Bethesda Game Studios. The developer.

I thought the publisher chooses.

In the case of Bethesda Game Studios I don't think it applies to Bethesda Game Studios anymore.

In a video interview at Gamescom 2014 I think it was Pete Hines said Todd Howard can do whatever the hell he wants.

We saw some of that at Bethesda Softworks E3 2015 conference as well. Todd Howard seems to have free reign in the company.

The one thing i dont want is a FO1/2 reboot. Nomather how true they stay to the original, you can never beat the originals quality. Making them 3d and FPS would just piss off a great many old time fans, its like peeing against a church for them, you dont touch clasics like that. Even Doom is a bad example, while many see the new doom games as good games, remaking the original Doom game (like literly copy paste plot, level and everything, but upgrading graphic wise) will always upset some of the diehard fans.

Sure there are lots of reboots, hell even Fallout 3 is actualy a reboot of the original series, it has its own style while retaining core elements of the fallout world including lore, but is is a new generation of fallout games. Then there is ofcourse FFVII, even there i can see some fans not happy with it.

While the majority will be ok with it, it depends on how well it is done. Part of why FO1 and 2 still are fun nowadays is nostalgia, its differance in comparison to the new generation of Fallout games keeps it unique and fun for me. But i know those even among my own friends who never liked Fallout 3 or its follow ups, simply because it is not like Fallout 1 and 2, its a spiritual succesor more then it is a direct sequal. To them Fo1 and 2 being remade would just mean that what they like about Fallout is taken further away from what they feel is fallout's core.

So while i personaly dont want to see a remake, i can still understand some of you want to play it/ see it happen. If it does, then i hope it goes well, and manny play it, i just wont most likely play such a remake.

The old school top-down, click to move game has never appealed to me but I attempted to play Fallout 1 anyways in preparation for Fallout 4 but...I just can't do it >_<

Play Fallout 3, New Vegas, then Fallout 1 & 2 to understand the original story better before moving on to Fallout 4. That's how I did it.

Skip Tactics, its a decent game, but tedious as [censored] to actually play!

Perfectly fine, i cant stand pladformers, doesnt mean they are bad just because I dont like them. Some of you will definitly not like the early FO games, hence i said that the lore is all on the wiki too (might have mentioned it in another thread though ) if you realy want to read up on past events.

Also lets keep in mind that FO1 and 2 play on the west coast of america, so this game being a east coast based game like Fallout 3 makes much of the lore unwritten still.

sorry added to wrong thread, pls disregard

I started with Fallout 3 and NV (New Vegas is my favourite for story/world impact/ speech and characters... Fallout 3 has a better atmosphere/world design). I haven't played 1 or 2 but read all the Fallout lore and I love it. I've read the Fallout timeline a fair few times too. I probably will play them one day.

I've played them all and see no reason to go back and play the early ones unless you are just curious. Fallout is a great game, Fallout:2 was over the top silly but still quite fun. Fallout:3 was very different but a ton of fun and Fallout:NV was also fun but I personally liked it less than either Fallout or Fallout:3.

My opinion is the only reason someone new to the series needs to play the prior ones is if they are curious. It's sure not required to play Fallout:4. Each game is a stand alone game.

i wouldn't recommend someone play the first two unless they enjoy the genera of games they are. Personally i think the story and interactions in the games are awesome but i found the gameplay tedious and boring.

I Imagine that fallout 4 will have much more to do with fallout 3, and any references to 1,2, or new vegas will will be minor.

I voted no, but with a caveat. I have never played the first two, and do not intend to. I do not like the play style, and regardless of story and how good it might be, I wish to go along with the lore that BGS has established with FO3.

I enjoyed playing NV, but still always found myself missing FO3. Just a personal preference, and I certainly don't begrudge anyone liking any of the games more than another.

Already played them.

But maybe it's time that I played them again, it's been a while.

According to the poll, a very large percentage haven't played the first two game (28 total versus 36). A reboot of FO1/FO2 for next-gen isn't a bad idea to make money.

There is no need to reboot them.

For you maybe. For others, many of us would buy them.

Already played through Fallout 2 again. IMO Fallout 2 still had the best music, the best atmosphere, the best characters, the best villain and the best story. Been a gamer for 20 years and of all of the hundreds of games I've played fallout 2 is one of the very few games I would consider perfect. New vegas was good too.

Maybe a strange opinion dunno. But imo fallout 3 and fallout 1 are nowhere close to NV and F2.

Played then years ago before fallout 3.
If you are looking for a game with a similar feel I'd say try underrail