What my idea of a perfect Fallout sequel would look like

Discussion in 'Future Fallout Game Discussion' started by Indigo, Dec 26, 2017.

  1. Indigo

    Indigo First time out of the vault

    Jun 30, 2017
    Hey guys, you might know of my previous video 'Why Fallout Isn't Fallout'. It got a lot of attention a few months ago, so I decided to follow it up with what I would like to see in a hypothetical sequel.

    Hope you enjoy!

     
    • [Like] [Like] x 6
  2. Gizmojunk

    Gizmojunk Vault Fossil

    Nov 26, 2007
    In some configurations, Firefox has a tendency to just not show embedded video links.

    So for those that don't see the video, here is the direct link:
    youtube.com/watch?v=fCUMv_7obC8
     
    • [Like] [Like] x 1
  3. Kohno

    Kohno Vault Dweller

    Jul 30, 2009
    A lot of stuff to agree with there (I don't particularly like the Shadow of Mordor or Dark Souls comparions and stuff like that, though, and certain stuff isn't even mentioned - like environmental interaction and skill checks there). Too bad it's all been repeatedly thrown at Bethesda by a wide variety of people since '07 and they just don't care about stuff like that.
     
    • [Like] [Like] x 5
  4. NMLevesque

    NMLevesque Commie Ghost

    Jul 2, 2016
    Not that it's handled correctly, but I think there could be substantial radiation (concentrated to a location) even after several centuries. If improper storage of waste (which is already a thing IRL), destroyed fission reactors and nuclear fuel cells aren't enough, then dirty bombs that use isotopes with longer half-lives.
     
  5. Gizmojunk

    Gizmojunk Vault Fossil

    Nov 26, 2007
    I saw a documentary once, that showed a nuclear waste dump-site, where they dug a warehouse at the bottom of a 2000' elevator shaft (built for the purpose).

    On the surface of the site, they hired an artist to decorate the landscape in a terrifying and foreboding manner; in the hopes that no matter who the later (far future) inhabitants were, or what language they spoke/ or could read... that no one would be comfortable living there, or establish any settlement there.
     
  6. Indigo

    Indigo First time out of the vault

    Jun 30, 2017
    I don't pretend to be a nuclear scientist, but according to the "Seven-Ten" rule, much of the initial radiation dissipates within hours and days of the blast. Long-term effects on water and settling into dirt can remain, and concentrated waste lasts longer, but the 7-10 rule was what I referenced toward the beginning.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_fallout#The_Seven_Ten_Rule
     
  7. NMLevesque

    NMLevesque Commie Ghost

    Jul 2, 2016
    That's for the isotopes produced or dispersed by nukes. If they salted their nukes it wouldn't hold, and if they destroyed a reactor (note that Chernobyl has a concrete casket to lessen the harm) or a storage site it wouldn't hold either. Either way the 7/10 rule is about the proportion of the original radiation level. If it's higher (more radioactive material) then it needs to be reduced to a smaller fraction in order to reach safe levels.
     
  8. Indigo

    Indigo First time out of the vault

    Jun 30, 2017
    ^ This guy nukes.
     
  9. Eshanas

    Eshanas Look, Ma! Two Heads!

    Jul 6, 2016
    That was Yucca and those were concepts. They didn't go through with it, the waste is still around and the science of trying to talk to the future has still gone relatively unanswered.

    I still think the best option is to recycle as much waste as possible and then shove whatever remains into a deep, deep, deep vault no one might ever find, no surface markings, and if they do manage to find it the chances are they know about radiation. If somehow they don't there should be two rooms - one with the gunk (maybe more of a shaft?) and one with a big gallery above it (filled, perhaps, to prevent instruments from finding this weird void in the earth) with drawings on the walls, very anatomically correct drawings, of what opening the barrels will do. They should be - again, hopefully - should be smart enough to recognize that this is some fucked up shit.
     
    Last edited: Dec 30, 2017
  10. mithrap

    mithrap Ring a ding-ding, baby

    May 17, 2016
    I just watched your video, and damn, you do describe a VERY interesting Fallout. One that would be ambitious and very, very costly, but actually possible. Congratulations for this amazing video, that should be watched by Bethesda.
    You mention the possibility of being sick, and need a cure, as a motivation for the main character. I had the same idea, and I think it would be the best way to reintroduce a sense of motivation, realistic urgency (one that keeps you going, but still lets you explore and do some side quests) and it should be a way to bring back a timer. You have six months to live if you don't find a cure, or something similar.

    We could even dream wild and imagine a mechanic where you'd infect people you spend too much time with. Some factions want your blood, to weaponize it, to study it, to find a cure... Give it to them on your own will (which should bring down your stats but boost your reputation with said faction) or resist. Your choice.

