I'd like to see the next Fallout take place in Seattle. A rainy city (acid rain? yeah!) with perhaps a bit more techological futuristic theme. Still keeping with the basics of the Fallout theme of course, but going with higher technology. The physical location of the city would also be a major advantage. It's closest to Alaska where the war began and on the west coast where it's a little closer to China than Washington DC was. I think there are some serious creative potential with using Seattle as the location for Fallout 4. Think about it.

Where do you guys think it should be?

I personally would like to see less of a focus on technology. In the first two Fallout games there was some high tech, but it wasn't in your face. Most people were eeking out an existence on a very simple level...many were even primitive tribals. It wasn't until later in the games that you would see more and more of the really high tech outside of what you see toward the beginning of the games in the vaults. Most of it came from the Brotherhood, the Enclave, or was recovered from abandoned military bases or vaults...there weren't robots running around everywhere or corpses with power armor and energy weapons littering the wasteland. Technology wasn't nearly as easy to come by. I really liked it that way, and it was also (IMO) a lot more realistic. It made technology feel a lot more rare and mysterious, and to me that was a good thing.

That said, Seattle isn't a bad choice. A mountainous region like Colorado and Utah would be my first choice, though.

China. Seeing the other side of this disaster would be interesting indeed.

I thought about that, but who would speak English? Beijing or Hong Kong would be awesome Chinese choices though. If a third country 'caught in the crossfire' was an option, I'd absolutely go for Tokyo. Enormous, technological, and featuring a real life cinema history of radiation created Godzilla type monsters, it would be PERFECT.

See, to me that sounds like a better setting for a cyberpunk game than a Fallout game. I'm not feeling like that fits the Fallout mood...not in my mind's eye, anyway. :shrug:

well yes i think that might be cool and such, but from what it looks like is that there just going to keep on putting DLC out and adding new areas? no?

and like also, i dont think a game should have a ton of games like "fall out 4".. then like "fall out 5".. and its pretty much based on the same thing.. kinda.. just changed a bit,.. i would much rather them keep the same look, and feel and just keep on expanding fall out 3 for a while, adding new areas, new monsters, weapons, perks.. keeping the level cap at 30 (thats when they rasie it and all)

thats just my opinion

Sadly, I missed out on Fallout 1 and 2. The third was the first I've ever played. Though I've since looked up footage of Fallout 1 & 2 and have been kicking myself for not having played them in the 1990s. But from what I've seen of Fallout 3, any less technology would be around Mad Max level. And while that's not a bad thing, it's just not my preferred kind of theme. Would still rock though

...why is that a problem?

They'll be speaking Chinese, but we'll be hearing it in English. Ever seen The Hunt for Red October??!? Jeez, use your imagination.

Like I said, it was actually pretty cool that way. You'd go through the first half of the game with everybody fighting with spears, knives, simple firearms, etc. Then later in the game when you see your first supermutants and BOS and somebody breaks out a minigun or an energy weapon you're like, "HOLY CRAP, WHAT THE HELL WAS THAT!?!?!" And then you realize that there's all of this technology that's either been forgotten or hoarded while everyone else is living in the bronze age and barely making it. I dunno...it just made all of the tech seem a lot more mysterious and special somehow...and the government conspiracies seem that much more insidious.

That's kind of my thoughts as well. I think Fallout 2 did an especially good job with the technology. Starting out with just things like spears and such was a nice change of pace, and it made finding those higher-tech items seem that much more valuable. They also did a real nice job with the pacing in that game, where you actually spend some time with the lower-value items before moving onto the big guns (you could of course jump right to where the good stuff is if you know where you're going, or run into stuff at random, but they also did a good job with pushing you in certain directions throughout the game so the progression felt real natural.) I still remember having to save up to afford even one stimpak, or a pistol, and thinking Combat Armor was just totally out of reach for a long while.

Personally, I think we're pushing it a bit with the game now taking place 200 years after the War. I think at some point if we keep making jumps like that, we'll be seeing more of a rebuilding effort going on in earnest. Not that's a bad thing, just getting away from some of the really neat things about the previous games. I can sort of see it making sense that all this stuff is scattered much more liberally around the DC area, as it's a smaller area in scale and also the source of a lot of good Pre-War tech and such. I'd go as far to say that maybe a next game could be something of a flashback of sorts, taking place in a time parallel to the adventures in the first two games, only in a different area. That would make the harshness seem a bit more believable, at least to me.

But I do think it works best when you start out with a much steeper curve in obaining items. When you start the game with nothing and have to scrabble to even find so much as a working pistol for a good portion of the game, it just makes it feel that much cooler when you're finally strutting around in Power Armor with your trusty Plasma Rifle.

Anyway, back to the OP, Seattle might be an interesting idea. I suppose as much as any other part of the US, really. Something tells me we'll be sticking to the East Coast for a time, though. Looks to me like it'll be moving North a bit, into the New England area to deal with the Commonwealth and such. (Which is likely going to introduce some higher tech aspects as well, come to think of it.) Personally, I think we've done the whole "Vault Dweller" plotline enough that maybe the next game puts you back as a Tribal, if for no other reason than to start you at the bottom of the tech chain. I just think that would be more fun to play.

