Escapist Magazine calls Bethesda killers of Fallout

Discussion in 'NMA News and Information' started by Proletären, Jan 4, 2019.

  1. R.Graves

    R.Graves Confirmed Retard

    Apr 21, 2016
    once again. completely different connotation which means they're used in different contexts which means they don't mean the same thing.

    its like how happy and ecstatic describe the same thing but aren't nearly interchangeable terms.
     
  2. Risewild

    Risewild Half-way Through My Half-life
    Modder Orderite

    Jun 14, 2014
    Not sure if you're serious or not... If the world "ended" with a nuclear war destroying it, it is both "post nuclear" and "post apocalyptic".

    Tim Cain uses the Post Nuclear as a way of shortening the "nuclear post apocalyptic". He always mentions Fallout as a post nuclear setting. And remember that when they set on actually start making/programming Fallout, they were making it to be a sequel to the Wasteland game, which is another "post apocalyptic by nuclear war" game.
    Why would Tim Cain mean something else besides "post apocalyptic by nuclear war" setting (which is what post nuclear is).
     
  3. R.Graves

    R.Graves Confirmed Retard

    Apr 21, 2016
    post nuclear has a broader meaning than post apocalyptic. this isn't hard. post nuclear can be 20 to 200 years after the apocalyptic event.
     
  4. Jabberwok

    Jabberwok Still Mildly Glowing

    Jun 7, 2008
    You don't need the license for that.
     
  5. R.Graves

    R.Graves Confirmed Retard

    Apr 21, 2016
    god you guys are thick.

    you don't need the license for anything. but you do need the license to make a fallout game fuck sakes.

    whether you guys admit it or not the fallout branding, lore, and world are qualities all their own.
     
  6. Hassknecht

    Hassknecht I guess you're through, huh? Admin Orderite

    Aug 16, 2010
    I'd say it's the other way around. "Post-apocalyptic" means, well, after a non-specific apocalypse, be it nuclear, natural, or even magical (as in Age of Decadence). "Post-nuclear" is a specific post-apocalypse, and neither term says anything about the time frame. Although they do imply that the apocalyptic event is still noticable in some way, otherwise you could consider something like Star Trek post-apocalyptic and post-nuclear.
    And before you go claiming that these terms mean something completely different, please EXPLAIN how they mean something different, because by all known definitions they have a large overlap.
     
    • [Rad] [Rad] x 5
  7. Jabberwok

    Jabberwok Still Mildly Glowing

    Jun 7, 2008
    Obviously. But the whole point was that that doesn't need to happen. If you want one, that's fine, but nothing you've said makes a compelling case for it in my mind.

    I have not seen anyone make an assertion like the one you claim here. It would take a very obtuse person to summarize any of these arguments in that way. You're just being a raging asshole for no reason.
     
  8. Risewild

    Risewild Half-way Through My Half-life
    Modder Orderite

    Jun 14, 2014
    No, post apocalyptic has a broader meaning than post nuclear. Because post apocalyptic can have many different causes, nuclear war, biological agents, weather change, aliens, epic natural disasters, massive meteor strike, etc.

    While post nuclear can only be after a nuclear war...

    Both "post nuclear" and "post apocalyptic" can be after 20 or 200 years. Because the "post" can be any time after the "event" (nuclear or apocalyptic).
     
  9. The Outsider

    The Outsider First time out of the vault

    Jan 9, 2019
    Saying the Truth like an open-minded individual, I like the way you think!
     
  10. The Outsider

    The Outsider First time out of the vault

    Jan 9, 2019
    To be honest, I was anticipating for Fallout 76 to be great, but a month later after its release (especially gathering my past experiences with Interplay/Obsidian and Bethesda versions of Fallout), the real problem with 76 is that it's infested with the same technical issues (but worse) and the fact that this is their first, yet only, Fallout game to be fully online as the game itself can be repetitive and lifeless as I progressed through Appalachia and it became from an exciting adventure to a SHALLOW-AS-FUCK chore when most of my friends on XBOX ONE stopped playing 76. That's a long sentence I typed in, Jesus! Almost forgot, the one wish I originally put down, but later scratched it out to put in Torment: Tides of Numenera, was a sincere apology from Todd "MOTHERFUCKING" Howard himself. Because of the poor marketing and some of the misleading promising features of recent games like Fallout 3, Skyrim, Fallout 4, and this, but instead it's on fucking life support by not just the development team, but also its community (which surprisingly very friendly and somewhat optimistic of the future of 76) Well enough of that rant, I know what game I'm REALLY looking forward for this year! The Outer Worlds by Obsidian Entertainment and directed by ,one of the two directors, Tim Cain! Look out 2019, here we come!
     
