Is fallout dry?

[wanamingo89790]

Now this isn't about if 4 & 76 signal the decline of fallout or not. The real question is whether or not fallout is actually redeemable at all at this point, no matter who is taking up the cause.

Everyone hates sequels. Actually, that's not true. There is a general bias against sequels because of the fact that they are always held up to the original. The sequels that are successful are usually ones that can't be held up to the original. Ones which are different enough that they are looked at as their own thing, rather than the successor of another. Think empire strikes back, or blade runner 2049.

I never played fallout 2 but from what I've seen it at least somewhat fits that criteria. I know new vegas fits this criteria, i mean 1 and new vegas, aside from being rpgs, are completely different games.

We've had so many fallout sequels that sometimes I think fallout, as a universe, has dried out. Sure, you could set a game in texas, canada, or china. But whats the point of even calling it fallout then? Fallout has long gone through its menopause, that was fallout 3, there was a brief sexual awakening in new vegas and then it slowed down again. Fallout in-game years is like 70 or 80 at this point.

TL;DR has fallout had too many sequels? Is it overdone?

 

[KingArthur]

That’s... a really good question. It brings into account whether the series even can be done correctly at this point. Honestly? I’ve no clue. Like you said, Fallout 2 and NV were the Spiderman 2, the Mad Max 2 of game sequels; fucking GREAT. But then Beth fucked it.

Tbh, I think that Fallout hasn’t gotten old yet. But if Beth keeps holding the reins, they will wring it to death.

 

[naossano]

Unofficial sequels are getting better and better as far as i know.
No need to worry about branded sequels.

 

[Millim]

It really depends in direction and who has it.
No doubt that even if Troika did get the IP, we would be here today discussing the same thing.

I think Fallout has just taken a logical step. I can't be angry or upset with Bethesda anymore knowing that I would feel the same way about Troika or Obsidian if they ever got the IP.

The truth is, people don't really like to step away from the familiar.
As you said, if the next game is set in Texas, would it be Fallout anymore?

Tim Cain's idea was to take it to Space. I don't know if I would have liked that, that idea completely destroys why I like the series. But it's evident that it would have been something very similar to 'The Outer Worlds'

Chris Avellone didn't want to see any improvement over the Wasteland. Which destroys the idea of civilization rebuilding. It does fit into the idea of humanity never learning from their mistakes. But at the same time, it wouldn't make sense for People to keep launching nukes.

Josh Sawyer wanted to see civilization rebuild, but again, Fallout was good for just how fucking hopeless the situation seemed that when you did solve it, you felt like a hero.

That's why I think New Vegas fit the perfect sequel. It was released long enough after F2 to allow for ideas to mutate (heh... Get it) but also kept the desolate feeling of F1 while also allowing Civilization to progress.

Fallout was always destined to run dry eventually. What we like about the game doesn't translate well to sequels.
That's why I can't hate on F2 as much as some people here, it was never going to recapture the feeling of F1, so it tried something new.

Sadly, Fallout was always going to be obsolete by the time it got to the 5th entry.

Audiences change, developers change and the industry changes.

So yeah, Fallout was always going to fun dry. Bethesda just did what they did with it and now we should just move on.

 

[wanamingo89790]

Unofficial sequels are getting better and better as far as i know.
No need to worry about branded sequels.

Like which ones?

 

[wanamingo89790]

It really depends in direction and who has it.
No doubt that even if Troika did get the IP, we would be here today discussing the same thing.

I think Fallout has just taken a logical step. I can't be angry or upset with Bethesda anymore knowing that I would feel the same way about Troika or Obsidian if they ever got the IP.

The truth is, people don't really like to step away from the familiar.
As you said, if the next game is set in Texas, would it be Fallout anymore?

Tim Cain's idea was to take it to Space. I don't know if I would have liked that, that idea completely destroys why I like the series. But it's evident that it would have been something very similar to 'The Outer Worlds'

Chris Avellone didn't want to see any improvement over the Wasteland. Which destroys the idea of civilization rebuilding. It does fit into the idea of humanity never learning from their mistakes. But at the same time, it wouldn't make sense for People to keep launching nukes.

Josh Sawyer wanted to see civilization rebuild, but again, Fallout was good for just how fucking hopeless the situation seemed that when you did solve it, you felt like a hero.

That's why I think New Vegas fit the perfect sequel. It was released long enough after F2 to allow for ideas to mutate (heh... Get it) but also kept the desolate feeling of F1 while also allowing Civilization to progress.

Fallout was always destined to run dry eventually. What we like about the game doesn't translate well to sequels.
That's why I can't hate on F2 as much as some people here, it was never going to recapture the feeling of F1, so it tried something new.

Sadly, Fallout was always going to be obsolete by the time it got to the 5th entry.

Audiences change, developers change and the industry changes.

So yeah, Fallout was always going to fun dry. Bethesda just did what they did with it and now we should just move on.

Yeah, its all one constant cycle. Someone makes one thing thats influenced by another thing which then influences another thing and so on. Maybe the outer worlds will be fallouts "successor" as far as things go.

