Poll: Fallout 4, would you buy it?

[Bvenged]

If Obsidian primarily develops it, I'm not touching it with a 10ft pole.
If Obsidian lend a helping hand and Bethesda primarily develop it, it's already bagged as a pre-order.

 

[Right Hook]

So after the double negative in your intro, I'm assuming you're saying it's likely that Bethesda will make another Fallout, in which case I agree with you.

I enjoy using double negatives. It's like toying with someone.

It sure is, you scared me for a second because I wasn't reading closely. I'd definitely get the next Fallout, it is one of my favorite game series after all.

 

[Jitters Caffeine]

In a heartbeat. Here's hoping they put that Skyrim engine to good use after how boring it was.

 

[GonzoGamer]

If it isn't a buggy mess, sure.

Yea.
I'd buy it but definitely not at launch and probably not for the ps3.
You have to give them a few months after launch to actually get the game working.

 

[Durgiun]

Would I buy it?

*****, I would take it out on the town, get it drunk, have sex with its tight little hole, give it babies, marry it at shotgun point from its daddy and live happily ever after. It's Fallout, damn it!

 

[SajuukKhar]

I would only buy fallout 4 if they got Obsidian to write the plot.

Bethesda showed very clearly with Fallout 3 that they understand little about what makes the fallout series what it is.

all one has to do is look at mothership Zeta to understand why they should never be allowed to write a Fallout story ever again.

 

[Erttheking]

I'd have to get a look at what they were planning for it first, but if I had to dive blind, yeah I guess so.

 

[Muspelheim]

It's always interesting to see the wildly contrasting opinions regarding Fallout 3 and New Vegas, and how so many liked one, but dislike the other.

Indeed, they were rather different yet so like.

I actually liked Fallout 3 the more, since it was my introduction to the series. However, I also think that I'm a bit more of a casual fan, and that it'd honestly be better if Obsidian handled it. There are bigger fans than me, with a very different take on the spirit and feel of the Fallout universe, and I do think they're more "right" than I am.

And again, if it's mod-friendly, it'll be easy to adjust it according to my personal tastes anyway. Hell, I found the prospect of playing as a regular old human boring enough in Fallout 3, so I went and got a custom race-mod (and a furry-race on top of that, too). So, yeah, "proper" fans really do deserve the game they like more than I do, at the end of the day.

 

[Launcelot111]

snip

For the record, FO:4 is most likely going to take place at or around the Capital Wasteland again. The original two Fallouts were put out by a company in the California area, which is why they were based in Cali. Fallout 3 was put out by Bethesda, which is situated in the DC Tri-State area. Since Bethesda is going to put out the next Fallout as well, I would be shocked for it not to be in the Capital Wasteland again. That said, I could definitely see side companies, like Obsidian, picking the game up. I've had my fingers crossed that a British company will raise their hands next.

I doubt we'll see too much green, unless Oasis is followed up on. As for size, I have a feeling that, based off of what Skyrim has done (rendering the map of the entire Tamriel Landscape, but only actually "populating" the province of Skyrim) I have a feeling that Bethesda may move in the direction of creating a larger world space than they use, and then populating the rest in larger "expansion-pack" type installments. One of the big rumors for Skyrim is that the three expansion-packs will take place in Hammerfell, Morrowind, and Cyrodiil respectively, which would mean that the explorable-world space could quardruple in size. Considering that the land is already pre-rendered (which was actually the major hurdle in modding efforts to create other parts of Tamriel in earlier games), it would make sense. What does this mean for Fallout? Well, it would be possible to recreate DC, and then extend the map over the course of three or four major installments, expanding the scope of the game greatly. My personal opinion is that is what I hope they do. Unlike a lot of people, I don't mind if Bethesda releases a game that isn't fully finished. I'd like for them to finish the main story arc and associated side quests, but past that, I'm ok with waiting for the other parts to come out.

I think it's overly simplistic to say that the location of the games are a direct result of where the company making the game is based. 1/2/NV are all very connected in terms of characters/factions/history, so keeping things in the same geographic area to allow for continuity of the setting seems like a more pressing concern than simply saying that the games are in California just because Black Isle/Obsidian are in California. On the same page, Bethesda is in Maryland, so it may have some unique insight into Washington compared to other developers, but Washington is probably the most distinctive American city in terms of landmarks, history, and role in the country, so it was an inspired choice to set 3 in DC regardless of where Bethesda is based. Now, 3 also shows us that there are other notable East Coast settlements like the Pitt and the Commonwealth. I think Bethesda might stay on the East Coast, but I think they will explore the expansions of the lore they have developed rather than limiting themselves to the Capital Wasteland.