    In the old Fallout way, getting cured should only end the first act, and has little to do with the actual, real threat that will be unleashed at this point, and initiate the second act. Have your personal, selfish quest turn into a heroic tale, as you get into the bigger picture and start to fight for something other than your own survival. Think about "soul reaver" kind of narrative. In any case, the actual, real antagonist shouldn't be the one responsible for injecting the virus to you, it should be something way, way bigger. Something EXTREMELY sinister and creepy. Don't be afraid to go dark. It needs to touch the absolute horror of radiation. It could be an evergrowing biomass coming from underground, releasing walls of spores, worshipped by some apocalyptic tribes and cults etc, for example.

    Quite a big quest could also be centered around a vault getting ready to wipe the wasteland clean in order to protect its citizen from the factions who want to get in, using a chemical weapon. Organize a siege or act as an ambassador to find a compromise, but whatever lies within the vault needs to bring a feeling of horror. "Icy" had quite a similar theme, and damn, it worked perfectly. "Vault rangers" should be a thing. Blue/Yellow hazmat suits, heavily armed, hostile to almost everyone, paranoid looters searching for "something" outside, even sometimes kidnapping people. A creepy alternative and a new take on the vault visual theme, that should surprise players.
    Taking over the vault should bring about a HQ/Base mechanic, like in Pillars of eternity. But it should be a reward for the second act. Many RPGs tend to introduce that sort of safe zones too early. The settlement building system should be earned the hard way, if kept in this interesting concept Fallout of yours.

    When it comes to the character's identity, I think there should be one available, one that is original : "you are a reporter, documenting what's happening in this part of the wasteland." your camera acts as a weapon that deals zero damage, like in "Beyond good and evil". Aim and shoot to take a picture. You now have a very clear reason why you should get to the frontline and speak with everyone : you need to have visuals and interviews. You have a clear motivation for a pacifist playthrough, BUT you can also be a ruthless war reporter who doesn't hesitate to take arms if needs be. And you can tell the tale in different ways. You can take sides, with your words and your pictures (the Piper interview scene actually showed how easy it would be : simple dialogue options). Imagine how it could have shifted the narrative from Fallout 4 (will you show the Institute as the boogeyman they are, with pictures of synths tearing down cities and kidnapping citizen, or will you speak of them as the misunderstood saviors that need to be helped? Will you make the commonwealth resist the arrival of the brotherhood or will you depict them as saviors?) That's actually a totally new way of handling the karma system, one that should be, at least, considered for a sequel.

    Bring the loyalty/fear mechanic from Tyranny. And near the end of the game, make your companions speak on your behalf, judging you, and depending on their testimony, have a final situation resolve differently.

    There should also be, at least, two very clear resources at separate locations. Which would explain the caravan roads, the faction infighting and the presence of, at least, two major settlements (think about gastown and the citadel from Mad Max, for example).
     
    • [Like] [Like] x 1
  11. Kohno

    Kohno Vault Dweller

    Jul 30, 2009
    One thing that struck me with this new "close up" perspective is that the raiders feel and behave like nesting animals. That was probably the intention too, but it was a new feeling... The raiders before didn't appear like that.

    What could be a neat little dynamic to make them more "humanlike", is that the game could check the players karma and based on that roll for raider hostility (let's say a couple of states... hostile, low opinion, neutral, friendly). If the roll is successful for friendly or neutral, the game could randomnly generates a name for a raider leader and let the player do simple conversation with him/her and some bartering with the raiders. And to not lessen the chances of permanently friednly/indifferent raiders, the game could generate raider "wars" and "mutinys" that would change the leader and reset the group.

    There's a ton little thing that might get combined with this kind of stuff, but it's just spitballing an idea and I can't be arsed to waste more breath to it right now.
     
  12. Gizmojunk

    Gizmojunk Vault Fossil

    Nov 26, 2007
    I liked the OP's video. There is nothing new in it for me though; every suggested aspect mentioned was proposed and debated to death on Bethsoft's forums during development of FO3 in 2007/08; much of it proposed by me :smug: —and immediately derided by TES fans looking for a new Wasteland-TES game.

    That said, on a personal note... No FPP Fallout is a Fallout sequel IMO; even just that alone makes it a spin-off; it completely alters the gameplay, and the psychological effect upon player attitude*.
    Spin-offs are not necessarily bad, but they don't make good sequels.

    In Fallout you see the PC deflagrate their enemies into ash, after they wriggle and writhe in an unexpected hot-foot dance. But it is detached, and a little bit comedic—at least at first. In FO3, it is the player doing this act; up close and personal.

