[MARLON JOHNSON]

I don't think they should have multiplayer in fallout 3 it should stay a single player experience, maybe in a spin off of fallout 3(fallout tactics 2 maybe?), but definetly not in the current product(as previously stated VATS would also be a diffucult obstacle). Bethesda currently cannot make a fallout MMO; not that it's possible that they can do it, but bethesda currently cannot legally make any fallout MMO as they licensed the rights to a Fallout MMORPG to interplay for Project V13. Although if Interplay does not meet their payment deadline(which is very possible)they will lose all development rights to any fallout MMORPG. Since ZeniMax inc. is very interested in making a fallout MMORPG, it is very possible(most likely 100percent) that there will a fallout MMORPG in the near future(either by Bethesda/ZeniMax inc. or Interplay), it would actually work if it was a spin off the fallout series, but without a doubt fallout 3 will not become a MMO.
http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Project_V13
http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Fallout_Online_FAQ

[Manuela Ribeiro Pereira]

I think it would be awesome to add a multi/single player survival mode

Where you and a friend can battle wave after wave of raiders,supermutants, Enclave and other fallout characters.
Like the Gears of War 2 Horde and COD5 Nazis Zombies

:gun: :violin:

[Samantha hulme]

I think it would be awesome to never ever see the word "Multiplayer" on a list of features for a Bethesda RPG. This excludes spin-offs of the sort like Battlespire. But if a numbered Fallout or Elder Scrolls game came out with a multiplayer component, I wouldn't buy it.

[Marie]

Van Buren was going to have a co-op mode.

[Rebekah Rebekah Nicole]

I think it would be awesome to never ever see the word "Multiplayer" on a list of features for a Bethesda RPG. This excludes spin-offs of the sort like Battlespire. But if a numbered Fallout or Elder Scrolls game came out with a multiplayer component, I wouldn't buy it.

^This. There seems to be a school of thought in the industry that single player is dead. Which Emil addressed directly in his interview with Shack News where he said that Single Player is not dead and the success of F3, Oblivion etc confirms it and reading between the lines it basically means don't expect Multiplayer from beth.

I really hate what happened to Resident Evil, you are basically forced to either have a dumb girl follow you about or play co-op. At the end of the day there is plenty of good co-op games, but very few good single player games. I like my escapism, this means I don't have to listen to someone shouting 'woot' 'pwned' etc or even 'FRAG EM', it ruins it for me.

Gaming to me is sitting in my room alone with noone bothering me, all of my problems in the back of my head and have my full attention on just the game. Not someone else running alongside me getting in my way and annoying the hell out of me.

[Agnieszka Bak]

It's not even that the CONCEPT of co-op in a game is bad, or that single player has few good games. It's just that Bethesda RPGs are not games which CAN support multiplayer AND have it be the same sort of experience. Multiplayer could only hurt the core experience of a Bethesda RPG. Maybe a small spin-off(a TES or Fallout-themed action game), I could get on board. Because I do like multiplayer games and my friends like the Elder Scrolls and Fallout franchises. But leave the main series alone.

[Gemma Archer]

I hope if Bethesda gets the rights of Project V13 from Interplay, they put it to good use. Who else can imagine fighting super mutants with turn-based/VATS combat (a combination) with their friends?

Van Buren was going to have a co-op mode.

Yeah, and look how great that turned out.

[Bird]

I hope if Bethesda gets the rights of Project V13 from Interplay, they put it to good use. Who else can imagine fighting super mutants with turn-based/VATS combat (a combination) with their friends?



Yeah, and look how great that turned out.

If Interplay looses the Fallout MMO rights they'll still retain V13, they just can't use the Fallout license with it. However V13 is an MMO, and this thread is for discussing non-MMO multiplayer.

[BethanyRhain]

If Interplay looses the Fallout MMO rights they'll still retain V13, they just can't use the Fallout license with it. However V13 is an MMO, and this thread is for discussing non-MMO multiplayer.

They would have to change the game drastically, since it's considered copyright-breaking to have something that looks to similar to another game/movie/book. So they would have to change all the location names/NPC's/gear/story/gameplay.

[Charity Hughes]

Yeah, and look how great that turned out.

