There is still a little bit hope for Fallout 4... right?

Sorry man, you are on your own.
I don't trust Bethesda with any creative license. Never played TES myself but I understand from fans of that franchise how Bethesda mishandled that franchise's lore, and I have witnessed in Fallout 3 in person what they did. (Glowing Ones with radiation attacks? Steel be with you?)

Only chance I see for this franchise is if Bethesda never develops another Fallout game in-house again, instead letting Obsidian handle it. (and yeah I am fully aware that Obsidian is not perfect either but at least they get Fallout lore and the atmosphere)
 
Sorry man, you are on your own.
I don't trust Bethesda with any creative license. Never played TES myself but I understand from fans of that franchise how Bethesda mishandled that franchise's lore, and I have witnessed in Fallout 3 in person what they did. (Glowing Ones with radiation attacks? Steel be with you?)
FO3 is effectively TES in a skewed and [mass-market] simplified version of the of the Fallout gameworld. The TES rules are cosmetically changed to resemble the system for Fallout; but it's otherwise little changed ~except for VATS. IIRC the world is still called Tamriel in the resource files.

Only chance I see for this franchise is if Bethesda never develops another Fallout game in-house again, instead letting Obsidian handle it. (and yeah I am fully aware that Obsidian is not perfect either but at least they get Fallout lore and the atmosphere)
Agreed.

*But to clarify a distinction between "chance at being a decent Fallout game" and "chance at being a commercially successful game"... I think it has no chance at the former, and assured success at the latter; and that's the market's fault, not Bethesda's. They design to suit the McMarket. :(

Fallout is just not popular enough for the McMarket ~unless it's something else entirely.
sadvaultboy.gif


Recently I've played a little bit of Skyrim after getting it as gift on steam. I expected it to be a semi-enjoyable dungeon crawler like Fallout 3, which at least had some interesting moments while it lasted, but it's only ridiculously boring and repetitive. It's probably going to be the same in Fallout 4, who am I fooling?
seriouslyno.gif

Phew, that's depressing. Time for some Fallout.
I wouldn't have thought of TES games as dungeon-crawlers. If you want really good dungeon-crawlers, pick up Legend of Grimrock 1 & 2.
:cool: (Or Lands of Lore:Throne of Chaos.)

Each are available at: GoG.com
 
Last edited:
But I do. For Fallout 3's "story" Bethesda already butchered the lore and stories of Fallout 1 and 2, which means they have to come up with something new by now. They'll read even more wiki articles than the 3 or so they used to make Oblivion a "Fallout", some of them might even play the games. They need to be creative by now, deal with the lore to invent a new story.
I think it's a bit extreme to say that none of them played the original Fallout games. However, it is the naked truth that imo only one of them was a fan of the franchise, he was the one who originally said to buy it up. I think it might have been Emil Pagliarulo, not 100% certain.

Anyhow, I think they might get the lore a bit more accurate this time around, although I don't agree that they butchered it in Fallout 3 since it's hard to butcher something that was already a mauled corpse courtesy to Fallout 2 and onward. But gameplay-wise don't expect an RPG, it's no secret that BGS is too afraid of pissing off their more immature fans to introduce choice and consequence, stats that matter, challenging and fun combat, etc.

I wouldn't have thought of TES games as dungeon-crawlers.
Daggerfall was a good dungeon crawler.
 
But I do. For Fallout 3's "story" Bethesda already butchered the lore and stories of Fallout 1 and 2, which means they have to come up with something new by now. They'll read even more wiki articles than the 3 or so they used to make Oblivion a "Fallout", some of them might even play the games. They need to be creative by now, deal with the lore to invent a new story.
I think it's a bit extreme to say that none of them played the original Fallout games. However, it is the naked truth that imo only one of them was a fan of the franchise, he was the one who originally said to buy it up. I think it might have been Emil Pagliarulo, not 100% certain.
Some of the devs admitted it on the forums; back when they posted. Some hadn't even heard of the game.

I have doubts, but I do know that Pete Hines and Emil were doing game reviews at the Adrenaline Vault, so it's hard to imagine Fallout passing by unnoticed by them.

*IMO that means (above all others) they should have known better. Emil... well... I'll let him speak for himself about FO3; I think he sums up Bethesda's [apparent] take rather perfectly ~I think:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GABzWHuIZ_4#t=54s
 
Last edited:
*IMO that means (above all others) they should have known better. Emil... well... I'll let him speak for himself about FO3; I think he sums up Bethesda's [apparent] take rather perfectly ~I think:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GABzWHuIZ_4#t=54s
But then there this video in which he talks hell of a lot differently: link

Some of the devs admitted it on the forums; back when they posted. Some hadn't even heard of the game.
The Bethsoft forums, right? Too bad none of those posts exist now, I'd love to read them, see what they have to say.
 
*IMO that means (above all others) they should have known better. Emil... well... I'll let him speak for himself about FO3; I think he sums up Bethesda's [apparent] take rather perfectly ~I think:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GABzWHuIZ_4#t=54s
But then there this video in which he talks hell of a lot differently: link
Oooh that's the bullet point PR answer... And one that can be said without many of the details that one may have never known; describing only the [possibly 3rd hand] reputation of the game... while not comparing it to one's own new product.
 
