Hello Bethesda. I'm a big fan of the worl of Fallout i,ve played fallout 1 2 3 and i have finish all the games. I want to ask you if bethesda have the idea to do fallout 1 like fallout 3?

I wish they would but they probably won't do it.

What purpose would that serve, Fallout 1 is already out for people to play? The translation to one map FPS would likely just tone down the overall effect of the game and it's highpoints.

http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1132877-fallout-remake/ http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1128749-could-somebody-remake-fallout-2-with-the-geck/ http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1120242-fallout-1/ http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1106998-remaster-fallout-1-and-2/ http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1098469-fallout-and-fallout-2-on-fallout-3-game-engine/ http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1074053-fallout-1-2-should-they-be-remade/

I'm not sure they legally could if they wanted, but I'll throw in my vote for a FP version of Fallout and raise it to include Fallout 2.

This is heresy for some, true. There will be cries of outrage (and many mentions that this idea has been mooted nonstop since F3 was released). Now, I'm an old school CRPG gamer (I'm 48), so I'm no stranger to isometric interfaces, turn-based play, glacial pace and the other elements of Fallout that turn off modern gamers. But, as the No Mutants Allowed crowd keeps reminding us, it's all about the writing. And the writing, plots and ideas in those 2 old games are still fresh and interesting. It's just, well, the gameplay isn't that compelling to most gamers. Recreating them as F3 style will lose some nuances (those funny notes when you click on objects & something will have to be done about the first game's time limit) but will help preserve them for prosperity as well as properly introduce them to younger players.

Plus, I'd love to play them.

Here's a final thought -- Both games share roughly the same map and locations. The California wastelands will be condensed like F3 and F:NV, sure, but that's not unworkable. A little bit of steering via landscape will help keep players from running roughshod over the plot (It's fairly linear in the first game). But since it's the same map for both games, it seems possible that both games could be put on one disk, as one very long game. When you play through Fallout as the Vault Dweller, locations from F2 can be blocked off by radiation, locked doors, etc.. This is soon after the war, so the wastes can be underpopulated and emptier than we are used to from F3 and F:NV.
After the end of Fallout (and yes, there is a definite end) there could be a '40 years later' title card and F2 can begin. Same map, but now with locations opened and (as a bonus) locations from Fallout can be seen as affected by the Chosen One's ancestor's actions in the first game (maybe even some gear?).
What do you think?

As a younger, old-school Fallout fan... I'm no stranger to the old mechanics myself.

But as I have often done in the past, I am willing to blaspheme those old rules that guided me in my ignorance for so long by saying that I... too... would find such a game a blast to play. I grew up in the era where FPS-style games were really beginning to take off. Games like Wolfenstein 3D (which wasn't) and Doom were busy getting all the attention. And so it happened that I was introduced, late, to Fallout. The game itself seemed overly simplistic at first.

I wandered around. I killed some raiders. I shot up Gizmo.

And then, down in the Boneyard, I met bounty hunter Chris Avellon... and he wouldn't give me a donut.

As I blew him away with my combat shotgun and cackled maniacally... I fell in love... but something deep inside me wished I could witness this wonderful world from the same amazing point of view as all those 'new' first person games.

"It could be done!" I said. "It could be done easily... making an RPG-style game in first person!"

Deus Ex proved it to be so. Although the sequel lacked most of it's predecessor's RPG qualities, it also continued to amuse me for hours and hours.

But I wanted Fallout. I wanted this amazing wasteland-wandering game... but I wanted to -carry- that gun... and I wanted to -climb- those hills, and dig through the ruins, and -see- through the eyes of my carefully crafted alter ego.


Worse, still... Fallout was shelved. Seemingly forever. One more sad note in the history of gaming.

But lo!

Fallout 3 came... and it proved it could be done. It sacrificed a lot to make it possible... but it proved it could be done, even with Fallout.

And now... well... now I'll just wait to see how things go.

But I would definitely buy the game you folks just described. And I would -love- it.

I'm sure someone is hard at work on it now.
Hell, since we're daydreaming here, why not do the entire series in both styles?

Since Bethesda does not own the first 2 games, it will never happen, and there is no real reason to remake them, they are fine as is.

Couldn't this be done as a mod? I know it would take a very very long time, but it could be done, yes? I don't have the skills to even know what would be involved in such an undertaking, so I'm not sure.

