Obsidian Would Love Another Chance at Fallout

[StormShaun]

Would it be possible to ask for both Bethesda and Obsidian to get together to make it?
That would be nice, I liked both games but both had their faults.

Fallout 3 had great characters, a good story and a more apocalypse feel to it. (But as you other guys have complained that Fallout is about being goofy and not serious.) Honestly I think Fallout 3 had the right feel to it ... hard to explain.
Though Fallout 3 had a new system for the Fallout series, the setting had a bland/colourless feeling to it, not much side-quests and a few other things .

Fallout New Vegas was great because it improved the system, had a wonderful world (A bit too bland with the colour still.) and added many more things. The thing with it is that New Vegas didn't have that great of a story (Well, it didn't really get me hyped up at all, I mean I HAD a connection to the Lone Wanderer due to the beginning/prologue, but with the Courier I don't know him at all). I didn't give a shit about most of the characters, I feel like I could throw them into oblivion and I wouldn't care ... also I didn't like most of them. The immersion of it being a game based in the post-apocalypse felt kind of wiped out ... felt more like a spaghetti western.

BOTH had at least one great DLC. Point Lookout for Fallout 3 (I still liked Broken Steel) and Old World Blues for New Vegas.
So it would be great if we could make Fallout 4's DLC like that.
And both games had horrible bug issues. (Which I didn't experience much, but I'm going off the internet's experience)

Also, YES I didn't prefer Fallout 3. My whole Fallout experience comes from it, and I enjoyed it to it's fullest.
And no ... I haven't played the previous games. I really hate that top-down look ... also plus I didn't hear of the series until Fallout 3.

Basically, both are great and both are horrible in their own senses.
If one, both or neither of the teams can combine these good aspects and kill the bad points ... I would be a very happy Lone Wanderer in Fallout 4.

 

[Stabby Joe]

On-launch bugs aside, if New Vegas came out BEFORE 3, 3 would have been critically lashed.

 

[KungFuJazzHands]

Seriously, I would hate to see the major technical work done by Obsidian.

As opposed to Bethesda doing it for them? Bethesda are on of the most incompetent companies around when it comes to technical proficiency, to the point where they expect their customers to QA test their games for them.

 

[Soviet Heavy]

Funny people are still blaming Obsidian for the broken nature of the console releases, despite the quality assurance being handled by Bethesda. And they did such a bad job that Obsidian was screwed out of their royalty bonus for getting an 85% rating on Metacritic. Bethesda, the people responsible for fixing the game's problems as per their deal with Obsidian, did a shitty enough job that they didn't need to pay Obsidian their bonus. Whether they were intentionally shit or just incompetent, they fucked Obsidian over.

 

[DarkRyter]

Humbug Fallout 3 was much better than New Vegas-it actually felt like an apocalypse game with a grim-dark world,new vegas was too goofy for me to take seriously >_>.

Really? Fallout 3 isn't the goofy game? With the giant robot? And the aliens? And the part where you're a baby? Or summoning the Chinese via lamp to mercifully kill a bunch of suburbanites to end a vr simulation? And the cowboys that hunt evil people?

 

[Knight Captain Kerr]

Of course I would want to see Obsidian make another Fallout. Fallout: New Vegas is one of my favourite games of all time. Hell Tim Cain works at Obsidian now. The man made Fallout. Who wouldn't want to see Cain, Avellone and Saywer working on a Fallout game?

 

[Stevepinto3]

Like most here, I would love another Obsidian Fallout game. Yes I know NV was, and still is, buggy as hell on consoles. This is just one situation where I don my pc-gamer hat and say I don't care. NV just had way more depth and nuance than FO3, to the point where 3 looks like a dumbed down version of NV.

Plus FO3 missed a whole lot of things about Fallout. Yes it feels more post-apocalypse, but it's been over 200 years since the bombs fell, people have been rebuilding for decades on the west coast. The series is actually post-post-apocalypse if that makes any sense. Hell, by the time the game starts the NCR had already been around for almost 100 years. Yet there are only two decent size settlements and virtually no economy or organized leadership.

Fallout was never supposed to be that grim and desolate. There are a thousand other games like that, play one of them if that's what you're looking for. Please let us have Fallout actually feel like Fallout.

 

[Wolfhowl the shadow lurker]

I liked NV more so i would want them too to LONG LIVE THE NCR

 

[Agente L]

Hopefully it will get 85 points at metacritics this time, eh?

 

[prophet0607]

Obsidian Would Love Another Chance at Fallout

The New Vegas developer says the development of Fallout 4 is entirely up to the bigwigs at Bethesda.



