|
Your donations keep RPGWatch running!
RPGWatch Forums » Comments » News Comments » Bethesda Softworks - Fallout 4 Planned

Default Bethesda Softworks - Fallout 4 Planned

August 5th, 2008, 03:10
I think it is pretty normal to expect a company who got a license to make more than one game, so whats the news here?

I for one am very over the fence with F3. I LOVED the old Fallouts, and while I am not totally against 3D, I really wonder if a party-oriented classic view wouldnt have been better to catch the atmosphere? Something along the lines of Neverwinter Nights or Drakensang, just with Fallout world design? This F3 looks awfully like any other dark themed shooter, at least in the videos. That good olde Fallout feeling… can it really be caught in a shooter-like 3D? I wonder.
elikal is offline

elikal

elikal's Avatar
Sentinel

#21

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 529

Default 

August 5th, 2008, 03:15
Originally Posted by Brother None View Post
Not a new setting, is it?



What makes you think that?
Because interplay went under. Or to be percise ran out of money and now are scrambling to try and make a online game…

Redguard was a very different game…..regardless its useless arguing with no mutants allowed groups they are messed u p about the game, but hey more power to them.
rune_74 is offline

rune_74

SasqWatch

#22

Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,077

Default 

August 5th, 2008, 03:25
Originally Posted by elikal View Post
I think it is pretty normal to expect a company who got a license to make more than one game, so whats the news here?
Somebody sent this news in. So he obviously found it interesting enough to share with our readers. Not everybody has enough business knowledge to understand that its indeed absolutely normal to use a license more than one time.
Gorath is offline

Gorath

Gorath's Avatar
Prime Evil
RPGWatch Team

#23

Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,898

Default 

August 5th, 2008, 03:26
You said "To say fallout did not need Bethesda is like saying lets not ever have a sequel because thats what would have happened. "
He answered "What makes you think that?"

You're making broad assumptions and he was pointing them out. There were other buyers for the Fallout IP, mainly Troika and Obsidian if I'm not mistaken, and as far as I can remember the official reason for why Troika shut down was "failure to secure new contracts", in other words after Vampire no one would fund them the development of a new game. Perhaps had they managed to work on a Fallout sequel their fate would have been totally different?

That is to say, sorry but we think your statement that Fallout would never had a sequel had it not been for Bethesda is incorrect. Hence why he's asking "What makes you think that?".

To which you reply "Because interplay went under. Or to be percise ran out of money and now are scrambling to try and make a online game…" You seem to believe Bethesda "saved" the Fallout IP from the hands of a dieing publisher. It's not really true. True that Bethesda had the highest offer, the most solid profile and was the most likely to be able to actually complete and sell a game. But they weren't the only ones willing to buy the franchise and make a sequel. And among the other candidates there were members of the actual teams that created F1 and F2.

PS: I never post at NMA ;-)
Last edited by Hedek; August 5th, 2008 at 04:00.
Hedek is offline

Hedek

Hedek's Avatar
Watchdog

#24

Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 203

Default 

August 5th, 2008, 03:38
Originally Posted by elikal View Post
I think it is pretty normal to expect a company who got a license to make more than one game, so whats the news here?

I for one am very over the fence with F3. I LOVED the old Fallouts, and while I am not totally against 3D, I really wonder if a party-oriented classic view wouldnt have been better to catch the atmosphere? Something along the lines of Neverwinter Nights or Drakensang, just with Fallout world design? This F3 looks awfully like any other dark themed shooter, at least in the videos. That good olde Fallout feeling… can it really be caught in a shooter-like 3D? I wonder.
Indeed. And as Emil Pagliarulo said: "What was said recently, by both Todd and me, is that in real-time, skill affects chance to hit less than it used to. This change was made after extensive playtesting. Why? Most everyone found it annoying that you'd have your crosshair over an enemy, and your bullets would go completely wide. So we dialed the accuracy penalty back so it would feel good in real-time."
http://www.bethsoft.com/bgsforums/in…#entry12611391

I loved how Arcanum managed to offer both Real Time, Turn Based and what they called Fast Turn Based (which I used most of the time in all my playthroughs). Arcanum's Real Time felt quite like Diablo, if isometric-3rd-view-non-FPS-no-crosshair like Diablo can sell well why did Fallout 3 necessarily needed to have a FPS view? Oh what was I thinking: it's not convenient for consoles!