    I had severe misgivings about them showing a burning death in FO3 (one par with the original's) using the kind of first person detail possible with their Oblivion games. That is not detached, that is not the PC doing it; that is the player torching victims at point blank range...
    ...and they did not show the equivalent of the original's implied consequences from that. As I recall, the targets didn't even notice they were on fire until they fell over motionless; merely re-textured with ash & gore. The original gets away with it because it's a 70 pixel sprite, but that image still evokes the full meaning of what it displays; and it's absent in FO3.

    It works because it is detached, and distant; it can't be funny at point blank.

    This applies to the whole environment of the game; when done correctly, Fallout is irreverent—(of everything except nukes), and it's depressing as hell. It works because the player is not living in it. FPP games seek to substitute the player for the character; this is almost always a bad idea with RPGs.

    To the OP's point, I would suggest Troika's tech demo, and the Ground Zero tech demo as better options to resurrect a future Fallout sequel from. (Not that Bethesda would every try it.)

     
    Last edited: Dec 31, 2017
    • [Like] [Like] x 1
  13. shihonage

    shihonage Made in USSR

    May 8, 2007
    This is a well-edited and articulated video, however it does not match my vision of a Fallout game. Fallout's most important qualities to me are:

    1) The goal of imitating a PnP game on a computer, where the small description screen plays the role of a DM, and the gameplay rewards you for using your mind and being clever.

    2) Immersion - accomplished through effective, compact, realistic writing and a cohesive world design.

    3) World reactivity on macro and micro-levels, creating this sort of a stretchy resin world, instead of hard walls. From dynamic flavor blurbs above people's heads, to multiple quest solutions, to various reactions to your stats or quest outcomes, Fallout 1/2 had some of the most sophisticated reactivity I've seen.

    If you look at Fallout quest guides, and compare them to the dire misery on the inside of Fallout 3, you will see that Fallout 1/2 was vastly ahead of its time. The programming, design and scripting efforts were made by people much smarter than Bethesda staff, who in turn expected YOU to not be a moron.

    ------------------

    Playing Fallout gave me the feeling of freedom, and however illusory that freedom was, it was far more advanced of an accomplishment than you see in any of the modern RPGs.

    What I DON'T CARE to see Fallout grow into, is a glorified Shadow Of War/GTA/Supreme Commander mix. Having a world dominated mostly by procedural interactions, removes life and soul from the game. The novelty of finding two caravans fighting is not worth the programmatic effort needed to accomplish it, and is just as easily simulated by random encounter system.

    The artistry of Fallout was that it set up a design where everything that happens was scripted, but modular, and the player's personal story was assembled by chaining together these pre-designed little reactive chunks.

    I don't care about which faction wins, and the whole "large map aspect of it". It IS important as part of the modular settlement outcome structure and C&C, but not to the degree where you would purposely manipulate the world like some grand strategy game.

    Fallout is not a procedural game, nor is it a strategy game. It is one man's journey in a dire post-apocalyptic world that was created by caring minds, not cold algorithms, and yet this world remains flexible to his will - within reason. That is the desired end goal of simulating a human DM guiding a PnP experience via a computer, and that is what Fallout strived to be.

    Not a combat simulator, not a strategy simulator, not STALKER, not a horror game. A PnP experience seamlessly managed by a computer.

    Remember when computers were just becoming a thing, and we were all like, "hey, wouldn't it be neat if all these dice rolls, rules and characters were offloaded into a computer which maintained this interactive world for us, presented it to us, allowed us to navigate it, and reacted appropriately?"

    I sure do.
     
    • [Like] [Like] x 4
  14. Gizmojunk

    Gizmojunk Vault Fossil

    Nov 26, 2007
    I'd really like to agree with this, but I honestly don't think that Bethesda (as a studio) is dense or inept. I believe that they simply didn't care about making a proper sequel for the fans. I think that for their purposes, any deep and necessarily pensive gameplay, or dialog would have been detrimental to their bottom line. :(

    They simply chose to make Cheetos instead of Beef Wellington... and made out like bandits, selling it hand over fist to the mass audience—who were just fine with Cheetos; we were the only ones they screwed over.
     
    Last edited: Jan 1, 2018
    • [Like] [Like] x 1
  15. shihonage

    shihonage Made in USSR

    May 8, 2007
    I've yet to see any proof that Bethesda aren't dense or inept. It's just that their ineptitude matches the quality of the product they're shooting for, aimed at the lowest common denominator. A good giveaway of their competence level is that their buggy games are usually fixed by fans.
     
