If you owned the Fallout IP...

Well, first of all I'd start up the Fallout Bible again from scratch where I go over what is canon and what isn't so I can clean up the lore. In it I would disqualify Fallout 3, Fallout New Vegas and Fallout 4 as canon. I'd then start a kickstarter for Fallout Van Buren, hire both Obsidian and InXile, give them relatively free reigns. The only leash I'd have on them would be to follow the lore completely without ever contradicting it and slap the notion out of Sawyer to merge Energy Weapons, Small Guns and Big Guns into Firearms. It'd be a turn-based isometric cRPG with fixed camera angle that has the same mouse button things as in Fallout 1/2/T where you can cycle through movement, combat and inspection/use cursor. I'd revamp SPECIAL and possibly remove Charisma and replace it with something else. Other than that I'd give them pretty much free reign to do whatever they want to.

After the game is a success (because it would be) I'd probably go back and remake Fallout 1 and later on Fallout 2. I'd use a different studio with the same assets for that though so I can let Obsidian and InXile have a year or two to work on their own projects. Clean up some of the lore in those games and flesh them out a bit more. Update their game mechanics and stuff. I don't want players to 'have to' read the Fallout Bible to understand what is canon and what isn't and since there are some inconsistencies in Fallout 1/2 I'd like to clean them up and polish up the aspects that were crudely done by today's standards.

After, a new IP, preferably by the same Obsidian/InXile combo. Then I'd remake Tactics for the same reason as remaking Fallout 1/2 (would probably use the same studio that I used for Fallout 1/2). Cleaning up the lore. After that, I'd alternate between the three studios, when Obsidian is free I'll hire them to create a Fallout game. When InXile is free I'd hire them. When ____ is free I'd hire them for a Tactics game. Then I'd just keep pumping out Fallout games while, like a dictator, keeping an eye on them to make sure that they don't fuck up any lore and that they aren't trying anything too wild of a gameplay mechanic that doesn't fit Fallout at all. Obsidian makes a game, then they take a four year break to recharge and come up with new ideas for storylines. InXile starts making a game once Obsidian's is released and after their's is released they'd also be given a four year break to recharge and come up with new ideas. Same for the third one.

So hypothetically,

2018 - Fallout Van Buren
2020 - Fallout 1 Remake
2022 - Fallout 2 Remake
2024 - Obsidian Fallout
2026 - InXile Fallout
2028 - ____ Tactics
2030 - Obsidian Fallout
2032 - InXile Fallout
2034 - ____ Tactics

(Of coures, if InXile or Obsidian wants to do a Tactics game or if ____ wants to try a proper Fallout game I'd let them but I do want Tactics to be continue as well)

I'd focus my attention on polishing up the gameplay mechanics to perfection and after they've reached it I'd demand that they stop tinkering with it and focus on the story. My direction for Fallout would not be to be ground-breaking and innovative in its gameplay. Instead I'd focus on expanding the world and its lore.

Every other year there'd be a Fallout game by a different studio who's had years to come up with fresh ideas to try out in the world of Fallout. I think that'd be pretty neat. The developers wouldn't need to adhere to a chronological time-line with the games. If InXile wants to do a game that is set in 2098 and put it in Canada then that's fine with me. The world of Fallout is so big and covers so many centuries that theoretically it would never run out of stories and it doesn't need an end. Fallout to me is not about an end. It's just, here's the story of the region for its current time period. So I'd just keep it going while controlling the lore with an iron fist.

I'd create a new wiki for this continuation of Fallout where only lore from these new games are allowed. No original Fallout 1/2 lore. No FNV lore. No FO3/FO4 lore. Only Mr Fish lore. And the reason for that is that I want the developers to have a good reliable tool that they can use to make sure that whatever they're writing fits in with what has already been established.
 
I think the brand is largely invincible at this point, so if I owned it I would license it out to make a ton of spinoffs. I see no reason we can't have roleplaying games, action games, city-building games, tactics games, stealth games, linear narrative games, grand strategy games, or whatever set somewhere or somewhen in the Fallout universe.