Fallout fans are still eagerly awaiting any news on their favorite Franchise. Bethesda recently quelled rumors that a "secret showing" of Fallout 4 happened behind closed doors at this year's E3, stating that "We are not into annual franchises ... These are big games that take a long time and folks need to understand that we have a very certain way of going about things."


Source: Gameranx [http://www.gameranx.com/updates/id/15895/article/fallout-4-development-up-to-bethesda-but-obsidian-would-love-another-chance/]

Permalink

Annual? At my count, Fallout 3 was released almost 5 years ago, in 2008, with the final DLC, Mothership Zeta releasing in 2009.
Fallout New Vegas was 2010, 3 years ago, with the final DLC releasing in 2011. The ultimate edition has been out since 2011.

This seems to be the opposite of annual. I'm not saying that they should have a Fallout 4 in development. I'm just saying that they should be considering it. More than an Elder Scrolls MMO in any case.

 

[NezumiiroKitsune]

Sic

The Sierra Army Depot ones? The floating art-deco radios with zappy laser tails? I can't see why, besides personal aesthetic preference. They had no personality, and were just fodder of the base, that if I could, I would skip with skill checks. The sentry bots in FO2 (were they in FO? Can't remember.), were fine, but I'd have said they were easier prey than the sentry bots of Bethesda's Fallout. They were slow and huge. I'd get a nostalgia hit from seeing them roam the wasteland, like the first time I spot a Robobrain in FO3, but are they sorely missing?

Centaurs, floaters and aliens (WANAMINGOS!) say Fallout to me. Proper centaurs, with six arms and two heads.

Edit: So many goofs in the first post of this D: Sorry.

 

[Muspelheim]

In the Elysian fields of my idealistic mirror world I keep in my heart, Bethesda and Obsidian developers join forces to create the best possible Fallout game. Together. Complementing each other's skills and covering for each other's flaws.

The wonderful design and enviroments of Fallout 3, with the much needed spark of life and purpose of New vegas. Why pick sides, when what we can do together can be so much more?

(I should write a game-themed speech for next May Day)

 

[Fox12]

Humbug Fallout 3 was much better than New Vegas-it actually felt like an apocalypse game with a grim-dark world,new vegas was too goofy for me to take seriously >_>.

Yeah, I felt the same, though most people seem to disagree. New Vegas was good, but it did not feel like a post apocalypse. The world was fer too civilized. The opening to Fallout 3 is still one of the most memorable I've played, whereas New Vegas was... less than impressive. New Vegas also felt more linear, as they were clearly shepherding the player in the directions they wanted them to take, whereas Fallout 3 really allowed you to roam where you pleased. I did like the companions in New Vegas though, and I hope Betheseda took notes on that account. Credit where credit is due.

 

[Troublesome Lagomorph]

I'd be very disappointed if they don't get it. Fallout 3 was shit in comparison to all the other Fallouts. If they aren't forced to rush everything out half done, as is usually the case, it will be a great addition to the series.
Edit:

Humbug Fallout 3 was much better than New Vegas-it actually felt like an apocalypse game with a grim-dark world,new vegas was too goofy for me to take seriously >_>.

Yeah, I felt the same, though most people seem to disagree. New Vegas was good, but it did not feel like a post apocalypse. The world was fer too civilized. The opening to Fallout 3 is still one of the most memorable I've played, whereas New Vegas was... less than impressive. New Vegas also felt more linear, as they were clearly shepherding the player in the directions they wanted them to take, whereas Fallout 3 really allowed you to roam where you pleased. I did like the companions in New Vegas though, and I hope Betheseda took notes on that account. Credit where credit is due.

That's one of the problems with FO3. It raped the canon. The bombs had fallen hundreds of years before. The radiation wasn't so bad that all water everywhere was still radioactive, and most importantly: humanity rebuilt. Play Fallout 1 and 2 and see how much humans have adapted to the wasteland. Fallout 3 threw that away and acted like the bombs had fallen decades before, when literally HUNDREDS OF YEARS had passed.

 

[Roxas1359]

OT: I would like that, I was way more immersed in the lore of New Vegas than 3

Same for me since Fallout New Vegas felt more true to the original Fallout games than 3 did. Now 3 had it's moments with the funny characters, but they made it a bit too depressing and dark which, while the Fallout games are set in a post-apocalyptic future, aren't really how the Fallout games are. The Fallout games have always made me laugh in some way with how goofy it really was, and with 3 it didn't take me back to the times when I'd play Fallout 2.

