Fallout-related tidbits

Tall_Paul said:
I harbor some sort of wishful dream that Wasteland 2 will sell a bajillion copies and Bethesda will hire inXile to make a turn-based Fallout game for PC, tablets, and XBLA.
Click to expand...

Oh man, that would be awesome.

I don't understand why anyone would argue for Bethesda to make an isometric, turn-based game. A remake in the current style, maybe, though I don't know that I want that either. But Bethesda has pretty much been making the same game and nothing else (that i know of) for the past twenty years. First person, open world RPGs, only one of which was not called Elder Scrolls.
 
Even going just by the diplomatic interviews, it's clear that the relationship between inXile and Bethesda has been irreparably damage. Fargo really didn't like working with them, and I doubt Beth was satisfied with Hunted either.
 
I rather want remake Fo1,2 as a non combat point-and-click adventure then beth's horrible fps AAA bullshit rpg. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
I mean remake as beth's fps is really horrible don't mean I want adventure game.
 
Diospyros said:
The old school, 90s isometric throwback style RPGs are going to be the realm of the small developers, such as we are seeing with Wasteland 2, Project Eternity, and the Planescape sequel. The sheer amount of money that needs to be generated by a company like Bethesda can only be done with state of the art looking games that appeal to mass audiences. There just aren't enough of us "substance over style" types out there that are going to buy a game that looks 15 years old, no matter how good it is, to get a big time developer to consider it financially viable.
Click to expand...
I don't believe that though. I think it can be done. All you have to do, is to do it right. Games like Pokemon prove that neither the newest graphics nor real time gameplay for combat are needed to make a game a commercial success that can generate billions.

Yes, certain games will probably always stay niche titles like Planescape Torment. But that doesn't mean some niche titles cant become block buster games that sell as much units like Skyrim. With the right marketing, everything is possible.

The problem that I see here is that both game developers and publishers have spend a lot of time in the past 10 years to explain the "normal" gamer how shit and outdated those kind of games are and how real time action gameplay is the superior way to do things, remember Bethesdas marketing? The idea to bring Fallout to the "next generation" of games or something like that?. But I don't see why something that works for the movie business cant work with games for example. There is this idea that only totally ridiculous and over the top action sells, but you have always pearls appearing in Cinema like Matrix (the first one), that prove how something can be awesome, yet more then just brain less action.

It could be done with turn based games, and hell you could also use the newest graphic engine, awesome physics and also make it a lot more important to the gameplay. Hard time dealing with those troops in that building? Blow up the whole building with explosives! I think a game with the depth of Jagged Alliance 2 and the newest graphics plus awesome and interactive story could sell very nicely if it had the right marketing. But if game developers believe that nothing else then CoD or Skyrim sells ... then this is what people will get till the point where they believe that only "those" kind of games can be awesome blockbuster games while they also support at the same time projects like Wasteland 2 and moan how those "big" companies continue to feed them with nothing else but games that are like Skyrim and CoD ...
 
Why can't people just leave the two old ladies alone - F1 and F2 are great as is...now if someone was going to make a new isometric, turn based version of Fallout, only one man could do it, and that's Tim Cain (Fallouts daddy). I don't trust anyone else.
 
Black isle did it without him though.
they made 2 without him.
and Tim made Arcanum which is far greater game than Fallout 1.
but your right. without developer who made 1 and 2, it can't be real sequel of Fallout.

sequel of remake without comprehension of intention of game is just POS. lots of remaking was bad because it was remaked without comprehension of intention of original. and I think only one who made original know about that.
 
Mr Fish said:
How exactly did Fallout 1 copy Wasteland's plot?
Click to expand...

My best guess of what that guy is referring to is that at the time of FO1's development and release it was being hyped as a spiritual successor to Wasteland, in that it had some of the same people making it but they were barred from actually using the Wasteland name or setting. I'm old enough that as a kid I had Wasteland for my Commodore 64 when it was new and was absolutely thrilled when I heard they were making Fallout because it sounded more or less like a sequel. It was never sold to the public as a remake and I never thought it was going to be one.
 
Guardian->BOS
Servants of the Mushroom Cloud->Cathedral
but different role

Finster-> master
Zax->Zax
but different role

Guardian base->lost hills
Base cochise-> military base
Darwin-> Cathedral
sleeper's base->Glow
Vegas-> junk town, hub

faran brigo& fat freddy->killian darkwater&gizmo
robots->mutants
and same self destruction ending

It's more then spiritual sequel .
 
If Wasteland 2 ships with an editor I'm sure someone will try to make a remake of the original Fallouts, and good luck to them.
 
woo1108 said:
Zax->Zax
but different role
Click to expand...

I'm picking this one in particular because the only similarity is the name (incidentally, it's VAX in Wasteland, but I assume you just made a typo). It's clear as day, and the devs never denied it, that Fallout was heavily inspired by Wasteland, but the plot is hardly a carbon copy.
 
yep with my logic fo3 is copy of Fo1 and 2.
so it would be exaggeration.
but I think it's more than heavily inspired.
for inspiring, fo3 and NV can say heavily inspired about Fo1's main quest: finding waterchip. but their plot is quite different from Fo1's but for Fo1, it's too similar.
 
The plot isn't really all that similar in Wasteland. The plot hook is different, the main threat is different in nature, the nature of the main characters is different, etc. To be honest, in terms of plot, the original Wasteland is more Terminator than Fallout.
 
IMO that's matter of scenario and world design, not the plot.
The plot is frame and scenario and world is color to fill.
What player should do is too similar. but the story and character is different. as a game, it's quite similar, it can't say indenpent game but close to kind of remake. bu as a story it's different.

and for remake it doesn't mean just copying but upgrading some part but means reinterpretation. so I can say Fallout 1 is good remake of Wasteland instead of copy of Wasteland.
and it means I'm wrong to say Fo1 is copy of Wasteland.
 
Wow, those Fallout memorabilia are wonderful. I'd bid on it if I had the caps to spend.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top