There's also a lot of stock for some interesting stories between the Coasts, as well. There's likely a whole epic storyline just dying to be told of Lyons' detachment making the trek from California to DC, for example. So I'd like to see something dealing with that as well. Maybe in a very large DLC or something. Or even sort of an episofic DLC would be a better fit for the scale of something like that. Plus, the Midwest and a lot of the smaller towns may not have been hit as badly during the War as the other areas we've already explored. It could be a completely different situation there, really, with the area more intact and some actual foliage and such, trees and whatnot. But instead of dealing with radiation you're dealing with the breakdown of the infrastructure holding the country together and more solidified settlements fighting off roving bands of raiders.

Seattle, hands down. Best city in the world...if ur into Gloom,Traffic, Rain, Suicide, Homeless armies, loose women, and crapy sports team.

Fits Fallout 3 Universe already.

I saw it should be set in Alabama.

Apparently its been confirmed that its going to be set in Boston. But that could just be a forumer that wants attention :facepalm:

Fallout 4 Needs to leave the upper east coast, And if some one busts out a fallout in boston im going to throw a fit.
Different country no! The Whole Fallout out series is in america, it should stay in america.
I believe fallout 4 should ethier go back to the west coast or do the plains states. Im not going to name a city because, most citys in fallout's series have been level'ed, then people have built new ones.
They need to bring back the tribal elements, nomadic's, rangers creeping across the waste land, enclave seizing buildings and leveling whole families trying to run.
AND I MISS NEW RENO! For obvoius reasons that was my favorite part of the fallout 2 game. Boxing matches, gun dealers, drug dealers, prosttutes, half burned casinos.
Total chaos, loved it. AND* most importantly honestly fallout 4 needs to be a wee bit gritter, they took major good points to the previous games out of fallout 3, sign of the times though.




To the technolegy talk, i agree they put way to much of it in, they should have made it so it did'nt get introduced until some what mid or end-game.

teh moon !

You mean like fallout tactics did?

As long as fallout is being (censored) into a FPS they might as well do a RTS during the third world war where you get a bunch of guys in power armour killing a bunch of other guys in power armour. then it can be the whole world!

Sorry I'm still a little dissapointed in the path bethseda took with it, strayes a little to far from the way the original games, the ones I grew up playing and loving, were set up. 3 is still a great deal of fun, but it's not the same...

I fear change...

If it were in the US, I'd say Seattle or general Puget Sound area. Would be interesting to see what a verdant wet place ends up being after a nuclear holocaust, plus you'd have the space needle which is pretty much the apex of the weird 1950's 'SCIENCE!' aesthetic.

I'd like to see Europe personally, maybe the UK. China could be cool too.

You know what I would like to see?

A return of the series back to its root and away from this FPS millitary slant they are taking with the game. If Bethesda wants to make an FPS based on the fallout universe then do so. But calling fallout 3 a sequel, at best, is reaching. And seeing the recent anchorage vid really bothers me.

And where should a 4th take place? How about all of America with world travel, instead of like 20 square Kilometers... You know, like they did back with fallout 1 and 2 back in 1997-1998? Instead of restraining you to a little sandbox part of greater world. I mean, if these games are sequels to the originals, they could at least include the scope that was a core element of the game, right? Or is easier and fiscally sensible to charge people for small downloadable content, that could free or packaged as a single longer length expansion? Ho hum.

It's just that they chose a different way to present the game. All of Fallout 3 takes place in what would have been one or two squares on Fallout 1's world map, but the density is much higher within that area. They could have gone the old route and made a variety of nodes that are separated by vast ranges on a larger world map, but you'd have ended up with basically the same amount of "stuff" in the game either way.

In other words, they could have gone the old route with a variety of smaller nodes connected by a larger overmap, and had, say Rivet City or Megaton, separated on the world map by a bunch of squares. But there wouldn't have been any more things to see doing it that way than there is now.

Arguably, there's more to see and explore in Fallout 3 than in all of Fallout 1 or 2, even though it takes place on a much larger scale. (There was only ever the one town or random encounter and in any square in Fallout 1, you'd have a lot of trouble cramming all of the stuff in Fallout 3 into each individual square if you were to go the overmap route.)

So I don't see that it's some sort of underhanded scam to con people into buying DLC, it's just a difference in what they wanted to emphasise on. Quality over quantity, in other words.

I think it should leave the US, maybe go to the UK, Europe or China or something.

I want to see what the world is like beyond the US

I just want to see a Fallout 4 designed and made by Bethesda, with the same style of game play. Where it takes place isn't that important to me, but I would like to see an increase in game size and length.

I know were not due to see it at all for quite some time though, and for now I'm still excited about the next 2 DLCs. Can't wait for The Pitt...

It would be nice to see what has happened to Forbidden City or Kreml, but USA would be the best and most obvious option for Fallout 4's location.
Leveled China wouldn't be that differend from leveled USA. Just differend geography and differend people.

Besides, Europe would be much more variable. Fighting Supermutants in Ruhr, and taking on the Deathclaws in the Ardennes forest. Exploring dead Rome. Many things to do in Europe. I don't really know what happened to Europe in 2077 but I'm sure that pretty much the same fate as with USA.

Still, USA would be best. Easier to make storyline and USA is so variable place alone that you can find pretty much anything in USA, from deep red forests to huge cities.

My money's on Oklahoma. I read one of those vaul tec letters I found in a mail box saying something about vault's being there.

I was hoping a small portion of China for Fallout 3 DLC, but I suppose that's out of the question now. =/

I'm another person who wants to see what's going on around the world.

florida!!

or

ALL of the U.S.A.