I'm going to have nightmares with those interviews, also, the guy telling that you could put a head of someone in the freezer after talking to them is a future serial killer
 
Wasn't that Emil? I still think the Maryland Police should investigate a possible connection between him and a series of murders on the elderly population in the state.
 
You do some good things so you can blow more head off ? Did they guy were actually allowed to work on Fallout ?
When did he say that?
Anyhow, it's quite rewarding to actually listen to some of the stuff they say because there are some good ideas beneath the horseshit. For instance the fact that they actually speculated on what's evil in a post-apocalyptic world. It provides a good reason why the entire abortion that is the good-evil meter should be dropped. They also seem to be getting at trying to be more realistic, so that sometimes being evil pays off more than being good. It always bothered me in Baldur's Gate, KotOR, and more classic RPGs where being evil is always harder than being good. I think Eye of the Beholder did it right when the first instinct of someone playing a sterotypical white knight is to help the wounded monster dying on the floor, and after you do, the monster stands up and immediately attacks you.

Wasn't that Emil? I still think the Maryland Police should investigate a possible connection between him and a series of murders on the elderly population in the state.
He also wrote the Dark Brotherhood questline in Oblivion*, dunno if you played that. I'm pretty sure the five oh is already on his ass, don't you worry.
*that was actually pretty well-done and mature too, unlike most of the shit in Fallout 3
 
Most of those interviews show how juvenile the staff at Bethesda/Zenimax are and that how they think that having "mature" and "dark" content is about psychopathic violence and that being able to brutalize someone who you just killed is somehow "adult".

This attitude by the Bethesda/Zenimax writing staff shows us that Fallout 4 will just be another poorly written gorefest!
 
Most of those interviews show how juvenile the staff at Bethesda/Zenimax are and that how they think that having "mature" and "dark" content is about psychopathic violence and that being able to brutalize someone who you just killed is somehow "adult".

This attitude by the Bethesda/Zenimax writing staff shows us that Fallout 4 will just be another poorly written gorefest!
I almost hate to say this and I know that I'm gonna regret it, but fuck it: the Fallout franchise was never about mature portrayal of violence and murder. The descriptive texts were completely juvenile, the game tried to make you feel good about killing the evil people, and let us not forget all the gory bs in those games. Fallout 2 especially, but even Fallout 1, for all its maturity, did not get the whole "violence is actually serious" thing right. New Vegas was a bit better on that front though.
 
Most of those interviews show how juvenile the staff at Bethesda/Zenimax are and that how they think that having "mature" and "dark" content is about psychopathic violence and that being able to brutalize someone who you just killed is somehow "adult".

This attitude by the Bethesda/Zenimax writing staff shows us that Fallout 4 will just be another poorly written gorefest!
I almost hate to say this and I know that I'm gonna regret it, but fuck it: the Fallout franchise was never about mature portrayal of violence and murder. The descriptive texts were completely juvenile, the game tried to make you feel good about killing the evil people, and let us not forget all the gory bs in those games. Fallout 2 especially, but even Fallout 1, for all its maturity, did not get the whole "violence is actually serious" thing right.

Admittedly though that was part of their charm.

I see FO1 and FO2 as being a lot like Verhoeven films in the 80s and 90s: there's a serious statement or observation in there, given somewhat interesting and intelligent consideration, but it's buried under gobs and gobs of gore.
 
Admittedly though that was part of their charm.

I see FO1 and FO2 as being a lot like Verhoeven films in the 80s and 90s: there's a serious statement or observation in there, given somewhat interesting and intelligent consideration, but it's buried under gobs and gobs of gore.
That's true, but at times I wish it wouldn't have been there. The Lieutenant's over the top death scene was just a bit too much.

I'd say that the earlier Fallout games treated war seriously, even if violence was portrayed like "duude did you see that shit, his head blew off, duude". Fallout 3 tried to treat war seriously, but it failed for most of the game due to bad writing.
 
This is not Emil who said that but the young guy that talk too, on the first video.

About the humor, it depends on the situation. Some situation are silly, some are wacky references, some are lampshading of storytelling devices (or fourth wall breaking) that are sometime clever, sometime not, some are effective satire of serious and deep topics that are indeed adressed wisely, but for some people humor=not meant to be serious. Sometime it is just humor as part of humanity. The thing is, that amongs those use of humors there are types that don't suit you specifically, types that don't suit anyone, and types that could suit people but isn't done right.

Humort end to divide people, as not all kind of humor is good for everyone. It is much harder to do a good comedy than a sad story.
 
I'm looking forward to Fallout 4 but I'm also a big TES fan. Hoping they learned something from New Vegas and can produce something both fun and rich in its content. Also hoping the soundtrack is as good or better than 3.
 
I find half of this proposals quite good actually.

Same CANNOT be said about Skyrim list. 90% of the things in Skyrim list would HURT the franchise.
 
Last edited:
Altrought it have some good points ( smaller locations, better companions) it have some awful ideas ( mutant power or nuclear stimulant) and some that are may not work ( multiplayer, romance and transfer characters).

Interesting, the Skyrim list is made by the same author from this list.
 
Back
Top