If Obsidian were given the opportunity to make Fallout 4 and weren't rushed then it'd probably be my most played game ever to be quite honest. Hell I played New Vegas on the PS3 version which was the buggiest of all and still had a way better time with it than I did with 3. Hell I even have modded 3 on the PC and still find myself going back to New Vegas again.

In the Elysian fields of my idealistic mirror world I keep in my heart, Bethesda and Obsidian developers join forces to create the best possible Fallout game. Together. Complementing each other's skills and covering for each other's flaws.

The wonderful design and enviroments of Fallout 3, with the much needed spark of life and purpose of New vegas. Why pick sides, when what we can do together can be so much more?

(I should write a game-themed speech for next May Day)

That combination would be both the best contribution to the sandbox genre as well as the buggiest thing to possibly grace this earth. XD

Hell Tim Cain works at Obsidian now.

When did he start working there!? 0.0
I would die a happy man if he were working on the next Fallout game.

 

[knight steel]

Humbug Fallout 3 was much better than New Vegas-it actually felt like an apocalypse game with a grim-dark world,new vegas was too goofy for me to take seriously >_>.

Yeah, I felt the same, though most people seem to disagree. New Vegas was good, but it did not feel like a post apocalypse. The world was fer too civilized. The opening to Fallout 3 is still one of the most memorable I've played, whereas New Vegas was... less than impressive. New Vegas also felt more linear, as they were clearly shepherding the player in the directions they wanted them to take, whereas Fallout 3 really allowed you to roam where you pleased. I did like the companions in New Vegas though, and I hope Betheseda took notes on that account. Credit where credit is due.

My thought's exactly couldn't say it better myself ^_^.

 

[Easton Dark]

Sure give them another chance but... please... let some other company work on building the environments.

You know what New Vegas had? Desert. AND MORE FUCKING DESERT. There is literally nothing interesting on the south half of the map, not a thing. And up top? New Vegas is 7 buildings, and 1/3 of the land is boomer territory, meaning empty.

Fallout 3 had all the environment, but none of the character. Mash them together in an engine THAT DOESN'T CRASH or LOAD EVERY ROOM, and that'd be great for Fallout 4.

Also get different music. Fallout 3's radio music fit the tone way better, almost all of New Vegas' is about lost love.

 

[Nicolairigel]

Well, the people who were responsible for Dead Money could pretty much get my get-go to take over the entire planet if they wanted to.

 

[Not Matt]

We would love that too. Let them do it Bethesda. Please please please let them. We all loved new Vegas

 

[BehattedWanderer]

A thousand times yes. Fallout 3 was great in exploration, but absolutely failed in it's story, railroading you into crap that removed you from a good roleplay. "You are not a mercenary!", the Brotherhood of Steel will tell you, despite continuously taking jobs only for the reward or nuking a major settlement for the petty cash and a nice house. Little is explained, and everything that is offered relies on you being taken for granted and assuming that you're only playing the game one way.

New Vegas, on the other hand, was a masterpiece of choice and storytelling. Practically no railroading, you could kill everyone and still solve any quest (good old fashioned Cut the Rope), and no matter how you decided to play your role, they fit it into the game. I'd love to see the greater exploration (distinct monuments and ruined highways were better than sparsely decorated desert) and unique weapon building of Fallout 3 added to the wonderful beauty that is New Vegas.

But what are you people talking about stability? Two hundred hours of either game provide a bug density greater than the biblical locust swarms that blotted out the sky. Yeah, the opening salvo of New Vegas had some impressive and nightmare-inducing issues, but most of those got fixes of one sort or another, and it's not like its Capitol Wasteland sibling got off scott free on that ride.

I don't care who develops it, both games were fun to play. But for the love of all that is great, let me murder everyone (fine, not children, but don't make them pricks I want to Mini-nuke, either), fill the map with interesting things, give me multiple roles to play in these role-playing games, polish up the crafting system from both games into one enjoyable aside, and get some more QA testers, PLEASE.

I've got NV, why have I never given it a proper play through? Oh yeah, because at the moment I'm scared of sinking another several hundred hours into an open world RPG like that.. because we all know that putting just 100 hours into 1 character is nowhere near enough.

In other words, despite some lack of first-hand experience on my part I'd love to see them get this chance too.

(Actually for that above admission do I deserve to be mocked, shunned and shamed per this week's Jimquisition?)

You should get over that fear. It's seriously hindering your life. Luckily, you are already equipped with all the tools you need to fix this serious issue to your personal happiness. Your friends all want this for you. We believe you can do it.