  11. CerberusGate

    CerberusGate I should save my game in a whole new slot

    Jun 6, 2016
    Decent article all things considered. I guess with gaming audiences finally turning on Bethesda, it is safe for publications to voice their honest opinions on Bethesda without legions of fanboys harassing or trolling them.

    With regard to the discussion between @Risewild and @R.Graves , I'm of the mind that Fallout 1 depicts a post-apocalyptic setting while 2 and NV explores a post-post-apocalyptic setting.

    The original idea of exploring the ethics of post-nuclear world is what Fallout is essentially (with fantastical elements to allow it creative license). 2 and New Vegas explores what lies beyond that post-nuclear world after reconstruction has begun. I don't mind the shift from that original idea though since I am not aware of many stories that explore a post-post apocalypse like 2 and New Vegas does.

    Though I feel New Vegas should be the end point for the series. Future games will end up being more about fully grown or growing civilizations/nations formed amidst the ruins of the old world that are being reclaimed (unless they do Bethesda's mistake and wallow in trying to make everything fell immediately post-apocalyptic despite the gigantic time-gap between the day the bombs fell and the current time in the setting).
     
    • [Rad] [Rad] x 3
  12. Black Angel

    Black Angel Grand Inquisitor of the Ordo Hereticus

    Mar 21, 2016
    I'd say expanding Fallout setting forward in time is a mistake if they really wanted to keep the IP as "Post-Nuclear". Just right around Fallout 2, it's already questionable how the entire setting counts as "exploring the ethics and civilization of post-apocalyptic world", since Fallout 2 is more like post-post-apocalyptic. Instead of going forward in time, I'd actually prefer to see different parts of the world at roughly the same year the Vault Dweller came out of Vault 13 in search of a water chip, even if only limited to North America. Basically, what happens in different regions of post-nuclear USA, like, I don't know, Salt Lake City? Texas? New Mexico? New York? God-forbid, Washington? Hell, in ideal world, the Las Vegas as depicted in Fallout of Nevada will be THE New Vegas, instead of the New Vegas we see in Fallout: New Vegas.

    To be honest, it's also difficult for literally ANY IP to actually expand and improve in a sequel. A sequel that's 100% faithful to the spirit of its predecessor, while ALSO bring a lot of significant improvement to what was achieved is something that came out once in a blue moon, or even when the stars align with one another. Video games sequels came out more in purpose of building up upon gameplay mechanics and features as the devs and players sees fit, but it's particularly rare for a video game sequel to improve and expand stuff like writings, lore and narrative of its predecessor WHILE 100% faithful to its spirit/experience of the original. Take the Gothic(s) series, and even the Dark Souls series. The first of each IP's games presented the players with overall unique experience, and when the sequels came out they bring a LOT of improvement and expand upon the gameplay mechanics and features of the original. And yet, in terms of other aspect like writings, lore, narratives, level/world designs, etc etc there are a lot of questionable things and design decisions. And then, we have Fallout 1&2. I'm pretty sure we all can agree Fallout 2 bring the best improvement and expansion of Fallout 1's gameplay, but when it comes to the story? The lore? Fallout 2 had a LOT of questionable stuff.

    Hmm, I'm pretty sure Tim Cain wanted to 'take' Fallout to space, as in making a space game that's based in Fallout setting of history (the nukes hit in 2077, the Master is defeated in 2160s, then after a lot of rebuilding, mankind gets to live in space in maybe 2500s or something). Does that counts as different IP?
     
    • [Rad] [Rad] x 1
  13. The Outsider

    The Outsider First time out of the vault

    Jan 9, 2019
    So, did anyone wished for a sincere apology from Todd Howard? Because deep down, I want to know what's really going on in his head or perhaps, what's the deal with Bethesda Game Studios?
     
