I don't get it? then why not play TES, and not force it's style on to a series that it doesn't belong?

Because you might be a fan of sci-fi or post-apocalyptic games, but not fantasy?

I love the open style of FO3 but have yet to play any TES games. Fantasy's not as much my thing, but I love the post-apocalyptic genre.

Chances are ~but I haven't :laugh: (neither one).
I would really hope for it... but that in itself tells me it won't happen.

Because like the other guy pointed out, I like the post-apocalyptic setting more than I do the medieval fantasy setting and I feel that Bethesda handled it better than Obsedian did. It's just my opinion though, and I'm sure there's millions of Obsedian fans out there who are going to strongly disagree with me, but I have a right to my opinion.

Okay, you liked the way Bethesda handled the post apocalyptic setting, all about opinion there, can't say you're wrong for having a different opinion.
But the thing is, even if Bethesda handled a post apoc setting better than Obsidian the problem is that they didn't handle a Fallout setting good at all.
And after all, this is Fallout we're talking about, either handle it the Fallout way or create a new IP specifically built to be a ES clone in post apoc clothing.
But to change Fallout to ES?
It just shows that Bethesda can't handle anything but ES games and should stick to it and leave Fallout in more competent hands.
If they want to do post apoc ES then do so by creating a new IP but don't ruin a unique cult series just because they don't know how to handle two different franchises.
How do you think ES fans would react if they changed the game to isometric turnbased combat with a hexagon system and city map nodes?
I think some of us dinosaurs would find a game like that very entertaining but imagine how many would be pissed off.
Same thing with Fallout.

To summarize; Bethesda, stick to what Fallout is or create a new IP but don't ruin this classic series cause you can't handle two different franchises.

[edit]
Not saying the games should return to default isometric turnbased combat with hexagon system.
I know that it would not sell well in the market.
All I'm asking for is to make compromises to put distance from Oblivion and to go closer to the older games in other ways.
And steadily move back to what Fallout really is and should be like.

I'm playing through FO1 at the moment, and I have to say I think FO3 captured the atmosphere of the universe pretty decently; FO1's got just as much humor, if not more, and FO2's got all those pop culture references.

Fact is marketing FO3 as a turn-based combat RPG would likely have been very difficult in the modern market, as these kind of games are no longer really in fashion (outside of JRPGs).

gabriel Well I understand all that because I'm sure that the fans of the original games would rather the games stick to the way they were meant to be. However why can't it go both ways? Why can't sometimes Obsedian make games to satisfy the traditional Fallout fans and sometimes Bethesda make games to satisfy the new fans who are more into the TES style gameplay? That way everybody can be happy.

So, what?
Bethesda is excused that they are crap developers cause Obsidian gets the occasional game?
Which is more than likely going to be put on a ridiculous deadline?
I'm overjoyed...
(Yeah I'm kinda in a pissy mood right now...)

And I hardly think Bethesda will allow Obsidian to take their games the way they want to take them.
They'll still be the publishers and call the shots.
So no, I wont be happy until Bethesda realizes that they need to get their head out of their ass and do Fallout as Fallout's meant to be.
Don't require much to make me happy with FO4 though.
Need a map node system with exploration in each node so that both sides can be happy.
Need more skills and more importance to SPECIAL.
Balance skills and perks out with new ratios.
And needs better writing than FO3 had.
It has that and I consider it progress.
Nothing too drastic, all fully viable compromises.
If they at least try, at a steady pace, to move the series back to the old ways, then I'll be as happy as a schoolgirl who just got a pink lunchbox with ponies on it.
Then I might have faith in Bethesda with Fallout.

[edit]
Anyway, on topic, Bethesda owns Fallout now, nothing to do about that, so they will likely handle all number games.
But I do want them to let Obsidian create their games too and would much rather that Obsidian handled all Fallout games with Bethesda only collecting royalties.

Thing is with Bethesda that all I have to judge them by in the recent years are Oblivion and FO3, neither of which were very spectacular.
So why I diss on Bethesda so much is cause since all I have to judge them by are those two titles I fear for Fallout, that they will ruin it by dumbing it down even more and ignoring more lore and changing more core design.
So I'm sorry, but unless Skyrim blows my mind with game mechanics, balance, writing and general RPG aspects then I'm not going to be very optimistic about anything that Bethesda develops.

There are three core games, plus New Vegas, (plus two spinoffs ~three by some counts). Even if the whole planet likes Fallout 3 better than any other game in the series... That does not make it better handled or more appropriate for that fact alone (new does not guarantee better). That you liked FO3 better is fine (by all of us ~I'm guessing), but a lot of us like FO:New Vegas better because of its writing and format changes. Others like it for it's vague and subtle similarities to the original style. Many could not care any less about the game's combat or respawning critters. I liked Fallout 3 a lot for what it was, but I tended to avoid speaking NPC and most towns as they ruined the atmosphere for me. I did not like their handling of anything save the admittedly superb landscape and art design. Fallout NV, I liked for the slight return towards what Fallout is supposed to be like (judging from the series as a whole). I liked their handling of most things, except their shortcuts on geometry; I did not like discovering that firing the incinerator 'down into' an ant hive, was really just toasting your feet. (the hole is for looks, and is just art. The collision geometry is solid, with no hole there at all. )

IMO this whole thing has a parallel in "Masters of the Universe" Fallout 1&2 equate to Filmation's version of MotU, while later versions... they equate to the later series remakes (reshaped to suit a new market). They might even be more popular ~but that does not guarantee that they are inherently better.