I wonder how Jason, Leonard, Tim and the others feel about Bethesda's work on Fallout 3
Hedek is offline

Hedek

Hedek's Avatar
Watchdog

#25

Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 203

Default 

August 5th, 2008, 04:11
Originally Posted by rune_74 View Post
Because interplay went under.
And? If you think Bethesda was the only interested party in the license let alone the only place it could possibly go to, you have been misinformed.

Originally Posted by rune_74 View Post
Redguard was a very different game.
Game yes, IP no. Just like Tactics is not a new IP over Fallout. That was the point, wasn't it? The current group of developers working at Bethesda have never, ever made an original IP. All the makers of The Elder Scrolls (Vijay Lakshman, Ted Peterson, Julian Lefay and Christopher Weaver) are all gone. In that sense it is no wonder ZeniMax had no inclination to let Bethesda try to create something, it is very unproven and thus a financial risk.

Originally Posted by rune_74 View Post
….regardless its useless arguing with no mutants allowed groups they are messed u p about the game, but hey more power to them.
No need to get personal.
Brother None is offline

Brother None

Brother None's Avatar
SasqWatch

#26

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,554

Default 

August 5th, 2008, 04:36
Some of the companies that "could" have purchased are no longer in business. I'm just as glad that Bethesda got the license over some other developers that had no business sense. It'd be great if Troika would have gotten Fallout and then folded up a few months later because nobody there understood the market. Maybe Atari (we don't make games anymore), Interplay (can somebody loan us a dollar?), or EA (can we put Alex Rodriguez as the main character?). Bioware sold its soul to EA so I'm especially glad they didn't get it. Blizzard would be the only other company that I would have been glad to see get the license, but I'm sure their vision of Fallout would have been just as vilified by the mutants and codexers as Bethesda's.

'nut
crpgnut is offline

crpgnut

crpgnut's Avatar
Fantasy Novel Archmage
RPGWatch Donor

#27

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: St. Louis, Mo USA
Posts: 3,932

Default 

August 5th, 2008, 05:28
Verily you realise the most common scenario would be a publisher getting it and then getting a company like Troika or Obsidian to make it, right, crpnut? Troika (or Obsidian) actually owning the license in the sense that ZeniMax does was never an option.

Also, while I agree Troika was badly run, they were also screwed over by publishers for both Arcanum and Bloodlines. I'm not sure any amount of business acumen can overcome those kinds of numerous setbacks.
Brother None is offline

Brother None

Brother None's Avatar
SasqWatch

#28

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,554

Default 

August 5th, 2008, 05:43
See what I think is, that no matter how good of a game it may turn out to be, certain people will despise it because it is not "The Fallout Game" they invisioned. To say there is no talent left at Bethesda is silly, sure the original guys are gone but even if you did not like oblivion you have to admit it ran well and was designed well….shocker is that I enjoyed it.

Too get games like oblivion and the new fallout they can't have a ton of games in development (they do have other games…look at their wiki…once again). And one thing is for sure with Bethesda you know they are going to support their games after launch.
rune_74 is offline

rune_74

SasqWatch

#29

Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,077

Default 

August 5th, 2008, 05:59
IMHO to call it Fallout 3 is just plain… wrong. It is not purely turn based. It is not isometric. It is not an RPG. It is not party based. It is a pause based , 3D shooter, solo action RPG now. Not exactly what anyone should expect from Fallout 3.

They could have called it something that reminded people of Fallout but does not imply is trying to be a true successor. Kind of like what was done with that other Fallout spin off, B.O.S. (POS is more fitting I know) or like Renegade (that FPS C&C spin off)

All that said, I am still looking forward to playing it. But it will NOT be FO3 to me.
Skullguise is offline

Skullguise

Skullguise's Avatar
Watcher

#30

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 24

Default 

August 5th, 2008, 06:16
How many of you would have bashed them for making a game that was similar to fallout but had their own name? I the same people would be on them stating they have no original ideas….
rune_74 is offline

rune_74

SasqWatch

#31

Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,077

Default 

August 5th, 2008, 06:18
well.. planned doesnt mean it will be released for sure. Fallout 3 isn't even out yet. I think it is bit too early.

