's just the presentation and glitches that they always fuck up on.

The engine can impress him as much as he wants but the game released with gamesave / autosave bugs amongst others. Why doesn't he impress everyone with testing that's followed through with fixing - then release the game or at the very least have a day one patch ready. To me a game that doesn't save reliably is still in beta & should never be released until that's fixed.

I have not found anything mind blowing about the engine at all? Kinda disappointed with graphics i guess i expected a little to much. Physics are ok but i think could be better. Its a shame such a high profiled game released with so many bugs.

Because they have to be on the defensive at all, tells the true story. Interesting that the response completely avoids the real issue people are complaining about, which is the bugs. They only defended the poor graphics on the old game engine.

LOL

I think the problem in F:NV in terms of glitches is just the engine. That would be entirely Bethesda's fault and this is why I think that (don't get me wrong, they're a great developer, but keep on reading):

BethSoft gave them the engine and said, "you have two years to make a successor to Fallout 3". Now, Bethesda took 4 years while created Fallout 3 with that engine and they have more experience with it than anybody. When it released, the game was buggy. They had taken approximately 2 years to frustratingly iron out bugs, yet the release was still filled with them. Obsidian had 2 years and no prior experience with that engine, so they had no idea how they were supposed to learn the engine perfectly, and deal the the removal of bugs withing two years.

It makes sense, doesn't it?

Honestly, anyone that enjoys the more recent elder scrolls games and fallout 3 will feel right at home with new vegas. The engine although buggy is familiar and charming to me and many people I know. Keep in mind I havent experienced one game breaking glitch so far.

Anyone that was expecting a game engine overhaul shouldve known what to expect from the day this was announced. Its a fallout 3 spin off, made by another dev team in a short time span with the same game engine that was basically lent to them.

Wait until the next cycle of consoles and I'll bet we'll see an engine overhaul, but as of right now this engine is apparently filling their needs and suiting their vision.

Obsidian has their own engine now!! They are using it for Dungeon Siege III!! They won't have to rely on other peoples old crappy game engines anymore!! Their next game will be their best ever!! You heard it here first!! In a random comment on N4G!! I like exclamation points!!

Honestly I was disappointed with the graphics in New Vegas when I got it because I was expecting it to at least have some more polish or some new shaders or SOMETHING. It's got nothing. It's exactly the same as far as I can tell. I was at least hoping for a close-up over the shoulder view camera. I guess I should get the PC version and wait for mods (I have the PS3 ver).

Personally I seem to recall finding the DC area in Fallout 3 to be more breathtaking than New Vegas.. which doesn't seem right. The skies/sunsets should be a lot more dramatic in New Vegas. How about just some heat waves? Nothing though? Weak...