This quotation isn't relevant but I wish to ask a question if I may:Russ Pitts said:That's it.Sovvolf said:I think I can see where your coming from here. Though correct my presumptuous arse if I'm wrong on this one. Your saying that, Fallout 3 broke enough new ground that your can forgive a few bugs getting through, no big deal, it happens. However with Fallout New Vegas being a sequel built (more then likely) on the same engine, you can't excuse the same glitches getting through the door twice. These bugs should have been none existent in the sequel.Russ Pitts said:Fair enough. As a reviewer, it's easier for me to overlook minor bugs (and in a game with the scope and scale of Fallout 3, yes I think they were minor) if they come with a game that breaks as much ground as Fallout 3. We didn't give scores in 2008, but Fallout 3 would have gotten 5 stars from me, and I stand by that. Those same bugs, however, are harder to excuse in a follow up title.
Again I could be wrong on this however that's the way I'd have looked at it and yes I would have docked a point of for it too.
Is the character customisation (physically) better than before? The choices in appearance and hair for Fallout 3 was somewhat disappointing, as most hairstyles seemed to be almost identical and despite the fact you are supposed to be 18, it's almost impossible to make a male character look less than 30.
Is this fixed?