It had nothing to do with the cancelation.

[sarah simon-rogaume]

Wasn't VB's co-op mode some business rather than developer decision ? Seem to recall it was more of "Boss says to do this" issue than anything else.

[Tha King o Geekz]

Wasn't VB's co-op mode some business rather than developer decision ? Seem to recall it was more of "Boss says to do this" issue than anything else.

The Fallout Wiki says so, anyway.Doesn't cite a source, though.

It would have been horrible in Van Buren anyway, though at least tolerable combat-wise in Turn-Based mode.

[Albert Wesker]

I am probably wasting my time but I'll say it anyway...

I've put 89 hours into fallout 3 and i haven't even done the last mission or bought any of the DLC yet so that probably tells you how much i like the game. However, playing Fallout puts me in a very lonely place. Not because it's a nuclear wastland and there aren't many people about, it's more to do with the AI. The NPC's in this game a so scripted and pridictable that it makes me feel like i'm the only real/special person in the world (i get the same feeling in GTA as i seem to be the only active ctiminal in the world).

I understand when people say that they want fallout to stay a single player experience and i kind of agree with that. However, multiplayer would be perfect for this game and it could be done in a way that wouldn't effect the single player experience. I'm not going to explain how i think it could work because it will probably fall on death ears.

I want RPG to start implementing some type of multiplayer, so much so that i will make a conscious effort not to buy anymore RPG's fail to innovate. If you can't see the potential for multiplayer in this game (even if it was just two people in the same game) then i don't know what you are doing in this thread.

[Latino HeaT]

The only problem I have with fallout 3 multiplayer is, HOW IS IT GOING TO WORK!? when you kill another person how will you search them if at all. Will you be able to take thier stuff leaving them an armorless, capless, weaponless shell of dissapointment when they respawn? Also how would VATS work? Would it stop the game for everyone confusing the hell out of them and leaving them thinking that their game froze?

[Samantha Wood]

Why would it need to be based on Fallout 3 game mechanics? Fallout Tactics had multiplayer, both in turn-based an real-time mode. It doesn't need to feature VATS.

[Tamara Primo]

I think it would be awesome to add a multi/single player survival mode

Where you and a friend can battle wave after wave of raiders,supermutants, Enclave and other fallout characters.
Like the Gears of War 2 Horde and COD5 Nazis Zombies

:gun: :violin:

I know what your saying and I know that that idea saved a bunch of games and nothing personal man but that would be the worst idea ever concieved by any man ever born in the history of everything, for fallout at least. The only reason it works for other games is because thier scripted streight-forword games that the only thing you have to do is run, shoot, run and shoot some more, and run behind a wall and wait for your health to regenerate. But fallout is an unscripted, play it the way you think it should be played, do whatever the f*** you want, sandbox of awsomeness. But also there is a limit problem with your health and ammo. When you run out then what. The other problem I have is that when you search a corpse or go into VATS will the other persons game stop. input please.

[Judy Lynch]

The only problem I have with fallout 3 multiplayer is, HOW IS IT GOING TO WORK!? when you kill another person how will you search them if at all. Will you be able to take thier stuff leaving them an armorless, capless, weaponless shell of dissapointment when they respawn? Also how would VATS work? Would it stop the game for everyone confusing the hell out of them and leaving them thinking that their game froze?

I'm sure if you put five minutes thought into how it would all work, you could answer your own questions.

Lets say that Bethesda released a patch that allowed you to connect to someone who was in the same part of fallout 3's world (paradise falls for example), chances are that one player would see the other first giving that player the advantage. That player could enter VATS which does not stop time but instead works in real time and therefore the chance of hitting the other guy would change as that player moves around. The player using VATS would have to fire their shot when they think they will stand the best chance of hitting the target.

Once one person kills another they would be able to search the body and take any bottle caps that player is carrying. They could also take weapons and armour from the dead player but these items would be duplicated and not permanently taken from the dead player. Meaning that when the dead player respawns, they would have all their weapon and armour but would have lost all the money they were carrying.

