i have an idea for a fallout4 online multiplayer world take fallout 1 and 2 and redo them in fallout3 style graphics and vision that covers those parts of the country fallout 3 covers the eastern part of country so all ya need is a new expansion to add em together for central part of country title could be fallout 4 rise of the enclave could be super computer ai makes robot soldiers instead of human ones cus humans cant be trusted to follow orders as it learned in fallout 3 and after dealin with the monster lib prime it decides to make its own giant robots as well so the brotherhood have no choice but to bring in apcs or there own piloted mech to fight it instead of power armor and ya can play a brotherhood or wanderer or enclave or could join one of the gangs from cali new vehicles can be introduced like apc's to travel or motorcycles ive seen enough of em lyin around the wastelands ya cant tell me not one person can figure out to to fix one but they can repair power armor come on theres so many posabilities it would make bethesda millions easy i know id pay to play it

LOL WUT

Multiplayer wouldn't fit with the Fallout ethos.

it could be if done correctly as far as i know noone has made a post nuke war mutiplayer game ever i think with fallout and the guys who made 3 it can be done

Truth.

Do your homework, guys.

A Fallout MMO game is already under development by Interplay and the creators of Fallout 1 and 2, who have licensed back the rights specifically to do just this. Its working title is Project V13, you can read pretty much all the known details over at the Fallout Wiki: http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Project_V13

:blink:

I'm not sure Bethesda would do all that.........

Auto Assault.

Not too sure of the multiplayer part BUT.... how about 2 player co-op?

As great as that would be, I don't think it would work.

I dont see why not...you get companions anyway so why not let a co-op player take over and play as the companion?

That wouldn't work because how would you like to be the lame sidekick that doesnt do anything but listen to the master

The sidekick has saved the hero more often than the hero saves the sidekick.

Coop could work. Just make it so if Player 1 invites Player 2 to his game. Everything they do only effects Player 1's world. Only Player 1 could loot things, and could give equipment for player 2 to use. Once the player 2 leaves the game, all the equipment could go that he had in Player 1's game would go a storage container in a house or something. NPCs would only talk to Player 1, and player 2 would also see the Head in a box thing, but not allowed to choose any dialog option.

You could even have settings like how far your partner is allowed to travel away from you and stuff. They could even make it so that the co-op players could go their seperate ways in the free-roam world, maybe run into eachother every once and awhile.

gamesas's style is not multiplayer, so I don't see it happening.

In a way gamesas are losing out, some ppl dont like single player games but would consider getting a mainly single player game if it had co-op (thats one of the reasons i got fable2 but the co-op was crap) i just think it would be cool to go on a killing spree with a friend and it would be handy for helping each other to find things, like a hidden cave or a piece of equipment they need for a schematic, that type of thing...admit it how many times have you gone on a treasure hunt for a crutch or a leather belt (be honest) because the vendors dont have any?? And as one of the previous replies stated all the things the co-op player aquires gets tranfered to a safe in a set location like the hollowed out rock near megaton and then saved to his/her save file. if they can do it for fable2 surely they can do it for fo4 (and dont reply with "fable2 is a completely different game" cos i know it is)

Fallout Online is in development at Interplay:

http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Fallout_Online_FAQ

Fallout 4 will be a single-player game:

http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Fallout_4_FAQ

By the way, Van Buren was actually going to have co-op multiplayer.

As far as co-op, I don't think it would all that big of a change to the game if they tried to do something like Fable 2 had attempted. Like others have said, you already can get one companion to follow you around - wouldn't really make that big of a difference design-wise whether or not that second character was controlled by another player or the computer. (Actually, if it was another player, they might be able to keep up with me a lot better...)

It's not really my cup of tea, though - I'm not all that big on co-op/multi-player. Just never got into it that much, for most games. But so long as any work put into adding a co-op feature into a Fallout 4 didn't take away from the quality of the single-player experience (ie, if they hired extra resources to work on the co-op mode instead of splitting the workload with the existing team,) then I don't see any compelling reason why I would push to deny other players the option. (And given - it would likely take some real work to get it polished and working, not the least of which is the problem of how you deal with VATS...)

As far as any sort of extensive multi-player beyond co-op, there's already a Fallout MMO in the works. There might be room in the Fallout universe for a more limited multi-player experience, but that could just as easily be another spin-off as opposed to anything added to Fallout 4. (No reason to cram every type of gameplay imagineable into the existing series - that's what spin-offs are for, after all.)

That said, chances seem slim. Bethesda has been pretty consistent in stating that they prefer to focus solely on the single-player experience, and that there are plenty of multi-player games already out there if that's what people want.

That might be good. but there are lots of [censored]s on xbox live.

I'm anti co-op but if it was put in a way that wasn't detrimental to one player(I.E RE5), i wouldn't really care.

I don't see beth going down that route any time soon, i'll be glad if they don't there is too many multiplayer games and not enough good single player games.

EDIT- I was using re5 as a negative example because it forced you to have this idiot women around all the time.

Doing a little add-on "co-op" thing is a bad idea. It either needs to be a main aspect or not done at all. Anything else saps dev time and will end up like how someone described Fable 2's co-op play.

Also, there would likely need to be congruency in assets, which will assuredly NEVER happen between two PC players due to the existence of mods. I'd rather have user moddability than some half-assed co-op play that sapped dev time away from the rest of the game.

A contemporary gamesas game would be less of a game with co-op, not more.

I don't know where you are from, so please tell me. Do you mind to make it more than 1 sentence? How hard it is to write properly anyway?

From the last part of part 1 there, it sounds like F1/2 all over several states using the same way as in the old ones. But using the "Its cool, it got to be good" methode as in Waistlander from Beth and i tell you thats a pure failure.

copied from another thread i wrote on the same subject.

One more time...

We have an official "co-op/multiplayer" discussion thread now, so http://www.gamesas.com/bgsforums/index.php?showtopic=976152