Heh, I think Tactics is more "part of the core series" than F3, or even FNV (OK maybe on the same level as that). They can call it whatever they want, it's still going to be too spun-off from the roots to call it a proper sequel . More so in case of F4, at least it seems so from all the PR materials we've seen so far. Obviously it's not about just the name.

It's hard to find something to compare it to... kind of a unique situation I guess. It sort of reminds me of the Windows Mobile > Windows Phone process, except they at least changed the name (although that was mainly to tell WP and WinRT apart).

Only until you got to Vegas. Or maybe even after Nipton.

...

Oh well! I'll still going to call it a spin-off as it shows all signs of being a spin-off. And enough of the OT for me.

Brotherhood of Steel for PS2 is the best Fallout game. *runs*

*sigh* ...Immovable object, meet unstoppable force...

Fallout New Vegas was a great game, and in many ways better than Fallout 3, but it's map design and exploration was terrible in comparison to its predecessor. I hated the Mojave Wasteland and the way the map was built. It was not adequatey designed and that ultimately hurt the game as a whole for me.

Fallout New Vegas is a spin-off. Hence, why it does not have a number in the title. It's a telling of a different region of Fallout in BGS' universe, but not a part of the main line of games.

If BGS can just take the pros of Fallout 3 and Fallout NV and remove the cons of both, Fallout 4 would be in very good shape. Obviously, some in the community will disagree on what's "good" and "bad," but overall I think consensus is well-placed for what worked well and what didn't work so well.

im sorry u are a old fan of the old studio but since Bethesda own Fallout now u need to svck it and live with it, since from now on Fallout 3,4,5,6,7,8,9,100000000 will be fallout games.

u can call it whatever u like but old fans need to learn to deal with the idea that u will never see a Fallout 1 or 2 agean, since Fallout is own by Bethesda and they move to the first person perpective that im glad, thanks to that i was able to inmers myself alot more on the game that the old games. im sorry yeah we lose so of the RPG part but im glad to give that up for what we go from Fallout 3 and Fallout NV.

i agree that storie on Fallout NV was better but at the same time the whole plote was horrible and the storie of the curier was tottaly disconect from the main plot of the game. And yeah Fallout 3 storie wasnt the biggest point but the impact of the city and exploration and DLC was 10 times better that NV.

For what little info i have got from Fallout 4 (part of the core serie) i think it will be a great game, i dont know if the best.

It might be, it should be. But changes in the game's system is a bit worrying.

you make no sense whatsoever

As long as quests have multiple paths to do them with and no invisible barriers that are seemingly in the middle of the map I'll be good to go. I doubt the invisible barriers will be there but you never know. I don't count the border ones as they are necessary.

I expect I will like Fallout 4 better than Fallout 3 and New Vegas.

It will be the first game in the series not using obsolete directx9, so the graphics will be the best of all.

Of course! This goes without saying.

Looks like its going to be my personal best, beating out Fallout 3 and NV.

The settlement building and improved combat look pretty fantastic, and that's what I think is going to push it out over the last two for me.

It's really hard to compare FO3 with FO:NV. FO3 is really a BGS game with a Fallout theme (emphasis on freedom and exploration), whereas NV is more focused and story-rich like the original games but at the expense of exploration (invisible walls, not a lot to find off the beaten path). I think if BGS tried to marry FO3 with NV it would be an unhappy union, but I do think they will just grab the best bits from both games which do gel together and improve upon them. So I expect to see a FO3-style world (emphasis on exploration, with lots of unmarked details to find), and NV-style combat features (which we already know to be true). I don't expect NV's level of quest complexity, at all, because I don't think it's compatible with a large open-world (clearing areas before you grabbed their associated quests and then having to redo them or having the quest fail, which happened to me quite often in NV); it'd be a convoluted, bug-ridden mess.

In other words, I think fans of NV are going to be a little disappointed, unless of course they enjoyed both games equally, as I did.

I don't doubt it will most certainly be better than Fallout 3 at least. Not sure if it will be the best Fallout game of the whole series.

Stating New Vegas is the best Fallout title is entirely subjective to your opinion. Personally, I could only get one playthrough out of New Vegas and I had already lost any interest in the game by the end.

As for the topic - Not sure. We will see

Nah I'm gonna play it anyway, everything else looks fun.

i feel the same, NV just didn't have enough going for it, to me fallout 3 was the much better game, atmosphere, enemies to fight and locations were all superior.

That's the hope. I'm thinking it will. I'm still cautious about the SS having a voice, but I'm not entirely opposed to it either. The trick with voiced characters is that they have to be really defined to succeed or you'll end up with a borefest like Dragon Age: The Quest for a Million Elfroots.

On the FO3 vs NV bit. I enjoyed both equally. The Lone Wanderer was a somewhat defined player character while the Courier was a blank slate. FO3's story took off running and almost forces you to do it while NV's story drags it's heels until you get to The Strip. Both are legit approaches and I'm fine with both. Different strokes for different folks and all that.

I loved FO3 and really loved FONV. I personally thought the DLC was far superior with New Vegas because of the 'story within a story' aspect of Courier 6, Ulysses, Christine and various other lesser characters, and how it all got tied together In the Divide. The expansion of crafting in FONV was a welcome addition. FO3's atmosphere was second to none. FO4 will definitely be the best to date, if they took what was great about FO3, great about New Vegas (and quit pretending it shouldn't ever be mentioned) and then add to it...which they appear to have done at first glance (layered armor system, weapon mod crafting, village building, better weapon sounds, seemingly better combat). I'm really just hoping they didn't leave the things I liked behind in their rush to do all the previous. Providing they do these things and didn't jettison the golden nuggets from the past two games, it will easily be the best...imo.

I think it will better than 3. It being the best though? Who knows.

Best Fallout game to date? Well that's really a matter of one's own opinion, and we all know what they say about opinions, don't we? Don't we?

What I do know about Fallout, is that despite all it's flaws, and all my (likely) criticisms of it, I'll still play and enjoy the game for what it is, not what I wanted it it to be. Whether it turns out to be my favorite or not, has yet to be seen, but I'll find out soon enough how I feel about it.

Nobody is qualified or prescient enough to answer this question, but to extend a fatuity; I doubt it'll be the best Fallout game and the real fun will begin when I consider if Fallout 4 can be reasonably considered a Fallout game in my own subjective opinion.

If we're using the metric of sales and metacritic, then most likely (to answer the original notion).

Instead of calling them Fallout # they probably should start doing something similar to FO: NV and call them FO: . That way you still know it's set in the Fallout setting but a different title rather than a sequel or spin off. Although you'll probably still get people stuck in the paradigms of either of those rather than just a setting.

Much the same as author Hugh Cook did with the Chronicles of an Age of Darkness series. They were all set in the same world/setting and mostly happened around the same time but the protagonist in each book was different and in a different geographical place. Sometimes protagonists from each book would cross each other's path but basically it was a combined story from a bunch of different perspectives. One of my favourite series.

To say that Fallout 4 will be the best so far is a bit of a big call but I'm really liking what I've seen so far and believe it will certainly be right up there.

I think it will be, Bethesda has the potential to make it. I hope it's better than New Vegas.

Nope.I think it is gonna be the worst. (sad) hush hush about story and in depths RPG elements tells me that RPG elements will be just cosmetic and story will be poor. More COD in wasteland then true Fallout. Only link to Fallout is VATS sistem . IF you dont need it and Todd did say they went in FPS direction more then ever then its bye bye Fallout hello COD in post apocalyptyc world . If that become true then they can put theyir game in place where sun dont shine.