 

[Risewild]

Like which ones?

Probably TC's like Fallout of Nevada, Fallout 1.5 Resurrection, Mutants Rising (still in production), Fallout: Sonora (still in production), etc.

 

[NMLevesque]

Sequels don't have to come after previous titles chronologically. Any game set in a new location wouldn't be a prequel if the plot lines don't intersect. The lore of each region should be developed across the first few centuries. So long as it expands overall, rather than being perpetually replaced through retcons, then Fallout would be rehydrated. If said lore is well written then the number of contenders for best Fallout will only grow. Neither is likely to happen.

 

[SquidWard]

If we ever want a good official branded Fallout again, it would take a good bit of just careful thinking and some creativity. Sure, tons of people will never accept something as better (or more true to the name is probably a better way to put it) than the original but that's the nature of anything if you ask me. What's more Fallout to the core than the original? What's more Spider-Man than the initial releases? Apply it most anything and you'll see that the initial interpretation is the commonly accepted one. I'd say the only types of sequels that receive no shit are ones like Mortal Kombat and Doom. It was pretty much more of the same, just bonus content.

Some might say that about Fallout 2 but the way that game was designed and the world connects isn't like Fallout 1.

The problem isn't in topping the first game or even the few accepted ones after it. The problem is stacking on iconic parts of the series onto a world that's less thought out than any of them. It's misunderstanding why they were loved. I'd wager that if you made an East Coast Fallout and left Supermutants, the NCR, the Brotherhood of Steel, and the Enclave all behind you'd have a better time being received by fans like you'll find here. Who knows what happened over there? Probably not a psychic biomass creating a new race called Supermutants in hopes of achieving world peace eventually. Probably something else interesting.

Think of anything you think would be fitting for Fallout, would reinforce its core ideas and themes, and doesn't harp back to the older games. Put it on the East Coast. We'd probably be more inclined to like it. Make it about the aftermath of humanity's worst hours. Make it about how we rebuild and how horrible we can still be. Make us question our place on Earth. Show us the devastating results that linger like the Glow. Show us how the past can be more of a burden than a guide.

I don't know, maybe I'm talking out of my ass. I'd like it at least. You need to make sense, not show me familiar factions and cannon fodder. Show me mutants that after X years live on the East Coast but haven't migrated west. Show me the new chems people invented there, not simply shoving Jet into it. Show me the factions and how they vie for power over one another. Don't show me remnants that keep rebuilding everywhere we go.

Nothing's ever dried out until people give up on it. Sure you can sit there and churn out the product and make the profit and it starts to seem dried out. But all it takes is some love and care and you can make something that at least a decent amount of fans of the originals will still like or at least I'd like to think so.

 

[Valdetiosi]

Fallouts are set in the desert and wasteland, it's like asking if sun is bright.

Joking aside, Fallout could potentially continue up to every single state in USA, but oversaturation can be a killer. What I find refreshing is games that take their own spin on it, like Atom RPG, Wasteland 2 and Dustwind. They don't try to mimic Fallout per say, but are essentially good candicates for craving that hard apocalyptic crpg mood.

Of course, the problem is Bethesda propably doesn't even know what Crpg is ever since Daggerfall.

 

[Einhanderc7]

My perspective is that Fallout's well has indeed run dry, at least in Bethesda's hands.

However if somehow another developer managed to wrangle the IP rights from Bethesda's hands I honestly would be worried about any future titles. Not because of the unnamed developers intentions, but because I really don't know how they would salvage the IP without removing Bethesda's titles from the brand entirely. I would know I've wracked my brain on how to solve all of the problems pumped into the IP.

The issue is that Bethesda has turned Fallout as an IP into a minefield where no course of action is the "correct" action to take to merge the different fan groups together. The IP itself has been obfuscated to such a degree I'm honestly surprised the Fallout trademark is still valid.

Therefore I think the're only two courses of action to bring Fallout as a creative work back from the brink.

1. Fallout as an intellectual property becomes public domain.
2. Another developer acquires the IP rights to then declare the Bethesda titles non canon in an attempt to restructure the mess Bethesda made. However to pull this off they must retain the integrity of the IP for the foreseeable future.
3. I'm going to be honest, this one is an impossibility. Bethesda somehow unf**** themselves to fix their own mess.

To be honest the future of Fallout is seriously bleak, and no manner of band-aids, glue, and yelling is going to fix this mess. I thought EA was king of killing intellectual properties, but Bethesda seriously raised the bar on how to f*** and IP big time with Fallout.

 

[Paladin Hank]

Fallout will always be wet in my book.

 

[KingArthur]

Fallout will always be wet in my book.

Actual footage of my reaction to that as the double-entandre sunk in

 

[Nirv]

My perspective is that Fallout's well has indeed run dry, at least in Bethesda's hands.