  14. Jabberwok

    Jabberwok Still Mildly Glowing

    Jun 7, 2008
    I doubt that. Bethesda is fairly secretive. And major studios don't like to admit fault of any kind. Heck, Bioware doubled down on their support for the Mass Effect 3 ending after the fan backlash. The closest I would expect would be some sort of press release about "improving on their vision."
     
  15. The Outsider

    The Outsider First time out of the vault

    Jan 9, 2019
    Just hope that Todd can learn his past mistakes by creating some compelling games, but at least get either an upgrade for their engine or obtaining a STABLE and SMOOTH engine with little to NO POSSIBILITIES OF TECHNICAL ISSUES. I'm looking at you STARFIELD! (especially Elder Scrolls 6) If not, then that's it. Just fuck it. Why do I care about BGS anyway? I'm only in it for Fallout, and OH BOY!!!...



    … it's just fucked... or maybe not... who knows.
    There's always The Outer Worlds (whenever that comes out on what half of this year) and I know someone is/are as highly anticipated as I am!
     
  16. Risewild

    Risewild Half-way Through My Half-life
    Modder Orderite

    Jun 14, 2014
    Todd specifically said in an interview that Starfield and The Elder Scrolls 6 will use Creation Engine.
    And why wouldn't they? They will have Creation Club stores, and a new engine wouldn't support Creation Club... They would have to design a totally new ingame real money shop and design a totally new Creation Club "mod" format.
    There's no way they would have spent all this time making CC and making consoles authorize the CC format and then drop it after only three games.
     
  17. The Outsider

    The Outsider First time out of the vault

    Jan 9, 2019
    Well at least upgrade their Creation Engine, because the engine itself works for single player games and cannot be balanced very well when it's online-only games.
    To be clear, they should've had a more stable and smooth engine before making The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim, just saying.
     
  18. mannawyadden

    mannawyadden First time out of the vault

    May 3, 2016
    Fallout was already dead. Brotherhood of Steel (and Tactics?) killed it, and that was when Interplay owned the IP.

    Bethesda revived the franchise and brought it into the modern era. It's only because of Fallout 3 that I discovered and played Fallout 1 & 2 as well as the 1.5 mod.

    New Vegas wouldn't exist without Bethesda picking up the IP either.

    Maybe the franchise is going down the tubes and will soon be dead or mutilated into an unrecognizable state.

    But no matter how much you guys despise Bethesda, you still have to give them credit where it's due.
     
  19. The Outsider

    The Outsider First time out of the vault

    Jan 9, 2019
    I don't despise Bethesda at all, I mean they have id Software with DOOM and RAGE, MachineGames with Wolfenstein The New Order and Colossus, Arkane Studios with Dishonored and PREY, and then they have their own Role Playing development team, Bethesda Game Studios. BGS, over the years, were popular with their recent titles like SKYRIM, but at the same time they start to lose their "magic" by favoring more on the Action rather than Role-Playing, just like what they did with Fallout 4. Most of it was pretty much how Todd Howard is like a one-trick horse that offers nothing but the same thing, with a grain of "extra content" of the Creation Club Engine. Do I think Todd Howard is a bad director? Of course not, he just needs to get his shit together when he's making a new IP that takes place in space. Break the cycle Todd! Break the FUCKING cycle!!! :twitch:
     
    Last edited: Jan 11, 2019 at 12:40 AM
  20. Norzan

    Norzan Water Chip? Been There, Done That

    Apr 7, 2017
    I'm not gonna give credit to Bethesda in nothing when it comes to Fallout because Troika Games was also in the race to buy Fallout. I'm just imagining a Fallout game made by Troika and it breaks my heart to know what happened instead. Or New Vegas on an engine that isn't total shit.

    All Bethesda did was outbid some other company, they didn't revived the series at all. Instead of going to a company that made actual good RPGs, it went into a company that only cares about pleasing the lowest common denominator at the expense of meaningful RPG elements.
     
    Last edited: Jan 11, 2019 at 12:29 AM
    • [Rad] [Rad] x 2