BG2 fan girl
BG2: Eowyn & Anomen
IWD: Orhlanna & Korin
ME: Shepard & Garrus
purpleblob is offline

purpleblob

purpleblob's Avatar
Princess

#32

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 1,129

Default 

August 5th, 2008, 09:31
Originally Posted by Hedek View Post
…Bethesda is just raping someone's else artistic creation.
Oh please. That is so melodramatic.

Bedwyr

Guest

#33

Posts: n/a

Default 

August 5th, 2008, 10:15
I don't get whats so great about fallout's combat anyhow. The game was a wonderfull rpg and one of my favourite games, but the combat was never the selling point for me. Usually i just wanted to get over it as soon as I could. Calling it tactical is funny, because to me it was pretty straightforward.
Dez is offline

Dez

Dez's Avatar
Watcher of The Keep

#34

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,198

Default 

August 5th, 2008, 10:41
Originally Posted by Brother None View Post
Also, while I agree Troika was badly run, they were also screwed over by publishers for both Arcanum and Bloodlines. I'm not sure any amount of business acumen can overcome those kinds of numerous setbacks.
Strangely enough, companies that are competently managed, reliably turn out high-quality (in this case, stable and reasonably bug-free) products, and have solid business people taking care of the business end tend to get screwed over by publishers a lot less rarely than companies that are badly run, don't have people with good business acumen, have schedule slippage, and turn out products that are buggy and unstable. Funny, innit?
Prime Junta is offline

Prime Junta

RPGCodex' Little BRO

#35

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 8,540

Default 

August 5th, 2008, 14:16
Originally Posted by Gorath View Post
Somebody sent this news in. So he obviously found it interesting enough to share with our readers. Not everybody has enough business knowledge to understand that its indeed absolutely normal to use a license more than one time.
I was the one; and Dhurin discovered it, too.

Me, I didn't expect more than a one-shot of Fallout 3.

I thought they would do this game alone, because I had no knowledge of Bethesda wanting to squeeze more money out of it.

I did not know that they want EVERY franchise to be squeezed out by them.

I think I'm still a member of the one-shot game philosophy; making franchises isn't new, because of the myriads of (A)D&D games, M&M, Wizardry, Lands of Lore, etc. , but apart from there franchises there are more than enough one-shot RPGs out there, too (Stonekeep, although there was Godmaker in early works), Albion, Technomage, Arcanum, Nox …

There indeed is a very, very strong tendency to create and to exploit franchises - because the "Ring To Bind Them" is there much stronger witz a franchise: Ifd a game has grown fans, then these fans want to play more of/in this world - a certain part of the envisioned amount of buyers is already secured.

Maybe one-shot games are mostly even nothing more than a failed try to create a franchise, too,

which would mean that there's in fact nothing more than franchises out inthis world. The franchise concept might be "The One Ring To Bind Them".

Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius and a lot of courage to move in the opposite direction. (E.F.Schumacher, Economist, Source)
Alrik Fassbauer is offline

Alrik Fassbauer

Alrik Fassbauer's Avatar
TL;DR

#36

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Old Europe
Posts: 16,037

Default 

August 5th, 2008, 14:39
Originally Posted by Alrik Fassbauer View Post
Maybe one-shot games are mostly even nothing more than a failed try to create a franchise, too,

which would mean that there's in fact nothing more than franchises out inthis world. The franchise concept might be "The One Ring To Bind Them".
Almost always true. In most cases single games are failed franchises, simply because a sequel to a successfull game is relatively easy money every serious business has to collect.
Gorath is offline

Gorath

Gorath's Avatar
Prime Evil
RPGWatch Team

#37

Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,898

Default 

August 5th, 2008, 19:02
Call me a hopeless optimist but I'm hoping that the obvious massive cost synergies on the engines etc between their two main cash cows and from knocking out sequels rather than starting from scratch will give them the scope to allocate a higher proportion of their development budgets towards actually filling their games with some decent writing.
Benedict is offline

Benedict

SasqWatch

#38

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: London
Posts: 2,348
RPGWatch Forums » Comments » News Comments » Bethesda Softworks - Fallout 4 Planned
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT +2. The time now is 12:18.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright by RPGWatch