However if somehow another developer managed to wrangle the IP rights from Bethesda's hands I honestly would be worried about any future titles. Not because of the unnamed developers intentions, but because I really don't know how they would salvage the IP without removing Bethesda's titles from the brand entirely. I would know I've wracked my brain on how to solve all of the problems pumped into the IP.

The issue is that Bethesda has turned Fallout as an IP into a minefield where no course of action is the "correct" action to take to merge the different fan groups together. The IP itself has been obfuscated to such a degree I'm honestly surprised the Fallout trademark is still valid.

Therefore I think the're only two courses of action to bring Fallout as a creative work back from the brink.

1. Fallout as an intellectual property becomes public domain.
2. Another developer acquires the IP rights to then declare the Bethesda titles non canon in an attempt to restructure the mess Bethesda made. However to pull this off they must retain the integrity of the IP for the foreseeable future.
3. I'm going to be honest, this one is an impossibility. Bethesda somehow unf**** themselves to fix their own mess.

To be honest the future of Fallout is seriously bleak, and no manner of band-aids, glue, and yelling is going to fix this mess. I thought EA was king of killing intellectual properties, but Bethesda seriously raised the bar on how to f*** and IP big time with Fallout.

Honestly, I think the only realistic(-ish) solution would be a reboot of the entire series by a competent developer. Just declaring the Bethesda titles non-canon would not go down well with the typical fan. The only way to get rid of the mess Bethesda made without just completely alienating the Bethesda fans is a reboot. It wouldn't have to be a complete reboot of the series though, I suppose; it could still consider the original Fallouts as canon.

I also don't think it would be financially viable to take Fallout back to its roots as an isometric, turn-based RPG. The game series has become synonymous with being an open-world action-RPG. That is personally fine with me as long as the titles are like New Vegas, with a bigger focus on the RPG elements than on the FPS elements, but I know that sentiment is not shared by everyone.

 

[Gizmojunk]

I am always of the opinion that if it cannot be done right—don't do it at all.

Fallout cannot be done right except in line with its roots. People think that it's isometric because of its age, but DOOM shipped several years before it, and Interplay shipped first person games before beginning work on Fallout, and published some the same year they released Fallout.

[AFAIK] Fallout began as a combat engine, before anything else; before the world setting was even considered. Aimed combat used to look like this:

Spoiler

It cannot be a coincidence that Fallout was planned as the best GURPS implementation on the PC, and then have it look like this:

While it lost the GURPS license, they still shipped the same game—sans GURPS branding. It is what Fallout is. Bethesda's games are like cuckoo chicks in the nest; with no relation...Fallout by fiat, nothing more.

 

[NMLevesque]

They could also split it into two series. One with classic canon and design sensibilities, and the other can do whatever the fuck is necessary to appeal to troglodytes bc apparently their idea of Fallout matters too.

 

[Gizmojunk]

It could be in the same game though. The Witcher had three camera modes (and two different methods of control; it was point & click as well as TPP).

And of course... no one is asking for 2D isometric graphics, it should of course be done in full 3D, as anyone should expect.

Spoiler

 

[aP // Elliott]

I don't think the Fallout series is dry it's just in the hands of people who don't know how to operate a well properly. Bethesda needs to give it to someone else to write and design because Emil and Todd are probably really fucking board of Fallout and The Elder Scrolls by now hence Starfield which I have my doubts about. I find Bethesda to be creative in their none creativity and what I mean by this is they creative some really good and fun ideas and then do fuck all with them it's almost like they write down 50 ideas put them in to a hat pick them at random and then add it into the game with out thinking about it for more than 5 minutes which leaves a lot of their games feeling shallow empty and just surface area which for me is no good. Also Van Buren is basically a Fallout game just waiting to be made.

 

[Nirv]

I don't think the Fallout series is dry it's just in the hands of people who don't know how to operate a well properly. Bethesda needs to give it to someone else to write and design because Emil and Todd are probably really fucking board of Fallout and The Elder Scrolls by now hence Starfield which I have my doubts about. I find Bethesda to be creative in their none creativity and what I mean by this is they creative some really good and fun ideas and then do fuck all with them it's almost like they write down 50 ideas put them in to a hat pick them at random and then add it into the game with out thinking about it for more than 5 minutes which leaves a lot of their games feeling shallow empty and just surface area which for me is no good. Also Van Buren is basically a Fallout game just waiting to be made.

There's also Tim Cain's original concept for a Fallout 3 that is waiting to be made. Not much is known about it except that it has no relation to Van Buren and that Tim Cain has gone on record saying that he wants to make that if he ever gets a chance to work with the Fallout IP again. Presumably, this would've been the Troika Fallout 3 if they had won the bid.

 

[aP // Elliott]

There's also Tim Cain's original concept for a Fallout 3 that is waiting to be made. Not much is known about it except that it has no relation to Van Buren and that Tim Cain has gone on record saying that he wants to make that if he ever gets a chance to work with the Fallout IP again. Presumably, this would've been the Troika Fallout 3 if they had won the bid.

At this point I just want Tim Cain to give us TimCainum Of Steamworks And Magick Obscura 2 after the Outer Worlds of course