Could it be done? Sure. Is it going to be easy? Probably not. I imagine that completely recreating an entire game is going to be extremely difficult.

Wrong. Bethesda bought the rights to the complete franchise minus the online game concept, which Interplay owns for the time being. Interplay owns the original game works themselves (F1, F2 and Tactics) , but not the concepts and IP except as applies to the online game.

So Bethesda is free to remake them as much as they want, if they want.

Yeah, this idea does get tossed around quite frequently. It was some time ago, but I seem to remember an interview with some of the Bethesda devs where they (jokingly) predicted that it would only be a matter of time before someone recreated the original Fallout games using the GECK. Honestly, that's probably more likely than a AAA company going through all that work to remaster a game into something quite different.

Just in terms of logistics - you're looking at making an entirely new world map, populating it with NPCs and enemies, designing all of the levels, etc. And then all of the quests, dialog, and so on. With all of the work that would have to go into something like this - you almost might as well just be making an entirely new game. The two are so different, really the only thing you could re-use would be the dialog and voice-overs.

Personally, I likely wouldn't play a "Fallout 3-style" remake of Fallout 1 or 2. For starters, I've been playing those games for well over a decade now - I wouldn't be interested in spending money on something I essentially already own (and have long since played to death.) For another, I'm just not a fan of the concept of "retooling" classics, in general. I mean, you'd never consider doing a remake of Citizen Kane, after all. The old games are what they are - they stand on their own qualities. Best to just leave it as is, essentially.

Probably the most extreme reworking I'd be interested in (though it's not like I'd be offended or anything, either way - I'm just talking about what I'd actually be interested in playing, myself,) would be a graphical update to the game. (Like Sierra used to do with their old adventure games on occasion.) Fallout 1 with the same game mechanics, levels, etc - but with advanced 3D graphics, etc - but which was otherwise exactly the same, that I'd possibly be interested in (though even - probably not.)

Why don't Bethesda studios take a tali on the amount of people who would actually buy a remake of the original games and see where to go from there.

All the old fallout fans remember that original fallout games in the old gamplay and graphic style will all ways be availbile to purchase or download from certain
places.

Its just remaking would be more appealing to modern gamers and bring new fallout fans up to date on past events across the wasteland.

personally Im all for the remake. :disguise:

The maps are far too huge for Gamebryo to deal with, unless they ditch sandbox and go with the old school map travel.

either way remakes are bad.

How exactly are remakes bad?

I didn't mean right at this very moment or year but in the not to distant future were software and hardware technology have improved signifigantly so like the next 5 to 10 years if that's still a demand then by some fallout fans.

I havent seen a good video game remake since Super Mario All Stars. Metroid Zero mission being the worst.

None of those games I would play anyway, but heres a remake, Resident Evil (PS1) remade into Dark Eerie Atmospheric Resident Evil (Gamecube) Excellent remake

I have never played a good remake, I always just end up playing the original after a few minutes, I do hope that Black Mesa Source is the first good remake I will play though, it looks great, even though Half Life 1 is fine the way it is.

also isn't Fallout 3 a remake of the first 2 games anyway? :disguise:

:flamethrower:

Simply put, the number of people who would buy the remake is necessarily smaller than the number of people who would buy a completely new FO game. So if they are going to make a FO game, simple logic dictates it will be a new game and not a remake.

You could be right but I still think all the newcomers like myself (FO3) and some of the old skool (just a term, can't think of how to put anyway else right now) FO players would but it. They'd still sell a significant amount imo.

Fallout is great as it is.

Oh, I have no doubt it would sell well, it's just that it would necessarily sell less than a new game: everyone who would purchase a remake would also buy a brand new Fallout game, but not everyone who would buy a new game would buy a remake (I for instance). And since they can only work on and finance a limited number of games, the more rational thing to do is forgoing a remake and developing a new one instead.

To true, can't really disagree with that, but there are people remaking it, how about a bit of funding or support (from Beth) to let them finish it and Beth diverts very little to the cause keeping all of the people happy all of the time lol while beth concentrate the vast majority of resources on a new game? Even sparing a little of their time to consult or assist may yield great results, may not take that much.

While some people believe Fallout 1&2 is fine, I DON'T! You have your iso turn based game, other gamers want an updated FO3 style version and they should have it! :hubbahubba: