Fallout: New Vegas Honest Hearts Review

What are we looking for with Fallout DLC? I don’t know about you, but I want stuff. Stuff to do, stuff to look at, stuff to explore and loot.

Honest Hearts has stuff to do, one thing to look at, some things — but not interesting things — to explore and very little to loot. By the standard I have established, Honest Hearts is a disappointment. I don’t know what I should have expected from a quest that takes you to Zion, Utah, though.


Fallout: New Vegas Honest Hearts (XBox360 [Reviewed], PS3, PC)
Developer: Obsidian Entertainment
Publisher: Bethesda Softworks
Release Date: May 17, 2011
MSRP: $9.99

The appeal of Zion in real life is that it’s a beautiful, natural place. It’s a national park, but without the mass appeal of places like Yellowstone or the Grand Canyon, and so human developments are at an absolute minimum. Unfortunately, very little of the beauty of Zion translates in the Gamebryo engine, and that sabotages everything.

What we’re left with is a new map in which very little stands out as unique to this area — so much of it just looks like places from the Mojave Wasteland. But unlike the Mojave, Zion is empty, with only a couple small buildings and a whole bunch of unremarkable caves to explore. So what else do we get?

We have the story, which is just awful. There are three “tribes” of folks who inhabit Zion. There’s the White Legs, who you met first — we are told these people are evil, and the game “proves” it by having them shoot at you. Next are the Sorrows, who speak Spanish and are “innocent,” or so says their leader, white man Daniel. There’s a third group whose name I can’t remember because I honestly didn’t care about any of this, and they’re nice. (I’d look up their name, but I’m trying to make a point here, damn it.) That last group is led by Joshua Graham, a former Legion member who was set on fire and tossed into the Grand Canyon.

The plot is driven entirely by fetch quests as you try to help the Sorrows and Graham’s group in their battles with the evil White Legs, and in between fetch quests you’re treated to lots of moralizing about whether or not the good guys should fight for Zion or evacuate.Graham and Daniel make speeches and are generally annoying, and by the end I was ready to murder both of them.

The only real cool part of the whole thing is when you take some sort of drug and battle a Yao Guai that’s on fire. That part was great. Otherwise, I felt like I wasted valuable time that could have been spent playing LA Noire. Or anything else.

Technically, there is plenty of content here. I spent something like four hours on this pack, which is decent bang for my buck. My character leveled from 25 to 32 in that time (the pack includes a 5-level cap increase), so if you’re looking to grind, this is the place to do it. But if you like to enjoy your gaming time, you should look elsewhere.

Final score: 50/100

Join the Conversation   

* required field

By submitting a comment here you grant GameFront a perpetual license to reproduce your words and name/web site in attribution. Inappropriate or irrelevant comments will be removed at an admin's discretion.

13 Comments on Fallout: New Vegas Honest Hearts Review

VodkaChill

On May 20, 2011 at 5:48 am

That’s an honest review.

Sephy

On May 20, 2011 at 11:10 am

It’s also a awful review :/

Ezra

On May 20, 2011 at 11:51 pm

I think its a good review, except for the fact that there is more good than he is making it out to be. What do you expect from New Vegas in general?

In my opinion Fallout: New Vegas should have just been a expansion DLC (like what BioWare did with Dragon Age Awakenings) and just called it Fallout 3: New Vegas Expansion, this way they can work with more expansions like New York City, or do something down south around New Mexico, that would have been a great idea.

Do I think it was an entire video game worth $59.99 hell no, do I think it was over hyped? Hell yes, do I think it should have been offered as a expansion for 1600 MSP, hell yes, and then it would have received far better reviews.

Honest Hearts would have been a great DLC for a great expansion, I think now what they are trying to do is make a bunch of DLC for it like they did FO3, but the difference is the DLC that came with FO3 went with the story of your character, all the DLC did, and the best part is, you could free roam at the end. You didn’t need to start over.

I just hope the next Fallout is more promising than New Vegas, and takes less time to come out. Bedestha should have handled this one on their own, now that is my opinion. This review was a good review of a staggering DLC that is trying to make up for a game that was rushed and could have been released in 2011 with twice the content it had.

Drew

On May 21, 2011 at 1:40 pm

Ezra, you’re a ing moron.

Dude

On May 21, 2011 at 7:45 pm

I agree with Drew. Fallout 3 DLC had all to do with the story of anything let alone the bull daddy’s boy character.

Kyle

On May 23, 2011 at 4:03 pm

Whoever reviewed this should be fired, what a terrible review, if you can even call it that, more like a personal rant because you couldn’t pay attention, very sloppy and unprofessional.

Jupiter551

On May 23, 2011 at 7:40 pm

Lol Ezra, New Vegas was MUCH better than Fallout 3, had a better storyline, better characters, more series continuity and overall just more “Fallouty” than FO3, and I’ve been a fan of the series since 1998, finished them all multiple times.

Better reviews? It got average about 9/10 according to gamerankings last time I checked.

Wasn’t worth 59.95? Bull it was HUGE, and as a result it won “Most Bang for your Buck” award 2010 from IGN.

lanep25

On May 25, 2011 at 6:27 pm

To start with, DLCs are robbery to the paying customers. When paying $60 for a game, this content should have already been in it.
Second, this DLC is not a RPG DLC, it is a story line DLC with a couple choices at during the course of the story. To follow the story one has to help the burned man, other wise you break the story. There is no way to join forces with the white legs, support the Legion, and take down the Burned man. Sure, you can kill Joshua, but then story ends there and courier has to hike around the damn canyon to find the map to get out of that stupid place. Very low re-playability value. And lets not forget, overpriced.
For all you Fallout nuts, I enjoyed both FO3 and FNV(despite all it’s bugs) even though FO3 was better. I’ve replayed them several times over. I love them. But this DLC is a disgrace to the Fallout name. It should be covered in tar, lit on fire, thrown into the Grand Canyon, and left to die.

Drew

On May 26, 2011 at 12:46 pm

Bad review is bad.

Cody

On June 8, 2011 at 10:15 am

whoever wrote this is a i n g d u m b a s s

SomeRandom

On June 27, 2011 at 10:48 pm

What a truly horrible review. The author is entitled to their own opinion on the product, but they can’t even be /bothered/ to research the name of the Dead Horses who were “nice”. Couldn’t be bothered to look it up because you were making a point? Was is it the point that you are the laziest video-game journalist ever? man, it’s not a hard job, put a little effort into it…

Martin

On July 1, 2011 at 3:28 pm

“(I’d look up their name, but I’m trying to make a point here, damn it.)”

The only point I can see you trying to make is that you’re a sloppy researcher. If you *had* looked up their name and other relevant information, you would have produced an informed, detailed review. If you can’t be bothered to produce details, why should I believe you can be bothered to provide an objective, thoughtful review?

Jacob

On September 24, 2011 at 12:36 pm

What a horrible review! The guy reviewing sounds like a jackass who should probably just stick to games like Modern Warfare, that don’t have much of a story. If you aren’t a fan of stories, roleplaying, ect., then just stay away from this game.