Well, I like Fallout 3 and New Vegas and I'm, uh, considered a dinosaur. Bethesda did fail alot of good things in Fallout, changed and added bad things, and dumbed down some RPG-mechanics, but I like the game. And I think NV is a big improvement of Fallout 3 except that I lost the "wow, this is new"-feel of F3 first time I played it (since NV looks so similar) and the rather boring wasteland. Which is why I think they should cooperate, Bethesda builds an interesting world to explore and fight in, Obsidian builds an interesting world to listen and to think in. I don't think New Vegas is "one step in the right direction but still bad/the best out of the worst", I think it's cool, although the engine annoys me alot being so limited and all. I hope I don't get kicked out of the club now. Fallout 4 will be a beast if Bethesda and Obsidian cooperate with the new engine. Rawr!

Also, that video of a turn-based mod in Fallout 3, I just find it looking very boring. I'm sorry. I don't think it's done right that way. In Fallout 1 and 2 it works great and it's a lot of fun, but not in this now 1st person, highly detailed (visually) world. It just feels wrong. That's why I think VATS should be improved upon alot, make it much much much more like turn-based where alot of numbers matter more, where the enemy gets to shoot back within VATS and keep the cinematic "action movie"-effect to keep it interesting and not having enemies standing there awkwardly (or with a moving animation, but not moving anywhere) but instead look like they are frozen in their action like it's in VATS now, and when it's their turn, it's slow-mo just like when you take your shots... Ok, it looks really good in my head, I svck at explaining.

Its missing all most aspects of a 'turn' except for the delay (and even that is timed, so its sort of an attempt at so called 'continuous turn' play ~which I never liked at all; it defeats the point).

I hope Bethesda make fallout 4 and then obsidian the next title. So we can keep getting our fix of fallout in a shorter time period!!

I don't think a map node system would be a bad thing. They could do it like the one in Mount and Blade. I played that gmae and i liked the map system and i think it would be good for Fallout with a few tweaks. They could make an even bigger map with larger main places than in FO3 and NV.

Fallout New Vegas, where you can read a novel's worth of words and shoot like 10 people with your collection of unneeded weaponry.

But Yea, Fallout 3's story was a little fishy at times. But at least it didn't bore me enough to make me go back to the prequel... :sadvaultboy:

I get what you were saying, I think I had the same imagine in my head also and was merely trying to explain the exact same thing you're explaining. I think we both are on to something here a shared vision.




Fallout 3's story made me thirsty I don't know why but I was craving water while playing the main quest. No game I've ever played made me that thirsty...

Bethesda. I think people went to hard on Bethesda, it was there first Fallout game ever. And now that they have more experience in the Fallout world and got to see what Obsidian did with New Vegas I believe they will make an awesome game.