faetal on 19/11/2013 at 14:37
Dethtoll - yes.
Nameless Voice on 23/11/2013 at 14:50
I wonder if it will be Bethesda or Obsidian?
Most likely the former, which probably means a return to the unrealistic settings and weak writing that are their hallmark.
Jason Moyer on 23/11/2013 at 18:44
There's 0 chance it's anybody but Bethesda, unless they have another studio helping them.
Nameless Voice on 23/11/2013 at 20:17
That makes me much less enthusiastic about it. Fallout 3 was fun, sure, but FO:NV was just so much better quality in almost every way.
Brad Schoonmaker on 23/11/2013 at 21:38
I'm one of the ones first introduced to the series with Fallout 3 and I loved all of it. True there's Oblivion level goofiness though out, but still a great game. Now that I finally started playing New Vegas... WOW. This one is up there with Skyrim for me. They could do an even better Fallout 4 with or without Obsidian judging by how great Skyrim is.
june gloom on 23/11/2013 at 22:12
Man, New Vegas is cool and all, but it just feels so empty and small compared to Fallout 3. The nature of its plot requires a lot of railroading too and undermines the game's supposed open-world nature.
I love the DLC to bits though.
Nameless Voice on 24/11/2013 at 03:20
The thing for me was that New Vegas felt like a more believable world. There were farmers, crops, cattle, towns where things seemed to be happening.
In Fallout 3, there was no food and all the water was irradiated, people seemed to be living on 300-year-old packaged food raided from supermarkets.
Now, I haven't played Skyrim yet (yeah, I know, I'm slow), so maybe Bethesda have significantly upped their game in the world-building and storytelling departments since Oblivion and FO3. Let's hope. :)
I did play all the Fallout games in order, but I only played the first two games quite recently, so I don't really have nostalgia for them.
The way I'm talking makes it sound a bit like I hate Bethesda games - that's not true at all, I love them, but I do find their myriad flaws painful at times.
Brad Schoonmaker on 24/11/2013 at 04:57
Fallout 3 is truly all about the Lone Wanderer. All events center on the protagonist which are well done, I think. There are issues similar to those in Oblivion that I could do without, but I enjoyed everything even the horse armor aka Mothership Zeta. NV, on the other hand, expands the magnitude of the game giving you avenues to commit to and then in turn take away others with much more complexity. This may seem typical of open world games, but I think the emotional investment I have with those choices makes it so rewarding. Instead of the goal being the loot at the end, it's the experience itself that make me want to play.
Everything Nameless Voice said about New Vegas is my thinking, too. Much less random fighting than in F3 and much more world to explore. When I first saw that world map, I thought it was dinky compared to the DC wasteland, but once I got going the size seemed realistic. The variety of perks, world interactions, factions, etc more than make up for the smaller scope of the world itself, imo.
Quote:
The nature of its plot requires a lot of railroading too and undermines the game's supposed open-world nature.
I've had the opposite feeling about the plot. Damn, they're a lot of quests and they intermingle nicely. Have to say, I won't be replaying any different than this. Killed Caesar and will any other play through. Boone's my hero. Great voice acting all round. Companion quest lines. So much to do and I haven't even done the DLC, yet.
Skyrim is still my favorite game. I think they learned a lot from doing the Fallout series. They carried over much of the improvements from F3 to NV so they can do the next installment justice.
Holographic705 on 27/11/2013 at 15:02
We'll all see when the countdown ends. It would be awesome if it's real.
faetal on 28/11/2013 at 15:43
They have the IP and FO3 has to be one of the most successful cross-platform titles of recent years, so I can't imagine that they wouldn't make a sequel.