Basically the rules would be that you have to place it so that it doesn't intersect with the other games, and that you cannot contradict, supersede, or retcon Fallout 1, 2, or New Vegas.

But I think a lot of different people could do great things in the Fallout universe if you just gave them their little corner and let them do whatever they want in it. These games don't need to hang together any more than the Mad Max films do, after all.
 
Depending on when. If it was in 2004s when Bethesda and Troika fighted for franchise I'd contacted to Troika and stuffed them Van Buren concept from black ilse (possibly get anyone worked at BIS work for me on F3) and ordered to rehash it to release as spin-off title. While this happening I'd contacted Bethesda and ordered them to make 'a roleplay operating system' (don't mind, it's turd howard's quote), of course on conditions where every flip costs them money for stimulation purposes. I'd release Fallout 3 and made it east coast too, but in Point Lookout setting and place to avoid possible contradictions in canon. Then another contract, same New Vegas but considering VB got released. Fill the gaps with console titles, mentioned before Vargant Story-style on PS2/PS3 (targeting on japanese gamers) and cash grab shooter like FO4 on Eggsbox.
If it's 2016... Shit.
 
A nice spinoff could actually be a city management sim... but you're actually managing a colony ship in space. Maybe not exactly canon, or we could say it's a spinoff based on the idea of House winning in New Vegas, but either way you'd have a ship or probably a small fleet floating through space over many generations.

You'd need to manage resources (maybe each ship has its own purpose, like replicating or food production), keep your people basically happy, and potentially even fight sudden mutant outbreaks as things go wrong with your experimental reactors or science projects intended for when you reach your goal (another world).
 
Perfect for handhelds.

How curious, would RTS actually work in Fallout universe. Due to resources being scarce maybe C&C4-style but not carbon copy.
 
0wing said:
Perfect for handhelds.

How curious, would RTS actually work in Fallout universe. Due to resources being scarce maybe C&C4-style but not carbon copy.
Click to expand...
Pre-war it probably would, since oil would actually be an incredibly important resource to keep your eye on during games.
 
I'd prolly keep the main series the action rpg style it is now in the vien of new vegas. And release a full fledged isometric rpg for mobile every few years.
 
if i owned fallout ip, i wouldn't do this stupid thing
P8uFAuT.jpg
 
If I own the Fallout IP, I'd scrap Fallout 4 and 3 out of it and state they were non-canon, and focus primarily on Fallout 1, 2, and New Vegas lore. THEN I would slither around here and RPGCodex to see if any willing writers would like to join into the studio and help in making the next greatest thing in RPG history, along with hiring Tim Cain into the work, that or throw it to Obsidian with hopes in helping them as well.
 
R.Graves said:
Yeah.. Jumping the shark backwards is prolly the best course of action
Click to expand...

Pretty much, and the impact would be negligible, since it was the East Coast that got shafted by bethesderp. With the slate clean once again, creativity can flow into that area and make it REALLY SHINE. Hell, I'd love to see gehennas walking about in Ground Zero areas.
 
I'd develop a new engine specifically designed for a Fallout game while feeding console gamers with action-'rpgs' they like so much with stories they like so much and finally come up with really massive and satisfying game because those action-rpgs would be so profitable to develop such thing. That's one of the way if IP got from Bethesda Hackworks. And yes, East Coast is doomed.
 
Well like the dude above me. I'd either run Fallout on its own engine or likely use unreal engine for the former isometric view. I'd definitely bring Fallout to its roots and do far better writing than Bethesda. I might even set Fallout 5 in the Carolinas and into Georgia. But I'd write the story since I'm a good writer and I understand the Fallout series well enough to make a good story out of it. I'd allow the kind and good people of No Mutants Allowed to jump aboard with making Fallout 5 and even ask Tim Cain if he wants to come back. Scrap Fallout 3 and 4 and say they're non cannon. Even though I'd likely be setting Fallout 5 in the Midwest or the Southeast for the sake of location to move on the from the West Coast.
 