    • [Like] [Like] x 1
  16. Risewild

    Risewild Half-way Through My Half-life
    Modder Orderite

    Jun 14, 2014
    While I don't like defending Bethesda... Their programmers and artists are actually quite good. Once you dwell into the game engine, scripting, etc. you can see that they are not idiots. They even created the GECK script and the Papyrus script. Idiots couldn't pull those off by themselves.

    If you compare both behind the scenes work in FO3 and FNV, you can see how Bethesda people work is much better than Obsidian one. One factor was time for sure, but Obsidian broke a lot of engine stuff and made mistakes all over the place.
    FNV is (in my opinion) the much superior game, but in terms of how things work, how it was scripted and programmed, how carefully things were made, etc. FO3 blows FNV out of the water.


    I am old enough to know P&P games, and they're my favorite type of games. I would also love to see Fallout become a P&P-like game again. I know it will never happen and it makes me sad.
    People these days go around saying that RPGs should stop using "outdated" P&P systems and features. I say the exact opposite. RPGs should always use more P&P systems and features, because there is no computer or video game RPG that can hold a candle to most (or all) P&P games out there. P&P is the medium if you really want to "Roleplay" (live, talk, act, think and interact with the world as your character) instead of roleplay (pretending in your head you're that character), you can roleplay in any game where you control a character (like Super Mario, you can roleplay you're Mario or Luigi), but those games do not allow the player to "Roleplay".
     
    Last edited: Jan 2, 2018
    • [Like] [Like] x 2
  17. Gizmojunk

    Gizmojunk Vault Fossil

    Nov 26, 2007
    FO3 is proof enough for me; it's a terrible Fallout game, but that hardly matters to them. If Troika had managed to make their own definitive Fallout sequel... (I'd have bought a $150 collector's edition); but it would not have outsold FO3; and for some of the very reasons that I might have considered made it superb.
    FO3 didn't happen as result of ineptness.

    ** It is interesting to me though, that Bethesda was apparently surprised to learn just how many players in Europe and Asia, played Oblivion in third person. They learned from that; they learned from New Vegas too... though perhaps we might not like what they learned.
     
    Last edited: Jan 1, 2018
  18. valcik

    valcik So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs

    Dec 20, 2008
    Not fair, Beth boys were working with it since Morrowind, for more than a decade. How much time did Obsidian get? A single year? Barely enough for creating the content, sure not enough for perfectly mastering the licensed tech.
     
  19. Risewild

    Risewild Half-way Through My Half-life
    Modder Orderite

    Jun 14, 2014
    Not only did they not mastered it, they broke it. Over and over and constantly. The TTW team is still fixing engine bugs caused by Obsidian breaking stuff all the time.
    One thing is not be able to use an engine to it's full potential, another is breaking to the point of needing external software and scripts plus years of learning both FO3 and FNV engines to fix or find workarounds to patch it.

    And I did point out in my previous that the short time was definitely part of the problem. But it can't be the main reason.
    You give one single good modding team of let's say 5 modders (world builder, quest designer, scripter, graphic and model designer and a programmer), one and a half years and the Developers GECK version (the public version of the GECK is not the devs version), pay them full time and tell them to make a game in that time. I am sure that they wouldn't break the game engine at all.
    The game wouldn't be as good as FNV (and almost guaranteed to not be even close), but still they wouldn't break the engine that bad (or at all).

    And the little time is all Obsidian's fault, because they have a really shitty business sense. Who in their perfect mind would sign a contract to make a game in one and a half years when they never even looked at the engine they will have to make the game in? And a bonus depending on the score value of metacritic?
    They had this grandiose idea for a game and ended up with a 1/50 of the game they wanted to make because they didn't know the limitations of the engine and consoles back then.
    I like their games and I hope they can keep releasing actual RPGs like they have been, but during their history they have almost gone bankrupt a few times because of their shitty business sense. Credit goes where credit is due but blame goes where it is due too.

    But anyway. The point of my previous post was to provide some proof that Bethesda employees are not dense or inept, which they aren't when you look at the engine or the scripting systems they created. They make the games they want to make, and not the games they can make because of them being idiots. And comparing Bethesda work against Obsidian (and even many big modding project out there) in the engine, programming, world building and scripting just proves that they aren't dense or inept.
     
  20. Gizmojunk

    Gizmojunk Vault Fossil

    Nov 26, 2007
    How is that not fair? It simply the way it is. Bethesda has more experience with their engine. Even the new talent they hire will likely have better teachers; due to that experience.

    I was told by an Obsidian dev that it took them a week get any animations working—using the whole kit from Bethesda; I can believe it too.