Moreover, seeing as the first person limits the size of the map compared to the isometric perspective of 1/2 where you could get a car and drive a couple hundred miles, I think that reusing DC would be boring because that one city would be the whole game rather than one of 10 major cities, and we have already seen that city in great detail. And even more, the conflict in the Capitol from 3 was more or less resolved, so the story would be either seeing how rebuilding would be coming along after Project Purity or introducing another random invading force , which would be too similar to the Enclave.

Long story short, I think Bethesda or whoever makes this would be smart not to revisit DC so soon. My choices would be New York (forget the wasteland, go all out urban), New Orleans (to see the intersection of the unique local culture and the developments of the Fallout universe, with mutated crocodiles for good measure) and San Antonio (because it's small enough to not be a major target, so the story could be a hampered society dedicated to protecting America from some post-apocalyptic menace coming out of Mexico, with a final battle where you hold off overwhelming opposition from the Alamo)

 

[Link Kadeshi]

I'd happily donate more money to Bethesda'a "Take Over the World Fund" for a Fallout 4. I'm not so keen on paying an extra $10 for a PC game, mind you... It's more greed than anything else.

 

[BlueberryMUNCH]

See I know this is heresy, but I didn't like New Vegas. That said, Fallout 3 is...definitely in my top 10 games of all time. Hmm. Just didn't like it haha, dunno why.

Nowadays I can't really afford that many games, so yeah I'll probably get it if it turns out to be good or when it comes down in price.

[small]or if it's set in London...[/small]

 

[emissary666]

I hated Fallout 3 and NV. Ruined a good series. If Fallout 4 was like the first two games (and thus an actual s equal), I'd buy it. Otherwise, I'd finally punch all of my friends in the face (all of my friends are super-crazy Fallout 3 fans)

 

[Soulfoodman]

I would buy a new Fallout without any hesitation.

Fallout > Elder Scrolls imo.

If I could pick, the setting would be middle to east Texas. If there was some way for the game to stretch from the Hill Country to the Piney Woods regions, I think that would be fun.

 

[TheSteeleStrap]

I would buy it. A Fallout game with decently looking and sounding NPCs sounds awesome. I'll take all the exploration they can throw at me really.

 

[Shdwrnr]

It's been painful, but since bethesda's legal battles with interplay and mojang, I have refused to buy their products. So if it was made by someone other than bethesda, yes. If it was made by bethesda, then no.

 

[JediMB]

I'd most likely pre-order it, and I certainly wouldn't dislike Obsidian having some involvement in the development.

Depends on early impressions, though... although I have no real reason to distrust Bethesda. Not even Fallout 3 was anywhere close to pulling a Mass Effect 3.

 

[FrostyChick]

Probably not, post-apoc isn't really my thing.

But I would suggest keeping it in America. Despite how cool Fallout UK, or Fallout Aus might sound. Do you really think splitting the Fallout fanbase further would be a good idea?
I mean Bethesda had people frothing at the mouth because 3 wasn't a turn based game (and other reasons, but shush). Do you really want to see the amount of nerd rage caused by "shifting the focus" of the series?
Well I do, but only because I find the butt-hurt both hilarious and pathetic in equal measures. But I can see the almost inevitable "Please stop with the Fallout 4 threads" threads popping up, and they're a real downer when it comes watching the carnage caused by a fanboy scorned.

 

[SnakeoilSage]

I'd play this game but I would like it more if Obsidian were not involved.

Hear me out.

I enjoyed New Vegas, but only in its gameplay improvements. As far as stories went I enjoyed F3's more: I had a greater investment in the story and my character felt like he had a back-story. As maze-like as it was I enjoyed exploring the ruins of Washington D.C. and the final battle between the Brotherhood of Steel (including Liberty Prime) and the Enclave was pretty epic. The Broken Steel expansion made it even better.

New Vegas on the other hand chose multiple plots, and while that freedom was nice it didn't feel as solid as F3. You didn't feel the same kind of investment, or connection to the setting. The characters - some of them - were interesting, but didn't draw me in much.

A solid main plot like F3, with plenty of factions like Skyrim, would make for a great game, in my opinion.

 

[General_Mills44]

Absolutely, Fallout 3 was a great game and although I enjoyed New Vegas more I still think Bethesda can make another wonderful entry to a amazing series.

 

[Saladfork]

I actually like FO: NV much better than I did FO3.

It'd be cool if they had Bethesda programmers create the engine and the world, and then have Obsidian take over and create the characters and story.