Mr Fish said:
Well, first of all I'd start up the Fallout Bible again from scratch where I go over what is canon and what isn't so I can clean up the lore. In it I would disqualify Fallout 3, Fallout New Vegas and Fallout 4 as canon. I'd then start a kickstarter for Fallout Van Buren, hire both Obsidian and InXile, give them relatively free reigns. The only leash I'd have on them would be to follow the lore completely without ever contradicting it and slap the notion out of Sawyer to merge Energy Weapons, Small Guns and Big Guns into Firearms. It'd be a turn-based isometric cRPG with fixed camera angle that has the same mouse button things as in Fallout 1/2/T where you can cycle through movement, combat and inspection/use cursor. I'd revamp SPECIAL and possibly remove Charisma and replace it with something else. Other than that I'd give them pretty much free reign to do whatever they want to.

After the game is a success (because it would be) I'd probably go back and remake Fallout 1 and later on Fallout 2. I'd use a different studio with the same assets for that though so I can let Obsidian and InXile have a year or two to work on their own projects. Clean up some of the lore in those games and flesh them out a bit more. Update their game mechanics and stuff. I don't want players to 'have to' read the Fallout Bible to understand what is canon and what isn't and since there are some inconsistencies in Fallout 1/2 I'd like to clean them up and polish up the aspects that were crudely done by today's standards.

After, a new IP, preferably by the same Obsidian/InXile combo. Then I'd remake Tactics for the same reason as remaking Fallout 1/2 (would probably use the same studio that I used for Fallout 1/2). Cleaning up the lore. After that, I'd alternate between the three studios, when Obsidian is free I'll hire them to create a Fallout game. When InXile is free I'd hire them. When ____ is free I'd hire them for a Tactics game. Then I'd just keep pumping out Fallout games while, like a dictator, keeping an eye on them to make sure that they don't fuck up any lore and that they aren't trying anything too wild of a gameplay mechanic that doesn't fit Fallout at all. Obsidian makes a game, then they take a four year break to recharge and come up with new ideas for storylines. InXile starts making a game once Obsidian's is released and after their's is released they'd also be given a four year break to recharge and come up with new ideas. Same for the third one.

So hypothetically,

2018 - Fallout Van Buren
2020 - Fallout 1 Remake
2022 - Fallout 2 Remake
2024 - Obsidian Fallout
2026 - InXile Fallout
2028 - ____ Tactics
2030 - Obsidian Fallout
2032 - InXile Fallout
2034 - ____ Tactics

(Of coures, if InXile or Obsidian wants to do a Tactics game or if ____ wants to try a proper Fallout game I'd let them but I do want Tactics to be continue as well)

I'd focus my attention on polishing up the gameplay mechanics to perfection and after they've reached it I'd demand that they stop tinkering with it and focus on the story. My direction for Fallout would not be to be ground-breaking and innovative in its gameplay. Instead I'd focus on expanding the world and its lore.

Every other year there'd be a Fallout game by a different studio who's had years to come up with fresh ideas to try out in the world of Fallout. I think that'd be pretty neat. The developers wouldn't need to adhere to a chronological time-line with the games. If InXile wants to do a game that is set in 2098 and put it in Canada then that's fine with me. The world of Fallout is so big and covers so many centuries that theoretically it would never run out of stories and it doesn't need an end. Fallout to me is not about an end. It's just, here's the story of the region for its current time period. So I'd just keep it going while controlling the lore with an iron fist.

I'd create a new wiki for this continuation of Fallout where only lore from these new games are allowed. No original Fallout 1/2 lore. No FNV lore. No FO3/FO4 lore. Only Mr Fish lore. And the reason for that is that I want the developers to have a good reliable tool that they can use to make sure that whatever they're writing fits in with what has already been established.
Click to expand...
But I have to ask. Why would New vegas be non canon? It has more to do with Fallout 1 and 2 than what 3 and 4 ever did.
 
Sn1p3r187 said:
But I have to ask. Why would New vegas be non canon? It has more to do with Fallout 1 and 2 than what 3 and 4 ever did.
Click to expand...
Hello? Van Buren?
It conflicts with FNV and I don't care for a compromise or anything.
Van Buren is more important than FNV to me.
And since they conflict with one another....
One has to be cut from the canon.