Its a funny fact that those that went to see the MotU movie were often advlts that enjoyed the tv series (and brought their kids along); most [all?] were sourly disappointed (despite the more realistic visuals :laugh:). I can't see advlts (then or now) watching the recent incarnations of the tv series for pleasure, other than the pleasure of seeing their kids have fun watching it. There is nothing in them to hold an advlt's attention or interest [IMO].

I would second that. :tops:

Same here, except.... that is exactly what I would want for Fallout (specifically) ~though there is no practical need for it not to be 3D (like the Witcher).

Oh believe me I would so want it too.
But unless we get a third party developer to do this risk then I doubt we'll be seeing one unless a modder takes the task to redesign an entire game.
At most we can hope for optional TB combat with maybe free roaming bird eye view (Dragon Age) for it.

I think they were spot on in the visuals, but that's really the extent of it IMO. I think they misunderstood the setting and series ~or understood that they would (in their opinion) have to change it to appease their TES fans (or themselves).

IMO "So What?" (Just saying, here). If you can't sell a turn based series without making it not one... why not make something else instead? (rather than an inaccurate reconstituted version of the series). Is that not basically similar to the difference between orange and orange flavored?
*Or to "Milk" and "Soy Milk" (where the latter merely looks the part)?

As to TB gaming... There is a market, (one that I feel should have games glad made for them, without having to resort to political chicanery to imply that a segment of the people are not getting their fair share of entertainment titles.:grad: ~~ :lmao:)

Have a look at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c8h7Cpgd9kU... I waited 8 years for them to get "http://i271.photobucket.com/albums/jj125/Gizmojunk/3800645874_513d0a551f.jpg" and they finally did. I could have bought this at Walmart; (and wish that I did; but I bought it day 1 ~off of Steam ... I didn't know Walmart would have it.) I can't put into words just how refreshing it was not to have this be a first person re-imagining of Disciples 2.

Play TES then

Fallout need to be different

I second this absolutely... But in my case, I have no problem with the engine, I only wish they had the freedom to use it differently (if they chose to). I can see a closer game made of it than FO:NV, but still using the same engine and assets. :shrug:

Loki and Kohan2 were also made using Gamebryo.

Sure, I don't object. Was merely trying to make a point about freedom to craft the game differently. And, based on the screens - http://eu.dungeonsiege.com/media/screenshots/ds3_screenshot_01_1280.jpg, http://eu.dungeonsiege.com/media/screenshots/ds3_screenshot_02_1280.jpg, for 2 examples - I've seen from Dungeon Siege 3, I'd like to see a Fallout esque game made with the Onyx Engine --- plus, using it would give Obsidian a benefit over other engines as it is their technology.

Yeah, I can agree with this. Bar none the biggest problem with FO3 was those things you just mentioned. Writing, character design, and worldbuilding.



I don't. Bethesda has never really written a good story. Even the much-vaunted lore of the TES series suffers from the sin of telling but never showing. Morrowind, arguably the best entry of the Elder Scrolls series, was carried primarily by its atmosphere and unique art direction, rather than its intelligent writing or storycrafting. The less said about Oblivion's and Fallout 3's nonsensical writing, the better.

If Bethesda hasn't gotten it right for three games now, I don't expect them to change.



I'd agree, except for the fact that worldbuilding is intrinsically linked with writing/story at the most basic level. Perhaps have Bethesda make a bunch of maps and populate them, then have Obsidian edit those locations to fit them into the game world.

I just want them to write, nothing else. Let Bethesda make another awesome world to explore, please?

I want Obsidian to write everything, characters, locations, story, and have Bethesda do the building, then let Obsidian look it over and tweak it, then QA, then ship the game to the stores.

the setting story locations and so on would have to be a collabo, at least in the creation of them - Beth isn't going to just hand over the reigns, at least i doubt... but they SHOULD let obsidian write all the dialogue, and flesh eveything out.

Yeah, and there we go! Agree on a nice collab. Combine the two companies strengths to get the best out of it. Obsidian do the better dialogue writing, Bethesda do the better world building, then they do the story together while Obsidian help Bethesda with keeping to Fallout

Yeah, writing... nothing else please? I hope it takes place in a new location too. Hell you have 51 states, make something out of them. Fallout 3 showed the east's true colors, which were hardcoe.

But seriously with Bethesda level design and Obsidian's excellent writing... we got ourselves one hell of a Fallout game.

I dont know sounds pointless. this is what they should do, hear me out. How bout they cooperate and make the came together. Makes alot more sense.

I think that Obsidian and inXile (Many of the good guys who left Interplay, including Brian Fargo) should do the writing, and Bethesda build the world.