This. We aren't against better exploration. We just don't care, because that really isn't an important feature of Fallout. It's when the TES/Fallout 3 fans act like it's the most important aspect of Fallout that it gets to be really [censored] annoying.

You think so? I've been playing Fallout 2 recently and I'd consider the exploration to be a pretty important part of the game; there's tons of things to explore and a lot of characters to find and interact with.

And I don't mean to be rude, but you may have to reconcile yourself with the fact that exploration may now be a pretty important part of the Fallout series; the transformation from 2D to 3D has of necessity irrevocably changed the way the games are played. Furthermore, seeing as how exploration is consistently cited as a great strength of the re-imagined franchise, shouldn't that be considered a positive thing?

@TrueHitman-Fallout 3 is on the East Coast, so there's naturally not many FO1-2 factions there. Were you expecting the NCR or the Arroyo Tribesmen to show up or something?

Cpme on People, are you being that nit picky about the fact that " oh it did not have this feature" or " it did not have that feature" that you cannot simply just enjoy a game for what it is, Bethesda did us a favor by thinking outside the box when Interplay was like vultures picking apart Black Isle, and gave Fallout to Bethesda, and bringing Fallout to the East Coast and making a wonderful game such as FO3. I have said repeatedly it has some flaws, but it is in fact a wonderful game, does every Fallout game need to follow the same pattern, Bethesda learned from FO3, and heard everyone, and with Obsidian's help made a good atempt with FO:NV, but that only means they will be ready when FO4 comes out, as they had the success with FO3, and the trial and error with FO:NV, now they will be ready, now all we need to do is be ready and just enjoy the games that are out there.

I see FO3 as the 'Arena' of Bethesda's take on the fallout world

a lot of potential and an excellent game in it's own right but still a lot of room for improvement

after all it was their first attempt at a fallout game, Much like Arena was their first TES, then we got Daggerfall

just my two cents

They didn't think outside of the box at all. They sat there and made it an Elder Scrolls. I know, I freaking watched their "making of". They talked a lot more the Elder Scrolls than they did Fallout. In fact, Fallout was hardly even mentioned. FFS the game is called "Fallout 3", so of course it should have followed the formula, or at least in the spirit of the franchise. I don't mind changes, but I don't like a) when a game series becomes a clone series of another and B) when these changes kill the spirit of the series.

But they did not kill the spirit of the series, they took an engine that worked, and used it, and it was success. Are you calling FO:NV a "Elder Scrolls" as well as it runs off the same engine? Look, i am not saying your wrong in your line of thinking, but it is no clone of another series, and it is quite a successful work. If you don't like FO3, simply don't play it anymore, don't ruin it for the rest of us who do like it, not every Fallout game has to be on the west coast, involve factions, or the same things all the time, you have to be original and think different to draw people sometimes.

Interplay is still an good company there just lead by money mongering idiots same with Zeni-max don't blame Bethesda they don't really call the buissness shots.
And Fallout 4 is in concept at the moment todd howard stated in a interview with Eurogamer he was working on a second game which is likely fallout 4 and they won't need a new engine for Fallout 4 ,as this is designed to fit both TES and Fallout.

And that's the news, Good night, and have a pleasant tomorrow! :whistling:

Great, so we're stuck with TES with guns.

That is fairly obvious. The only thing we can do is read Van Buren design documents from the Vault and cry ourselves to sleep. :sadvaultboy:

I dont care too much what engine they gonna use,

What I care is that Fallout 4 wasnt "Skyrim with guns"



Fallout 3 was a sucess but New Vegas was just a "good atempt",



Right :spotted owl:

Damnit! We were so... close!

I wish, but then again I want them to buy a new graphics engine and come up with a better idea than before :whistling:

I need a new Fallout game :ermm:

i disagree, i think they were smart using the oblivion formula, FO3 is kinda like oblivion and i like that, since i loved oblivion, the basic framework was the same, the same template and i would of done the same thing, oblivion and fallout 3 are huge successes for em, its not like those games flopped, if you have excellent cake recipe, don't change it just for the hell of it, it might not be as good, they did what they do well, they are good at open world games, with lots of exploration, dungeons, good enemies to fight with some cool battles, thats what they do best.

:stare: No, no it wasn't, would you TES fans PLEASE play the original Fallouts before you say things like that, IT SIMPLY IS NOT TRUE!

In response to the cake statement, would you use a cake recipe when you are trying to make sourdough bread?





The cake is a lie.

It's pretty [censored] clear that he isn't [censored] listening to us. We'll keep telling him that Fallout isn't TES, and he'll keep pointing at how Fallout 3 and Oblivion were successful despite that Fallout 1 and 2 were successful when they were completely different games. It's pointless, he obviously wants Fallout to be something it really [censored] isn't.

Fallout 4? I am just getting into Fallout 3...just ordered it from Amazon. So is Fallout: New Vegas the Shivering Isles of Fallout 3?

this isn't about FO1 or FO2, fallout3 is like oblivion, the framework and formula is exactly the same, i was playing oblivion and when fallout 3 came out and i started playing it, the similarites were obvious, the menu system, the combat mechanics, the way they build dungeons and buildings, the way they make enemies to fight, the exploration, fast travel system, how they set the towns and settlements up, its the same formula. and bethesda decides how fallout is gonna be, its their franchise.

Fallout games arent supposed to be like TES, dont you understand!? FO3 deviated from the key aspects and mechanics from the series, Fallout 3 SHOULD have been NOTHING like TES and more like the originals, thats how Van Buren (The cancled Fallout 3 that was being made by Black Isle before Interplay shot itself in the foot) was supposed to be, any game that calls itself Fallout should be like Fallout, NOT THE ELDER SCROLLS.

Will you people quit bashing, please! It is not going to be like FO and FO2 anymore, it is not going to be turn based, it is not going to be anything like canceled Van Buren. Just enjoy the games, and let it rest and get over the fact that Fallout is not going to be attacked by the Norns. It is not TES, it is Fallout, and we are advlts here, not ranting feral ghouls who gang up on people who do not agree with our opinions, we need to get along and let bygones be bygones and respect our own opinions, agree to disagree.

Why not?

I would, if people would stop attackig NV for returning to Fallouts roots and praising FO3 for everything that was wrong with it.

I'm not getting into that argument again, like i said, we can agree to disagree, simple as that, you think NV is strong for returning to it's roots, i think FO3 is strong for being different, best to leave it at that. Nuff Said.

I guess, but this isnt over :stare: this isnt over by a long shot.

Sure you can still argue,

But you know

Well

Let just say that Big Brother are watching us

I just hope that Fallout arent becoming a "The Elder Scroll: Post Apocalyptic Edition"

Or Im gonna kill this Gecko

You mean Fallout 3? Nyuk nyuk.