I'd probably ask the ones doing FVB to at least try to work in some elements of FNV so long as it doesn't take away focus from Van Buren.
 
Last edited:
I seem to remember Hexer saying that the writing team for the Van Buren mod was fairly close to having Van Buren not conflict with New Vegas. Even if that's impossible, as the owner of Fallout you could alter parts of New Vegas or Van Buren until they all fit together.
 
Van Buren itself already doesn't look or sound Fallout-y judging by design docs enough though.
 
0wing said:
Van Buren itself already doesn't look or sound Fallout-y judging by design docs enough though.
Click to expand...
How doesn't it sound Fallout-y?
Mr Fish said:
Hello? Van Buren?
It conflicts with FNV and I don't care for a compromise or anything.
Click to expand...
It does contradict New Vegas a lot, I must admit. However, I reckon that if you rewrote Van Buren a little it could work, you'd just have to change the following
  • Replacing Caesar's Legion with another slaver organisation,
  • Reworking NCR quite a lot. Maybe move there settlement in Hoover Damn elsewhere, and just say that with all the tribals, they haven't had a chance to explore the Mojave yet.
  • Give The Hanged Man a new backstory, declare him a different individual to Joshua Graham.
  • Make Hangdogs and Blackfoot separate tribes(Like they planned to originally)
  • Write new endings for the Blackfoot, where they carry on there lives as usual, leaving room for Caesar.
Then Van Buren could be cannon without rewriting New Vegas.
 
To the OP,

If I ran Interplay or at least the Fallout franchise I would have had Van Buren fully developed and completed with no features cut such as quests, npcs, and areas.
But after release I do want to follow how well it is received and how well itself.

I also would like to hear from the development team and other designers in Interplay what the possibilities are to develop this into a larger franchise (if that is possible with the IP, does it have larger market appeal or is it more niche?)

If it could be expanded and branched out I would have teams and designers come with proposals for spin off titles and other material.
I would like to have a spin off series designed with the console gamer in mind and perhaps a spin off that appeals to both PC and console users.
So a FPS-RPG a la Fallout New Vegas would perhaps be possible as would be overhead shooters similar to FOBOS if there is a market for it, strategic titles, and eventually perhaps mobile titles and an MMO.

(it does not mean I want to water down the franchise but from a business perspective it is the most sensible to make titles that attract as much customers as possible)

If the franchise would really take off I would have the developers write a version of the Fallout Bible that all Fallout titles would have to adhere to. It would include all information about the settings, a general timeline including a projection at which moment Fallout would no longer be Post-Post Apocalyptic, what regions are useful for games, information about the various groups, nations (hierarchy, history, iconic characters), cults, mutants such as the Ghouls, Super Mutants and animals mutants (and information on how to best design new mutants), information about the Enclave, the Pre War US government, the corporations.

Of course such control would never lest and any successor that would follow me up would probably introduce 'soft' retcons and reboots or even complete ones.

Edit: Lucas9, I might have gone with what you are proposing as a combat system for a console Fallout spin off series.
 
JO'Geran said:
How doesn't it sound Fallout-y?

It does contradict New Vegas a lot, I must admit. However, I reckon that if you rewrote Van Buren a little it could work, you'd just have to change the following
  • Replacing Caesar's Legion with another slaver organisation,
  • Reworking NCR quite a lot. Maybe move there settlement in Hoover Damn elsewhere, and just say that with all the tribals, they haven't had a chance to explore the Mojave yet.
  • Give The Hanged Man a new backstory, declare him a different individual to Joshua Graham.
  • Make Hangdogs and Blackfoot separate tribes(Like they planned to originally)
  • Write new endings for the Blackfoot, where they carry on there lives as usual, leaving room for Caesar.
Then Van Buren could be cannon without rewriting New Vegas.
Click to expand...
That's the thing though, I would not re-write Van Buren. If anything has to go to the cutting room floor it is FNV. Like I said, I won't do compromises. Van Buren takes absolute precedence and if FNV becomes contradictory because of that then it'll have to be cut completely.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top