Any news?

You mean Obsidian?

Well, not much of a chance for Fallout 4, since it's in Bethesda's hands now. But maybe another spinoff in the future?

Yes, Obsidian but I wanted to be more specific because not every development team in it is as skilled as the one that created F:NV IMO.

Yeah, FO4 will definitely be a Bethesda game and as such, I'm sure I won't enjoy it. Like Oblivion, FO3 and Skyrim it will be focusing on exploration only. Story, dialogue, quests, characters and combat will again be neglected.

As it is, nothing short of an Obsidian-developed Fallout game will please me.

Not anytime soon, maybe they will take turns each at making one. Like Treyarch/Infinity Ward do with Call of Duty

I'd really like that. Obsidian did such a good job with F:NV that it'd be be shame to let them go.

No news yet.I do hope Obsidian does another spin-off because New Vegas was really good.Although, I have to admit while FO:NV had great story it lack in many other areas. The exploration was very linear and enemies don't randomly spawn anymore so instead of "oh I might run into a deathclaw" it was more of "if I go this way I will run into deathclaws". Having that setup loses the whole "survive the wasteland" aspect because you can avoid pretty much everything. I also didn't the like fact that places in the Mojave didn't stand out like places in the DC(Little Lamplight, Oasis, Andale,tranquility lane etc).This time around they let you join the "evil" guys but they didn't do it right. The legion was way outta place, had little quest content, and no companion to give you in depth insight on them. IMHO Bethesda should design the world and Obsidian should write the story. Best of both worlds.

Not to start another FO3 versus F:NV argument but FO3 lacked in more areas than F:NV. At least, F:NV offered a few opportunities for non-quest-related explorations. FO3, on the other hand, practically neglected story, dialogue, combat, characters and branching questlines altogether.

Fallout 3 is considered one of the BEST games ever made, as well as holding the title of also producing some of the best DLC ever made...

I wonder why and by whom (other than the oblivious gaming press who couldn't tell a good game if they were forcefed one, as they now work more of a marketing platforms for big names than actual evaluators of the content quality) because it did nothing special, and certainly nothing to deserve "best ever" title.

So?

All im saying is that theres no need to slam down of FO3 so hard
i know people have their favourites but fallout 3 was sheer brilliance and amazing ingenuity which captured a large amount of peoples attention
dont get me wrong i love F:NV alot too but it was no Fallout 3

fallout 3 was great yeah but it had lots of things that makes you wounder how and why alot more than in new vegas still i like it alot in the other hand what i hated about new vegas is thats there was alot of the homo stuff than what it should been mybe thats just me understanding things wrong

Fallout 3 was a great game, but it is still a deeply flawed Fallout.
In New Vegas the people are much more realistic, they are much more like regular people. Homosixuals are regular people too, why should they not be in the game?

Really? By whom? I mean, don't get me wrong, I loved Fallout 3 and it was what got me into the Fallout franchise in the first place. But no matter how much I enjoyed it, it was still far from perfect. The writing is mediocre and there are plot holes you could drive a truck through, the graphics are good but not spectacular, some stats and skills are poorly implemented, there are a lot of bugs, etc. Yes, despite its flaws it's still a good game, but not anywhere near being the best ever made. Maybe there are some people who slam it unfairly, but that doesn't mean the appropriate reaction is to stick your fingers in your ears and go "lalala I can't hear you, Fo3 is flawless and the best thing evar!"

They are my 2 favourtite games so any comparisons are for me pretty incremental.

FONV was, I think, the best made game I have ever played. It's completely classy, intricate, vast, and offering enormous freedom of action. But somehow in its strict adherence to certain important principles, and the whole series lore thing, it actually lost something.

FO3 ended up being significantly better to play, and I prefer it. It was less restricted in the way it was made. It shamelessly recycled loads of ideas from the early games without any great requirement for continuity. It didn't take itself too seriously and was more democratic in it's appeal. It was still Fallout though, beautifully updated and interpreted to make the most of modern gaming possibilities.

But anyway, I don't care which of the 2 companies makes the next one. They've both proven their worth as far as I am concerned.

There is a topic for speculation about future Fallout games, please use it.

http://www.gamesas.com/topic/1352810-fallout-4-speculation-suggestions-ideas-thread-54/