I Think We Need To Realize Something

Kilus said:
joevonzombie said:
Dr Fallout said:
joevonzombie said:
A new game like the classics would be nice, but I'd be content with another New Vegas. Just give me that, Obsidian.
Click to expand...

Fixed. Respect where respect is due.
Click to expand...

I know Obsidian is the reason why that game was great, but Bethesda has to allow that to happen again. It's unfortunate :(
Click to expand...

Obsidian also needs to be in the position to do a new Fallout.
Click to expand...


So much uncertainty for a good Fallout game.
 
X12 said:
PossibleCabbage said:
I mean, that I understand Bethesda doesn't make the sorts of games that I really like does not preclude me from having an opinion on the games that Bethesda makes. If nothing else, complaining is cathartic, and doing it in a place where most everybody else is similarly inclined is pretty much the least irritating way to complain.
Click to expand...
That makes sense. I guess from my point of view the time spent complaining could be used doing something else, like playing games you enjoy. Its kind of like a metal fan complaining about pop music.
Click to expand...

Fallout was a game we enjoyed, and for reasons the Bethesda fanbase cannot fathom. I actually had some guy 'LOL' post at me when I mentioned that the FO4 PC did not seem to have any weapon skills. His thinking was only I must inexplicably love mechanics that make me miss a lot. And I replied that I never miss in Fallout or Fallout 2. (And I don't; nobody does. It's the PC handling the weapon, the player only selects the target.) In FO4 the PC is a hollow puppet that requires the player to do everything for them; how un-Fallout is that? The PC is supposed to be the player's conduit into the situation; not some some Halloween costume for them to prance about in the sandbox with.
 
Last edited:
So what you're saying is BGS shouldn't give two fucks about things like good writing, good story, good gameplay mechanics including leveling up system, a good dialogue system etc? Things that are the absolute CORE of making a game good? Things that games universally need to be considered quality? These aren't even things like setting or where you look at worldbuilding and see if things make sense in the world. No. These are ESSENTIAL. Also doing stupid shit like settlements where you could put resources into fixing your over-all game is just fucking stupid.

They don't have to make a game that's more like the classics, they should make a GOOD fucking game.

You even said it yourself, NEW VEGAS. New Vegas was completely fine as a FPS Fallout game. The game wouldn't even sell less if they would bother doing things like New Vegas did. It's ultimate proof that Fallout can still be more like the classics and sell well.

Thank god we might still get a new Obsidian Fallout though.

It always baffles me how everyone who comes here to shit on us or tell us how much we're complaining somehow think that's all we do with our lives. Come here and complain. Somehow it's hard to understand that we actually have in fact played a lot of games other than Fallout over the years and that we do enjoy other games, whatever it might be. Maybe some people here don't even give a shit about Fallout anymore and just shit on BGS for fun.

Witcher 3? Better than BGS's Fallout. MGSV? Haven't played it but probably better than BGS's Fallout. Get it now?

No matter how much we complain, Bethesda won't make the game we want, BECAUSE THEY'RE STUPID. Either that or they just know their target audience and don't even bother because they're just lazy.
 
X12 said:
PossibleCabbage said:
I mean, that I understand Bethesda doesn't make the sorts of games that I really like does not preclude me from having an opinion on the games that Bethesda makes. If nothing else, complaining is cathartic, and doing it in a place where most everybody else is similarly inclined is pretty much the least irritating way to complain.
Click to expand...
That makes sense. I guess from my point of view the time spent complaining could be used doing something else, like playing games you enjoy. Its kind of like a metal fan complaining about pop music.
Click to expand...

THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I'M SAYING DUDE. Why, because you disagree with what we're doing, do you automatically assume all we fucking do in our day is complain ad nauseam about how terrible BGS's Fallout is? Obviously we're "playing games we enjoy" because what else are we doing? We're talking about how shit BGS's Fallout is and play other games we enjoy. Why is that so hard to understand? We're living our lives, and discussing Fallout on this forum. GOD...
 
Last edited:
Bethesda are not stupid, they're just a product of the boring dystopia that is the mainstream creative industry under neoliberalism. They know exactly what they are doing and how to refine it so as to make as much money as is humanly possible.

Even the most vehement of anti-capitalists would find their spin at least somewhat impressive.
 
apparently he's talking in London in a few days time

not interested but hey, I get all sorts of things in my inbox.
 
1. Collect money on kickstarter.
2. Give that money to the team who have created Follaut of Nevada. If rejected - hire someone who will abduct the Nevada team and force them to work.
3. Wait 6 month.
4. Enjoy!
:grin:
 
Nah, the Fallout of Nevada team got disbanded (plus, the english speakers won't be able to play it). All Obsidian needs to do is release a completely new Post apoc iso-RPG called Afterfall (or something like that) and have it be the spiritual successor of the originals.
 
TheChosen1 said:
Nah, the Fallout of Nevada team got disbanded (plus, the english speakers won't be able to play it). All Obsidian needs to do is release a completely new Post apoc iso-RPG called Afterfall (or something like that) and have it be the spiritual successor of the originals.
Click to expand...

And we love spiritual successors.
 
In all seriousness though he has commented on "Pervert's Guide to Ideology" that the whole appeal of post-apocalyptic fiction is that when you see civilization stopped and dead is when you truly feel the weight of history (he says that this is an idea he borrowed from Walter Benjamin, but I tried to find the book where he talked about that to no avail).

If I were to haphazard a guess as to what Zizek would say about Fallout if he knew it even existed I think he would probably notice the undergoing aesop about heroism in that being too fierce about chasing your version of the greater good ends badly: On every game there is aways some big antagonist that thinks he has got it all figured out how to make the world a better place (The Master, The President, Henry Eden, Mr. House) and then goes for it without restraint, in Fallout 1 this extends not least to the protagonist who is exiled from his Vault because he saved it. In a way it's like the game is passing the message that the world has no place for ardent and proactive self-righteousness and that self-control and tolerance is more important, that would be why the factions that seek to make a positive change into the world and still endure are the ones which tame their passions (Followers of the Apocalypse, (western) Brotherhood of Steel, NCR).

In fact it is like the zealotry of the antagonists is so great that they often didn't really even think their own plans very throughly and can in almost every case be simply "talked out of it" by the protagonist once they point a flaw on their thinking.

All put into contest - that is, the death of the world at the hands of nuclear warfare - this moral message becomes an criticism to the unrestrained and self-righteousness aggressiveness promoted by ideologies such as jingoism. In the specific case of the United States - the culture of which the game dances around with - this in reality served and still serves as ideological justification for atrocious aggressions the world over all in the name of the "greater good" (democracy or bushian "peace").

Then he could perhaps notice a turning point in the way Fallout 3 depicted ardent heroism, that is, in the way it glorifies it. Fallout 3 is depicting the same actions of unquestioning ardent heroism and yet it twists the moral message the other way around by making the deaths of the heroes (James and Vault Dweller or Sarah) messianic in nature. Having this in mind it is not, perhaps, coincidental the usage in Fallout 3 of the Bible and american national symbols under pious and nationalistic airs (which does not happen under even remotely similar lights under any of the other games). Fallout 3 went the other way around and instead of exploring skepticism it embraced the ideology of unquestioning self-righteousness.
 
I think "Ground Zero" is a good name for a post-apocalyptic RPG. IIRC Troika Games was making a game by that name so why not use it?
 
I think there is something you should realize. This thread is over seven years late; at this point, no one here expects Bethesda to step out of their vision of what Fallout is. No one here is expecting Bethesda to replicate the first two Fallout games because we know damn well it will never happen (at least not by them).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top