[Sarah Edmunds]

Once one person kills another they would be able to search the body and take any bottle caps that player is carrying. They could also take weapons and armour from the dead player but these items would be duplicated and not permanently taken from the dead player. Meaning that when the dead player respawns, they would have all their weapon and armour but would have lost all the money they were carrying.

And that would make the entire online community run around with PA and full high-tech gear in the weapon class they prefer within, say, two weeks? People wouldn't get their equipment by accomplishing anything, they would just form up and jump on one guy with excellent gear to get his gear without him losing it when he respawns. That would make every character out there generic (at least in gear and appearance) and would discourage finding that stuff yourself.

[Amanda Furtado]

As above.

That was just a hypothetical way in which the the multiplayer system could work. I thought of a solution to the problems you brought up within 1 minuet of reading your post. Do you really need me to think for you?

[rebecca moody]

That was just a hypothetical way in which the the multiplayer system could work. I thought of a solution to the problems you brought up within 1 minuet of reading your post. Do you really need me to think for you?

It's a discussion, so I think people are encouraged to chip in and give their two caps on any ideas.

VATS was designed as as a gimick-worthy nod to previous games turn-based combat. VATS may aswell just turn into auto-aim for a real-time mmo. As standing there taking a 'target assisted' shot whilst the opponent can run, jump, crouch and blow your head off, just leads me to believe that the most effective thing you can do is not make yourself a sitting-duck. But this just makes a Fallout MMO sound like Unreal Tournament, so I don't think combat needs to be addressed all that significantly between players.

[Isabel Ruiz]

It's a discussion, so I think people are encouraged to chip in and give their two caps on any ideas.

VATS was designed as as a gimick-worthy nod to previous games turn-based combat. VATS may aswell just turn into auto-aim for a real-time mmo. As standing there taking a 'target assisted' shot whilst the opponent can run, jump, crouch and blow your head off, just leads me to believe that the most effective thing you can do is not make yourself a sitting-duck. But this just makes a Fallout MMO sound like Unreal Tournament, so I don't think combat needs to be addressed all that significantly between players.

I don't understand what you mean. Without VATS multiplayer Fallout would just be a shooter. A person would have to assign skills and perks to improve their abilities in VATS so you may get someone that concentrated on it and could therefore hit people easier using VATS or you could get someone who concentrated on athletics and sneak which could, in theory, make them harder to hit.

[Andrea Pratt]

I don't understand what you mean. Without VATS multiplayer Fallout would just be a shooter. A person would have to assign skills and perks to improve their abilities in VATS so you may get someone that concentrated on it and could therefore hit people easier using VATS or you could get someone who concentrated on athletics and sneak which could, in theory, make them harder to hit.

I disagree. I think there are plenty of roles for everyone to fill in a Fallout world. Sure there are people that just want to war other players, but I think they'd be too busy playing COD to devote to a Fallout title. You'e talking about Fallout from a very combat-centric point of view, there are other, more significant strengths within a Fallout game, to do with rebuilding civilisation, or destroying it as you see fit, moral ambiguity and making choices to benefit yourself or others. It's definitely not all about running and gunning.

[Justin]

And a multiplayer Fallout game wouldn't have to be an FPS. Fallout Tactics had a multiplayer mode in which you could play in real time and wasn't a shooter.

[leni]

And a multiplayer Fallout game wouldn't have to be an FPS. Fallout Tactics had a multiplayer mode in which you could play in real time and wasn't a shooter.

One almost wonders if the RT mode was just to facilitate Multiplayer

*Though there are other TB games that have online play (not just Chess )

[Ezekiel Macallister]

That was just a hypothetical way in which the the multiplayer system could work. I thought of a solution to the problems you brought up within 1 minuet of reading your post. Do you really need me to think for you?

First of all, your initial response, in which you suggested your hypothetical loot system with duplicated items and lost money for the virtual deceased, was not even directed at me. Secondly, I told you how, in my opinion, that system wouldn't really work or could ruin some of the gameplay fun. Now, if I have somehow offended you by giving my opinion about an idea, I am terribly sorry. But please, how would you go around people looting their friends who have better stuff than they have, since all that stuff will be duplicated? Or wouldn't that be a problem since every gamer out there really wants to put some work into it when playing such a game...