Don't get me wrong I like Fallout New Vegas a lot, but I have played all of the Fallouts and both Wastelands and Fallout 3 reminds me more of Fallout: APNRPG then New Vegas, New Vegas reminds me of Fallout 2, my least favorite of the series.

Let's hope not Fallout New Vegas svcked.

Only thing I hope fallout 4 takes after new vegas is decent writing and improving its crafting system. Do those and I'll be content.

It's kind of foolish to judge their efforts by a single game. Fallout 3 was bound to have many similarities to their TES games as that was what they were familiar with at the time. I suspect they'll have a learned a few things from Obsidian's take on the series and come up with a much more fleshed out game this time around.

haha, I don't know about all that, but hey if that's what you think...

Anyway, I do hope the Bethesda team takes some cues from New Vegas with this one. New Vegas offered so many different ways to complete any number of quests with different consequences for each.

This is one of those things that's never been a Bethesda strong-point, but I'm sure they're team is more than capable of pulling it off, so we'll see.

Absolutely not!

Fallot 3 was great !
New Vegas was utterly boring and not up to the same standards of Bethesda quality , morelike a big mod with boring quest rather than a great storyline .

Disagreed. Fallout 3 was good, but NV upped the bar even further up.

F3 main storyline was a joke compared to that, IMHO. The only good thing about it was the endless wasteland safari in the DC ruins and FWE.

Also, I certainly hope that Bethesda looked more towards NV rather than Skyrim this time, since they actually bothered to hire them in the past for the said game.

Yikes, you wouldn't last a minute in the Fallout General Discussion.

I can't imagine Bethesda would've chosen to hire Obsidian, of all people, to make Fallout New Vegas if they didn't want their iterations of the series to be true to the originals. I think they saw all the criticism of 3, and so decided to give the original crew a go with their engine. What reason could they have to do that, if not for the chance to learn from it?

I'm as skeptical of the trailer as the next person, but I do believe that Bethesda actually cares about the series. I still believe this game will benefit from New Vegas.

I agree with you. New Vegas was quite clearly a compromise, not everyone from the pro-Black Isle and pro-Bethesda camps liked that compromise, but I'd be genuinely surprised if Bethesda didn't use anything from it for future Fallout games - including this one.

I'm not sure about Fallout 4 since we know so little about it at this point. Still, this trailer reminded me a bit of classic Fallout with its art style - even the vault jumpsuits are the classic jumpsuits from the first two Fallout games. The trailer isn't perfect, but I think it's pretty obvious that Bethesda took at least some of the criticisms about their handling of the franchise in Fallout 3 to heart.

I highly doubt it. It would be a nice surprise otherwise.

This same discussion happened before Skyrim was released. Would Bethesda learn from New Vegas and add in changes and innovations like weapon mod systems or fleshed out companions?

No they didn't. They sort of did with Serana, but that was a DLC, the base game didn't. Quests are as linear as ever and I feel like the entire world is written for 12 year olds.

Yea, sandbox games as big as an ocean, but as deep as a puddle.

That was catering to their TES crowd, and I agree, it was disappointing. But why would they hire Obsidian of all people if they didn't care at all?

I'm like you. I prefer Obsidian'a Fallout 100x over. And for me, another one would be the most exciting gaming reveal possible. But I do think that Fallout 3 was Beth's first shot, and NV, while not their game, gives me hope for the direction they wish to move in. Fallout 4 will prove me right or wrong, and if I'm wrong, you can bet your ass that I'll criticize it just as much as I do 3, which, according to my Beth-fan friends, is a lot to the point of being annoying.

You talk has if New Vegas actually had different paths....you could choose to allie yourself with a faction but all the quests were still the same.

lol yeah different ways of completing the same quests. Many games do that, and they should.

I agree. I hoped that they did learn from nv, but my hopes sunk when skyrim released.

I hope your point with obsidian is true and fallout 4 becomes a much better fallout game than 3.

I hope 4 takes after NV in having different factions we can join and a main quest that actually makes sense. e.g no bad guys who magically cheat death and reappear in places they shouldn't be able to reach (Colonel Autumn was a pretty poor nemesis). In theory 3 and NV should have helped Bethesda get a better idea of what people want from a Fallout game. But I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

People always say this but it applies more to the games before Skyrim than Skyrim itself. It matches Daggerfall to a T, in fact, and I love that game.

But they really are at this point. It is clear that the focus is on exploration and that the writing was neglected for so many years. To an effect, their games (Skyrim), are a hiking simulator at times. New Vegas incorporated writing/story as a main focus. I would like this focus to be kept on writing with good exploration.. Also, the gameplay has to be better (but that is for another time and they probably did fix it).

While I do agree that Fallout 4 should be more like New Vegas than any game Bethesda has made I don't want them to just copy it. New Vegas wasn't perfect so instead of trying to emulate it, Bethesda should be thinking of ways to top it. Of course, that'll never happen.

New vegas' story was just as linear, you still had to do the same quests through out the game until the very end you got two different endings, which you got by making a very uninspiring choice to either be friends with one faction or the oposite faction. The choices in how to complete the quests in the main questline were shallow and personally felt lazy to me. Only giving an illusion that your story was different because you either got a good karma dialog prompt, bad karma, or the completely uninspiring nuetral.

There were some things New vegas improved upon, but the story was horrible and the way they handled it gameplay wise was a huge step back to my tastes. one of the few things that would cause me to consider not buying FO4 would be if they were to take that sort of direction.

That's what they build... It is the point. Their games are foremost focused on maintaining a reactive environment around in which ~to hike. No seriously. The gameplay is running here and there, and asking for other places to run to; or ride there on a running horse.

Nothing that can happen in their games can interfere with this [unless that's a new change with FO4], and anything (outside of a major set-piece event) that would seem capable of major changes ~gets reset. (And the major events tend not to actually change anything but the cosmetics.)

Look at Megaton... What changed? (with detonating the bomb), changed really?

I recall that the player could shoot the BOS paladin that guards the Citadel gate; shoot him in the face, and return later asking to be let in to join the BOS. Another time there was a fight between all the BOS guards at the gate, they killed the BOS paladin ~who seconds later got up, and resumed his post at the door; all was forgotten.

What they build is a semi-static world that moves by as you hike, and nothing gets in the way of that; nothing gets in the way of the point.

The point is the fantasy stream of consciousness play; and no consequences are tolerated that might interfere or frustrate the player.

This is why the player can be told to hurry, and not care; and show up a month later [in game], and they are just in time to begin the urgent quest.

I don't think FO4 will be much like New Vegas at all. It might add a few aspects, a few items; but the studio's philosophies of design are fundamentally opposite each other.

I have to say you do have a point. The ability of the world to react to the player has always been Bethesda's weakest point, even as far as Daggerfall. I thought Morrowind did a better job, but nothing to call home about. Looking at their games objectively, it is their weakest point. The Elder Scrolls is my favorite series, been playing the games for more than a decade, and I'm willing to admit there are some faults in their designs, but it's nothing that can't improve. I'm hoping they will take some cues from New Vegas.

It may be that this 'weakness' is the only way their design can work effectively. It may be that others fail at it for trying to engineer around it.

I hope so. New Vegas did a lot of things very right.