Swipetotheside
First time out of the vault
Brb contacting Ubisoft to acquire the rights. Can't wait to climb up towers to unlock more of the map
First time out of the vault
I don't see Bethesda being in a different class from Ubisoft or EA. And if Fallout died in 2004 I wouldn't care(I would have no knowledge of Fallout:New Vegas in this timeline). Fallout 1 and 2 would still exist nothing that gets released or doesn't get released will/could change the fact they are great games.
Infact, in your timeline there might have been a kick-starter Fallout even. Who knows?
Earth
Vault Senior Citizen
When you look at games like Planescape Torment and Arcanum, and look at how kickstarters have really helped developers, I think it's safe to say that the Fallout series would be in a better position today if it hadn't been put up for sale.
farchettiensis
First time out of the vault
As far as Skyrim is concerned, it's plausible, since it is a magical world, and it was magic that animated the skeletons and the old dead norse folks.
Mr Fish
Slippy sloppy, The
What's plausible?
Magic should not become an excuse for inconsitency or bad writing though just because you need a Deus Ex Machina so badly to solve a problem.
D Borous
It Wandered In From the Wastes
A franchise that would have included Brotherhood of Steel 2 in it would be a preferable one to one that includes New Vegas in it? I find that notion disagreeable.
tekhedd
Hoarding ammo IS gameplay
As my friend said to me, "You're right, and I disagree with you."
Yes, you are right. But, magic frequently is used as a get-out-of-jail-free card to do things like that in magical universes, and we're pretty much used to that. It stilll feels pretty cheap in skyrim/oblivion/etc because beth likes to throw in "skeletons with nobody there to animate them and no explanation for hwy they exist" or simlar tricks to "use the IP to generate more things to blow up without explaining". But it doesn't feel quite as cheap there as it does in Fallout because magic. So, yes. Magic is a cheap Deus Ex Machina. In skyrim some things are, if not always plausible, at least possible in the rules of the world. In Fallout when you do something impossible you only have two excuses, 1) It's necesasry for an ironic joke so we bent the rules, or 2) there is no other good excuse.
So, er, I think maybe the other answer is "We don't mind when they do it in Skyrim because we have no real respect for it as an RPG."
Last edited:
Swipetotheside
First time out of the vault
That's due to your own negative bias. I'm just glad Fallout is continuing and the originals are getting much more recognition nowadays.
Swipetotheside
First time out of the vault
Must ban all Fallouts that are not cavalier oblique or "isometric" Didn't you know?
Swipetotheside
First time out of the vault
Fallout simply shouldn't be excused for its shortcomings either, you're no better than the writers who dabbled up the inane dribble in Skyrim.
As my friend said to me, "You're right, and I disagree with you."
So, yes. Magic is a cheap Deus Ex Machina. In skyrim some things are, if not always plausible, at least possible in the rules of the world. In Fallout when you do something impossible you only have two excuses, 1) It's necesasry for an ironic joke so we bent the rules, or 2) there is no other good excuse.
So, er, I think maybe the other answer is "We don't mind when they do it in Skyrim because we have no real respect for it as an RPG."
Interplay didn't have the money to finish Brotherhood of Steel 2.
@Swipetotheside use one post to reply to things and not one post per response. Like this:
No. Things don't need sequels. An IP isn't a living thing that needs sequels to survive. Continuing for the sake of continuing isn't something that appeals to me. I only care about sequels when they are true to the original and bring something new to the table. Fallout: New Vegas fits the bill for me, Fallout 3 and 4 don't.
Swipetotheside
First time out of the vault
No. Things don't need sequels. An IP isn't a living thing that needs sequels to survive. Continuing for the sake of continuing isn't something that appeals to me. I only care about sequels when they are true to the original and bring something new to the table. Fallout: New Vegas fits the bill for me, Fallout 3 and 4 don't.[/QUOTE]
Your opinion, I suppose. They are a business and they need to make money somehow with a positive return on their investment and Fallout 4 was a "money maker". So, as long as people keep buying it they're going to continue making sequels. Just the way the industry has been, I guess.
