4 stars. 
 
UPDATE: First signs of a review, but no score. Article states that reviewer says after 12 hours he hasn't even scratched the surface, and that it's a much longer game than Fallout 3. 
http://www.product-reviews.net/2010/10/18/fallout-new-vegas-review-bigger-than-predecessor/ 
 
 EDIT: Not actually a full review, but impressions of the game.  Link to actual impressions here: 
http://feedyourconsole.com/2010/10/fallout-new-vegas-countdown-day-5-first-impressions/

I'd say four as well. Not too hard to guess on GiantBomb, when there's only five possible answers (unless they could give zero, but I've never seen that, and I don't think this could possibly be that bad).  
 
I'm going to say around 8.5 for other sites that have a higher star count. 

4 stars for sure. if it had more than Fallout 3 that would just be weird since they are so similar, although that would also mean it would have to have a fantastic story.
 
@InfamousBIG said:

" @MooseyMcMan: I assume it's probably possible for them to do so (Screened has done it), but, you're right, I've never seen them do that even with the worst games.   "

3 stars, unless the story is awesome, then it might be a 4.

RPG Codex will probably give it, like, half a star, and spend three months insulting the development staff. 
 
That's how they roll.  <wink>

I'm going to be extreme and say 5 stars and a 93 from metacritic.

3 stars

" 4 stars I really hope they change the rating system somepoint. "

4 stars, definitely. any word on who'll be writing the review?

" 4 stars, definitely. any word on who'll be writing the review? "

obsidian entertainment makes mediocre games so 3.5 stars

" @OtakuGamer said:

" 4 stars I really hope they change the rating system somepoint. "

That would be incredibly stupid. "

Probably 4.  These kinds of games (though I adore them) never really have the polish of a 5 star game, though I doubt it will stumble to the point of dipping to 3 stars.

" 4 stars I really hope they change the rating system somepoint. "

Giantbomb - 4/5 
Gametrailers - 9,1/10 
IGN - 9,4/10 
Gamespot - 9/10 

" @forestofdeath said:

" 4 stars, definitely. any word on who'll be writing the review? "

Pretty sure it' Jeff.  I'd say three stars because it's definitely going to be pretty glitchy and probably won't change too much from Fallout 3.  Still looking forward to it. "

Gotta be 4. It's pretty much a Fallout 3 expansion pack. How far can they go wrong with that formula?

Giantbomb will give it a 4, I think it will be for me personally a 6/5. Yeah, a fucking 6 out of 5.

" Giantbomb will give it a 4, I think it will be for me personally a 6/5. Yeah, a fucking 6 out of 5. "

8.6 from ign 

3 stars. 

8.5, followed by fanboys raging " OMG how could they not give it a 9 or 10 IGN suxxxxxxxx!"

4 stars from GB and 8.5 from IGN.

I expect 4 stars. Considering how close it is to fallout 3, it can't be significantly better, but it can only be rated worse if it has some horrific glitches.

It depends on how good it is.

" 4 stars. "

Better than medal of honor but not by much

" @NekuSakuraba said:

" Giantbomb will give it a 4, I think it will be for me personally a 6/5. Yeah, a fucking 6 out of 5. "

could you explain your enthusiasm to me? keep in mind, i spent well over a hundred hours with fallout 3--loved every second of it. however: this just seems like a retreading of old material. "

I don't know maybe 3 game looks a little bit..janky.

"

Giantbomb - 4/5 
Gametrailers - 9,1/10 
IGN - 9,4/10 
Gamespot - 9/10 

"

" @NekuSakuraba said:

" Giantbomb will give it a 4, I think it will be for me personally a 6/5. Yeah, a fucking 6 out of 5. "

could you explain your enthusiasm to me? keep in mind, i spent well over a hundred hours with fallout 3--loved every second of it. however: this just seems like a retreading of old material. "

I hope Arthur Gies reviews this (I don't think he is) this for IGN as it'll be a realistic review rather than one bloated by hype.

GiantBomb - I could see a 5/5, but most likely a 4/5
IGN - 9.5/10
Gamespot - 9.0/10
GameTrailers - 9.3/10 
G4 (X-Play) - 5 (insert not so funny line) out of 5
Myself - 10/10

" 4 stars I really hope they change the rating system somepoint. "

2 stars. 
 

• Outdated gameplay and engine.
• Terrible graphics, no art style to save it.
• A large map with nothing to do.

I'm thinking 3 stars

It be more fun if GB had a 10 point scale but since we don't I'll agree with a 4.

" 2 stars. 
 

• Outdated gameplay and engine.
• Terrible graphics, no art style to save it.
• A large map with nothing to do.

"

I'm wondering when we're gonna see reviews. Having an embargo until the game's released is not a sign of confidence.

3 Stars, it will lose a star for not changing enough from Fallout 3 to bring in new fans. Which will enrage people and they'll bring up Jeffs MW2 review, like usual.
 
But personaly I think it will be 4, because I don't want them to change too much.

3 stars, but the review will state that there will be a lot to like about the game, but it'll just be too similar to the last game.

3 Stars and a 6/10 on Gamespot

" @forestofdeath said:

" @NekuSakuraba said:

" Giantbomb will give it a 4, I think it will be for me personally a 6/5. Yeah, a fucking 6 out of 5. "

could you explain your enthusiasm to me? keep in mind, i spent well over a hundred hours with fallout 3--loved every second of it. however: this just seems like a retreading of old material. "

Well it's not retreading of old material, because your not in DC anymore. "