Your opinion, I suppose. They are a business and they need to make money somehow with a positive return on their investment and Fallout 4 was a "money maker". So, as long as people keep buying it they're going to continue making sequels. Just the way the industry has been, I guess.
Yeah right. What about all those companies that decided to create their completely own franchises, like let's say Bioware with Dragon Age? Or Mass Effect? Or the countless other developers that did it.
It's true that Bethesda got Fallout to make money with it. Everyone here understands that much. But to make the claim like that Fallout somehow required a Sequel, particularly by someone like Bethesda, is a very bold statement.
There are many companies out there buying franchises and making new things with it. But there are also companies out there starting their own thing. So, no, it's not just opinion. No one, as far as I know, has used a gun on Bethesda and forcing Todd Howard or anyone else to buy Fallout and make Sequels for it.
It's true that Bethesda got Fallout to make money with it. Everyone here understands that much. But to make the claim like that Fallout somehow required a Sequel, particularly by someone like Bethesda, is a very bold statement.
There are many companies out there buying franchises and making new things with it. But there are also companies out there starting their own thing. So, no, it's not just opinion. No one, as far as I know, has used a gun on Bethesda and forcing Todd Howard or anyone else to buy Fallout and make Sequels for it.
Swipetotheside
First time out of the vault
Considering they bought the IP for a sizable sum, one would think they'd use the IP for all they can. I wasn't saying Fallout needed a sequel in any sense of the word In my personal opinion I just think its the lesser of two evils than if EA or Ubisoft got their hands on it.
Jabberwok
Mildly Dipped
Actually, I'm pretty sure the only thing that kept NV from a higher rating (barring actual corruption?) was the absurd number of bugs. Which is probably what happens when a third party studio has a short development cycle to work with an unfamiliar engine, there is insufficient QA, and it is historically some of the buggiest software in AAA development.
Spacemunkey
Vault Senior Citizen
The problem is Bethesda is just a lackluster developer. Had Bethesda been creative and completely made the Fallout franchise their own, in a good way, the biggest complaints you would hear are how people miss certain things from the classics followed by "but man what Bethesda did was awesome." You won't hear that because Bethesda would rather cash in than to show any creativity.
tekhedd
Hoarding ammo IS gameplay
Fallout simply shouldn't be excused for its shortcomings either, you're no better than the writers who dabbled up the inane dribble in Skyrim.
As my friend said to me, "You're right, and I disagree with you."
So, yes. Magic is a cheap Deus Ex Machina. In skyrim some things are, if not always plausible, at least possible in the rules of the world. In Fallout when you do something impossible you only have two excuses, 1) It's necesasry for an ironic joke so we bent the rules, or 2) there is no other good excuse.
So, er, I think maybe the other answer is "We don't mind when they do it in Skyrim because we have no real respect for it as an RPG."
Well, obviously I agree with you then, don't I?
So the personal attack seems sort of illogical. 
Trash of the Den
Jet Dealer
If you actually listen to this. You can see why Fallout 4 doesn't make sense. Because Tom Howard doesn't make sense. How is a game of Football a role playing game? 
That does not make any sense at all. Football is a game of strategy. Call of Duty has role playing Elements?
Really? lol From what I can tell it has a progression system, not role playing elements? Maybe I'm wrong? I dunno but from observing this guys demeanor and the things he's talking about, I get the sense he doesn't even play video games anymore. From what I can tell. He seems to have a warped, if not a very simplistic idea of what a role playing game really is or should be. He also seems a tad naive about the current state of the industry, and completely disconnected and out of touch from the gaming community as a whole in general. Maybe all his awards and accolades has gone to his head? I dunno, But that is just me.
Cheers,
-Trash
That does not make any sense at all. Football is a game of strategy. Call of Duty has role playing Elements?
Cheers,
-Trash
Last edited by a moderator: